It has been suggested that I should think about why I have decided to concentrate solely on black and white images for this, the last , of my Courses as I work towards obtaining sufficient credits to apply for my degree. I have long been of the opinion that human beings are rarely the organised thinkers that we say we are and that much of our decisions are based on largely irrational thought processes that we then rationalise to ourselves before presenting them to the world. If this be true then what follows is, hopefully, the rational explanation of why I came to the decision that I did which, in reality, was a combination of conscious thinking and unconscious wishes and desires.
As a child all the photographs that I saw were black and white including those in newspapers such as the Picture Post. When I began to take photographs I used black and white film because colour film was difficult to obtain and was seen to be expensive. As I became more serious about my photography I continued to produce black and white images although I did dabble in colour photography on occasion but it remained something of only mild interest, largely because I developed my own images in my darkroom and black and white images seemed to be easier to obtain an acceptable finish. I don't claim this to be true just that that is how I felt. In simple terms I enjoyed black and white photography and I have little doubt that my memories of those times was a significant part in my decision about what I wanted to do in Advanced Photography. We are a product of our experiences and we tend to follow those memories of happy times when making choices.
More recent influences was being a member of a number of Photographic Societies and seeing work by other members whose primary output was monochromatic. Some of the work was quite exceptional and I often felt that I would like to produce work of a similar standard although at the time I worked almost completely in colour. It is difficult to put into words a personal reaction to any image that grabs your attention. I am drawn by the apparent simplicity of the image that belies the complex interaction between the range of tones across the image which produce the final picture. There is a clarity about the 'message' that one does not always see in colour images where the blocks of colour compete for our attention and the message is not always clear. In a monochromatic image we are drawn into a world that is familiar and yet strange because, in presenting our world as black and white, there is a conflict with the world of colour that is our everyday experience. We are invited to think about what we see.
When I am visiting a Gallery or an exhibition I am conscious that I will spend more time looking at a black and white photograph than a colour unless the latter is exceptional. When visiting the National Portrait Gallery recently I found greater enjoyment in the many monochromatic portraits than those in colour. There is a drama about a black and white portrait that is almost impossible to capture in colour without the very real risk of it seeming unreal. Again this is a product of background rather than specific based learning.
As I consciously thought about what I wanted to do for Advanced Photography I knew that I wanted to use the experience of the Course to broaden my knowledge of photography further. I also needed the challenge of doing something where my experience was limited. I was also aware that black and white photography had 'lost out' to colour as the dominant element in major and minor exhibitions throughout the World but that there was a groundswell of opinion for its return as evidenced by the decision of the Arles Festival 2013 to devote a large amount of exhibition space to monochromatic images. I felt the need to understand why; not only why the return to acceptability but also what is was in contemporary photography that was contributing to its wider acceptance.
In summary I am a product of my past and in making decisions my past has a strong influence on the final decision. Combine this with my need to face another challenge that was demanding of my time and skills the decision was probably inevitable.
Sunday, 13 October 2013
Wednesday, 2 October 2013
Antoine Gonin - Arles Festival 2013
Gonin's exhibition is from his series entitled "Empreinte". I have chosen it to comment on because I don't really understand it. I found the following on his web-site www.antoinegonin.com that offers an explanation.
"His “Empreinte’ series marks the coming together of his landscape work. Free of any documentary-like intention, it lends itself freely to a hallmark of a much more personal nature, and is host to many abstract, graphical and poetic compositions which together reveal the mark that human activity has left on nature. Thus, his pictures are at once the imprint of how man has modified the landscape, and the singular nature of his regard."
One image in the series is titled "Oregon 1 United States 2012". At first sight it is a black and white image of white lines of varying curvature against a black background. There is no discernible pattern nor structure to the white lines and it was only when I applied the knowledge that this was a landscape image that I came to the conclusion that the lines are traces of wheel tracks across a field. At this point I found my previous knowledge kicking in as I found that I wanted to know how big the field (or part of a field) was that I was looking at. I was trying to make sense of what I saw by fitting the image into a framework that I understood. I find that this is my usual reaction to abstract work. Rather than seeing it for itself I want to impose my world onto the image.
In his book "Camera Lucida" p7 (Barthes Roland (1980) Translation edition (2000) London Vintage) Roland Barthes writes of his desire to be "a primitive, without culture" when trying to discover the essence of the Photograph. When looking at a photograph our culture, our prior knowledge, acts as a filter between our 'looking' and our 'seeing'. This is what happens with all photographs but for me and probably others when what we are looking at does not fit into any previous known structure we try to force it into a known framework. By becoming a 'primitive' we have no prior knowledge, no culture so that we see the image as itself. In practice this is very difficult if not impossible because our culture provides us with a language that not only allows us to think about the image but also to explain it to others. Is it possible to understand without language? If I talk to an expert about this image and ask him what he 'sees' he can only communicate with me in a common language that is a product of our common culture.
