Let's get the trite answers out of the way first:
- These are different mediums that cannot be compared. It's like comparing an apple to an orange.
- It depends on how good the text and the photograph is. There are different ways of using language, and there are different ways a picture can be taken. Depending on what the receiver is looking for, a text could be more descriptive than a photograph or vice versa.
- It is a personal choice.
Each of those three responses are correct, but they're right only because they are generic explanations. It's hard to dispute a vague answer.
Descriptions provided by texts and photographs have different functions for the viewer. Photography has more of an extrinsic value; it concerns itself with how things are portrayed to others. The photographer manipulates the composition of objects or settings in order to suggest evoking a certain emotion within the viewer.
Language, on the other hand, serves more for intrinsic values. Because language is the vehicle for thoughts and opinions, the author dictates exactly how the reader should think; the reader is allowed to form his or her opinion about the text later. Authors also have the freedom to write very long passages to describe a single thing. Photographers only have one photograph to communicate with, which makes it more ambiguous as to what they want the viewer to understand.
No comments:
Post a Comment