Tuesdays Class
Review of Why People Photograph… an article by Robert Adams.
Adams believes there is no purpose to add text to art as it is a self-explanatory medium. He also talks about the straight forwardness of pictures and photography. In contrast to what Adams says, the class reached the conclusion that context can help enrich audience’s experience with art, especially if they are unfamiliar with the piece and the artist.
Adams tends to use sweeping generalizations and seems to speak a bit hypocritically judging from the fact that he is criticizing writing about art, through writing. In some ways he is claiming that text and writing cannot co-exist and if one is not successful alone, than there must be some sort of flaw in the original work. He says that work should be strong without the addition of writing or explanation.
He believes that photographs should have clarity and should not use text as a crutch. However it is more probable that, as Colby put it, “the visual rhetoric and the textual rhetoric add to the piece as a whole instead of taking away.” Lazy pictures depend purely on text to be successful is what Adams maybe arguing about more specifically rather than claiming that all photographs which include text should be considered lesser works or art.
Episode 6 documentary notes:
Variability of photography
Digital age brings about new types of photography and snapshots, however still maintains the “more than meets the eye” back idea.
Asks: What is a photograph really worth these days?
Staging behind photography, almost similar to a theatrical production
Gregory Crixon, brining cinematic materials to photography- Lots of labor intensive work for photographs.
Priced at 60,000. With a list of potential buyers – “Hollywood values” with photography
Crixon is looking for the “perfect photograph.”
Photography is a very different experience for modern photographers than it was for previous generations.
Robert adams (author of the article we read earlier in class)- lived on the line of poverty – photography was a different world then
Now collecting photography has become “a lot of fun… baby boomers are collecting photographs,” which is pushing price of photographs up at auctions- but how do you assess the worth of a photograph. Higher priced photographs are made by the photographer himself. “Vintage” means the print was produced closer to the time it was taken.
Aesthetics do not necessarily come into play
“trying to make photographs like works of art”
history matters (like what I mentioned about vintage above)
the market has changed photographers
photography has become both a commodity and a medium
in 1970- a photographer tried to get listing in NY times and they said photography “wasn’t art” however in 2000 photographs are going for millions!
81 billion photographs taken this year
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Writing and the Popularization of Photography
It was provocative for me to read the Adams piece as someone who is interested in combining poetry/other forms of text with photography in book form. Adams seems to see text as secondary to photography, and not something that can stand on its own, although he has gone to great lengths to create this standalone book with no images in it. He describes mostly the effect of text that serves to describe the intent or content of images. Adams does not discuss text that branches off of photography to create a new art form, or serves to expand on the photograph in a creative manner.
It is strange to me that he discusses creating text as mainly an act of “saying something worse,” or being used because the picture doesn’t say enough on its own, but then also discusses the writing process as “opening a vein,” which is very personal, intimate, and expressive. Adams seems to have ambiguous feelings about text, but writes mainly to say that words are inferior to images. However, it seems that he has much more to say, and that his actual experience with text and photography is more complex. I would have appreciated it if he had gone into a deeper and more philosophical argument about text and its relationship to photography, rather than discounting text so outright. This is good for prompting debate on the subject, but it also seems like he is a very intellectual person sidestepping the challenge of delving into the relationship deeper. I would have been more interested in reading a more complex evaluation of the different ways text and photography have been used in conjunction with each other.
I found the “Genius of Photography” video that we watched to be incredibly interesting – mostly, seeing how high-end photography and the business of auctioning works. I didn’t know that this was so organized and expensive a business, and this film clarified a lot for me. I liked that it discussed the differences in value between images printed through an actual piece of film by the photographer (“vintage prints”) and images copied from other prints. I also found the part where the photograph from the early 20th century sold for 2.6 million to be fascinating – due to the rarity of this print, as well as the rarity of photographs using this early technique.
I thought it was interesting that this very recent increase in the value of photography is largely attributable to the baby boomer generation that grew up with the explosion in photography, who have now become adults involved in the purchasing of famous and valuable photographs. The technological boom and commercialization of photography caused more widespread appreciation for the medium. The baby boomers grew up in this age of appreciation, and really allowed photography to become accepted as an art. Even photographs that had been taken much earlier on and were not considered art are now deemed not just valuable art, but incredibly important from a cultural and historical perspective.
In thinking about the reading and the film together, prior to the 60’s or 70’s, photography generally was not considered a higher art form than writing. It is only after the rather recent popularization of photography that an argument like Adams would even be considered. If the argument was between painting/other older visual art forms and writing, there might have been more of an argument, but an argument weighing photography over writing would not have had much force. Recent trends and societal patterns have a huge influence on how we view different art forms, alone and in combination.
I don’t think that writing will ever be “replaced” with photography and film, even though I have heard some people say this. Despite the growing popularity in photography and film, writing is such an integral force even in images (Facebook, for example) and things such as television advertisements. Written language is such an important way of communicating information that it should not be undervalued. Photography can often stand alone, and there is great value to the individual’s own interpretation of a photograph without added textual information. However, text allows us to talk about photographs from a historical and cultural perspective, as well as enabling us to discus where photographs lie theoretically in the arena of art. Without text and verbal discussion, I think that art just wouldn’t be as interesting, and art theory wouldn’t exist. The appreciation of art would be something that people never discussed, but experienced only in isolation. We could never branch out of our own interpretations and learn through others, thus limited in the knowledge we could gain.
It is strange to me that he discusses creating text as mainly an act of “saying something worse,” or being used because the picture doesn’t say enough on its own, but then also discusses the writing process as “opening a vein,” which is very personal, intimate, and expressive. Adams seems to have ambiguous feelings about text, but writes mainly to say that words are inferior to images. However, it seems that he has much more to say, and that his actual experience with text and photography is more complex. I would have appreciated it if he had gone into a deeper and more philosophical argument about text and its relationship to photography, rather than discounting text so outright. This is good for prompting debate on the subject, but it also seems like he is a very intellectual person sidestepping the challenge of delving into the relationship deeper. I would have been more interested in reading a more complex evaluation of the different ways text and photography have been used in conjunction with each other.
I found the “Genius of Photography” video that we watched to be incredibly interesting – mostly, seeing how high-end photography and the business of auctioning works. I didn’t know that this was so organized and expensive a business, and this film clarified a lot for me. I liked that it discussed the differences in value between images printed through an actual piece of film by the photographer (“vintage prints”) and images copied from other prints. I also found the part where the photograph from the early 20th century sold for 2.6 million to be fascinating – due to the rarity of this print, as well as the rarity of photographs using this early technique.
I thought it was interesting that this very recent increase in the value of photography is largely attributable to the baby boomer generation that grew up with the explosion in photography, who have now become adults involved in the purchasing of famous and valuable photographs. The technological boom and commercialization of photography caused more widespread appreciation for the medium. The baby boomers grew up in this age of appreciation, and really allowed photography to become accepted as an art. Even photographs that had been taken much earlier on and were not considered art are now deemed not just valuable art, but incredibly important from a cultural and historical perspective.
In thinking about the reading and the film together, prior to the 60’s or 70’s, photography generally was not considered a higher art form than writing. It is only after the rather recent popularization of photography that an argument like Adams would even be considered. If the argument was between painting/other older visual art forms and writing, there might have been more of an argument, but an argument weighing photography over writing would not have had much force. Recent trends and societal patterns have a huge influence on how we view different art forms, alone and in combination.
I don’t think that writing will ever be “replaced” with photography and film, even though I have heard some people say this. Despite the growing popularity in photography and film, writing is such an integral force even in images (Facebook, for example) and things such as television advertisements. Written language is such an important way of communicating information that it should not be undervalued. Photography can often stand alone, and there is great value to the individual’s own interpretation of a photograph without added textual information. However, text allows us to talk about photographs from a historical and cultural perspective, as well as enabling us to discus where photographs lie theoretically in the arena of art. Without text and verbal discussion, I think that art just wouldn’t be as interesting, and art theory wouldn’t exist. The appreciation of art would be something that people never discussed, but experienced only in isolation. We could never branch out of our own interpretations and learn through others, thus limited in the knowledge we could gain.
After reading and discussing the Robert Adam's "Why People Photograph?" I am still undecided on what I believe about text and photography. Adam's seemed to believe and would possibly agree with the statement that text does not belong with photography. He believes that the text takes away from the photo and that the photo should speak for itself.
In the reading he states" the main reason that artists don't willingly describe or explain what they produce is, however, that the minute they do so they've admitted failure. Words are proof that the vision they had is not, in the opinion of some at least, fully there in the picture. Charactering in words what they thought they'd shown is an acknowledgement that the photograph is unclear-that it is not art." This statement basically shows that Adams feels as if the text supplied with the photograph makes the photo no longer art because it had to be explained and the picture could not speak for itself.
I understand what Adams is saying because I think photos should be perceived in the eye of the viewer. I don't feel like the picture should make someone feel one exact way or about it and they should have the right to interpret and take away from the picture whatever they please. However, I do believe that text can help explain a photo in some cases. It can get across the message that the photographer wanted to portray in his/her photo. As discussed in class yesterday, the text in the photos about Kareem Abdul-Jabar and snow white played a vital role in the understanding of them as well as the Paul Fusco RFK image. Too much text can take away from the photo or make it see as if the photographer is creating fluff or unnecessary detail but in many cases it enriches the viewers experience with the photograph.
Also the documentary we viewed in class yesterday showed me just how far photography has come. The fact that it could not get into the New York Times newspaper in its early stages to it now being the catalyst of photos selling for millions of dollars amazes me. It makes me wonder how far photography will grow in the future if these changes happened in the matter of 30 years.
Robert Adams Photographs and Wirtings
Robert Adams perspective is that Photographs and writings do not go together. He believes this because he feels that writing takes away from what the reader should actually get from looking at the photograph along with their imagination.
However, from my perspective I believe that a Photograph can be more benefitial from the writing. I believe this because the writing helps the reader understand what the photograph is about as the reader is looking at the photograph.
Also after watching the docmentary in class yesterday, I acquired an understanding into the history of photography. I also learned that duplicated photographs are not vaued as much as the original photograph.
This is my perspective on both the documentary and Robert Adams perspective on photographs and writings.
However, from my perspective I believe that a Photograph can be more benefitial from the writing. I believe this because the writing helps the reader understand what the photograph is about as the reader is looking at the photograph.
Also after watching the docmentary in class yesterday, I acquired an understanding into the history of photography. I also learned that duplicated photographs are not vaued as much as the original photograph.
This is my perspective on both the documentary and Robert Adams perspective on photographs and writings.
