Photography

In Bazin's article, the fact that artistic representations of reality are inherently inferior to images as they lack the "quality of credibility".  In previous readings, the subjectivity and past experiences of an artist influenced how they painted certain images.  When Renoir and Monet both painted the scene at La Grenouillere, the two paintings came out differently due to their emphasis and de-emphasis on certain elements.  My confusion arises on the notion that we perceive the world differently because how is what I see different from what you see?  If there is a difference, then how does photography account for this different in perception because there would be a discrepancy between what one actually sees and what is captured on the photo. 

Kracauer glosses over the notion of photography as a memory aid.  How would modern society be different today without the advent of the photography?  Would it profoundly change the way education is taught, history is learned, our perception of the world?

I feel like without photography, we lose a integral part of our history because those pictures capture what words cannot.  After all, a picture speaks a thousand words