There were definetly a couple things through out this article that struck out to me like the fact that she says "photography is not practiced by most people as an art. It is mainly a social rite, a defense against anxiety, and a tool of power." I halfway disagree with her on this. I do believe photography is a tool of power but I believe that photography is always going to be a practice of art. Infact, photography is the most powerful tool used in art because of how really are no constraints when creating a work of art. I believe that if the photographers intent is to create a piece of art, then who is to say that it is not art?
Sontag also states that "A way of certifying experience, taking photographs is also a way of refusing it-- by limiting experience to a search for the photogenic, by converting experience into an image, a souvenir." I don't believe that taking a photograph creates that kind of disconnection with an experience. By allowing ourselves to take that photograph, helps us relive that experience. Every time that I look at photos with me with my friends or family, it always seems to take me back on a journey through time. If anything the photographer it creates the experience by setting no limits.
She then goes on to relate photography to sex and violence. How camera's are a "fantasy-machine whose use is addictive" just like guns and cars. She makes it sound that picture taking is violating, "to photograph people is to violate them, by seeing them as they never see themselves, by having knowledge of them they can never have; it turns people into objects that can be symbolically possessed." I kind of agree with her on this to an extent because there are people out there who do take pictures without someone knowing then they go and use that photo for god knows what reason. A reason that could hurt someones feelings to the point in which that they feel that they are violated.
01 November 2010
30 October 2010
Richard Avedon (May 15, 1923 – October 1, 2004) was an American photographer. An obituary, published in The New York Times following Avedon's death said that, "his fashion and portrait photographs helped define America's image of style, beauty and culture for the last half-century." I began shooting some photgraphs for our portrait assignment this weekend. One of my favorite artist is Richard Avendon. His photographs amaze me. I have found myself on many an afternoon flipping through the pages of one of the many books that collect his works. I hope you guys will find some inpsiration in his work too.
This Is An Invitation
Like Marcella, the thing that struck me most about Sontag's In Platos Cave was the idea of a photograph being an invitation. As an artist, I strive to make all the work I create an invitation. Through my work, I want to invite the viewer into my world. I want them to come along for the ride. I want the viewer to experience the emotions and ideas that I felt and had while creating the work, and I want to invite them to feel their own emotional response and form their own ideas about the piece. I strive to invite the viewer into my world through my visual art work, and also through my music. When I step out onto a stage, I strive to invite the audience to come along with me on a journey for 2 or 3 hours. A journey through my world. Music and Art are not only invitations, but also vehicles for travel and self discovery. The song, or the photograph, must be inviting. It must make the viewer or listener want to get up, trade in their wings for some wheels, and go.
25 October 2010
In Plato's Cave
There is a balance between taking a picture to remember the moment and taking pictures for the sake of taking pictures.
I found it interesting that the Sontag writing mentioned that a French study stated most households have a camera and that homes with children were twice as likely to have a camera than homes without children.
One could gather that a parent wants to document those adorable moments in a child's life to look upon years later and cherish the memories the photographs recall.
Another may argue that being so caught up in taking any picture and every picture of an event or moment in life can lead the photographer to forgetting the details of what happened because the photographer was so caught up in making photographs, they missed the moment.
I have caught myself not enjoying moments in the past because I was so caught up in composing that perfect shot. In two recent and similar trips to Chicago, I had two very unique experiences.
In the first, I brought my camera along with an array of lenses and accessories to capture every possible moment. When I returned home, looking to freshen-up my desk's picture frames, I started sorting through the images. Out of nearly one thousnand digital images, I had one I enjoyed , printed and put in the frame. The seconds and minutes spent composing the hundreds of other images were wasted.
In the second trip, I left my camera at home. No point-and-shoot, no digital SLR, nothing but a cameraphone with a crappy sensor that made terrible images. Upon returning home, I realized that I had not taken the time to even take one image with the cameraphone and I had more memories of the events and moments of the second trip compared to the memories of taking many images in the first trip.