Yesterdays Class
I found it very interesting the views Robert Adams had towards text and photography. In the sense that its either one or the other instead of both of them combined. I really believe that the fact that there is text in a photograph apart from helping describe the photo it gives it more meaning to it. It maybe tries to prove a stronger point on emphasize the photograph on some specific thing.
Text and Photography: Never the twain shall meet?
Reading the Adams piece was a rather visceral experience for me, as an artist myself who has had to write about my own work for public perusal. Writing about your own artwork is a chore. Often, you aren't sure what your original intention was, or if it even has any relevance to the work you produced. Perhaps you did not start out with an intention and developed content in the production process. Or you may want to leave a piece vague and ambiguous so that the audience can read into it what they will.
And this is fine. Artwork does not always require text - magazines, newspapers, and other mass media flood us with images that very well speak for themselves, and the text only serves to fill in the details or tell what is happening outside the scene. However, art sometimes does require text - either to enlarge its content or to provide a context so that the viewer can locate themselves within a piece. This text does not need to be entirely explicit about the artist's intentions - it can meerly state where the piece, who or what it is of, or how the artist came across the particular subject. As mundane as this information may seem, it can completely explode what a piece of artwork is, while still allowing a viewer to read their own narrative into the work.
Additionally, I have been trained to find visual cues in an image and read meaning into them. I can develop elaborate stories about images I know nothing about. But, for the general public, this activity may not come so easily. A person that is not familiar with artist motifs or art history may find an image powerful, but still be at a loss as to why they are drawn to it and are thus denied the full experience of appreciating an image. By denying context to these viewers, and insisting that art can only be appreciated by artists, is a disappointingly elitist stance and one that I am vehemently opposed to.
Adams may not entirely devalue text, but it seems as if he has not fully explored the manner in which it can be utilized to enrich an image. Perhaps he should go talk to someone who is not an artist once in a while.
Concerning the small portion of the documentary that we viewed last night, I was most struck by the comodification of artists and their photographs, particularly in the way that some images can sell for elaborate sums but during the artist's time their work was completely undervalued. It seems as if antiquity and distance give photographs their value, displacing them from their context and elevating mediocre images into expensive masterpieces (not to say any of the images in the film were mediocre). It was also strange to see the artist at the end of the film, who created his style and intention in his native land, but was then appropriated to a high class New York audience, completely removed from the people he was photographing, and in the end turned into a fashion trend. Once again, it seems the distance and exotic nature of the artist was what gave his images such appeal.
And this is fine. Artwork does not always require text - magazines, newspapers, and other mass media flood us with images that very well speak for themselves, and the text only serves to fill in the details or tell what is happening outside the scene. However, art sometimes does require text - either to enlarge its content or to provide a context so that the viewer can locate themselves within a piece. This text does not need to be entirely explicit about the artist's intentions - it can meerly state where the piece, who or what it is of, or how the artist came across the particular subject. As mundane as this information may seem, it can completely explode what a piece of artwork is, while still allowing a viewer to read their own narrative into the work.
Additionally, I have been trained to find visual cues in an image and read meaning into them. I can develop elaborate stories about images I know nothing about. But, for the general public, this activity may not come so easily. A person that is not familiar with artist motifs or art history may find an image powerful, but still be at a loss as to why they are drawn to it and are thus denied the full experience of appreciating an image. By denying context to these viewers, and insisting that art can only be appreciated by artists, is a disappointingly elitist stance and one that I am vehemently opposed to.
Adams may not entirely devalue text, but it seems as if he has not fully explored the manner in which it can be utilized to enrich an image. Perhaps he should go talk to someone who is not an artist once in a while.
Concerning the small portion of the documentary that we viewed last night, I was most struck by the comodification of artists and their photographs, particularly in the way that some images can sell for elaborate sums but during the artist's time their work was completely undervalued. It seems as if antiquity and distance give photographs their value, displacing them from their context and elevating mediocre images into expensive masterpieces (not to say any of the images in the film were mediocre). It was also strange to see the artist at the end of the film, who created his style and intention in his native land, but was then appropriated to a high class New York audience, completely removed from the people he was photographing, and in the end turned into a fashion trend. Once again, it seems the distance and exotic nature of the artist was what gave his images such appeal.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Collaboration has always been my favorite method of production - work always turns out so much more enriching and fulfilling when it is drawn together from the consciousness of more than one individual. I loved hearing the interplay between Colby's photographic investigations and Bernard's literary ones. I've been creating graphics for nearly a decade now, so I have delved into issues of text as decoration, visual stimuli, and commentary on the image. However, I loved working hands on with these two media and seeing the way that they could collage together to create an entirely different message. I look forward to completing the photomontages tonight.
I have always been, and will always be, an enormous fan of Dadaism and Surrealism. They were the two movements that pushed me into entirely new realms in my own artisitic process. One of the major facets of both movements that I am drawn to is the spontenaity and subconcious decision making involved in creating a work, and these two issues were highlighted in the exquist corpse exercise. I've participated in the game through drawing before, but never through text, but I am still deligted at the way in which meaning and connotations appear from entirely seperate agendas. In high school I would spend ages with my friends passing around a sketchbook where each person could only add one element into the picture, and the results always became far more imaginative and entertaining than anything any one person could create. I am also pleased that we are engaging in these creative acts in class, because it will provide a much richer perspective through which to view the work we are analyzing and studying.
I have always been, and will always be, an enormous fan of Dadaism and Surrealism. They were the two movements that pushed me into entirely new realms in my own artisitic process. One of the major facets of both movements that I am drawn to is the spontenaity and subconcious decision making involved in creating a work, and these two issues were highlighted in the exquist corpse exercise. I've participated in the game through drawing before, but never through text, but I am still deligted at the way in which meaning and connotations appear from entirely seperate agendas. In high school I would spend ages with my friends passing around a sketchbook where each person could only add one element into the picture, and the results always became far more imaginative and entertaining than anything any one person could create. I am also pleased that we are engaging in these creative acts in class, because it will provide a much richer perspective through which to view the work we are analyzing and studying.
Tuesday's Class
I had never played either of the two creative exercise games before, however I really enjoyed both of them. they helped me to not worry if what I was producing was something that other people would consider "good" which has always been one of the biggest obstacles between ideas that I have and realizing them, I spend far too much time worried what other people will think. these exercises didnt allow for that, and because they were so quick actively fought against it. Though some of the poems or phrases we created didn't really make sense some of them seemed almost like they could have been written by one person and some of them were quite poetic; " Tears are a phone ringing in an empty room". Also the writings that the guest speaker read were fascinating, I had never heard anything like it, and I am also pretty sure I wouldnt be skilled enough to write anything like it either. I am also really looking forward to completing my collage that I started. When I signed up for the class I didn't think we would get to create any art, but I am really excited we are getting to. I don't consider myself a good artist by any means but I am looking forward to seeing how my piece turns out.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
response to guest writer workshop
yesterdays class
well in the beginning of class i was like, this is going to be a long class...
BUT!! then when colby showed us some of the collaborative work he had done with the guest (name? bernard i think?), i became more interested in the presentation. I was also really interested in Joe Halls little coffee shop poetry reading art gallery thing. I know joe hall only through my boyfriend, who had him last semester for creative writing, and we had talked briefly of this little venue or whatever it is that he kind of heads up. Now i am particularly interested in going after hearing the guest talk about it with us. I also liked the fact that we got to see some of our professors work, as most of my other art professors have kept their art separate from their students, which seems unfortunate to me.
I really enjoyed the surrealist games. To be honest i have played these same games in Art history with Joe L, Intro to Visual with Sue Johnson, and now in this class. HOWEVER these games continue to be fun and inspirational every time i play them.
I was also really happy when the guest announced that "if your collage has a message you get points off" this put me much more at ease, and felt that i could be much more creative with less rigid instructions from our guest guy.
I think everyone was feeling inspired when we sat around clipping out of books and magazines with fun music and little instruction. it was a nice bonding night.
All in all i really enjoyed hearing from and spending time with out guest, and i'm glad that he was nice enough to visit.
well in the beginning of class i was like, this is going to be a long class...
BUT!! then when colby showed us some of the collaborative work he had done with the guest (name? bernard i think?), i became more interested in the presentation. I was also really interested in Joe Halls little coffee shop poetry reading art gallery thing. I know joe hall only through my boyfriend, who had him last semester for creative writing, and we had talked briefly of this little venue or whatever it is that he kind of heads up. Now i am particularly interested in going after hearing the guest talk about it with us. I also liked the fact that we got to see some of our professors work, as most of my other art professors have kept their art separate from their students, which seems unfortunate to me.
I really enjoyed the surrealist games. To be honest i have played these same games in Art history with Joe L, Intro to Visual with Sue Johnson, and now in this class. HOWEVER these games continue to be fun and inspirational every time i play them.
I was also really happy when the guest announced that "if your collage has a message you get points off" this put me much more at ease, and felt that i could be much more creative with less rigid instructions from our guest guy.
I think everyone was feeling inspired when we sat around clipping out of books and magazines with fun music and little instruction. it was a nice bonding night.
All in all i really enjoyed hearing from and spending time with out guest, and i'm glad that he was nice enough to visit.
Tuesday's Class
I really enjoyed hearing about the work that Colby and Bernard had collaborated on, and learning about the different ways in which the collaborative process can work. It was great being able to watch the film, which I had seen once before in Photo Studio. It is such a beautiful film and the stream-of-consciousness-esque narrative and music seem to fit so well with the mysterious, creepy, and raw nature of the film. I liked that the class opened up for us many new ideas and opportunities for the creative process, and I had not experienced exercises such as the "exquisite corpse" before, so this was very enriching. I thought it was neat that Colby and Bernard discussed their work through a collaborative lecture, so we got to hear about both of their perspectives, one more text-oriented and one more image-oriented. I really enjoyed working on the collages and am excited to see what everyone produces. It was great to do creative exercises that engaged us in some of the things we are learning about, enabling us to apply these things to our own creative process. I appreciated that Bernard brought a lot of philosophical discussion into his explanation of his writing process, giving us some background on the Dadaist and Surrealist philosophies. Both professors discussed various ways of "writing to discover" and destructuralizing / recontextualizing ideas, which I want to consider in working on my SMP.
Class Yesterday
My view towards photography had always been pretty plain but yesterday I felt like I finally understood that there was a lot more in photography than just the image. I was excited to learn and understand how photography and text could be applied and could be seen. And there is a lot more meaning in a photograph when there is text.
