Can a photograph capture the 'essence' of somebody?

Wow this could be (and has been) interpreted so many ways...

Can a photograph steal your soul? Does the image represent a double of you that can be invested with your powers and leave you unprotected against the spirit world? Many cultures believe so, especially those descended from animistic customs.

Can a photograph record the soul leaving the body at the moment of death? Many people believe that it is possible, but evidence suggests otherwise. Don't take my word for it, set up your tripod and do some experiments.

Can a photograph depict a likeness of an individual that conveys all of the character and nuances that make up a lifetime? Arbitrarily, yes, on very very rare occasions, sometimes taken by amateurs, sometimes taken by professionals. The concept, though, is rather flawed and conceited. Living creatures are mercurial by nature, they are in a constant state of change both physically and emotionally. It is impossible to know ones self, therefore it is impossible to define ones self, therefore it is impossible to capture that definition. Add to that the natural inclination to judge a photo as "good" because it bares a resemblance to the imagined idealized concept of an individual rather than consider it as an artifact of the animal captured in time. It is very much akin to the experiments of dabbing paint on a chimps face and seeing if he recognizes himself in a mirror.

To understand the true nature of a photograph, it would help to understand quantum physics and the exploration and understanding the dimensions, specifically the dimension of time. Time is a moving stream, there is no past, present or future, there is, rather, a complete stream that exists in it's entirety. There is a headwater and there is the river and there is the delta. The water in the stream only moves in one direction, but all of the parts of the river exist at once. If all the people and houses and grass are made of water in the stream, a photograph records all the water at this point on the bank, at this time, afterwards the water has moved down stream. A photograph literally records a frozen split second of time. It is one of the few processes mankind has at it's disposal to do this. So when the camera goes off, you record forever evidence of a transient reality. It doesn't matter if the picture looks like the human, it doesn't matter if it is in focus, doesn't matter if it is a snaphot of the inside of your pocket. They are all records of stolen reality, despite what interpretation we may assign to them. Our judging of whether it is good or bad is a secondary process that is totally unrelated to the photo and is assigned in a completely arbitrary way after the fact.

There is a need in humans to seek out a secure feeling of constancy. It is in our nature, it is in our philosophies and our religions. This is why we attach so much sentimental power to the photo and whether it looks like us. We are made of that theoretical water, we constantly change and eventually we are no more. Our need to have the photo live on forever representing an idealized encapsulation of all that we are- is ultimately impossible to juxtapose over the frozen halfsecond image of a constantly changing animal. Any success in that is due to our willing delusion and not the recorded image.

In otherwords, we place importance on the picture because, if, by a trick of the light, it is beautiful, we can insist that it is us, that we are beautiful. The photo becomes our proxy, our touchstone, while we live out our less than beautiful existances. As long as it exists out there somewhere we remain beautiful.

Good luck.

this really depends on what exactly you mean by "essence".

Can a camera capture a "ghost" or "spirit visitor"? It depends on the photographer and his integrity. There have been many claims of catching a face or a person in a shot that shouldn't have been there or looks very different from modern people (such as clothes). However, many of these can be debunked by taking a closer look at it and finding it has been edited severely (even on a recording can be changed now). Though, there are some instances where it looks to be true. That one shot something is there and the next there isn't and only a couple of seconds passed between both shots. But this comes down to the honesty of the photographer. So capturing ghosts is still questionable.

Now, can a camera capture a "soul" or "essence" of a person as the body dies? This seems almost a taboo question. Nobody talks about it but there are several pictures capture something leaving a body as it dies. There has also been a scientific finding. After a person dies there is a difference in weight as if something is gone. So there is a lot to think about here!

i would definately recommend you check stuff out at book stores (not the weird stuff) just skim through photographs if they have any there (perhaps even a library...) hope this helps

Capture The Essence

I say no.

Every person is a complex being. Furthermore, who they are -- their essence, if you will -- can be perceived in different ways by different people. In such a reality, no single photograph could possibly capture a person's entire essence for everyone to see. The extent that a photograph captures a bit of a person's essence makes it exceptional.

Perhaps yes. A camera can be seen as an obstacle, an inanimate object between the subject and photographer. So it would depend on the ability of the photographer, and the comfort level of the subject. I think the term 'essence' can be an ambiguous concept as it relates to photography because only so much can be recorded by a two dimensional image. But if you're a person who can accept what you see as fact, I don't see why a photograph can't capture the essence of someone. Can your eyes capture the essence of somebody? I highly doubt they can. You can't know all there is to know about a person by simply looking at them in the same way you can't know all there is to know about a person by simply looking at a photograph of them. So we are always expected to rely on what we see as 'truth', unless we can see things from another perspective. But when you think about it, how are we able to see things in any other perspective but our own? I mean, people speak of taking the perspective of others, but you can't really do that, can you? You can use emotional states like empathy, understanding, and open-mindedness to have the ability to "walk a mile in someones shoes", so to say, but in reality, unless you can physically view the world from someone else's eyes, you can only see it through your own.

So what is 'essence'? There are only two definitions of the word which can apply in this situation. The philosophical; the inward nature, true substance, or constitution of anything, as opposed to what is accidental, phenomenal, illusory, etc. Or, the literal; the basic, real, and invariable nature of a thing or its significant individual feature or features. Which do you mean? You give few details about the susbstance of your inquiry, which leaves the answerer to digress on the meaning in thier own context. Sounds like an essay question. So if it is your goal to answer this question for yourself, you must first decide for yourself which of the two most pertinent meanings of the word 'essence' applies to the context of capture and form your own opinion. If it is your goal to probe the community, you must realize that people will invariably form an opinion based on how they derive its meaning. In my opinion, a photograph can be made to show anything, whatever essence is captured will be recorded. Most of the time, a photograph is meant to mean whatever the viewer wishes it to mean. After all, a photograph can be worth a thousand different words to a thousand different people.

No

The most photographed people in an election year are politicians. If a photograph could capture their true essence, how could any of these people be elected to office.

What exactly U mean .by essence of some body,there is a special method of photograph known as Kirlain photography which is said to give picture of an Aura about a human body from which some analysis like health etc can be predicted.are u thinking about this ?

I don't think so; but I think a really fine artist can capture the true essence of a person in a portrait, by combining features and expressions together that would not normally happen together,,,...maybe? :-)

The essence is a vital part of an idea or experience; yes.

Until you can provide a definition of what you mean by 'essence' of someone, you're question can't be answered.

Vance