Paul McWhorter

edit

Your points on Mathew Brady are good ones. During his day, there was really no such things as photojournalism, so no real standards existed. Some of the things he did would likely not pass muster today. Yet, the overall message portraid in his pictures are of large historic value. For example, thousands did die at Antietam, and he took photographs of the aftermath of the battle. Lets say that for a particular corpse, he turned the head towards the camera, and put the soldiers gun back in his hand, as if he died clutching the gun. These artistic enhancements would not be considered acceptable. However, we still learn a lot by viewing Brady's photo of the dead soldier. His gear, the terrain, the nature of his injuries, the landscape, etc. The conclusion I come to is to learn from the Brady photos, but to keep in mind the standards were different in the era he worked. Thanks for the feedback. Paul

edit

edit