Writing Workshop Poems and Definitions
Below you will find the poems and definitions that ARTH260 wrote during an Exquisite Corpse exercise class conducted by Bernard Welt and Colby. The definitions were a two-person affair, while the poems gave each student a line to write.
Definitions:
1. Cake is a person who jumps from an airplane
2. Seagulls are a tree that falls in the middle of the forest that no one hears.
3. Basketball is a plump cat sleeping on a sofa.
4. Vengeance is a tattoo of pink flamingos.
5. Pancakes are the single greatest thing on this earth.
6. Beauty is a couch in the room.
7. Tears are a phone ringing in an empty room.
8. Absolute truth is a flying object.
9. Colby Caldwell is Chipotle.
Definitions:
1. Cake is a person who jumps from an airplane
2. Seagulls are a tree that falls in the middle of the forest that no one hears.
3. Basketball is a plump cat sleeping on a sofa.
4. Vengeance is a tattoo of pink flamingos.
5. Pancakes are the single greatest thing on this earth.
6. Beauty is a couch in the room.
7. Tears are a phone ringing in an empty room.
8. Absolute truth is a flying object.
9. Colby Caldwell is Chipotle.
God, this is all there is.
A clock ticked,
tic-toc the clock went
as time passed many people wonder
what
people turn their heads unsure what to think
an outcast rides away into the desert
without a care
tic-toc the clock went
as time passed many people wonder
what
people turn their heads unsure what to think
an outcast rides away into the desert
without a care
As the mind wonders
Poems that the class constructed:
He walks up and discusses the woman she knows from his past
Bell towers ringing
Land and aminous clouds rain down
Upon the ocean floor there laid a perfectly wonderful day with the sun shinning
Catch a tiger by its tail
Of the dog
He walks up and discusses the woman she knows from his past
Bell towers ringing
Land and aminous clouds rain down
Upon the ocean floor there laid a perfectly wonderful day with the sun shinning
Catch a tiger by its tail
Of the dog
School is Rough
As I walk through this world
Many people streaming into
The waters black
All consuming pounds of flesh
In the fields there could be nothing
That would change the way the world
Would be seen in the rabbit hole
Many people streaming into
The waters black
All consuming pounds of flesh
In the fields there could be nothing
That would change the way the world
Would be seen in the rabbit hole
Completion
He stumbled into faith
and thought why am I still
here if I don't understand, Great is thy
Faithfulness is a big
part in a relationship when it is time to go
and begin
the new cycle
California Mix
A flower beautiful and alone
fluidand fragile babies cry continuously
through the night the sound travelled
until it reached to the point
that it expanded, 4 o'clock is
tea time is relaxing
for old people to speak their wisdom
fluidand fragile babies cry continuously
through the night the sound travelled
until it reached to the point
that it expanded, 4 o'clock is
tea time is relaxing
for old people to speak their wisdom
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Someone is crawling towards me in the darkness.
a paper airplane flies
from a window he fell into the world
of impossible things that are
unachievable, the best is yet
to come over to my
friend's house I started dancing
as we.
from a window he fell into the world
of impossible things that are
unachievable, the best is yet
to come over to my
friend's house I started dancing
as we.
Poem
Life
is a gift
of the world
I continue running
grasses whip me, legs
crayons leap from the highest mountain
until there was nothing left to know.
Stars
Love is something
completely unexplainable. you can't teach an old dog
new tricks, the dog learned,
in the past week " i'll play basketball
with shoes"
Then, they rip them off, unaware of how it changes
everything different than what it was before.
completely unexplainable. you can't teach an old dog
new tricks, the dog learned,
in the past week " i'll play basketball
with shoes"
Then, they rip them off, unaware of how it changes
everything different than what it was before.
Text and Image
http://www.thevirtualvine.com/drseuss.html#TheCatInTheHat
The green eggs and ham story, where the picture is right above it then the tex underneath it talks about the picture
The green eggs and ham story, where the picture is right above it then the tex underneath it talks about the picture
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Readings
While Baudelaire has a universally negative approach to photography being viewed as anything other than a science, nearly 100 years later Sontag and Barthes see photography a bit differently. While Sontag has expresses distaste for certain things that photography is used for, she does seem to approve of its inclusion as an art form. One of the issues brought up by Sontag is that photography can “violate” the person in the photograph. The camera probes and captures them forever, they are turned into an object, a possession of the photographer and of everyone who is able to see the photograph. This made me think of how certain cultures are extremely against having their picture taken. They believe that it is a violation and that the pictures captures something of them they can never get back.
Barthes idea of the punctum and the studium is a fascinating idea, and one the seems to me at least to be incredibly true. I found the perfect example of this when I brought in my picture for the class assignment on Friday. When I look at that photo of my two friends and I, it brings up emotions and has meaning to me that anyone else (excluding perhaps the two people in the picture) could understand. While others may find the picture nice to look at, and can recognize that the picture depicts friends, they are not stirred in the same way, nor can they understand fully all that the picture stands for to me just by looking at it. It makes me reflect not only on our friendship then, and brings up memories not only of that day (of which when I look at the photo I can remember quite a lot of) but also makes me think about now, and about the lasting and enduring bond of friendship we share, how we could not have known then all the struggles and triumphs we would face, but looking at are faces we knew we would see them through together.
Sontag and Barthes
I was particularly interested in how Sontag described photographs as parcels of time and space, and how the photographer is seemingly slicing up reality into rather permanent objects that can be kept and collected. She says that "to collect photographs is to collect the world,” as if the image is taking something from the world which can then be possessed by an individual. She describes the tourist who experiences his/her environment through the camera and treats pictures as souvenirs. This can be related to all people who use pictures as proof of their experiences, and tokens of satisfaction that could have been obtained in other, arguably more fulfilling ways. Sontag poses that taking pictures is not just an act of violence upon the world and our experience of it, but is also a violation upon living subjects within the frame. The camera is paralleled to things such as a gun and a penis, “shooting” and almost “raping” its victims. After all, anyone’s picture can be taken without them knowing or approving it.
However, she also illustrates photography as an art form, the photographer manipulating his/her subject and working to obtain the perfect picture. She seems to feel that photography can have multiple purposes, depending on the intent of the photographer. She also seems to believe that photography itself is ambiguous in that it is both an art form and a potentially invasive, addictive, distorting process in which someone can take part. There is an overarching question of ethics in her writing as to the growing acceptability of replicating the world so many times over on pieces of paper, and experiencing the world through a square lens. However, she definitely seems to value the artistic capacity of the photograph, and does not discount what can be achieved with the camera despite the seeming simplicity of reflecting light, and visual reality. Sontag looks at photography from a psychological and metaphysical perspective to present its complexity as an art form, something that hadn’t been done for over a hundred years after photography's birth, which is quite incredible.
Barthes takes a more personal view on photography, discussing the impact one photograph of his mother had on him. He seems more interested in what the individual viewer brings to the photograph, in terms of experiences and personal relationship to the subject matter in the photograph. Another viewer would have had a very different experience of this photograph than did Barthes, because he knew his mother’s past and her overall disposition – through the photograph, he “rediscovered [his] mother.” For Barthes, the influence of the photograph is more subjective. There is an outer circle of “studium” where viewers locate the overall subject of the photograph that is appealing to them, and an inner circle of “punctum” which involves what about the photograph particularly calls to them as individuals. They may or may not understand why this item draws their attention, but Barthes argues that it has to do with their personal psychology, history, knowledge, etc.
To connect the two articles, both serve to discuss the complex effects that photography can have on the viewer, on the photographer, and on the world. These effects are disputable because they are so multifaceted, because they can be looked at from the perspective of various disciplines, and because the debate regarding them is relatively new. Photography is a large and growing part of society, interwoven with our experience of it. As such, the “philosophy” of photography, so to speak, is something that will continue to be discussed and debated among intellectuals, photographers, and the general public.
However, she also illustrates photography as an art form, the photographer manipulating his/her subject and working to obtain the perfect picture. She seems to feel that photography can have multiple purposes, depending on the intent of the photographer. She also seems to believe that photography itself is ambiguous in that it is both an art form and a potentially invasive, addictive, distorting process in which someone can take part. There is an overarching question of ethics in her writing as to the growing acceptability of replicating the world so many times over on pieces of paper, and experiencing the world through a square lens. However, she definitely seems to value the artistic capacity of the photograph, and does not discount what can be achieved with the camera despite the seeming simplicity of reflecting light, and visual reality. Sontag looks at photography from a psychological and metaphysical perspective to present its complexity as an art form, something that hadn’t been done for over a hundred years after photography's birth, which is quite incredible.
Barthes takes a more personal view on photography, discussing the impact one photograph of his mother had on him. He seems more interested in what the individual viewer brings to the photograph, in terms of experiences and personal relationship to the subject matter in the photograph. Another viewer would have had a very different experience of this photograph than did Barthes, because he knew his mother’s past and her overall disposition – through the photograph, he “rediscovered [his] mother.” For Barthes, the influence of the photograph is more subjective. There is an outer circle of “studium” where viewers locate the overall subject of the photograph that is appealing to them, and an inner circle of “punctum” which involves what about the photograph particularly calls to them as individuals. They may or may not understand why this item draws their attention, but Barthes argues that it has to do with their personal psychology, history, knowledge, etc.
To connect the two articles, both serve to discuss the complex effects that photography can have on the viewer, on the photographer, and on the world. These effects are disputable because they are so multifaceted, because they can be looked at from the perspective of various disciplines, and because the debate regarding them is relatively new. Photography is a large and growing part of society, interwoven with our experience of it. As such, the “philosophy” of photography, so to speak, is something that will continue to be discussed and debated among intellectuals, photographers, and the general public.
After reading and discussing the readings assigned this week I now realize that photography is more than just snapping a picture. I never thought of photography in the light that these historical art figures have challenged us to think about when viewing photography. It is in a sense very philosophical when you think about the concepts that they are asking us to grasp when breaking down a photo.
In Baudelaire on Photography we are presented with what we described as a "rant" as to why photography is not an art. Baudelaire saw photographers as "too ill-endowed or too lazy" of individuals to even be considered artists. He even went as far as stating that if "photography is allowed to supplement art in some of its functions, it will soon have supplanted or corrupted it altogether, thanks to the stupidity of the multitude which is its natural ally." The fact that in a sense that anybody can snap a picture and consider it art made Baudelaire not only furious but worried for the sake of his view on art.
