… that is, perceived in reality. Indeed should a photograph be a true representation of what one sees in the world?
The answer to that knotty little question depends upon what the photograph is for. For example one could be making a likeness for identification purposes. In this case, then answer would be yes. But, in the main I tend towards a photograph being a representation of the subject.
If one’s goal was always to produce a perfect likeness, then all the really good technicians would produce identical results. How boring that would be. Call me old fashioned, but I think we aspire to a little more than just being excellent technicians.
Here’s an analogy. If all the conductors in the world produced exactly the same representation of Beethoven’s Pastoral Symphony, there would be precious little point in listening to more than one!
The same applies to photography, if one is looking for more than just an accurate likeness. Why would one just want to see an accurate likeness anyway … one could just look at the person or the thing in the flesh?
Yes, OK … I admit it … I’m talking about art. You knew that anyway but I have to get on my hobby horse every now and then, otherwise people would think I’m just a technician.