In his essay, “The Work of Art In The Age of Mechanical Reproduction”, Benjamin divulges the rather "new" outlook people of the twentieth century have on film and photography. I found myself having a hard time understanding Benjamin's take on this new perspective and its possible effects until I reached his surgeon-magician metaphor found on pg.45.

The metaphor reads:
"Magician and surgeon compare to painter and cameraman. The painter maintains in his work a natural distance from reality, the cameraman penetrates deeply into its web. There is a tremendous difference between the pictures they obtain. That of the painter is a total one, that of the cameraman consists of multiple fragments which are assembled under a new law. Thus, for contemporary man the representation of reality by the film is incomparably more significant than that of the painter, since it offers, precisely because of the thoroughgoing permeation of reality with mechanical equipment an aspect of reality which is free of all equipment. And that is what one is entitled to ask from a work of art"(Walter Benjamin 1969, pg. 45). 

I have been a photographer ever since I fell in love with my first camera when I was just five years old. In high school one of my most beloved and successful classes was my studio art class. At first, I was reluctant to when I was asked to paint. I found myself so confident in my photography skills that I was afraid to try something new. When assigned projects such as painting landscape, I struggled with getting what I saw in front of me (reality) onto my canvas. My teacher then recommended that I try to paint personal photos I have taken of landscapes. I went through my photo library and found several photos that I was interested in painting. To my surprise, portrayal of the photo was far more accurate than I would have ever believed. I, along with my teacher, were in awe of the successful result before us.

After reading Benjamin's take on film and photography I was brought back to this memory, especially after reading the surgeon-magician metaphor. Why was a machines representation of a scene easier for me to paint than the depiction acquired from my own eyes? Benjamin suggests that the painter maintains more of a natural distance from reality than the cameraman. I find myself questioning this claim because of my own experiences attempting to do both as a millennial in the twentieth century. I found that I had a harder time estimating distance, latitude, and over all positioning of nature before me with my eyes alone. Mechanical equipment allowed me to surpass common human misjudgment due to its ability to capture a moment in time faultlessly. Painting reality through a photograph enabled me to have better judgment of details and the landscapes overall orientation.

Although I disagree with Benjamin's insight on who distances themselves from reality more naturally, I do agree with his point on which of the two is a more significant representation of the man. He writes: "for contemporary man the representation of reality by the film is incomparably more significant than that of the painter..."(Benjamin 1969, pg. 45). Why? Because when one observes a work of art we ask the artist whether or not he or she encompassed a precise representation of reality. A cameraman's work will more often than not be precise in its representation of reality because it is free from human error.