In Susan Sontag's "In Plato's Cave" presented us with her own concerns about photography. She seemed to be more worried about what photography can do to society. She takes a powerful stance and states that photographs prevent the photographer from engaging in the activities they are photographing. This made sense to me especially in the case of vacation and tourism because we indulge into capturing these experiences in photos that we waste time enjoying the experience our ourselves. Instead, of taking the photographs and using them for reflections of our experience, we should use our stories and memories of actually participating in activities the area has to offer to recall the fun of the experience. Sontag also feels that photographers have too much control over what the viewer sees because in reality they depict what the viewer is presented with. This claim can be made for many other things in my opinion, from books, to music, and to other art forms because at the end of the day the artists decides what they want to convey to their audience.
In Barthes piece "Cameral Lucida: Reflections on photography" the attention is brought more to the meaning of photographs. Barthes uses this piece to describe his relationship with his mother while still getting across his point that photos have different meanings for different people. With any given picture there can be several different interpretations just based on the the individual and what their personal experience. For example, if you showed a photo of World War II to a war veteran their prospective of the photo would be a lot different and more personal than anyone who didn't share these experiences. He also presented the reader with the idea that photographs are actually alive. I couldn't quite grasp this concept but the fact that the claim was even made was interesting to me.
Sontag + Barthes
After being saturated with images of photos and the manifestos accompanying them, to realize that all of this data has only real emerged in the past 40 years was shocking. Baudelaire provides an entrance into the study of photography as art, and while his justifications need support, I understand his concern. Art had remained within the mediums of painting, to a lesser extent drawing, and sculpture for what must have seemed like an eternity - what was photography to claim itself as art?
The comparison of Sontag and Barthes was refreshing in that it provided viewpoints that were either objective and wary or subjective and emotional. Both of these perspectives still resonate within the artworld and the study of photography in general, so I was pleased to experience the first voices to jump into such a weighted subject. Sontag's argument was appealing for the fact that she approached the medium through a feminist lens, but did not end up dismissing it for its voyeuristic functions. Feminist art, primarily from the 70's but also continuing into contemporary times, has relied on photography as a means of allowing female artists to depict themselves in ways that male artists would never show them while questioning the nature of the reproduced image at any turn. Sontag both critiques and praises photography - it may take away from the actually real life experience of an event, a phenomena we are all more than familiar with today - but it also "democracies experience" allowing anyone and everyone to make their own mundane perceptions relevant through the photograph. One aspect of Sontag's argument I was particularly drawn to was her discussion of photography as non-intervention. I've taken ethics classes before, as well as entire course on violence and non-violence, so understanding photography as an ethical endeavor is of extreme importance to me. I've viewed images of victims from the Vietnam war, heard interviews with their photographers, and it is traumatizing to see how much they are dedicated to their images to the point that they will allow innocent people to die and suffer for the sake of recording it.
Roland Barthes provided a completely different experience for viewing photographs - he did not try to hide the fact that the photograph is not the person that he can hold in his hand. However, I was entranced by his description of the photograph as a living thing, and his use of the metaphor of light to describe photos as decaying items reflecting light from a previous age. I have photographs of my grandparents, people I never met and will never have the chance to meet, yet somehow I feel like I can form some kind of infinitesimal relationship with them by observing their image. It is obviously not the person I am seeing, but a representation of them through another's eyes - often a loved one. This understanding is compounded by a lifetime of stories and experiences that others have passed down to me. I do not know my grandmother or grandfather, but I have some record of their existence, the fact that someone loved them enough to record that existence, in the albums and boxes that are scattered around my house. Despite having never lost someone very close to me, reading Barthes description of his mother evoked a number of similar responses from me. I understand the fear of the death of a parent and I know the experience of trying to recover that loved one through photographs taken of them. We cannot ever reclaim a person who is lost through photography, but the photo is still an object we can hold and view in order to bring this past life and experience into the present and find a way to deal with the fact that this will never be again.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Sontag and Barthes reading
After reading the Sontag "Plato's Cave" and Barthes "Camera Lucida reflections on photograph" there were many things that were fascinating to me.
"Camera Lucida" was very interesting to me because of the way Barthes could talk about his mother's childhood picture and compare the picture to her. Also, I was facinated after reading the way he thought you could read different actions in a photo. The actions were actions that you would do when you grow up.
Reading "Plato's Cave" Sontag talks about how photography gives you information. It tells the viewer what it actually is. Sontag believes that the inforomation a photograph can give is important.
What I find most interesting about these two photography, is that there work is believed to mean more than just looking at the photo itself.
"Camera Lucida" was very interesting to me because of the way Barthes could talk about his mother's childhood picture and compare the picture to her. Also, I was facinated after reading the way he thought you could read different actions in a photo. The actions were actions that you would do when you grow up.
Reading "Plato's Cave" Sontag talks about how photography gives you information. It tells the viewer what it actually is. Sontag believes that the inforomation a photograph can give is important.
What I find most interesting about these two photography, is that there work is believed to mean more than just looking at the photo itself.
Barthes, Baudelaire, Sontag
It has been really interesting to read and discuss these articles, mainly because I admittedly do not have a great heap of prior photography knowledge. These papers were almost philosophical in some ways with their interpretations and judgments of photographs and photography in general. It was also interesting to see how the papers responded to each other as if in some sort of textual conversation.
Cameral Lucida: reflections on photography
Roland Barthes:
I had not realized the cleverness of the title until just now, “reflections” on photography seems to be almost a pun, about how photographs are reflections of reality, but maybe I’m just reading too far into things. In this piece Barthes writes about life and death in photography, most likely brought on by the sickness and eventual death of his mother. He brings up the idea of photographs being living things themselves, since they are composed of organic matter. He also contemplates the idea of his mother being child like in early photographs, and childlike in her sickness. He feels that while she is sick there has been a sort of switching of roles that has caused him to become the maternal figure and his mother to be a little girl in her weakness. He also states that even after his mother has died, she is not completely gone, rather just her soul has left, but the parts of her that could be captured via photography live on to eternity. It is also interesting to note that Barthes does not actually show any of the photographs with his writing, he only describes them. Perhaps this is a note on his idea of the “studium,” which is the element of the photograph that encompasses formal qualities such as time period and costume, and the “punctim,” which is the element of the photograph that “wounds” or emotionally touches the viewer.
I liked this idea of a living photograph that Barthes brings up. I had never considered photographs themselves to be living things, but I suppose that is because I come from a digital age, where photo prints are not as common as they used to be. Perhaps I will start getting some actual prints made with this kind of nostalgic idea in mind.
Baudelaire on Photography
Right away the title seems to announce that Baudelaire is on a rant again, and this time it is centered around photography. Opinionated Baudelaire believes that photography is a science, not an art and that in some ways photography is corrupting art. He accuses painters who use photographs as reference as being lazy. He also alludes to industry, and his elitist values, stating that if photographs can be mass-produced and anyone can have one, then they lose their value. Basically I feel that Baudelaire was kind of a mean old man who didn’t like the new technology which was being brought about, mainly because he didn’t understand it, or was just adamant about change. The points he make seem very protective of the fine arts, of which photography certainly is not one (in his opinion).
In Plato’s Cave
Susan Sontag:
Here again is a clever title, In Plato’s Cave, is a reference to the idea that photographs merely portray a reflection of reality like a reflection of the outside on the wall of a cave. In her writing Sontag extends the idea that photographs, in some ways, prevent or distance the photographer from actually experiencing reality. Instead, she argues, that the photographer is caught up in wanting to go places only for the sake of the camera, and a sort of proof that they, the photographer, had been to that place or done that thing. “Photographs furnish evidence” she puts it. Sontag voices her concern that the world merely becomes a potential photograph. She also suggests that photographers impose their ideas on their subjects, by taking multiple pictures but being unsatisfied until they find the one shot which matches their beliefs about how their subject “should” look. She also brings up the idea of the camera as a weapon of probing, capturing images without the agreement or awareness of the subject, bringing to light the idea of morality of photographs. Sontag concludes in her morose way, by quoting “today everything exists to end up in a photograph.” How depressing, I hope that perhaps there can be a healthy balance between experiencing a situation and capturing that situation for memory in photography.
Cameral Lucida: reflections on photography
Roland Barthes:
I had not realized the cleverness of the title until just now, “reflections” on photography seems to be almost a pun, about how photographs are reflections of reality, but maybe I’m just reading too far into things. In this piece Barthes writes about life and death in photography, most likely brought on by the sickness and eventual death of his mother. He brings up the idea of photographs being living things themselves, since they are composed of organic matter. He also contemplates the idea of his mother being child like in early photographs, and childlike in her sickness. He feels that while she is sick there has been a sort of switching of roles that has caused him to become the maternal figure and his mother to be a little girl in her weakness. He also states that even after his mother has died, she is not completely gone, rather just her soul has left, but the parts of her that could be captured via photography live on to eternity. It is also interesting to note that Barthes does not actually show any of the photographs with his writing, he only describes them. Perhaps this is a note on his idea of the “studium,” which is the element of the photograph that encompasses formal qualities such as time period and costume, and the “punctim,” which is the element of the photograph that “wounds” or emotionally touches the viewer.
I liked this idea of a living photograph that Barthes brings up. I had never considered photographs themselves to be living things, but I suppose that is because I come from a digital age, where photo prints are not as common as they used to be. Perhaps I will start getting some actual prints made with this kind of nostalgic idea in mind.
Baudelaire on Photography
Right away the title seems to announce that Baudelaire is on a rant again, and this time it is centered around photography. Opinionated Baudelaire believes that photography is a science, not an art and that in some ways photography is corrupting art. He accuses painters who use photographs as reference as being lazy. He also alludes to industry, and his elitist values, stating that if photographs can be mass-produced and anyone can have one, then they lose their value. Basically I feel that Baudelaire was kind of a mean old man who didn’t like the new technology which was being brought about, mainly because he didn’t understand it, or was just adamant about change. The points he make seem very protective of the fine arts, of which photography certainly is not one (in his opinion).
In Plato’s Cave
Susan Sontag:
Here again is a clever title, In Plato’s Cave, is a reference to the idea that photographs merely portray a reflection of reality like a reflection of the outside on the wall of a cave. In her writing Sontag extends the idea that photographs, in some ways, prevent or distance the photographer from actually experiencing reality. Instead, she argues, that the photographer is caught up in wanting to go places only for the sake of the camera, and a sort of proof that they, the photographer, had been to that place or done that thing. “Photographs furnish evidence” she puts it. Sontag voices her concern that the world merely becomes a potential photograph. She also suggests that photographers impose their ideas on their subjects, by taking multiple pictures but being unsatisfied until they find the one shot which matches their beliefs about how their subject “should” look. She also brings up the idea of the camera as a weapon of probing, capturing images without the agreement or awareness of the subject, bringing to light the idea of morality of photographs. Sontag concludes in her morose way, by quoting “today everything exists to end up in a photograph.” How depressing, I hope that perhaps there can be a healthy balance between experiencing a situation and capturing that situation for memory in photography.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Photo Quick Write Comparison
Looking at the picture it is noticed the lighting of the day, the fact that in a way it is very misty and early. Though there is a lot to be said about the photograph both quick writes were very similar. One person described the photograph and gave its opinion towards what time period could this be in due to the prices of gasoline, then also its position in market by asking itself why one station is bigger and catches your attention compared the the other. Both quick writes though they described the environment they were different in the sense that one of them included or tried to include emotion. Like how the photographer must have been feeling? or what type of person the photographer must be, like lonely, etc.
