These two photos are of the same scene, you can even see the same clouds. The one on the right was taken seconds after the one on the left - same camera, same film. The difference is a yellow filter on the second one. But anyone who's looked at the sky can tell you the filtered one looks more "real". Except for the specks at the top right, which are either a result of the filter being old and crinkly or lens flare.
Below the fold are a few more photos. Only one of these even used a camera I can put a filter on, and that was an IR filter.
the thing about photorealism, well, it wasn't so much about embracing truth in photos, it was about rejecting art, and nothing exemplifies this more than anstel adam's beef with mortenson.
although both photographers took the time to manipulate the photo into what they desired, anstel's work is "realism" and mortenson's is "derivative shlock".
mortenson saw cameras as a tool and film as a canvas, embraced pictorialism and was near written out of history for it. the styles he embraced are still popular today, and you only need look at instagram to see the proof. his photos have an almost ethereal touch, dreamy and picaresque
meanwhile anstel, being a big weenie, wanted his photography to be free of original sin. he called it "straight photography", explaining that it possessed "no qualities of technique, composition or idea, derivative of any other art form",
his form of realism involved spending days in the darkroom, exaggerating tone and contrast to make his images stark, but that wasn't "art" so it was ok. he even created his own science/numerology to demonstrate how clinical and mechanical his work was. nature's harmonious ten point zone system, etc.
it was never about being truthful, it was about pretending that photography was something purer and more objective than a traditional canvas painting.
and well, anstel's work wasn't truthful at all. nor objective.
nothing exemplifies this more than his war time propaganda. a photobook about japanese internment in the manzanar concentration camp: "Born Free and Equal: The Story of Loyal Japanese-Americans"
it's worth comparing one anstel's photos of manzanar concentration camp to one of dorothea lange's. his has happy smiling children lining up to exercise, hers is of a dusty prison camp
ostensibly his work was about showing people overcome adversity, but in practice it was a "this practice is fine, everyone is happy and thriving at this concentration camp!". that's why his work got published, and dorothea's photos were siezed and impounded.
in the end: that's what photorealism is about, a purity of technique, not a purity of image. the sort of mentality that leads to boring men on twitter yelling "can you do this with your phone, hmm?" and posting a corporate stock photo with a tiny bit of bokeh.
photorealism is where the technique, the equipment, and the practice trumps all else. a load bearing cognitive dissonance that lets you believe you're objective as you create propaganda for concentration camps
it doesn't matter how staged the photograph is, all that matters is that the lens is corrected for chromatic aberration.
