What I got from Flusser’s The Photograph was that photographs are not meant to be decoded as simple recreations of the world around us, but rather complex relationships between the camera, the photographer, and reality. I think if we accept the image in front of us as reality, we’ve failed to fully try to understand the photo. It’s important to recognize the photographer’s intent for the photo and how they use the camera to carry out that intent. Photographers have the ability to alter the reality around them, cutting out details in their environment and using different angles or lighting to create the message they want to convey with what’s in front of the lens. I found the bit about black and white being more “real” than color photos interesting as well. A teacher of mine in another class recently explained to the class that everything we see is not exactly real as we see it because we do not have the ability to see the world around us – rather, we see reflections of light bouncing off our surroundings. So, if black is the total absence of light and white is the opposite, are black and white photos theoretically a more “true” value to the reality that’s captured in it’s image? I think it makes sense!