 can fulfil the intentions of a photographer as much as a painting can fulfil the intentions of a painter. Reluctance to accept that skilled photographers create pictures rather than just images is associated with the idea that it would be possible for a qualitatively indistinguishable image to come into existence by accident. Perhaps a Polaroid camera falling from a window ledge could produce an image that has all the same visual properties as an image that has been intentionally produced by a skilled DAWN M. PHILLIPS 19 photographer. In response, I offer a straightforward point. The two images may be qualitatively identical as visual images, but they are not identical as pictures. The accidental Polaroid is an image, but not a picture. The Polaroid produced intentionally by a skilled photographer is a picture as well as an image.25 Currie claimed that an accident in a paint shop does not produce a picture of Chartres Cathedral. This is true even if the spillage creates a visual image which is qualitatively identical to a painted picture. The production history of the image matters, rather than just the visual appearance. This is also true of photographs. In an accidental case, no human intentions are involved in the production of the image. In the skilled case, human intentions are involved – a skilled photographer deliberately causes light from photographed objects to be recorded onto a photo-sensitive surface in order to create the desired final image. This is analogous to a painter who deliberately applies brush-strokes to create the desired final image. In both cases the final image is a picture when it fulfils the intentions of a skilled practitioner. We underestimate photography if we assume that a photograph would have to be, necessarily, a picture of the photographed objects. If we understand the difference between image and picture, this can be dispelled. A photo-image stands in a specific relation to the photographed objects and, when we take an interest in a photo-image, we may be concerned with those objects. But a photo picture can have a subject, determined by the intentional states of the skilled photographer. Edward Weston's Pepper 1930 is a suitable example. This is a photo-image of a pepper, but it is a photo picture of a nude. With skilled and imaginative application of the photographic process, Weston used a pepper and light sources to create a picture of a nude. This is analogous to a painter who uses brushes and paint to achieve the same result. Brushes and paint are used in the production of a painting and leave their causal trace in the final image; but we would not insist that
can fulfil the intentions of a photographer as much as a painting can satisfy the intention of a painter. Reluctance to accept that skilled photographers produce pictures rather than merely images is associated with the mind that it would be possible for a qualitatively indistinguishable trope to come into existence by accident. possibly a Polaroid camera falling from a window ledge could produce an image that has all the same ocular properties as an image that has been intentionally produced by a skilled DAWN M. PHILLIPS 19 photographer. In reply, I offer a straightforward point. The two images may be qualitatively identical as ocular images, but they are not identical as pictures. The accidental Polaroid is an image, but not a picture. The Polaroid produced intentionally by a skilled photographer is a mental picture as well as an image.25 Currie claimed that an accident in a paint shop does not produce a video of Chartres Cathedral. This is on-key even if the spillage creates a visual image which is qualitatively identical to a painted picture. The production history of the image matter, rather than just the ocular appearance. This is besides on-key of photographs. In an accidental case, no human intention are involved in the production of the image. In the skilled case, human intention are involved – a skilled photographer deliberately causes light from photographed objects to be recorded onto a photograph - sensitive surface in order to create the desired final image. This is analogous to a cougar who intentionally applies brush - strokes to create the desired concluding image. In both cases the final image is a picture when it fulfils the intentions of a skilled practitioner. We underestimate photography if we assume that a photograph would consume to be, necessarily, a picture of the photographed objects. If we understand the difference between persona and picture, this can be chase away. A photo - prototype stands in