with the baseline ranging from instinctive to total control where the two end terms relate to the photographic type as judged by the work of the individual. It is important to state that the judgement relates solely on what we perceive when we examine any particular photographer's work. It would be wrong, in my view, to extrapolate from the person's work to a general statement about his/her personality type. If there is any reality in what I am proposing then the majority (approx 70%) of photographers (here I am thinking both professional and amateur photographers) lie in that area where photographs are chosen and the photographer has some control over the resulting image.
Lets first deal with the question - "Can Crewdson's work can be considered to be photography?" Of course the answer lies in how you define what is a photograph. A suitably broad answer would include everything (A photograph is a photograph because I describe it as a photograph!). Perhaps a more limiting answer, and probably more acceptable to most, would be the definition Roland Barthes provides in the book Camera Lucida. (1. Barthes R (1980) . Camera Lucida. Translated edition (2000) London Vintage). Barthes in “Camera Lucida” (p76) argues that it is not possible to deny that the subject of the photograph “has been there”. It is this unique property that is the essence (Barthes uses the term ‘noeme’ ) of Photography. He gives the noeme a name: “That has been”. It is argued that a photograph is a photograph because it shows something ‘that has been’. what we see is a photograph because all the elements within that photograph "have been". Although much of Crewdson's work can be described as created, what we see existed in front of the camera at the time the shot was taken and that what we see is a 'photograph' because all the elements "have been".
It is probably an injustice to describe the images Crewdson creates as a single frame from a movie film but in essence that is what they are. The result, although a single image, is the coming together of Crewdson's original idea, created by a specialist team and using up to 60 people with all the paraphernalia (scenery, location, and lighting etc.) of the movie set. Crewdson has almost complete control of everything except the weather conditions when shooting outside. There is a moment in the DVD Gregory Crewdson: Brief Encounters (I have only scene a trailer as the DVD itself is only available in the format used in the States which is not compatible with UK players) when he says to crew members - "Look at that sky. It is the best sky we have ever had". The climatic conditions are the one uncertainty in his world at the time of shooting so although he may be very close to the 'total control' end of the continuum he is not quite there. Where the set has been created and photographed in a studio then he can exercise total control but this is only part of his work.
Early photographers necessarily had to exercise a great deal of control because of the limitations of their equipment and processes. However as exposure times fell then they had greater degrees of freedom in the images that they could create. For an early example of someone who would exercise total control one has only to look at the work of Julia Margaret Cameron (1815 - 1879). She was given a camera by her daughter in 1863 when she was 48 years old and she records that the first print with which she was satisfied was taken in January 1864. In broad terms her work can be divided into two main groups - portraits and creations based on religious or literary works. In portraiture she would ask that her subjects patiently wait as she made numerous exposures that necessitated her preparing each wet plate separately. Cameron's control here lay in her almost obsessive desire to get the perfect image. For her allegorical work she exercised the same control whilst insisting on a specific pose that reflected the original work. One of her most famous images is Beatrice Cenci:
© V&A Museum
Cameron posed May Prinsep a relative of Alfred Lord Tennyson as Beatrice Cenci illustrating the story of the girl who killed her father and was subsequently executed.
A more recent example is the work of Maisie Broadhead who produces modern interpretations of old masterpieces by such artist as Vermeer and Velasquez. One example is the work shown as part of the Seduced by Art Exhibition held at the National Gallery from 31 October 2012 - 20 January 2013. The two thumbnails below are taken from the book - Hope Kingsley (2012) Seduced by Art Phtography Past and Present London National Gallery Co. Ltd that for those who were unfortunate to miss the exhibition is an invaluable resource.
The top image is by Simon Vouet entitled "An allegory of Wealth (La Richesse)" about 1635. Oil on Canvas 170 x 124cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.
The lower image is by Maisie Broadhead "Keep them sweet" 2010 Digital C Print 145 x 106.5cm Represented by Sarah Myerscough Fine Art, London.
All aspects of the photograph were under the control of Ms Broadhead although I say this with some doubt having recently spent an afternoon photographing young children who were a little bit older than the two in the image!! Perhaps it would be unfair to place Broadhead at the far right of the baseline.
At the same exhibition was an image by Jeff Wall ("The Destroyed Room" 1978 printed 1987 Cibachrome transparency in fluorescent Lightbox 158.8 x 229cm National Gallery of Canada Ottawa that was inspired by Delacroix,s "The Death of Sardanapalus"). Wall has stated ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yG2k4C4zrU) that he sees but does not photograph until he has re-created what he saw in the Studio. Presumably he is in a very similar position to the painter who is at liberty, when painting, to move the relative positions of the various elements to create a more idealistic scene. I would suggest here that Wall can assert complete control over all aspects of the shoot and therefore can be placed on the far right of the baseline.
Where then do we find phtographs at the 'instinctive' side of the distribution. Three examples that came to mind were war photographers, street photographers and wildlife photographers. In both situations the photographer is faced with a multiplicity of opportunities that may vary only slightly from all that surrounds the 'best' image. The greats of the trade instinctively (without conscious thought) take the right one. The instinct is probably a combination of training and experience, 'something' tells him/her that this is the shot, but the reaction is instant and defies rational thought. Some have the question mark as to whether the photographer was just lucky, as in the following shot
entitled South Vietnam National Police Chief Nguyen Ngoe Loan executes a suspected Viet Cong member 1968. Taken by Eddie Adams it is a Silver Print and is ©World Press Photo/The Associated Press New York. Yet it can be argued that Adams experience told him that something dramatic was about to happen so the shot was taken.
Wildlife photographers spend many years learning and assimilating the movements of the wildlife they photograph. In this image Michael Nichols working for the National Geographic Magazine catches the magic moment between these two Serengeti lions.
Again I would argue that the many years of experience led to an awareness that created the opportunity for the image.
The next image is a mix of conflict and street photography Don McCullin took the image in Londonderry Northern Ireland in 1971 and shows the moment British soldiers commit themselves to 'battle'.
McCullin's instincts have been honed over years of being in the middle of conflict.
Are there lessons to be learnt from such an analysis of types of photographer? Probably only at the individual level for only the individual can decide what sort of personality he brings to his/her photography. It may help someone to decide what type of photography they are best suited for so that they can direct their learning and gain experience in the type that best suits them and in which they will be most comfortable.
No comments:
Post a Comment