Note on truth in photography

One of the most basic definitions of a photograph describes it as a two-dimensional rendering of a motif using light-sensitive components capable of storing image information. While technically accurate, this definition does not account for the photograph's complex role as a cultural artefact and vehicle for meaning. Philosopher and semiotician Roland Barthes (1993) described a photograph as a trace — a track of a single, unrepeatable event that belongs irrevocably to the past. In this view, a photograph becomes more than just an image; it is a fragment of reality, preserved and transported across time. It can potentially carry visual information, emotional weight, cultural meaning, and underlying truths or opinions about the event it records.

At its core, a photograph represents the physical presence of a subject in front of a camera at a specific moment in time. It confirms, to some degree, that a human observer saw, selected, and captured what we see — and that it existed.

This physicality gives photography a documentary quality: a photograph offers a kind of proof, a visual testimony of presence. However, this "proof" is never absolute. While the photographer may use the camera to record what lies before it, the resulting image rarely offers a neutral or complete representation of the subject. It is a version of reality filtered through layers of decisions, contexts, and interpretations.

Photography is, fundamentally, a synthesis of those processes. The subject alone does not make the photograph; rather, it is the culmination of numerous decisions made by the photographer — decisions that shape how the subject is perceived. The photographer always plays an active role in the photographic event. While their physical presence is usually not visible in the image (except in self-portraits), their influence is everywhere: in the framing, composition, lighting, and the choice of when to press the shutter.

From a pragmatic perspective, photography often functions as documentation, evidence, or a record. Journalism, science, law, and personal memory use photography practically, frequently treating it as a truthful representation of reality. The camera's ability to capture and preserve moments for future viewers lends photography an aura of accuracy, even objectivity. It provides viewers with a sense of security, a feeling that they are seeing something tangible — a surrogate for memory. In this sense, photography aligns with the long-standing human desire to freeze time and hold onto truth, a utopian aspiration to know and preserve the world.

However, this perception of truth is not without its complexities. When we view a photograph, we do so through the lenses of our memory, knowledge, and experience. Sight is never neutral; physical, cultural, and social conditions shape it. The same image may evoke entirely different meanings in different viewers. In this way, photography involves what the photographer shows and what the viewer perceives. The viewer's interpretation creates a model of reality that is necessarily subjective.

According to correspondence theory, truth is the alignment between what we observe and know — a consistency between the image and the reality we believe it represents. However, this definition raises a critical question: How can we judge the truthfulness of an image if we did not witness the moment it captures? Without firsthand experience of the photographic event, we depend entirely on the image and the photographer's decisions to shape our understanding. This creates a paradox. Photography connects to reality through mechanical and chemical processes, but human choices shape every image. The photographer decides what to include, what to leave out, and how to present the scene. In doing so, they construct their version of the event.

Thus, the "truth" in photography may not lie in the objective accuracy of the depicted motif but rather in the truth of the photographic event itself. It is not only the subject that matters, but the encounter between the subject and the photographer, mediated by tools and choices. Ultimately, the only certainty we may draw from a photograph is that such an encounter occurred. It reflects not only what stood in front of the camera but also how the photographer saw it — and how they chose to share that vision with others.

References:

Barthes, R. (1993). Camera Lucida (R. Howard, Trans.). Vintage Classics.