Seek and ye shall find

Thoughts on photography as Art, reflections on reading so far.

I read "The Photograph" by Clarke soon after I received the course materials, I already had (and have now re-read) "The Photograph As Contemporary Art" by Cotton and "The Genius of Photography" by Badger having watched the television series and now re-reading again.

There are a number of things that strike me, firstly the likelihood that the same photograph will turn up in each book to illustrate a point. This concerns me a little in that whilst the image itself may have significant relevance to the chapter or genre being discussed, it would benefit the reader/researcher to have more variety to consider, otherwise the genre may tend to be considered a little narrow. This tends to suggest that more work needs to be done (by me) to investigate some of the photographers, to try and put some context to the text, in as much as it relates to what the authors is trying to relay vis a vis the photographers work and intention. There is a tendency to look at individual images and think that could be a "jumping-off" point for my own work. The seemingly straightforward compositions, especially of the still life work - which may or may not be atheistically pleasing - could quite readily be "cloned" and used to make similar images, in appearance at least. I suspect that when I have looked at more examples of the artists work it will help me put their work into perspective.

Clarke's book was less pleasing to read as it contained, for me at any rate, a number of contradictions which I have covered in previous entries - War and Peace and Confused already and I felt more at ease with Cotton's book. Both books, together with the Badger publication looked at how some modern photographers looked at, as Cotton described "Intimate Life". The photographs seem to be taken at the periphery of life (albeit intimate studies) and whilst I agree that they are "intimate" shots, I am a little concerned that it is the viewers prurience that is being pandered to. I saw an exhibition of Corinne Day's work (or it might have been photography that included Day and another's documentary of Day)  at the Photographer's Gallery some years ago which did detail the excruciating process she went through with the brain tumour. I can appreciate the bravery of the decision to record it, as there was no guaranty that there would be positive conclusion to the process. It was moving, I did feel shock and awe, but I came away thinking that it was the the image that shocked, rather than the emotive force that fed the creative process in its creation; much in the same way that Weegee's images shocked New Yorkers in the middle of the last century. Could it be that both of these photographer's contribution to the medium is as recordists of the society at the time? However Richard Billingham and Nan Goldin have both earned significant reputations as photographers almost by happenstance. Both recorded life as it happened around them, Billingham to gain material for his painting course and Goldin to record her life and that of her close friends - much in the same way that Facebook users do today. Both of these photographers work again seem to pander to the prurient and both photographers work have been legitimised by their having studied in either "Liberal Arts" in Goldin's case and "Fine art" in Bilingham's case. I will add that I have seen an exhibition of Billingham's work as well and again I was moved and shocked by the imagery, but much in the same way as for Day's work. I am also concerned that to research it more may inure the viewer to the "shock value" that must surely be at the core of the work; I can only assume that Billingham found himself looking for "more" intimate images of his family once the project gained momentum. This all needs more thought and research.

I did notice a similarity in a number of the "still life's" in that the subject - or object - found itself at the centre of the image, this was especially true in Cotton's chapter 4, "Something and Nothing". I struggle to believe this is a contrivance of the photographer to emulate a naive photographer's approach. For example Fischli and Weiss's Quiet Afternoon p114, Wentworth's Kings Cross, London, p119, Evan's "New Scent" p115, Shafran's "Sewing Kit" p115 amongst a lot of others and even Wall's "Diagonal Composition" p131 has the object (probably a piece of kitchen appliance) noticeable by it's absence at the centre of the image. I'm wondering why this all is.

All the books had something to say about portraiture which I found exciting, illuminating and challenging. I believe that portraiture should say something about both the artist and the subject - and it probably does in every image, even if it is nonchalance. I think that portraiture opens windows on both parties in a way that is difficult to do on other genre's in photographic art. When a photographer asks someone to sit, or is commissioned to portray someone in a portrait there are all sorts of emotions at play that cannot be involved in a landscape, still life or street photography. Two people, generally staring at each other, one decoupled through a lens the other naked in full view of that same lens. The emotions are probably amplified on a square law basis. The finest movement from either party will amplify the connection, or disconnection between the artist and sitter. I have taken a lot of portraits and intend to carry on doing so and I fully expect this course to inform my approach to portraiture.

I have included some examples taken of some volunteers sitters. These photographs were taken over a series os sittings where I have tried to convey, through the image, a sense of what the sitter is without being affected by the process of sitting. I am convinced I have not fully succeeded in as much as there is still residual artifice in all the portraits despite having each having sat for me a few times and all being very well known to me - good friends. The brief for the sessions that these images came from was for the sitter to turn up in everyday, comfortable clothes, not made up in any way, to be as natural as possible. One of the ladies spent some time in order to be "presentable" whilst the other did pretty much as I asked. Both males did exactly as I asked. I tried to have the sitters express bland, emotionless expressions to convey the "naturalness" of themselves, one of the ladies had no problem with this and it was so for the males. I have included one shot where the sitter has her eyes closed, I asked both the ladies to pose this way as I expected it to present a layer of emotion, trust in me as the photographer and only one lady was able to pose readily in this way.

I will try and get back to this project with either these models or some others to see how my thought processes develop. Maybe my lighting was too dramatic? Maybe I should use colour more?

Contrasts - initial thoughts, work in progress

The first assignment for TAOP is contrasts and it has been on my mind for a little while. The assignment sheet suggests 8 pairs (16 photographs)  from a list of 21 pairs. In addition another photograph which demonstrates contrast in a picture - it doesn't say whether the contrast depicted should be from a pair in the list.