Photo Quick Write - Comparing 2 Approaches
For the quick write exercise, I was initially given a photograph and told to write what I saw. The photograph was black and white, showing four younger women standing close together in a group in some unrecognizable outdoor setting. It resembled a typical group portrait style photograph, displayed in horizontal format, showing each from the torso up. All of the women are shown facing towards the viewer, making eye contact with the camera.
My photograph description was focused heavily on specific formal qualities or subject matter (examples: format, distance between photographer and subjects being photographed, depth of field, composition of figures in frame, etc.). Some keys words that helped to organize my description included framing, focus, contrast, time, confrontation with the viewer, composition, and lighting. I wrote my ideas in a list as I thought of them, explaining in a good amount of detail as an elaboration of each bullet. While the majority of my writing was focused on subject matter, I did include some speculation about the subject of the photograph, such as the possible age of the figures, how they might be related or why they're grouped together, and what their type of clothing suggests about their lives.
The other person who received this photograph wrote a description that seemed more focused on subject rather than subject matter or formal qualities. The description was shorter, and organized into more of a brief listing of ideas instead of a rambling of elaborate detail. Some examples of heir ideas include: the women seem close to one another, possibly a sisterhood relationship, possibly some sort of marriage involved with one of the women (wedding ring shown), natural appearances, etc. Many of these ideas represent this viewer's own perspective and background that they bring to the image, as well as their understanding of what certain aspects of the subject matter might signify about the overall subject of the photograph.
My photograph description was focused heavily on specific formal qualities or subject matter (examples: format, distance between photographer and subjects being photographed, depth of field, composition of figures in frame, etc.). Some keys words that helped to organize my description included framing, focus, contrast, time, confrontation with the viewer, composition, and lighting. I wrote my ideas in a list as I thought of them, explaining in a good amount of detail as an elaboration of each bullet. While the majority of my writing was focused on subject matter, I did include some speculation about the subject of the photograph, such as the possible age of the figures, how they might be related or why they're grouped together, and what their type of clothing suggests about their lives.
The other person who received this photograph wrote a description that seemed more focused on subject rather than subject matter or formal qualities. The description was shorter, and organized into more of a brief listing of ideas instead of a rambling of elaborate detail. Some examples of heir ideas include: the women seem close to one another, possibly a sisterhood relationship, possibly some sort of marriage involved with one of the women (wedding ring shown), natural appearances, etc. Many of these ideas represent this viewer's own perspective and background that they bring to the image, as well as their understanding of what certain aspects of the subject matter might signify about the overall subject of the photograph.
Photo quick write compare and contrast
When i first received this photograph I took note of the fact that it is printed in black and white, as did my companion writer. Next i questioned whether the photo could be a silver gelatin nitrate print, because although i know very little about photography prints, this one looked very similar to several others we had viewed in class, which were mentioned as being silver gelatin nitrate prints. Next in my description, i moved onto subject matter, noting that it included prominent images of telephone poles and telephone wires which were repeated at least 11 times through out the photograph. This repetition led me to notice the houses in the image which were along the right side of the photograph and all looked very similar. Down the center of the photograph i took note of a road. To the right of the road i noted a car, its older make led me to conclude that the photograph had to have been taken in the 1920's or 30's. I also mentioned that a man stood beside the car, both appeared to be stationary. This led me to ponder the meaning of the photograph. Why was the car there? What was the purpose of the car being there? I surmised that perhaps the car was a symbol for a halt in the day to day routine (which was suggested by the repetition of images mentioned above). I thought that the repetition of the houses and the telephone poles seemed to also be sending some sort of message to the audience. I guessed that perhaps the photographer wanted to inform about conformity or loss of individualism, as the car appeared in a neighborhood full of repeated images. I also thought it was ironic that the car had stopped only a few feet short of a sign offering "GAS", as if it had suddenly run out of fuel only a few moments from a gas station. Lastly i noted that the ground beside the road is barren and the sky seems peaceful with few visible clouds, providing natural lighting. I wrote that there is a large depth of field in the photograph and that the entire photo is in focus.
My companion writer also noted that the car was from an earlier time period, speculating that it was around the 20's or 30's. They also noted on the uniformity of the houses, and that the city seemed manipulated and unnatural. The other writer also noted on some formal qualities of the photograph, such as its high contrast. They further develop their writing by offering that the gas station may be representative of commercialization. They comment on the geometry of the photograph, a thought i find intriguing and definitely agree with. They then comment on the bleak and sullen atmosphere of the photo, "the sky is bleak and desolate".
All in all i feel that the other writer and I shared a lot of ideas about photograph in general. And the other writer also brought up some good points to think about that i had not seen in the photo myself.
HURRAH!!
My companion writer also noted that the car was from an earlier time period, speculating that it was around the 20's or 30's. They also noted on the uniformity of the houses, and that the city seemed manipulated and unnatural. The other writer also noted on some formal qualities of the photograph, such as its high contrast. They further develop their writing by offering that the gas station may be representative of commercialization. They comment on the geometry of the photograph, a thought i find intriguing and definitely agree with. They then comment on the bleak and sullen atmosphere of the photo, "the sky is bleak and desolate".
All in all i feel that the other writer and I shared a lot of ideas about photograph in general. And the other writer also brought up some good points to think about that i had not seen in the photo myself.
HURRAH!!
Quick-Write Analysis
The photograph that I first did a quick-write for was the one of the segregated bus, taken from the side. I would say that my interpretation and that of the other individual weren’t very different, overall. We both discussed racism, segregated buses, the children who do not understand the societal system yet but are being raised into it, the white supremacist lady scorning in the front of the bus and perpetuating the problem, and the distress of the black male. The way we did this was a bit different, though. I began by describing the subject matter of the photo – such as the framing, what was going on in each window panel, and the passengers’ expressions – and then began to think about subject. The other individual discussed mainly subject.
There are some interesting content differences between the “subject” descriptions that were developed, with both of us picking up on some different important things. In his/her description, the other individual stated how the white children had more of a right to a seat than a black adult, the feeling of being ignored that the black passengers seem to express, the black individuals not having the opportunity to look as well-dressed as the white individuals, a feeling of pity that the photographer seems to draw for the children who don’t understand but are brought up with these ideals anyway, and the dark and sad vibe given by the reflections in the windows above the people.
A few things my description involved that the other person’s didn’t were that it seems as if the young white girl is upset and is maybe crying, that although the reflections in the top glass panel are of the town, the passengers’ expressions seem as if they are looking at the photographer, the connotations between the black adult male’s large frame (which takes up most of his window frame) and what would have been sought after during the slave trade, the parallel between the young white boy’s and the adult black male’s arm positioning, how this may express permeable, constructed and false boundaries in society, and the obscured driver panel and how this could be metaphorical for the driver of racism in society being obscure or invisible, and even a blind driver.
I think that all of these interpretations are important, and that it takes several eyes to pull from a photograph all of the material to support even the same conclusions. Although the other person and I came up with basically the same interpretation, we supported it in many different ways, and other individuals would certainly have found even more support for these or other interpretations. This is one reason I think that as a photographer and a poet, it is important to get feedback from various individuals, in order to get a fuller idea of how your work is being viewed and interpreted by others. In terms of this photograph specifically, although it seems to produce a consistent interpretive direction in our modern society, which educates its youth rather extensively on segregation and Jim Crow laws, the ways in which individuals support this interpretation vary quite a bit. Furthermore, other photographs – especially abstract ones – would probably have more diverse interpretations. It would be interesting to see how differences in types of photography create variations in the amount of disparities seen in their interpretation.
Quick Write: Family Photo?
The picture that I looked at first is of a woman and a man, both in bathing suits, both sitting in lawn chairs, and a small boy in the background by a small child’s pool.
The largest and most notable difference between my interpretation and the other person, is simply the large amount that I had to say during the quick write (in the ten minutes I could not possibly write down everything I had to say) and their lack of description. While my description included both broad description and interpretations of the both subject and subject matter as well as examining the smaller details in the photograph, the other person focused mostly more broadly and more on generalization. Its possible that they did not find as much interesting about this photograph as I did, or simply felt self conscious about writing and interpreting a photograph, which is understandable especially if they never had before.
However what was written was in many ways similar to what I had to say. We both agreed that the photograph was probably taken a while ago, I gave guess of the 1950’s. We also agreed that the photograph likely depicted a family. The other person brought up an interesting point, which I did not think of, but which goes along well with our earlier discussion. They hypothesized that perhaps the people in the picture did not know that they were having their picture taken. While this didn’t strike me outright the first time I saw the photograph, given a second look its very possible. No one is looking at the camera, something which I noted, but did not take further to this reasonable conclusion, and it does not appear to be posed.
We both discussed subject and subject matter to a degree, the main difference again being the amount of detail that was in my description, mentioning many different things that were in the picture as well as many things that could be inferred from the picture, and the lack of detail and elaboration in the other person’s description. The first thing both of us noted, (I am guessing because it so different from the photographs we take today) is the fact that the photograph is in black and white. I feel like I spent more time describing the subject matter because I was so focused on all the details in the picture (the picture had a lot in it), describing the picture down to what appeared to be on the table in between the two adults. I also took a stab at guessing from details in the picture, that those pictured were probably pretty well off, the other person didn’t note this, but this was something very noteworthy to me because it helps build a more complete picture of the people in the photograph We both came to the same conclusion that a potential subject for the picture was family.
Quick Writes Photo
The photograph that I first was given to write about quite simple depicts three males of seemingly Caucasian decent wearing formal attire, carrying canes, set against an out of focus barren landscape. Both myself and the other writer for this image honed in on the time period of the photograph - the attire the men are wearing, the style of their hats, and the fact that they are carrying canes all hint at the fact that this image is from a past time. Additionally, the photograph is taken in black and white which is a large indicator of time period.