I say earlier in the blog that the quotation from his web site "offers an explanation". I doubt if it does.
"His “Empreinte’ series marks the coming together of his landscape work. Free of any documentary-like intention, it lends itself freely to a hallmark of a much more personal nature, and is host to many abstract, graphical and poetic compositions which together reveal the mark that human activity has left on nature. Thus, his pictures are at once the imprint of how man has modified the landscape, and the singular nature of his regard."
One image in the series is titled "Oregon 1 United States 2012". At first sight it is a black and white image of white lines of varying curvature against a black background. There is no discernible pattern nor structure to the white lines and it was only when I applied the knowledge that this was a landscape image that I came to the conclusion that the lines are traces of wheel tracks across a field. At this point I found my previous knowledge kicking in as I found that I wanted to know how big the field (or part of a field) was that I was looking at. I was trying to make sense of what I saw by fitting the image into a framework that I understood. I find that this is my usual reaction to abstract work. Rather than seeing it for itself I want to impose my world onto the image.
In his book "Camera Lucida" p7 (Barthes Roland (1980) Translation edition (2000) London Vintage) Roland Barthes writes of his desire to be "a primitive, without culture" when trying to discover the essence of the Photograph. When looking at a photograph our culture, our prior knowledge, acts as a filter between our 'looking' and our 'seeing'. This is what happens with all photographs but for me and probably others when what we are looking at does not fit into any previous known structure we try to force it into a known framework. By becoming a 'primitive' we have no prior knowledge, no culture so that we see the image as itself. In practice this is very difficult if not impossible because our culture provides us with a language that not only allows us to think about the image but also to explain it to others. Is it possible to understand without language? If I talk to an expert about this image and ask him what he 'sees' he can only communicate with me in a common language that is a product of our common culture.
I say earlier in the blog that the quotation from his web site "offers an explanation". I doubt if it does.
Tuesday, 1 October 2013
Gilbert Garcin - Arles Festival 2013
I do not remember having seen any of Garcin's work before so it was something of a shock to come across his work at the Arles Festival. As far as I am aware his approach is unique and certainly is set apart by him using himself as the main character in a series of montages that make a statement about his take on life. He describes the individual works as 'small philosophies'. It is well worth visiting his web site at www.gilbert-garcin.com where you can see virtually all of his work. It is impressive.
Although I comment on three of the works in this blog the choice was difficult. Whilst there is a unifying theme (Garcin) throughout his work each is unique in its own way. The first image I wish to say something about is 'When the Wind will come 2007'. It is a simple montage having two elements - a dandelion 'clock' and Garcin. The 'clock' is about three times the size of Garcin with the seed head about one and a half times his size. A seed has fallen to the floor and Garcin is looking at it. The photograph is cleverly lit with the 'clock' brightly lit as is the seed on the floor. Garcin is lit from the side so half is in shadow. It is the lighting that, for me, creates the biggest impact as it draws the viewer's attention to the subject matter. We, the viewer, are left with the task of deciding the point of the picture as the title is enigmatic and we are given few if any clues as to what Garcin is thinking. In many of his images Garcin is actively doing something that seems to have relevance to what we see (the image) and what we are told (the title) but here he is stationary.
My second choice is 'The Decisive Choice 2006'. In this image Garcin is walking carrying a suitcase, head down looking at the road in front of him. The road enters the picture to the bottom right. A couple of paces from him the road divides with one part steeply rising to disappear at the top left hand corner of the image. The other part curves and then dives down with a slight twist leaving the image at the bottom left hand corner. In this image we have two 'no-no's' of composition. Both parts of the road take the viewer's eye out of the image. We cannot argue that they take us into the picture because the figure is walking to the left so that this too should lead our eye out of the image. Yet this does not happen and one has to ask why? I would suggest that this is because we go back to see if there is anything that tells us what the decision made by the figure will be. i.e. which path is he going to follow? We are captured within the image because at the time we see the image the choice has yet to be made. Far from being a compositional error there is an increase in tension because of the unresolved future of what we see - it is brilliant.
My third choice is 'Driven ambition 2003'. In this image the action takes place in the bottom third of the image. We have two human figures. The first is female and who is standing on the first on the left of seven blocks that go across the image the gap between each block increasing as we move to the right. The second figure, Garcin, has jumped from the second block and is about to land on the third block. His position seems precarious and the viewer wonders whether he will land successfully or fail in his ambition at this early stage. Again the tension in the image is created by the unresolved crisis as Garcin teeters on the brink of disaster.
In the first image an air of uncertainty is created by the relative sizes of the main participants. There is uncertainty in the next two but by including unresolved elements Garcin increases the sense of tension for the viewer. Both are very clever use of understated clues within the image and require a level of understanding of these clues from the viewer.