Contrast, from the Collins dictionary:

Contrast is a noun and verb

"The state of being noticeable different from something else when put or considered together. A difference so revealed. A thing or person noticeably different from another. The amount of difference between tones in a television picture, photograph etc. Differ noticeable, compare so as to emphasise differences.

I spent some time thinking about contrasts and without referring to the list on the course came up with:

Have/Have not   Empty/Full   Black/White*   Signed/Unsigned   Greedy/Generous  Right/Left
Bright/Dull         Rich/Poor     Framed/Unframed   Strong/Weak  Right/Wrong   Heavy/Light*
Fast/Slow    Pass/Fail    Plenty/Famine

I then compared this list with the list in the course notes  - I have put an asterisk by pairs that are coincident with my list. I am initially curious and concerned about the disparity in the two lists - I'll come on the those issues later.

I then studied the list a little and had the following thoughts. The list in the course guide looks limited in terms of the scope for interpretation, whereas my list, I know (because I've thought about it), has a scope for greater subtler meaning and connotation.

I was curious as to why there was such a disparity, was the course list meant to suggest certain images, certain interpretations and therefore a "right way" of completing the assignment; in which case I've got it completely wrong. I decided to read the assignment again. I was concerned that I wouldn't be able to produce anything that was subtle in its meaning, able to convey any sub-text or maybe I shouldn't be thinking like this. Maybe I should just deliver 8 pairs of contrast from the list and be done with it.

No subtlety here though. Black and White, Portrait and Landscape, Loud and Quiet, Alarmed and Peaceful, Awake and Asleep. Whichever, he is our grandson and we're very proud.

 I took this shot as part of a small project on graffiti when I was in Sicily recently - I was impressed by the neatness of the lettering. But for this assignment and for illustration it was the horizontal aspect which drew to me it again. Comparing this photograph with the one below which is about verticals, in the graphic sense. The image below was concerned with the aftermath of a fire which had left these scorched trunks. I took the photograph from a very low perspective and, whilst ensuring I kept the horizon in the frame, I used a wide angle lens to capture as many trees as possible

all seemingly to strive or reach for air. I appreciate that fire is part of the natural cycle of woods and forest and whilst it is destructive it is reconstructive at the same time. The bench above was bathed in a hot sun in contrast with the overcast sky in the shot on the right, the sun on the seat caused a good deal of contrast and I happened to be using film capture which has a slightly wider dynamic range than digital capture.

The image to the left is about peace and calm. The photograph was taken on a late summer's afternoon in Alberta. The ambience was very calm and quiet, no-one else seemed to be around and there is barely a ripple on the surface. Composed on the thirds with good contrast at each segment, I think this harmonious construct helps the image achieve a peaceful image.

Whereas the photograph on the right is a close up of a  cascading waterfall in the Smokey Mountains. The shot isn't easy to read immediately it takes a while for the eye to settle and recognise what it is looking at. It is a shot that is all about energy being expended, the water sprays at all angles and appears almost to come out of the frame. I took the photograph in black and white film as I felt that the energy would be best described in monochrome terms and I also felt that the addition of colour might militate against the expression of the power of the water. I focussed on the twig to try and ensure a visual structure to reference to.

The photograph on the left of a vineyard shows multiple lines of multiple plants, whereas the shot on the right is a single stem. The vineyard taken in the glow of the evening sun compares starkly with the monochrome treatment of the anthurium lily on the right. The lily was lit by a single lamp and was taken to explore the tone, texture and form - more a still life than a nature shot. All photographs are about light,- literally painting with light and the very fine grain film (Technical Pan, now discontinued) I used, set at 12.5 ISO and developed in a liquid developer produced an almost invisible grain, enabling me to reveal in great detail the subtle variations of tone in the white flower. Almost all the tonal texture was delivered by shadow and I feel the image has a sensual feel. Whereas the vineyard was annexed to a "gastronomic farm/restaurant/hotel where I was staying. The ambience of the area was rustic, with all the food that was served being grown at the farm - the image sets out to portray that artisan feel. With the vines running down toward the hills and only a few sporadic farm buildings scattered about, the feel is of a timeless bucolic image and the only similarity between the photographs is the single light source.

Two shots of similar geometric shape yet delivering two distinct feelings. The flower head on the left was taken at the Oxford botanical gardens (I didn't make a note of it's name) and the dandelion was taken close by my home in North Oxfordshire. Both images were taken on black and white film and within a couple of months of each other, two years ago. The photograph on the left doesn't allow the eye to rest easily on the petals the contrast is strong and seems to fight any concentration, whilst the dandelion has a gossamer texture inviting the viewer to rest a while and wander around it's geometric forms, all the interlocking constructs seem to contrive to keep you there; it is very calming. Whereas the flower head has the opposite effect, it rejects any intrusion and it's globular shape will repel all borders no matter where they stem(!) from. The background of both images devoid of any distraction helps both images I think.

These are then my initial thoughts and my selection of four differing contrasting images. I think I will now have a better idea of how to tackle the assignment

As I've thought more about this subject I have realised a couple of things:

Firstly that my initial list was more emotional than pictorial - the Innet list is, in the main, a set of structural ideas to build an image around, to challenge the artist to construct an image and I will use this as my basis for the assignment.

The assignment is not about any of the alternative views of contrast - zone system, local, colour, political, emotional.