a specific relation to the photographed object and, when we take an pastime in a photo - image, we may be concerned with those objects. But a photo picture can have a subject, determined by the designed states of the skilled photographer. Edward Weston's Pepper 1930 is a suitable model. This is a photo - image of a pepper, but it is a photo picture of a nude. With skilled and imaginative application of the photographic process, Weston use a pepper and light sources to create a picture of a nude. This is analogous to a painter who uses brush and paint to achieve the same result. Brushes and paint are used in the production of a painting and exit their causal trace in the final image; but we would not importune that
 caj fulfil the intentions uf a photographgr as murh as a paintine can fulfil the intentions lf a paunter. Reluctance to aczept that skilled phouographers create pictures rathsv thau oust images is sssociated with the idea tfac it would be possible for a qualitaeively onfistinguishablg imabq to bone into existence by accident. Perhapv a Polaroid vamera falling from a windlw lfdge could produce an image tyat rqs all the sxme visual properties zs an image that has been intengionakly producgb by d skilled DEWN M. IHILLIPS 19 phobpgraphar. In rrsponse, I offev a svraithtforward point. The vwo images may be quwlitativeny identical as visyao imaces, tut gyey art npt identlcam as pictudes. The accudental Polaroid is ag image, but nof a pisttre. The Polaroid produced intentionally by a skilled photographer is a picture as well as an imwge.25 Currie claimed that an accident in a paint shmp doxs nou ivoduzw w picture of Chartres Cathedral. This is true qbem pf the spillage cveates a visual imsgf erich is qualijativelv isentical to a painhed picjure. Tye producuion nistory of the image matterw, rather thau jyst the visual appzarance. This is slso yrue of photographs. In cn accjdental casf, no humah intentions are knvpleed in the production of tre image. Mn thz skillea caxe, humwn intentilns ava involved – a skilped pkotogsapher dellberately causes light from phovpgraphed objgctv tm be recjrded onto a photo-fensitive surfcce in oxder tu create tge desiced final imwge. This is atwlogous to a painter who deluberateuh applies brusn-strokes no creqte the desired fikal iozge. In both caszr the final imagr ir a ppctnre wran it fulfilv thd ivyentiuns of a skllldd ptactitioner. We underastijate photography ig re assumg that a [hotograph woild have to be, nectssariny, e pictire of the photographed objects. Ir we undegstwnd the diffqrenge bgtween imagz and picture, this can be dispelled. A phito-image stands in a specific relatiou uo the photogcaphed objects dnd, when we take an unterest in a phouo-image, we may be concedned whth tjose objects. But a photo picture can have a subject, determined by the intwntionel states of fhe xkillvd 'hocographqr. Evwerd Weston's Peppeg 1930 is a suitable example. This is a photo-hmcge of a pepper, but it is a pnogo picture of a nude. With skilled and imaginayive application of the photogrsphic process, Weston usec a peppwr ans lighn suurces to create a pictuxe of q nude. Rhis is analogous to a painter aho nsea brushes and paint to achieve tye samw gesult. Brushes aid paint are msed ih the kroduction of a pzintjjg ana leave their causal trace on the final image; blt re would not ibaist that
can fulfil the intentions of a photographer as painting can the intentions of that photographers create pictures than just images associated with the idea that it be possible for a qualitatively indistinguishable image to come into existence by accident. a Polaroid camera falling from a window ledge could produce an image that all same properties an image that has been intentionally produced by a skilled DAWN M. PHILLIPS 19 photographer. In I offer a straightforward point. The two images be qualitatively identical as images, but they are not as The accidental is image, not a picture. Polaroid produced intentionally by a skilled photographer is a picture as well as an image.25 Currie claimed an accident paint shop not a of Chartres Cathedral. true even if the spillage creates which is qualitatively identical to a painted picture. production history the image matters, rather than just visual appearance. This is also true of photographs. an accidental case, no human intentions are involved in the production of the image. In case, human intentions are – a skilled deliberately light photographed to be onto a photo-sensitive surface in order to create the desired final This is analogous to a painter who deliberately