Although I comment on three of the works in this blog the choice was difficult. Whilst there is a unifying theme (Garcin) throughout his work each is unique in its own way. The first image I wish to say something about is 'When the Wind will come 2007'. It is a simple montage having two elements - a dandelion 'clock' and Garcin. The 'clock' is about three times the size of Garcin with the seed head about one and a half times his size. A seed has fallen to the floor and Garcin is looking at it. The photograph is cleverly lit with the 'clock' brightly lit as is the seed on the floor. Garcin is lit from the side so half is in shadow. It is the lighting that, for me, creates the biggest impact as it draws the viewer's attention to the subject matter. We, the viewer, are left with the task of deciding the point of the picture as the title is enigmatic and we are given few if any clues as to what Garcin is thinking. In many of his images Garcin is actively doing something that seems to have relevance to what we see (the image) and what we are told (the title) but here he is stationary.
My second choice is 'The Decisive Choice 2006'. In this image Garcin is walking carrying a suitcase, head down looking at the road in front of him. The road enters the picture to the bottom right. A couple of paces from him the road divides with one part steeply rising to disappear at the top left hand corner of the image. The other part curves and then dives down with a slight twist leaving the image at the bottom left hand corner. In this image we have two 'no-no's' of composition. Both parts of the road take the viewer's eye out of the image. We cannot argue that they take us into the picture because the figure is walking to the left so that this too should lead our eye out of the image. Yet this does not happen and one has to ask why? I would suggest that this is because we go back to see if there is anything that tells us what the decision made by the figure will be. i.e. which path is he going to follow? We are captured within the image because at the time we see the image the choice has yet to be made. Far from being a compositional error there is an increase in tension because of the unresolved future of what we see - it is brilliant.
My third choice is 'Driven ambition 2003'. In this image the action takes place in the bottom third of the image. We have two human figures. The first is female and who is standing on the first on the left of seven blocks that go across the image the gap between each block increasing as we move to the right. The second figure, Garcin, has jumped from the second block and is about to land on the third block. His position seems precarious and the viewer wonders whether he will land successfully or fail in his ambition at this early stage. Again the tension in the image is created by the unresolved crisis as Garcin teeters on the brink of disaster.
In the first image an air of uncertainty is created by the relative sizes of the main participants. There is uncertainty in the next two but by including unresolved elements Garcin increases the sense of tension for the viewer. Both are very clever use of understated clues within the image and require a level of understanding of these clues from the viewer.
Sergio Larrain - Arles Festival 2013
Born 1931 in Santiago, Chile, Larrain took up photography following a family visit to Europe and the Middle East. He lived in London in the late 1950's for a year and in 1960 joined Magnum Photos carrying out a number of commissions for the Agency. He returned to his home Country in 1963 settling in and photographing extensively Valparaiso where in collaboration with the poet Pablo Peruda he produced an extensive photographic essay. This work was eventually published on the occasion of his work being shown at the Rencontres d'Arles in 1991. The exhibition at Arles in 2013 is a retrospective of his work . He died in Chile in 2012.
My overall impression was one of the simplicity, almost naiveté, of the images as though Larrain had grabbed at his camera and taken the shots almost on instinct. Some have parts of the image that are out of focus and yet this lack of focus adds to the effect of the image rather than detracting from it. Despite the perceived simplicity there is a sense of strength almost power that grabs your attention. You find yourself being drawn into the image either because of the angle from which it was taken or because you feel the need to explore the detail - to try to make sense of what you see before you. Here was a man who clearly understood the conventions of photography but who was secure in his own beliefs to do what he wanted.
'Passage Bavestrello, Valparaiso, Chile 1952 is an image that at first glance is simply of two young girls walking through a passage. The strength of the image lies in the position of the two girls drawing the eye into the picture. The young girl in the foreground is in shadow and slightly out of focus and detail is unclear. There arises in the mind of the viewer why is she carrying the bottle in her left hand and what does it contain? The second girl is in the sunlight and although she has her back towards us we feel that we can 'know' more about her. The much sharper definition of her image makes her the focal point. Both girls are walking away from the camera which adds to the interest.
The rest of the image is a combination of light and dark with the shadows having, in the main, sharp edges indicating the 'brutality' of the architecture. It does not give the sense of being somewhere where one would feel comfortable. Yet the shapes created by the shadows add significantly to the whole effect.
