Future is not ours

First of all. People's perception is like a picture. The photograph does not capture the image of the object "as it is". First, the screen is limited. There is no camera that captures the whole world, even in three dimensions( June,1979 ;Japan).
Then there is the first choice of which part of the object, which side, and which side not. Next, the nature of the lens is too large for near objects, and too small for far objects. It never comes as it is. Then, even from the person who takes pictures, it is possible to make a close-up of a certain part, or to make the image small and small, by using the character of the lens. This is the second choice.

Furthermore, the relationship of time comes in. There are various times in this world. Morning and evening, day and night, spring and autumn, blooming and scattered, youth and old age, health and illness, success and joy, failure and sorrow and suffering. It is all time change. This world is constantly changing. Whichever one of them, it is not yet the whole. It is only a fragment. Which part of it do you see? This is the third choice.

As for the photos of the newspaper, I am astonished at the variety of methods of photography for the same person. When you have a good reputation, it really
care about it, in case when you are in bad luck and is also critical situations you
deliberately photographed from an awkward angle, even in the article,
in the case of positive or polarizing sentences, though in the case of "the same person's coverage", it makes a big difference,too.
But is it possible to see things "as they are"? It seems like a very difficult thing.