What is your opinion of this statement by Robert Heinecken?

As Shakespeare said: "... much ado about nothing ...". In my opinion Mt. Heinecken is attempting to dismiss photography as an art form. In attempting this, he fails to differentiate between the painter who starts with a blank canvas and can easily include or exclude whatever is before him and the photographer who is confronted with an entire scene and must use his knowledge of light and composition and exposure and depth of field to make the image he visualizes.

It is, of course, much easier to manipulate an image using today's technology than it was when photographs were printed using an enlarger.

Well, it's rather pretentious, although if you look at it, it is true. Opening the shutter immediately starts refracting the light, making it deviate from its "natural" path, i.e. a straight line. That's manipulation right there. The point he's making is...what? That photography doesn't show things exactly how they are? We knew that. It's just a question of how far you take the process; you could argue that a camera obscura is as close as you'll get to purity, and HDR / filter hell is the furthest away.

I disagree with your last point though. A lot of young photographers today would need a dictionary and a thesaurus to be able to understand that quote. It doesn't have any smiley faces or three letter abbreviations.

Clearly neither this guy or you have read Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time". That will change your concept of the nature of the Universe.

The simple truth is that 'reality' really is just a subjective experience. Reality is just a concept. One of many concepts we have to deal with on a daily basis. (Assuming what we think of as Day actually exists, That is!)

That pertains to photography in a huge number of ways. But one of those meanings is, you can't guarantee that what you perceive to be the altered 'reality' of a heavily edited photo is any LESS real than what you saw when you took the photo. The other meaning is, you can't predict how the viewer will 'see' the same reality that you see, nor can you say the viewer's version is any less 'real' than yours!

You don't have to be young to think this way, you just need to understand that physics is starting to define a universe far stranger than we can imagine.

I actually disagree with it...and would have dismissed continuing reading it after the first point...

I don't see photography as manipulative at all...it's a medium to record a moment and give a visual representation of an event...yes the captured image could be powerful enough to stir emotions, even cause outrage...that wouldn't be stepping away from the real...in my book it would be raising awareness of the atrocities and cruelty or persecution that exists...

You cannot get any closer to reality than that.

I do actually agree with your own views on the generation that is coming through...i'm not impressed with the mindset of the 'internet children'...all this technology isn't doing much for their I.Q.

I neither agree or disagree with it. Some photography would fit the quote, some certainly would not. Overall, I tend to find the quote a lot of pretentious artsy fartsy gibberish.

As for your assessment of young "photographers" today and their "mindset", ... no, you first have to have a mind in order to have a mindset. Most of the phone and app button pusher "photographers" of today would not bother to read through the entire quote before they would get a text saying, "OMG.... did you see Justin Bieber's new haircut...... ohhhh, he is soooo dreamy". As Mark said, even if they managed to read through it, they would be clueless to understand it.

I agree that the technology of today is creating the most stupid generation to ever exist instead of what should be the smartest. Quite sadly ironic.

steve

A load of tosh!

Photography should be enjoyed and not analysed in such an intense way.

Okay statement but I don't care about the 'hows', show me the whats as an end product and I'll go from there.