The Theory of a Photo by Slastyonoff

The Theory of a Photo
Slastyonoff.com

The Theory of a Photo. (translation from russian)

All reality accessible to our sense organs, is described by four dimensions: length, height, width (space) and time. Any real event occurs in space and time. But each person has own "an individual reality", shown, for example, in dreams. And its laws do not depend in any way on laws of an objective reality. Any work of art is more or less exact transferring a material by the artist (an objective reality) to his individual reality. Further. Any direct contact (the work with model concerns also) includes not only the communications at a level of speech and gestures, but also contact of individual realities which is fixed by them. A place where this contact occurs, it is necessary to define somehow. I have named it "the Fifth dimension". (In passing I should note that I consider all of it, including application of the term "the Fifth dimension" is the intellectual property :)

And so, in my opinion, the Photos are pictures from the Fifth dimension (and the camera is a tool from which they are getting). Every film is the fixed result of interaction of an individual reality of the photographer and model (the term "model" designates any object of shooting as alive or not alive). And it occurs by any pressing descent of any camera by any person. Distinction consists only in quantity of spectators to which these pictures are interesting. It puts a photo absolutely separately from other kinds of the fine arts. It is elementary that is giving rise to another (cinema, TV). Yes, laws of construction of the image (pictures) are the same as in painting, but they are not laws of painting or laws of perception.

In my opinion, at everything that was written about a photo some "picturesque" complex is present. It has been started 170 years ago by the words: " - Henceforth painting has died! ". Artists which were there then threw up: " - the Photography is not an Art! It is too much technics!". Photographers (former artists) have amicably rushed to unproved it. All it is very similar on a bet as: " - And you who such? " . Photography has its own laws of CREATION of a picture. But I, apparently, already repeat. By the way, if to look from the point of view of my theory, it is impossible to consider a photo as the objective document. And consideration of negatives in courts as proofs - no more than a product of the private public contract. Your photo in the passport is, strictly speaking, a photo of absolutely other person. Remember that chemical elements of your organism are completely replaced for every seven years :)

For example, I have shown the photo in my passport to my friends, accompanying it with a confused history that it's a photo of my schoolmate (!!!) who looks similar like me. Result - 100 %. Try it – and you’ll be surprised. But, if it is possible in one case why it is incorrect for all others?
Yes, the photo is a document. But the document of how the photographer sees how the model sees itself. It is the most valuable in a photo for me.