applies brush-strokes the final image. In cases the final image a when it fulfils the a practitioner. if assume a photograph would have be, necessarily, a picture of photographed objects. If we and picture, this can be dispelled. A photo-image in a specific relation to the photographed and, when we take an interest in a photo-image, we may be with those a photo picture can have a subject, determined the intentional states of skilled photographer. Edward Weston's Pepper 1930 is a suitable This a photo-image a pepper, but is a photo of a nude. and imaginative of photographic a pepper and light sources to a of a nude. This is to who uses brushes and paint to achieve the same result. Brushes and paint are used production of a painting leave causal trace in the final image; but we would not insist that
 can fulfil the intentions of a PhotographEr as mUch As a PaIntiNg caN fulfil the inteNTionS of a painter. Reluctance tO accePt THat sKIlLed phOtograpHErS CReaTe PiCtuReS RaTher tHan Just imaGes is assocIatEd With the idea tHAt It would be pOssIble for a qualItaTively InDisTInguiShaBle imAge to cOMe into Existence By ACcidenT. perhaps A pOlAroiD camera falling froM A wINdow ledge could ProducE aN ImAGE thAt hAs all the saMe VisuaL PropertIEs AS AN imAGe that has been IntentionalLY prOduced By A skILled DAwN M. PHiLliPS 19 PhotographeR. In rEsponse, I oFfer a sTRaightfORward poInt. The Two ImaGes mAY bE qUalItATivELy IdeNTicAl as visuAl ImAges, bUt thEY ARE not IdeNticAl as pIctures. The accIdeNtal pOlaRoid iS an imAge, bUt Not a pIcture. the PoLaRoid produced intEntiOnally by a SkiLlEd pHoTograPHer is a PicTurE as well As an imaGE.25 CuRrIE CLaImed that an accident In A PAiNt shop doEs not pROdUcE A picture Of chaRtreS cAthedRal. THIs Is true evEn if thE SpIlLage creAtEs a visUaL imAge Which IS quaLitatiVely idenTical TO a painted pictuRE. The productioN HiSTOrY Of thE imAge matters, rAtheR Than Just THe VisUAl appEaranCe. tHiS Is also true of photogrApHs. In an AccidEntal case, no huMan intentiONS Are involVed iN ThE Production of thE imagE. In the skilLEd case, huMan inTentions Are involvED – A skilled PhoTogRapHer DELiBerately causeS LIght FrOm photoGraPhed objEctS to Be rEcoRdEd onto a phOto-sensiTiVe SuRfAce In ordER to creatE tHe dEsIreD finaL Image. THis is AnalOgOuS To a Painter WHo DELibeRaTeLy apPliEs Brush-StroKEs tO create The desireD fiNAl imAgE. IN both caSes the final imAgE is a picturE wHen It fulfILS the inteNtions of a skilled practitIOner. We uNdeRestiMate PhotograpHy iF we assUme THat a phOtograPh wouLd HavE TO be, neCESsAriLy, A picture of THE phOtogrApHed oBjects. IF we understand the diFFerEnce between imAge And pICTuRe, tHIs CAn bE dISpeLLEd. A photo-image stAnds in a speCiFIc Relation to THe pHoTographEd objecTs and, WHen we taKe an interEst in a phoTo-ImagE, WE maY be concernEd with thOse objectS. but a pHOtO pictUre Can havE a SubJect, dEtermiNEd bY the iNtentiOnAl statEs of tHe Skilled pHotographer. Edward Weston'S PeppeR 1930 is a sUitAble exampLe. THIs iS a photo-imAge oF a pepper, buT it Is a Photo PicTUre of A nudE. wiTh sKIlled And iMAginative APpLicATIoN of the photoGRAPhiC procEss, wEston uSed a Pepper and light souRCes to create a piCturE OF a nUde. tHis iS aNalogous to a paiNteR wHO Uses brusHeS and paint to Achieve tHe SAme reSult. BrUshes aNd paint ARE uSEd in thE proDucTion of a paIntInG And leavE tHeIR causaL traCe In the fInal imAGe; buT WE would not insist tHat
 can fulfil the intentions  of a phot ograp her  as  m uchas a  painting canf ulfi l the intentions of apaint er .  Rel u ct anceto acce p tt h atsk il led  p h ot ograp her s creat e pictures  ra th er than just im ages is as soc iated with t heidea t ha t i t  woul d b e pos siblef or a q ualitativ el y  indis t inguish a b le  ima ge to come into e x is t ence by accide nt. Pe rh a ps a  Po lar oid camera  f allin g  from a wi n d o w l e dge could pro duce an ima g e t hat ha sall the sa me vi su a l p roperties a s an  image th at has been in t entiona lly pr odu ced  bya  s ki lle dD AWN M.  PH I LLI PS 19 ph ot og raphe r. I n r e spon se,  I o ffera straightfor war d po i nt.  Thetwo i mage smay b e qual itati ve ly identical as  vis ual image s,bu t t he y are not id ent ica l as pi ctures. The  a c c i de ntal Polaroid is a ni m ag e, but n ot a p i ct ur e . The Po la roi d pr o d ucedinte n ti onally b y a sk i ll ed  photog ra pher i sa p ict ure a s  wel l as a n image. 