Professor, I would like to start by apologizing for my tardiness. I may not get any credit for this, but any would be appreciated. Upon reviewing the photo and Capa’s explanation for authenticity, I have come to my own conclusion that it was staged. I am aware of the importance of the public believing in its truth and that is most of the reason why it was taken in the first place. At this time people needed to feel closeness to what was happening where they couldn’t be but were still very emotionally invested. This photo helped family members of soldiers and Americans country-wide gain a vague understanding of how serious things can get and gave them some sort of peace-of-mind. I believe it was staged because there doesn’t seem to be much going on other than the soldier falling from a alleged gunshot wound. There isn’t the sense of chaos I would expect. Capa also seems to be awfully close and personal with the subject to have take such a clear and direct photo. Personally, if I were photographing someone being shot I would likely be in the process of ducking for cover myself and the timing just seems to be too good for the split second after impact. Either way, staged or not, this photo needed to be provided and used for the propaganda of war.
Though this by far is an extraordinary photograph, it was very difficult to be content with. This being that we have been exposed to many photographs in which appeared to be real but in reality were actually staged. Robert Whelan has many good points. One that really stood out to me was that the photograph was taking multiple times. In one of the photographs the man captured in it, is doing the exact pose as the one who was caught falling. I don’t believe it is real due to Robert Capa being known for most of the staged photographs. I also believe that the authenticity doesn’t matter at this point because back then, it was a photograph that was never seen before, so it gave people a broad and different perspective of reality.
Whelan’s uses a great amount of evidence to help back up why he believes Capa’s photo isnt staged. Personally I am torn between whether or not it was or wasnt. The message behind the photo is very relevant but the images scenery doesn’t seem like it occurred during an actual war. To me because there arent any other soldiers around and the persons facial expressions dorang seem genuine, those are reasons I believe the photo may be staged. Capa is know for going to extreme lengths to getting the right photo, so I wouldn’t put it past him to be right by the side of a solider being hit by a bullet.
Whelan’s argument is very convincing. His points of the photo not being staged is good, but i still believe it is staged. The way the person in the photograph is falling doesn’t look realistic to me. It seems off because normally you wouldn’t see someone fall in that angle. I don’t think its authenticity matters because the photo looks awesome to see. The way the photo was shot makes it interesting.
The image was controversial for me because other pictures we have been exposed to that seemed truly authentic have not been and vice versa. However, Whelan provides both his own and other professional dissections of Robert Capa’s “Falling Soldier.” Alongside the proof of date of Federico’s death and location, Robert Capa’s location at time of photograph and Federico’s brother’s confirmation of person, Whelan provides a through rationalization. From the other soldiers’ stances to the location on the hill of Federico and how he may have been snuck up upon and fallen in such a manner. It seems extremely authentic in both explanation and proof. What stuck out to me was the analysis of the fingers curling upon a dying individual as opposed to the innate sense to put a palm open out to stop a fall.
To be honest, the first time i saw this image i was pretty skeptical myself. But after reading Richard Whelan’s article on proving that Robert Capa’s “Falling Soldier” is genuine, it became clear to me that it was. Richard provides the article with enough evidence to prove that the image is not staged. He points out every aspect of the image from the angle it is taken, to the soldiers position. Of course authenticity matters. that is what creates true photography in my opinion. Capa caught the image the second the soldier was shot. Another reason to prove Capa did not stage this, well, Capa risked his life trying to get photographs on D-Day. I don’t think anyone with the guts to do that will stage an image like this. #studentHW
Richard Whelan produces a very convincing argument when it comes to Robert Capa’s Death of a Loyalist Soldier He references a lot of counterarguments and even writes in a way to confuse at first but towards the end he begins to prove using other photographs and the way certain features stand out to prove that Capa’s photo is genuine. I was skeptical at first because it appears too good to be true. The moment was just right, as was the fall. Now looking closer, it appears to be real.
Richard Whelan’s article on proving that Robert Robert Capa’s “Falling Soldier” is genuine is quite convincing. Whelan established a multifaceted approach in addressing the controversy behind the photograph. Although many of the reasons seem to be superficial, the argument that was the most convincing was the research of the identity of the fallen soldier. The article stated that the falling soldier in the photograph was a man named Federo Borrell Garcia, it was also confirmed in the Spanish government archives that Borrell had been killed in battle Atamo Muriano in September 5, 1936. Putting a name to the face, in a lack of better words, allows for the photograph to appear more personal. Looking at the photograph and after reading the article, the photograph does not seem staged. The trajectory of the fall and the unusual position of the soldiers arm illustrates authenticity. One of the functions of photography is that it is used as means of conveying a message to its audience. Whether a photograph is authentic or not depicts how an audience will react to it. Granted, it’s is unrealistic to believe that all photographs must be produced authentically as most often staged photographs are used in ways of entertainment and informing the public of serious issues however, authentic photographs are more appreciated and essential. A photograph that is manipulated or staged may take away from the overall message; meaning the audience may simply focus on the fact that the photograph is fake rather than the actual message behind it.
After reading Richard Whelan’s argument defending the authenticity of Robert Capa’s photograph, I am fully convinced that the photograph of the Loyalist soldier getting shot was not staged. He provided ample evidence; from the locations where Capa was seen and located at around the time the photo was taken, to the position the soldier’s hand was in when the photo was taken. All in all, his argument was convincing and well structured. I believe the authenticity of the photograph does matter, because it represents victory and conquering the enemy. If an image like that was falsified, the idea it represented holds no value anymore.
I think Whelan’s argument is very convincing, or rather, would be very convincing to many people, but I personally just can’t imagine a soldier hearing gunshots from multiple guns and decide that I’m just going to run straight towards them. That sounds like suicide. So yes, I do think Capa’s photograph was staged. I don’t think the authenticity of the photo mattered back then, Capa had an idea and decided to act upon it. I think I would have don’t the same honestly. Also, I don’t think the authenticity of the photo matters now either. The only reason I would want to know if it was staged would be out of pure curiosity and that alone, the photo would and is still an important photo that changed photography.