There were a number of characteristics given in the subject matter of this photo, both formally but also regarding the men themselves, that both I and the other writer were drawn to. I noted the high contrast of the image, and we both observed the shallow depth of field which allowed the figures to stand out as prominent against the blurry background. We both noted the juxtaposition between the two men on the right, who are prominently vertical, and the man on the left whose cane and hat are tilted on an angle. The men all seem to be relatively young, as conveyed by the smooth and unworn texture of their faces. We both determined that the photograph seems very traditional, as observed once again from the men's dress, but I also commented on the presence of the cigarette in the left man's mouth as well as the serious expression and generally stark posture of all the men in the image.
I took an approach of attempting to pinpoint specific formal qualities and then explore what subject issues the photographer was hinted at, according to these visual ques. The other writer chose to list formal qualities first, and then delve into what these formal qualities could suggest. While we both noted a number of similar issues of subject matter, the conclusions we drew about the content of the image varied widely. I was interested in why such a formal group of men was pictured against such a dry and rural background. Additionally, the youthful nature of the men seems odd for how dignified their dress is. The man on the left also seems to be far more casual in his mannerisms which looks quite strange considering his dress. Rather than drawing any conclusions, I chose to ask a number of questions about the image. I felt that the men almost seemed to be playing dress up or role playing in these clothes, because the whole situation seems very forced. I wondered why the man on the left is so severed from the rest of image, due to his breaking of the rigid geometry of the frame in both cane, cigarette and hat. I wondered why these men chose to dress in such a manner out in the middle of what might be plains or a desert. Ideas of industrialization, the destruction of agriculture, and the massive gulf between rich city life and poor rural life came to mind.
The other writer focused her interpretation on the divide between the two men on the right and the man on the left. He/she observed that the man on the left might be of a different ethnicity, according to the features of his face and hair, and that the separation between the three men might suggest some sort of racial commentary. He/she noted how separate his mannerisms are from the other men, and that the photographer likely intended to convey some message about the seperation between the men on the right and the man on the left.
I am now intensely curious about the context of this image, after realizing how completely different interpretations of the image can be based solely on visual qualities and subject matter. Regardless of whether an artist intends to make a statement about any particular issue, the way in which they compose a photograph and arrange his/her subjects will always have some connotation in the mind of the viewer. Often, these connotations are beyond the control of the artist, so he/she must be very responsible and aware of the way they construct an image. Also, this excercise again recalls for me how hard it is to only focus on formal issues without attempting apply some meaning or message to them.
There were a number of characteristics given in the subject matter of this photo, both formally but also regarding the men themselves, that both I and the other writer were drawn to. I noted the high contrast of the image, and we both observed the shallow depth of field which allowed the figures to stand out as prominent against the blurry background. We both noted the juxtaposition between the two men on the right, who are prominently vertical, and the man on the left whose cane and hat are tilted on an angle. The men all seem to be relatively young, as conveyed by the smooth and unworn texture of their faces. We both determined that the photograph seems very traditional, as observed once again from the men's dress, but I also commented on the presence of the cigarette in the left man's mouth as well as the serious expression and generally stark posture of all the men in the image.
I took an approach of attempting to pinpoint specific formal qualities and then explore what subject issues the photographer was hinted at, according to these visual ques. The other writer chose to list formal qualities first, and then delve into what these formal qualities could suggest. While we both noted a number of similar issues of subject matter, the conclusions we drew about the content of the image varied widely. I was interested in why such a formal group of men was pictured against such a dry and rural background. Additionally, the youthful nature of the men seems odd for how dignified their dress is. The man on the left also seems to be far more casual in his mannerisms which looks quite strange considering his dress. Rather than drawing any conclusions, I chose to ask a number of questions about the image. I felt that the men almost seemed to be playing dress up or role playing in these clothes, because the whole situation seems very forced. I wondered why the man on the left is so severed from the rest of image, due to his breaking of the rigid geometry of the frame in both cane, cigarette and hat. I wondered why these men chose to dress in such a manner out in the middle of what might be plains or a desert. Ideas of industrialization, the destruction of agriculture, and the massive gulf between rich city life and poor rural life came to mind.
The other writer focused her interpretation on the divide between the two men on the right and the man on the left. He/she observed that the man on the left might be of a different ethnicity, according to the features of his face and hair, and that the separation between the three men might suggest some sort of racial commentary. He/she noted how separate his mannerisms are from the other men, and that the photographer likely intended to convey some message about the seperation between the men on the right and the man on the left.
I am now intensely curious about the context of this image, after realizing how completely different interpretations of the image can be based solely on visual qualities and subject matter. Regardless of whether an artist intends to make a statement about any particular issue, the way in which they compose a photograph and arrange his/her subjects will always have some connotation in the mind of the viewer. Often, these connotations are beyond the control of the artist, so he/she must be very responsible and aware of the way they construct an image. Also, this excercise again recalls for me how hard it is to only focus on formal issues without attempting apply some meaning or message to them.
Compare and Contrast
After reading both quick writes, I've come up with some interesting similarities and differences. Many of the similarities were about subject matter inside the photo. for example, they both talk about the emotions that are displayed in the photo by the women. One of the emotions displayed, showed that the subject had a strong heart and that what ever took happened was unable to break her spirit. It was clear in the writing that the women spirits were not easily broken even through the devastaion they had gone through. Also, hope existed somewhere even though it was barely visible for them to see after the devastation that had occurred. Another similarity talked about was of photos being and black and white. The writing gave a description as if it might be some type of old photo. The two women could possibly be family or friends who share a strong bond between each other.
There were also a couple difference between the two quick write. The other quick write went into more detail with the women feelings and emotions, such as how depressed the women were. How sad one of the women looked. The saddness in their eyes. The quick write also stated how much more depression the women could with stand. Though I have been brief and quickly moved to the next subject, the details within the photographs caught my attention. Another difference that we spoke about was the women's right hand placed on her chest. The other quick write talked about how Photos showed character by not giving up and continuing to fight the struggle of whatever she going through. It was my belief that she was either posing for the camera or distraught because he took the photo of her.
I now see how people can walk away from a photo with a different opinion. Each eye that views a photgraph see things differently thus drawing a different conclusion from the next person that views the photograph. In the end, there are many similarities and differences people can have after looking at a photo.
There were also a couple difference between the two quick write. The other quick write went into more detail with the women feelings and emotions, such as how depressed the women were. How sad one of the women looked. The saddness in their eyes. The quick write also stated how much more depression the women could with stand. Though I have been brief and quickly moved to the next subject, the details within the photographs caught my attention. Another difference that we spoke about was the women's right hand placed on her chest. The other quick write talked about how Photos showed character by not giving up and continuing to fight the struggle of whatever she going through. It was my belief that she was either posing for the camera or distraught because he took the photo of her.
I now see how people can walk away from a photo with a different opinion. Each eye that views a photgraph see things differently thus drawing a different conclusion from the next person that views the photograph. In the end, there are many similarities and differences people can have after looking at a photo.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
"Proof", Paul Strand, and Geoff Dyer
"Shooting blind", whether literally or figuratively, creates a similar sense of "pure recording" that Walker Evans mentions in the Dyer article that a photographer like Paul Strand deals with in shooting the blind woman on the street. Whether it is the photographer him/herself or the subject of the photograph whose sight has been taken away, blindness on either end of the interaction between photographer and subject seems to yield a certain more truthful quality in the image (truthful referring to a natural, unhibited sense, much like what would be captured by a photographer whos presence goes unrecognized by the subjects in the photograph). The viewer then is given a voyeuristic view of the moment captured by allowing them to take on the role of both the eyes of the photographer and the eyes of the subject, if in fact they cannot see themselves.
In the odd case of the blind photographer, such as the character of Martin in "Proof", the viewer becomes the eyes of the photographer. In this film, the main viewer here was Martin's friend Andy, who spent a good deal of time verbally describing the subject matter of each of Martin's photographs to him after he received the developed film from his blind shoots. Much of the controversey in the film revolved around whether or not the photographs represented the "truth" for the photographer, which plays on the idea of the photograph being a creation that embodies both real and artificial qualities. For Martin, his blind ideas of what his photographs looked like became a visual memoir of his surroundings and memories in his own mind that became his entire visual life, which was ironically something that was given to him only through the lens of another's person's description of each photograph's subject matter as they chose to reveal to him. "Proof" as the title of the film plays on the concept of the photograph itself, and represents the dialogue beteween the viewer of a photograph, and how they see and process the subject and subject matter (which represents the dialogue between the photographer and subject being photographed).
The relationship between Martin and Andy in this film was incredibly significant - represented a metaphorical explanation of how the photographic process tricks the viewer into believing that everything within the frame is the truth (for both the photographer and the rest of the world). For the blind photographer who cannot even physically see his/her surroundings, what they're photographing, or what the photograph looks like, becomes forever created, manipulated, and influenced by another person's persepective and choices. By putting the photograph into words that are translated to the photographer by another, he is forced to put his trust in the words, the verbal, the text, to create his own visual tat may or may not be synonymous with the photograph itself - something that viewer's do all of the time with text and image. This poses a question: How much does the actual photograph, how what has been captured within the frame, even matter to how we process the visual into our own minds? How does text (visual or verbal) change this understanding?
This makes me think of how photography often only embodies the visual, as obvious as that sounds. But as the viewer, we look at a photograph and start to see the moment that was captured; we put ourselves in the position of the photographer at that point in time and proceed to play out the events both before, during, and after the moment the photograph depicts. We see what is within the frame, the internal information, and then we imagine what is beyond the frame, or what could have been captured had the photographer shifted the camera to the left or right. This combined with our own historical, cultural, and social approaches to the subject matter or the image, makes up the external information. Still, the photograph seems to embody only the visual, only sight, which even by itself is subject to a whole realm of varying approaches, perspectives, and "ways" of seeing. This doesn't even account for the fact that sight alone only accounts for a fifth of the five senses that we use to absorb, understand, and communicate with the world around us. So, the idea of a photograph representing the truth seems like an unaccomplishable task - something that Martin in "Proof" deals with throughout the film.
Geoff Dyer discusses in detail several examples of photographers who shoot blind subjects: those who cannot see and may not even be aware of the photographer's presence. He mentions that the blind subject serves as the "objective corollary" of the photographer's desire to be invisible, and at the same time allowing a photographer such as Paul Strand to see his subject, the blind woman on the street, as she is unable to see herself. In this way, he becomes her sight, just like in "Proof" where Andy becomes Martin's sight, except the person seeing is flipped.
