‘Images are surfaces above which the eye circles only to
return again and again to the starting point.‘ (Flusser; Towards a Philosophy
of Photography; p.77)
Understanding the relationship between photography and
psychology is a process which requires an in depth analysis and the ability to
connect subject matters which at first might seem completely unrelated to one
another. Photography and materiality are two topics which when combined, will
result in emotional triggers under the shape of images.
In order to comprehend the entire process, which
takes place between these two elements, one must start by understanding the
definition of an image and what its purpose is.
Defining photography based on associations is essential when
aiming to understand the mechanism. ‘Photographs are, of course, artifacts. But
their appeal is that that they also seem, in a world littered with photographic
relics, to have the status of found objects.’ (Sontag; On Photography; p.69)
Susan Sontag is not the only person to associate photos with objects.
Wittgenstein also has an innovative perspective with regards to the manner in
which pictures are perceived and understood. ‘……We regard the photograph, the
picture on our wall, as the object itself (the man, landscape, and so on)
depicted there. – Wittgenstein’ (Sontag; On Photography; p. 198) Looking at an
image and seeing the object or person who is actually depicted in the picture
rather than the image itself leads the brain into triggering certain emotions
and mental states, as a response to the object.
When observing the symbols present in each image, a certain
pattern can be established when it comes to responses and reactions.
Roland Barthes has identified two elements, which should be
present in each photograph one looks at. The first one, entitled Studium ‘is
that very wide field of unconcerned desire, of various interest, of
inconsequential taste: I like/ I don’t like. ‘(Barthes; Camera Lucida; p.27) It
creates the feeling of interest towards and image and it determines the viewer
to either explore the subject further or lose interest.
The second one is the Punctum, which is described by Barthes
as being ‘a detail’ which ‘attracts me.’ ‘I feel that its mere presence changes
my reading, that I am looking at a new photograph, marked in my eyes with a
higher value.’ The author takes things even further by explaining that ‘it is
not possible to posit a rule of connection between the studium and punctum. It
is a matter of co-presence.’ (Barthes; Camera Lucida; p.42)
In this case, the studium is represented by the toy depicted in the image and the punctum is the detail such as facial expression, texture of the 'fur' which take me to the moment in which I received the toy or bought it, depending on each fluffy friend.
The need to have an actual photograph which might be under
the shape of a Polaroid or a print, is triggered by what the image depicts and
most importantly, by the effect it has on the viewer. If it is important and of
sentimental value that will lead to the desire of having an actual object,
which can be touched. According to Roger Scruton, ‘A photograph is a
surrogate for its image content.’ The photograph substitutes the content it depicts and
the viewer’s emotions towards the content are redirected towards the print.
It can be said that the print is the final stage of an
image, from its beginning to completion. What at first was observed and
documented through the camera, was then ‘imprinted by rays of light on a plate
or sensitive film.’ (Trachtenberg; Classic Essays on Photography; p.288) Afterwards,
another point of transition occurs when the image is projected from the film
onto the paper, resulting in the creation of a photographic print.
