A Response to Group 3: Poor Image - Aveyra/Josh GitHub Wiki

Question: Do you think “Poor images” can take away from the message that is trying to be delivered?

Response:

The beauty of art is that it is interpretative, in that different people assign different meanings to the same objects. In relation to cinema that may mean a film fitting more than one genre while in photography it may mean different opinions about an image. In any case, perception has the ability to change the meaning of that art to fit the mind of whomever is receiving of those images. And while these perceptions may not be what the artist originally intended, that is the beauty of art. Once the work leaves the hands of its creator(s), its meaning rests in the minds of whoever gets it next. Still, the question remains that if someone is trying to deliver a specific message and that art which conveys it becomes altered, does it detach from the original intentions? If one were to watch a film intended for IMAX, intended to bring the viewer into the film the way that only IMAX can, watching that work without the added experience of the massive curved screen and surround sound definitely reduces the impact of the experience. Would it make the film bad? Likely not, if it’s good enough to stand on its own. However, if the message intended by the filmmakers was one that could only affect a person if they felt as though they were inside the film, then without a doubt there is something being removed from that message. The same can be said about watching a movie that was illegally bootlegged instead of seeing it in theaters. These copies are usually of lower visual and audio quality, which undermines not only the law, but the amount of professional effort that would otherwise be noticed.

On the other hand, there may be sufficient argument to say that a good image is a good image. That focus and sharpness don’t necessarily dictate the message behind an image. For if one were to take a blurry photo of their child laughing, would that image still not show love or happiness regardless of the quality? Maybe, maybe not. There’s no question that that same photo with the child in focus would easily convey that message since the clarity of the image quality relieves the viewer of the need to think. For when you can see clearly, you can think clearly. If the image is blurry, if it is out of focus and not clear, then the message is unclear.

It’s a difficult question to answer and that is the way of messages: They are sent by one party and received by another wholly different entity. So even if the conveyor if messages intended that image to be blurry, open to interpretation, one receiving that message may just assume that it’s simply bad form. The same way a professional photographer would be unlikely to take a blurry portrait if the goal is to take a clear one, that photographer would relate to a blurry photo as just bad form. So yes, it’s possible for a poor image to take away from a message on a simple level, but the real answer to that lies in the hands of who is receiving the message.