In the odd case of the blind photographer, such as the character of Martin in "Proof", the viewer becomes the eyes of the photographer. In this film, the main viewer here was Martin's friend Andy, who spent a good deal of time verbally describing the subject matter of each of Martin's photographs to him after he received the developed film from his blind shoots. Much of the controversey in the film revolved around whether or not the photographs represented the "truth" for the photographer, which plays on the idea of the photograph being a creation that embodies both real and artificial qualities. For Martin, his blind ideas of what his photographs looked like became a visual memoir of his surroundings and memories in his own mind that became his entire visual life, which was ironically something that was given to him only through the lens of another's person's description of each photograph's subject matter as they chose to reveal to him. "Proof" as the title of the film plays on the concept of the photograph itself, and represents the dialogue beteween the viewer of a photograph, and how they see and process the subject and subject matter (which represents the dialogue between the photographer and subject being photographed).
The relationship between Martin and Andy in this film was incredibly significant - represented a metaphorical explanation of how the photographic process tricks the viewer into believing that everything within the frame is the truth (for both the photographer and the rest of the world). For the blind photographer who cannot even physically see his/her surroundings, what they're photographing, or what the photograph looks like, becomes forever created, manipulated, and influenced by another person's persepective and choices. By putting the photograph into words that are translated to the photographer by another, he is forced to put his trust in the words, the verbal, the text, to create his own visual tat may or may not be synonymous with the photograph itself - something that viewer's do all of the time with text and image. This poses a question: How much does the actual photograph, how what has been captured within the frame, even matter to how we process the visual into our own minds? How does text (visual or verbal) change this understanding?
This makes me think of how photography often only embodies the visual, as obvious as that sounds. But as the viewer, we look at a photograph and start to see the moment that was captured; we put ourselves in the position of the photographer at that point in time and proceed to play out the events both before, during, and after the moment the photograph depicts. We see what is within the frame, the internal information, and then we imagine what is beyond the frame, or what could have been captured had the photographer shifted the camera to the left or right. This combined with our own historical, cultural, and social approaches to the subject matter or the image, makes up the external information. Still, the photograph seems to embody only the visual, only sight, which even by itself is subject to a whole realm of varying approaches, perspectives, and "ways" of seeing. This doesn't even account for the fact that sight alone only accounts for a fifth of the five senses that we use to absorb, understand, and communicate with the world around us. So, the idea of a photograph representing the truth seems like an unaccomplishable task - something that Martin in "Proof" deals with throughout the film.
Geoff Dyer discusses in detail several examples of photographers who shoot blind subjects: those who cannot see and may not even be aware of the photographer's presence. He mentions that the blind subject serves as the "objective corollary" of the photographer's desire to be invisible, and at the same time allowing a photographer such as Paul Strand to see his subject, the blind woman on the street, as she is unable to see herself. In this way, he becomes her sight, just like in "Proof" where Andy becomes Martin's sight, except the person seeing is flipped.
Permanence, "Proof," and Ethics in Photography
Many of the photographers discussed in the Dyer article, including Strand, have been fascinated with the connection between the camera and the human eye, and how the camera creates a solidified voyeuristic image that is only fleeting to the naked eye. The camera changes the way we act, because we know that we are not only being intently watched by someone, but also that what we are doing will be recorded permanently. It is as if a person “ducks” from his/her natural expression in response to the shooting “gun” of a camera. This poses a serious problem for photographers wanting to capture images of natural emotions and reactions – but there is also an ethical dilemma in trying to get around this problem, as the individual changes his/her expression for a very personal reason.
Nevertheless, many photographers have tried ways of working around this to achieve more naturalistic pictures. If subjects are unaware or less aware that their pictures are being taken, they will have less time and less desire to change their expressions. However, is this ethical? On the extreme level of the subject being unaware that the picture is being taken, is Strand’s image of the blind beggar ethical? Would she have wanted her picture to be taken, reflecting her in this light? I think that this reaches into a much broader ethical issue in photography – even when subjects are aware that their pictures are being taken, they may not be “okay” with it. How you feel about this issue depends on whether you weigh art or individual wishes for personal depiction higher. People will inevitably be offended by certain pictures of themselves. I don’t feel that is always a bad thing, though – I don’t think there is anything wrong with reflecting people in an unflattering or honest light, especially considering some of the great photography that has been achieved involving corrupt political figures. In cases such as the more innocent blind beggar, I feel that the image is more of a statement about societal labeling and job opportunities for the handicapped, and does not seem to be a negative reflection on this individual. I don’t think that photographers often shoot with the aim of contorting the true nature of people, and I don’t think it is unethical to capture reality, because we engage in it every day.
Considering the movie “Proof” in this context, the issue is reversed and the photographer himself is the blind individual, capturing the overwhelmingly seeing world. The camera serves as the main character’s eye. It “proves” to him – but only through the eye of a seeing individual he must trust – that the contents of the photograph were the actual circumstances where and when the photograph was taken. The seeing photographer does not need this proof of reality for himself/herself, but is proving to the rest of the world what he/she saw. What is more important? Obviously, for the blind photographer, the camera holds such great weight because he did not trust what his mother told him and needed a sense of truth and reality in his adult life – even if this eventually becomes complicated and turns against him due to the nature of people not always being honest. The seeing photographer may use “blind photography” means, but he/she still basically knows what is in the frame by glancing, without having to rely on smell, touch, sound, or other senses. The seeing photographer has that advantage, and the issue of being temporarily “blind” in the photographic process is generally used in order to prevent the subject’s alteration of his/her expression or to experiment with the framing and angling of the camera. The seeing photographer is still more focused on having other people recognize what was there, and the photographer’s way of seeing it, whereas the blind photographer in “Proof” intends for his photography to serve as concrete evidence for himself. However, because he must still go through another individual to “prove” reality, he can only trust in the external viewer and can never actually fully prove what was present if he did not use his other senses to verify it. In the end, the issue of blindness and the camera-as-eye is one that photographers both blind and seeing have attempted to span the spectrum of, and the issue of the camera creating a permanent “proof” of reality remains one that raises issues of distortion and ethics.
A Vision of No Vision
It seems simple: a photograph is a record the visual stimuli present in front of the lens of the camera. These visual stimuli are taken to constitute reality, thus it would seem to follow that a photograph is a record of this reality. However, the movie Proof provides ample examples of how the relationship between image and experience is not so concrete. One particular example that struck me was when Celia attempted to reconstruct Andy’s face from the photographs that Martin had taken. While the combination of the images served to provide a meager semblance of Andy, no one particular photo gave evidence as to what Andy actually was in real life. The photographs were a record of an experience, of a particular set of lighting and movement and perspective that defined the space in front of a camera lens in a particular moment – but this perspective was unique to the camera at that moment and could not have expressed the fullness of the reality we experience.
Even perception itself is subjective – no two people can observe the world in exactly the same way. Minute differences in retinal makeup can change details of a scene and eye deterioration can cause scenes to become blurred. Contact lens and glasses are employed to correct these deficiencies but even they are mediations on reality because they too are lens with unique properties that will altar forms. The most extreme form of this ocular subjectivity is blindness. Blind people still have eyes, just as everyone else does, but their genes cause them to pick up none of the visual data that most people are able to absorb. Both the movie and the reading, “the ongoing moment”, touch on the symbiotic relationship between photography and blindness. Photographers use their cameras as a manner of seeing the world through a different perspective – they realize that the world as it is cannot be accurately reflected in their photos. On the other hand, Martin used his camera as a means of finding some “proof” of what exists in the world, but this notion eventually failed. As Andy said, “everybody lies”. Our eyes can lie to us as well, and it is only the blind who escape from this grasping towards some permanent image of a fleeting moment.
The obsession that many of the photographers discussed in “the ongoing moment” have with blindness is voyeuristic yet it also seems to be a yearning to understand a lack of vision for those whose lives are understood primarily through their visual sensations. Vision is a sort of communication between two people. In Proof, the relationships that Martin values in the world are founded in partnerships of viewing and understanding the world. However, for artists such as Strand and Winogrand, the photographs they take of the blind deny the blind their voice in the relationship. The photographers see these people, but these people have no way of seeing back. They are denied any sense of subjectivity in their interaction with the photographer, and once the photographs are printed they become an object of visual consumption for any viewers that encounter the images. This is not to say that the photographers intentionally wish to strip the blind of their subjectivity, but to portray someone in a sensual arena that they have no option of participating in is to make them into objects stripped of any perspective. I do believe some of these images can serve a social purpose, but my initial reaction to Blind Woman, New York was repulsion. I felt like an intruder into the intimate life of this woman, who would never be able to look back at me and tell me her story. Her life and her ailments are laid bare to me, but she herself did not have any choice in whether she wanted these aspects of herself open to a public forum.
Even perception itself is subjective – no two people can observe the world in exactly the same way. Minute differences in retinal makeup can change details of a scene and eye deterioration can cause scenes to become blurred. Contact lens and glasses are employed to correct these deficiencies but even they are mediations on reality because they too are lens with unique properties that will altar forms. The most extreme form of this ocular subjectivity is blindness. Blind people still have eyes, just as everyone else does, but their genes cause them to pick up none of the visual data that most people are able to absorb. Both the movie and the reading, “the ongoing moment”, touch on the symbiotic relationship between photography and blindness. Photographers use their cameras as a manner of seeing the world through a different perspective – they realize that the world as it is cannot be accurately reflected in their photos. On the other hand, Martin used his camera as a means of finding some “proof” of what exists in the world, but this notion eventually failed. As Andy said, “everybody lies”. Our eyes can lie to us as well, and it is only the blind who escape from this grasping towards some permanent image of a fleeting moment.
The obsession that many of the photographers discussed in “the ongoing moment” have with blindness is voyeuristic yet it also seems to be a yearning to understand a lack of vision for those whose lives are understood primarily through their visual sensations. Vision is a sort of communication between two people. In Proof, the relationships that Martin values in the world are founded in partnerships of viewing and understanding the world. However, for artists such as Strand and Winogrand, the photographs they take of the blind deny the blind their voice in the relationship. The photographers see these people, but these people have no way of seeing back. They are denied any sense of subjectivity in their interaction with the photographer, and once the photographs are printed they become an object of visual consumption for any viewers that encounter the images. This is not to say that the photographers intentionally wish to strip the blind of their subjectivity, but to portray someone in a sensual arena that they have no option of participating in is to make them into objects stripped of any perspective. I do believe some of these images can serve a social purpose, but my initial reaction to Blind Woman, New York was repulsion. I felt like an intruder into the intimate life of this woman, who would never be able to look back at me and tell me her story. Her life and her ailments are laid bare to me, but she herself did not have any choice in whether she wanted these aspects of herself open to a public forum.
