being an autodidact in the age of L’internets is quite interesting. mainly, the outlets are photo-social networks, and the development is quite influenced by what one sees there (to accept or repel), and the urgency to acquire the social currency— such as comments and likes. when I think back on the days of flickr, and Instagram since its inception, there is no doubt that I could not divorce the social from the photographic attempts. however, I like to think that there is a big difference these days to be able to find out what is possible with owning a camera (or two): 1. I photograph what I want, and thinks develops a language and not a style; 2. photo-social sites are just a sharing mechanism, which is to say, more social than photographic**. while previously I would search for a photo to take that would give me currency at the sites, and develop by mimicking others (famous or not), these days I just search for something that connects, and use a camera to record it. one such interest is that of chairs at Parisian parks. I like to go in the afternoon, if possible, and find their arrangement as left by peope, and think “a conversation happened here”— even if, like this one, it looks like someone needed to rest their feet— and try to give them a conversation context via composition. the photograph, indeed, is an artifact, and its judgment is as much divorced from the art as possible.
** this is an attempt to not be overtaken by the grey goo.
link: “grey goo” in PressPlayPause [ link ]
the appeal of Street Photography still alludes me, and while I truly admire some of the work/ideas from Henri Cartier-Bresson and Brassaï, I do not find much that captures my appreciation**, never mind the “I wish I could do that”. then there are two books from Alex Webb that hold my attention, and appreciate that Decisive Moment and/or the use of shadows. one such example is shown below, and example of the use of geometry and shadow at the link below, where everything is right… and what finally makes me connect with me is the hand in on the tree. the sails and other hands pointing seem to play on the tree, as other forms of limbs/leaves, and while there are other people in the frame, it is the hand that offers the biggest clue of a human essence. I think that moment, and all else about the photo, which makes it quite brilliant. it was hard to choose one photo, as with his book on Mexico called « La Calle ».
** yes, Saul Leiter is definitely street photography, and my favorite photographer, yet with him, the street is a canvas, not so much within what Street Photography usually conveys with the luminaries in the field.
link: Alex Webb at Magnum Photo, with 120 sample images from The Suffering of Light.
at least the way that I manage to find out about photographers, the Czech contingency is quite the blind spot. luckily, because of first discovering Josef Sudek, and the instant connection it made with me, then I was suggested to look at the work of Jaromír Funke. surely, there is a feeling of German Expressionism to his work, mainly through the work of light and shadows in his still life. though I think the resulting “flattened” perspective of the resulting image has me thinking of Italian Futurism— as the lines in the photo below demonstrate. while his books/work are not easy to find, thanks to the reissues and/or retrospectives, his book Between Construction and Emotion is a favorite one in my collection. I also love this aspect about his short life: « He studied medicine, law, and philosophy at the Charles University in Prague and the University of Bratislava but did not graduate and instead turned to photography. » perhaps a projection of a wish for my life’s path.
links: Between Construction and Emotion (at ArtBook) & Jaroslav Rössler‘s Czech Avant-GardePhotographer (at AbeBooks). a photo gallery and noting the exhibit now in Frankfurt (at L’œil de la Photographie)
one advent of digital photography, mainly as shared online, seems to indicate a love for no-shadows photography. this is also very apparent in the candy-coloured photographs found in modern «New Topographics». yet, obviously, shadows can be embraced and forget about “expose for the shadows” suggestions. one classic example of embracing the shadows right away is the cinematography in The Godfather, which begat the nickname for Gordon Willis as “the prince of darkness”. (the nice anecdote is that, during the remastering of the film, they could not make them brighter for modern tastes because there is nothing in the shadows.) I have personally started to embrace the shape of shadows in the photos I take, and eventually will bring it into portraiture with purpose, versus accident/cliché. as a nice example, there is the work from Marina Lovato, and others will follow.
there are so many ways to take a portrait: fill the frame, or face on center, and they can all be the best way to photograph the sitter. yes, photography should not have a formula, and just have a sense of the sitter and a language that each composition provides. Richard Avedon worked with a few approaches to this, in addition to lens distortions. a preferred method, for me and what I appreciate in others, is for the sitter to be off-center. in this way, I must admit, the sitter is the last selection for the photograph, and the scene (to conform to a desired geometry at play) comes first. an equivalence I like to convey is to a song: the instrumental part is composed first, and it must work as an instrumental, and then one adds the lyrics to suit the instrumental version. in movies, this approach was exceedingly good, and done very often, in Ida. (as best as I can discern, the opposite approach would have been most frame compositions in Yasujirō Ozu‘s movies, and Richard Avedon (again) with his white background. in this “off-center + the sitter comes in last” composition, there is a bit of danger: who is the protagonist? the background or the person? what has been done to the portrait by (most likely) cropping parts of the person out?
link: some of my experiments can be viewed at liminaleye‘s selection of the Incidental Interiors series.
like many industries, it is difficult to accept changes n fashion photography. yes, fashion is about quarterly/yearly changes to the clothes, though we can see that fashion photography was pretty stale for many years— and that stale view can still be found today. it seems that that Deborah Turbeville was not a fan of the fashion world, still, it may have been this disdain that propelled her to be subversive, in a way, with her photographic work within that industry. « It is the psychological tone and mood that I work for… », she said, and thus it is not only a “lo-fi” approach to otherwise saturated/sharp (and stale) fashion work that was subversive, but also what the fashion photograph should convey: as if she wanted to integrate the scene, and not just differentiate the clothes. in my view, an integrative view of composition and presentation can produce a stronger work, rather than concentrating on equipment and photographic rules/clichés (such as “rules of thirds”, sharpness, small or large DoF gimmickry, and the fads in post-processing). Deborah Turbeville took an assault on fashion photography norms from many different angles which reverberate through today.
info: her fashion photography has been compiled onto the book The Fashion Photographs. for a look at integration versus elimination (differentiation), the article from Malcom Gladwell, for The New Yorker, on the advertising targeting via psychological integration vs differentiation classification can be found at [ summary ]
there seems to be a flood of Polaroid books in recent years, and I personally, have been lowering my threshold of what is a good book to buy. it is not a “pass”, rather, it has to do with an attempt to understand a distortion/transformation (or two). that is, there is the transformation that Polaroids shifts in color relative to the real world, and there is the transformation on the photographer/subject by using the Polaroid equipment. among the early books, themed on Polaroids, that I obtained was from Sibylle Bergemann. I watched the video-review (by Jörg Coldberg), and was hooked— and no, it didn’t require for me to lower my threshold on photo books that I would own. I am glad to see that more of her work is being given a book release, as her talent, demonstrated in The Polaroids, gets an immediate spark of interest on how she saw the world. further to this interest, and despite the fact that I have not taken that many Polaroid photos because I completely avoided it when the company was viable— heck, I even worked a summer at Polaroid near Boston and was not interested in the camera— then, it is strange how much it influences my perception of color in presenting a photo… and perhaps, if I get to understand the second transformation: what a portrait should convey.