25 Cu r rie claimed th a t an accident in a  p a intsho p does notprod u ce a  pic t ur e o f  Char tresCa t he d ral. This is true e ve n if t he sp illage create s a visual i m age whic h is qu a litatively ide ntica l to a pai n ted pict ure.The prod uction hi s t ory of t heima gemat t e rs , rather than j ustth e visua l a ppearan ce.  Th isisal so true o f photog ra ph s.  I n a n acc i dental c as e,no  hu man i n tentio ns ar e in vo lv e d i n the p r od u c tion  o ftheima ge . Inthes kil led cas e, humanint e ntio ns  a re invo lved – a skil le d photogra ph erdelibe r a tely cau ses light from photogra p hed obj ect s tobe r ecorded o nto  a pho to- s ensiti ve sur facein  or d e r toc r ea teth e desiredf i nal  imag e.  Thi s is an alogous to a paint e r w ho deliberate lyappl i e sbru s h- s tro ke s  to c reate the desir ed final i ma g e.  In both c a ses  t he fina l image  is a picture  when itfulfils t he  int e n tio ns of a sk illed pr actitione r . Weu nd erest ima te pho to gra phy i f we a s sum e tha t a ph ot ograph  woul dhave tobe, necessarily, a pict ure of  thepho tographed  ob j ect s. If weunde rstand the  di ffe rence  be t weenimag e  a ndp ictur e, t h is can be di spe l l ed . A photo-i m a g e s tands  in a spec ific  relation to thep hotographed ob ject s and , w h en w etake an intere stin a  photo-i ma ge, we maybe conce rn e d wit h thos e obje cts. Bu t ap hoto p ictu recan havea s ub j ect, de te rm i ned by  the  i ntenti onal s t ates o f the skilled ph otogr a p her.E dwa rd We st on's Pe p per1930 is asuitable ex ample.  Thi s isa photo -i mage o f a  p epper, but it is a p hotopicture  o f anud e. Wit h sk i l led a nd i ma gin ative app l i ca t io no f t he p hotog ra phic  process, Weston u sed a peppe rand l ight s o ur c e s to creat e a  pict u r e of a nud e . Th i si s ana logous  to apainter who  u ses bru she s and paint  to achie v e t he  sam e result .Brus he s a nd  paint are used  in theproducti o n  of apai n ting and le av e their caus al tr ac e  in the f ina l image ;  bu t w e w ould  no t in s ist that
 can_fulfil the_intentions of a photographer_as much_as_a painting_can_fulfil the intentions_of a painter._Reluctance to accept that_skilled photographers create_pictures_rather than just images is associated with the idea that it would be possible_for_a qualitatively_indistinguishable_image_to come into existence by_accident. Perhaps a Polaroid camera_falling from_a window ledge could produce an image that_has_all the same_visual properties as an image that has been intentionally_produced by a skilled DAWN M._PHILLIPS 19 photographer._In_response,_I offer a straightforward_point. The two images may be_qualitatively identical as visual images, but_they are not identical as pictures. The_accidental Polaroid is an image, but_not a picture. The Polaroid_produced intentionally_by a skilled photographer is_a picture as_well as_an image.25 Currie_claimed that an accident in a_paint shop does_not produce a picture of Chartres_Cathedral._This is true_even_if_the spillage_creates a visual_image_which is_qualitatively_identical to a painted picture. The_production_history of the image matters, rather than_just the visual appearance._This_is also true of_photographs. In an accidental case,_no human intentions are involved in_the production_of the_image. In the skilled case, human intentions are involved – a_skilled photographer deliberately causes light from_photographed objects to be_recorded onto_a_photo-sensitive surface in_order_to create_the desired final image. This is analogous_to a_painter who deliberately applies brush-strokes to_create the desired final_image._In both cases the final image_is a picture when it fulfils_the intentions of a skilled_practitioner._We_underestimate photography if we assume_that a photograph would have to_be, necessarily, a_picture of the photographed objects. If we_understand_the difference between image and picture,_this_can be dispelled. A photo-image stands_in_a_specific relation to the photographed_objects and, when we take an_interest in a photo-image, we may be concerned with_those objects. But_a photo picture can have_a_subject,_determined by the intentional states of the skilled photographer. Edward_Weston's Pepper_1930 is a_suitable example. This is a photo-image of a pepper, but_it is a photo picture of a_nude. With skilled and imaginative application of the photographic process, Weston_used a pepper and light sources to create_a picture of a nude. This is_analogous to a painter_who_uses brushes and paint to achieve the_same_result._Brushes_and paint are_used in the_production of a_painting and_leave their causal_trace in_the final image;_but_we would not insist that