Photo Description Comparrisons
After reading the description of the classmate who also described my photo I can tell that he/she knows a lot about cameras and photos. In their description you can clearly see that they have had some interaction or practice with cameras due to their camera vocabulary and knowledge. The way they described the vantage point the colors, the type of photograph, the lighting or lack of lighting, the frame, depth of photo, and distance between the photographer and the figure(boy or girl) shows their experience. They also did a very good job of describing what they saw as well and how it made them feel that there was a "lack of intimacy" in the photo. He/She was very descriptive of the figure in the middle of the floor with the way he/she was laying, the items in the area of the photo, and the color of these items. Overall I feel that my description was more subject matter than subject when compared to their description and their description was both subject matter and subject based. The lack of knowledge and experience with cameras is apparent in my description when compared to theirs.
Dyer and Blind photo
The photo of the blind woman is intriguing within itself. As we discussed yesterday in class the lady seems to be rough around the edges and apparently blind. Even without the sign, which fights to be the focal point with her appearance, we can obviously see there is something wrong with the lady's eyesight due to one being slightly closed and the other unfocused. Needless to say this lady did not appear to be the approachable type. With that being said I am sure it was difficult for Strand to get such an up close and personal shot of the lady.
In class I wondered how the photographer was able to attain such a close shot of the lady. I thought it may have been seen as rude for him to sit right in front of what appeared to be a blind homeless lady and snap shots of her face. As a result of the accuracy of the photo I figured it had to take at least 10 shots to get the shot that the photographer was able to capture, so for 10 shots he/she was standing in the face of this lady snapping photos. This confused me because this lady did not seem as if she would agree to having her photo taken, not wanting to feel in a way as if she were trying to be humiliated or made fun of. That is why after reading Dyer's "The Ongoing Moment" things made a little more sense to me.
The fact that the shots were taking blindly without the lady or others around knowing they were being photoed seemed much more believable and realistic to me. It also adds to the talent of the photographer. For Strand to be able to capture a photo like this blindly is interesting. It seemed to me that the quality of the picture could only be attained through the lady posing for the shot or knowing that the photo was being taken. When I read that Strand was just "blindly" taking the photo I appreciated the shot even more.
In class I wondered how the photographer was able to attain such a close shot of the lady. I thought it may have been seen as rude for him to sit right in front of what appeared to be a blind homeless lady and snap shots of her face. As a result of the accuracy of the photo I figured it had to take at least 10 shots to get the shot that the photographer was able to capture, so for 10 shots he/she was standing in the face of this lady snapping photos. This confused me because this lady did not seem as if she would agree to having her photo taken, not wanting to feel in a way as if she were trying to be humiliated or made fun of. That is why after reading Dyer's "The Ongoing Moment" things made a little more sense to me.
The fact that the shots were taking blindly without the lady or others around knowing they were being photoed seemed much more believable and realistic to me. It also adds to the talent of the photographer. For Strand to be able to capture a photo like this blindly is interesting. It seemed to me that the quality of the picture could only be attained through the lady posing for the shot or knowing that the photo was being taken. When I read that Strand was just "blindly" taking the photo I appreciated the shot even more.
Sight and its relation to truth in photography
Sight: which is so paramount to the photographers work, was brought up in the Dyer reading, the movie, and the picture of the blind women we examined in class. The movie made the viewer examine (or at least me) what exactly constituted “truth” and its importance not only in life, but in photography as well. Martin, the blind photographer, considers photographs to be the ultimate truth, they are “proof” that something happened, that a moment in time existed. However is this really so? We brought up issues in class about how photography is not truth, it is the world as the photographer is portraying it. And for Martin, his photographs, to him, can only appear to him as other people choose to describe them. He cannot know what is actually in the photograph.
The movie also made me question how realistic it is to have a blind photographer. However the concept of taking a photograph “blind” isn’t foreign to the photography world. The dyer reading talks about how one photographer, Paul Strand, would take subway pictures without looking through his lens. He would simply point and shoot, without himself knowing what picture he was taking or those in his pictures knowing they were being photographed. This was a way to perhaps cut down the photographers interference with the photograph.
Just as shooting individuals who do not know they are having their picture taken, (such as the photograph of the blind women we looked at in class) is a way to try and capture a more “real” or “truthful” representation of the world through a photograph. Shooting individuals who are blind, either physically or simply blind to the fact they are being photographed prevents them from posing, or adopting a different and perhaps false persona in front of the camera.
However this brings up the question to me of whether its ever possible to capture a completely truthful image on film, and that I am not sure of.
Blind Photo
Paul Strand, was a photographer who liked to take photos of the blind. He has taken many famous photos of blind people. Strand also liked to take blind photos. He used a false lens to look at the person, while hidding the real lens inside his sleeve. There would also be photo's of three other people who were also blind. However, unlike the other photo's the first photo was more in depth. Based on the sign she wore around her kneck one could assume she was a begger. Although you would really have to focus on the photo to determine that she was possibly really a begger. It was clear though, we can see that she is blind. In the other photo's you can tell that the people are beggers looking at the picture, but it is harder to determine if they are blind or not.
Article on Dyer
After reading the ongoing moment there were serveral photos on roads, buildings, signs , light light posts and gas stastion also these pictures are in color. Looks like these pictures were develop in the early 60's maybe 70's. These are all subject matter descriptions of the pictures.
Monday, May 17, 2010
PROOF, Blind, and The ongoing moment
i decided to fix the lame accidental post i did before and make it an actual post.
In class on monday, we went over a few select texts, which Professor Colby read to us, each of them addressed certain issues which were on my mind while i was watching Proof...
John Banville- The Sea
Which is more real?
- the memories or the remains of the actual?
- what remains after death? “dust of the death”
- how does this author contextualize photographs
W.G. Sebald- Austerlitz
“shadows of reality…as memories”
Thomas Burnhard- Extinction (1995)
Different take on photographs
- “…basically I detest photographs”
- photographers have nothing but to portray themselves
- vulgar addiction, enamored of such perversion
- “inhumane art”
- do not display genuine people or scenery
- “truth and reality behind the distortion”
And now for...
PROOF
Australian film by Jocelyn Moorhouse
I noticed that distinct focus is placed on the sounds of Martin (blind man’s) house at the beginning of the movie.
The first photo is taken in vets office against a backdrop of other photos...suggesting... what?
Martin describes photographs as being “what people see through their eyes”…”the truth”
Takes dark glasses off when listening to the orchestra concert. (he can see them with his ears?)
Celia takes glasses off when she has sex.
He is not wearing glasses when he walks in to his house to find Andy and Celia having sex.
Last scene, he has long white fingers like his mother.
So what do i take from it all? well... I suppose the film is based around the dichotomy formed between memories from sight, and photography. There is also definitely a question of truth in the story. For example, who is telling the truth in the story? the audience is unaware. It could be andy, celia, or martins mysterious mother. Did his mother truly love him? Why was she lying to him, or was she lying? These questions are left up to the reader to figure out. Just like the photos themselves which Martin captures, the viewer gets to determine what the "truth" actually is. This movie left me feeling that "truth" especially as it relates to memory and sight is very subjective. hmmm.
Today in class.... tuesday May 18th... we talked about the difference between:
Subject matter: Formal qualities, what is in the picture?
Subject: what the picture is about
Then i went home and did the reading titled Ongoing Moment, which was specifically about the "Blind" picture which we had viewed and discussed in class. I thought it was cute that Strand attached a fake lens to his camera, like he was trying to be all sneaky with this huge ass camera in front of his face. Its actually pretty clever. I also enjoyed the references to other photographers as if their work was a conversation instead of solitary works. Furthermore, i am interested in the several links to poetry which were brought up... were the photographers aware of these poems and responding to them, or were the lines which seemed to coincide with not just one, but multiple works, just a coincidence?
k, bye!
In class on monday, we went over a few select texts, which Professor Colby read to us, each of them addressed certain issues which were on my mind while i was watching Proof...
John Banville- The Sea
Which is more real?
- the memories or the remains of the actual?
- what remains after death? “dust of the death”
- how does this author contextualize photographs
W.G. Sebald- Austerlitz
“shadows of reality…as memories”
Thomas Burnhard- Extinction (1995)
Different take on photographs
- “…basically I detest photographs”
- photographers have nothing but to portray themselves
- vulgar addiction, enamored of such perversion
- “inhumane art”
- do not display genuine people or scenery
- “truth and reality behind the distortion”
And now for...
PROOF
Australian film by Jocelyn Moorhouse
I noticed that distinct focus is placed on the sounds of Martin (blind man’s) house at the beginning of the movie.
The first photo is taken in vets office against a backdrop of other photos...suggesting... what?
Martin describes photographs as being “what people see through their eyes”…”the truth”
Takes dark glasses off when listening to the orchestra concert. (he can see them with his ears?)
Celia takes glasses off when she has sex.
He is not wearing glasses when he walks in to his house to find Andy and Celia having sex.
Last scene, he has long white fingers like his mother.
So what do i take from it all? well... I suppose the film is based around the dichotomy formed between memories from sight, and photography. There is also definitely a question of truth in the story. For example, who is telling the truth in the story? the audience is unaware. It could be andy, celia, or martins mysterious mother. Did his mother truly love him? Why was she lying to him, or was she lying? These questions are left up to the reader to figure out. Just like the photos themselves which Martin captures, the viewer gets to determine what the "truth" actually is. This movie left me feeling that "truth" especially as it relates to memory and sight is very subjective. hmmm.
Today in class.... tuesday May 18th... we talked about the difference between:
Subject matter: Formal qualities, what is in the picture?
Subject: what the picture is about
Then i went home and did the reading titled Ongoing Moment, which was specifically about the "Blind" picture which we had viewed and discussed in class. I thought it was cute that Strand attached a fake lens to his camera, like he was trying to be all sneaky with this huge ass camera in front of his face. Its actually pretty clever. I also enjoyed the references to other photographers as if their work was a conversation instead of solitary works. Furthermore, i am interested in the several links to poetry which were brought up... were the photographers aware of these poems and responding to them, or were the lines which seemed to coincide with not just one, but multiple works, just a coincidence?
k, bye!
Saturday, May 15, 2010
WELCOME TO CLASS BLOG
Greetings:
We will use this forum to respond to particular assignments, to share ideas, thoughts, and links that pertain to ARTH_260 concerns. Please check DAILY while taking the class.
We will use this forum to respond to particular assignments, to share ideas, thoughts, and links that pertain to ARTH_260 concerns. Please check DAILY while taking the class.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)