The second image that particularly caught my attention was 'Chiloe Island Chile 1957'. My interest was aroused because almost two-thirds of the image is black with no detail at all. The rest of the image is difficult to interpret in terms of what the viewer is seeing. What can be seen is three young children apparently asleep on some sort of platform/shelf/table. Of the child on the left we can see most of the lower part of his body from the back; the second child appears to be squatting but again we can only see the lower part of his body apart from his right arm and hand but my interest was piqued because he is in the process of picking up (or possibly putting down) some object; the third child is again seen from the back and we see his bare feet and his posterior. All three are bare footed and that, together with the quality of the clothing that we see, suggests considerable poverty. There is a sense of complete exhaustion in the position of the three and I found the whole image disturbing and challenging.
The tonal values across the image are well represented and the quality of the image is such that one feels that one could feel the texture of the clothing. It was an image that stayed with me.
The third and final image that I have chosen from those that I saw is 'Bar, Valparaiso Chile, 1963'. It is so different from the other two both in terms of subject matter but also in the quality of the image. What we see is a young lady facing the camera although looking to the photographers left with a half smile on her face looking somewhat wistful/thoughtful. Her hands are clasped tightly in front of her suggesting tension and a certain level of discomfort; although what is the cause of this discomfort is less than clear. The other two main elements of the image are three crates of 'Limon' Soda and a head and shoulders shot of a man in profile. What is surprising is that most of the elements of the image are out of focus to varying degrees as though the image was 'snatched' quickly. This probability is also suggested by the very poor overall lighting with ugly shadows distorting the woman's face.
His work raised the question for me - Why do we adhere to the 'established rules' of photography when breaching the conventions leads to challenging and exciting work? I have heard often the statement that we cannot break the rules until we fully understand their purpose but at what point does this happen - if ever. Not the understanding but the acceptance by others that doing your own thing is not only healthy but part of 'growing up.
My overall impression was one of the simplicity, almost naiveté, of the images as though Larrain had grabbed at his camera and taken the shots almost on instinct. Some have parts of the image that are out of focus and yet this lack of focus adds to the effect of the image rather than detracting from it. Despite the perceived simplicity there is a sense of strength almost power that grabs your attention. You find yourself being drawn into the image either because of the angle from which it was taken or because you feel the need to explore the detail - to try to make sense of what you see before you. Here was a man who clearly understood the conventions of photography but who was secure in his own beliefs to do what he wanted.
'Passage Bavestrello, Valparaiso, Chile 1952 is an image that at first glance is simply of two young girls walking through a passage. The strength of the image lies in the position of the two girls drawing the eye into the picture. The young girl in the foreground is in shadow and slightly out of focus and detail is unclear. There arises in the mind of the viewer why is she carrying the bottle in her left hand and what does it contain? The second girl is in the sunlight and although she has her back towards us we feel that we can 'know' more about her. The much sharper definition of her image makes her the focal point. Both girls are walking away from the camera which adds to the interest.
The rest of the image is a combination of light and dark with the shadows having, in the main, sharp edges indicating the 'brutality' of the architecture. It does not give the sense of being somewhere where one would feel comfortable. Yet the shapes created by the shadows add significantly to the whole effect.
The second image that particularly caught my attention was 'Chiloe Island Chile 1957'. My interest was aroused because almost two-thirds of the image is black with no detail at all. The rest of the image is difficult to interpret in terms of what the viewer is seeing. What can be seen is three young children apparently asleep on some sort of platform/shelf/table. Of the child on the left we can see most of the lower part of his body from the back; the second child appears to be squatting but again we can only see the lower part of his body apart from his right arm and hand but my interest was piqued because he is in the process of picking up (or possibly putting down) some object; the third child is again seen from the back and we see his bare feet and his posterior. All three are bare footed and that, together with the quality of the clothing that we see, suggests considerable poverty. There is a sense of complete exhaustion in the position of the three and I found the whole image disturbing and challenging.
The tonal values across the image are well represented and the quality of the image is such that one feels that one could feel the texture of the clothing. It was an image that stayed with me.
The third and final image that I have chosen from those that I saw is 'Bar, Valparaiso Chile, 1963'. It is so different from the other two both in terms of subject matter but also in the quality of the image. What we see is a young lady facing the camera although looking to the photographers left with a half smile on her face looking somewhat wistful/thoughtful. Her hands are clasped tightly in front of her suggesting tension and a certain level of discomfort; although what is the cause of this discomfort is less than clear. The other two main elements of the image are three crates of 'Limon' Soda and a head and shoulders shot of a man in profile. What is surprising is that most of the elements of the image are out of focus to varying degrees as though the image was 'snatched' quickly. This probability is also suggested by the very poor overall lighting with ugly shadows distorting the woman's face.
His work raised the question for me - Why do we adhere to the 'established rules' of photography when breaching the conventions leads to challenging and exciting work? I have heard often the statement that we cannot break the rules until we fully understand their purpose but at what point does this happen - if ever. Not the understanding but the acceptance by others that doing your own thing is not only healthy but part of 'growing up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)