To summarize, there are times to take photographs, times to leave the camera in the bag, and times to leave the bag at home.
I found it interesting that the Sontag writing mentioned that a French study stated most households have a camera and that homes with children were twice as likely to have a camera than homes without children.
One could gather that a parent wants to document those adorable moments in a child's life to look upon years later and cherish the memories the photographs recall.
Another may argue that being so caught up in taking any picture and every picture of an event or moment in life can lead the photographer to forgetting the details of what happened because the photographer was so caught up in making photographs, they missed the moment.
I have caught myself not enjoying moments in the past because I was so caught up in composing that perfect shot. In two recent and similar trips to Chicago, I had two very unique experiences.
In the first, I brought my camera along with an array of lenses and accessories to capture every possible moment. When I returned home, looking to freshen-up my desk's picture frames, I started sorting through the images. Out of nearly one thousnand digital images, I had one I enjoyed , printed and put in the frame. The seconds and minutes spent composing the hundreds of other images were wasted.
In the second trip, I left my camera at home. No point-and-shoot, no digital SLR, nothing but a cameraphone with a crappy sensor that made terrible images. Upon returning home, I realized that I had not taken the time to even take one image with the cameraphone and I had more memories of the events and moments of the second trip compared to the memories of taking many images in the first trip.
To summarize, there are times to take photographs, times to leave the camera in the bag, and times to leave the bag at home.
Snap My Picture
The thing that struck me the most about the Sontag article was the relation to Cameras and family life. One thing that wasn't mentioned that struck me with how true and great this is , is the constant photo snapping of our children. They are our whole being and we want to memorialize them and see how they grow through the ages, but it is especially important to the children. Developmentally there is very little that we remember of our younger years. To have photographs to look back upon moments shared with family, friends, and loved ones. It has an even higher importance for those family members or friends who have been lost and with the lack of physical memories we can look back at photographed ones.
I have a trunk in my home of photos from the early 1900's of generations past and while I do not know who they all are or their stories it is fascinating to see my family history and wonder about the mystery of their existent and/or experiences. Photographs are truly cherished for it could be one of the only things to look back upon.
Photography is a sign of caring, showing great mile stones in ones family or life. To not have pictures of your graduation, or a birthday or especially a wedding breeds about a feeling of lack of love or importance.
Along with that the statement on page 12 "the photographer has the choice between a photograph and a life." People can get so caught up in having to capture a moment or event that they do not truly experience it but only experience it through the photographs they took which is kind of sad but could also be seen as a sacrifice for others.
All in all I hated reading this, and wanted to fall asleep about every other page.
What I reflected upon while in "Plato's Cave"...
While reading In Plato's Cave; on Photography, I had many random thoughts and criticisims. I liked the reading, but also seemed to have many negative thoughts while reading it. The idea that taking pictures is like sex struck me quite odd, but at the same time, I can see what they mean; taking pictures is no longer an "only certain people can do it", or secret thing... Literally EVERY ONE IS DOING IT!!!!
When Sontag was explaining that a photograph is meant to capture one's experience, I questioned whether it would be better to capture the experience for ones self rather than base it on someone elses experience. You can look at a picture from the Hubble Space Teloscope and say "look I've been to Mars, this is what it looks like" but in reality you have most likely not been, and therefore, who is to say that that tiny red square is really what Mars looks like? Sontag is correct in saying that photographs are just pieces of the world; one could gather every single picture ever taken of New York and still be missing key parts of it.
When Sontag wrote about the pictures being in books, I agreed that it is a nice way to keep them, but not everyony will agree with the sequence, and it is extremely rare that anyone will ever spend more than 5 minutes looking at a picture book. Thats why I love walking into a friend's house and seeing their family photo album laying out in the open- why?- why have pictures out for anyone to see when you know for a fact that the viewer is going to have no idea of what the picture is about; let alone whom is even in the picture; without the owner guiding them through it.
When I read about the documentary photography, it struck me with the realization of how we demean all people in photographs... it is all one psychological defense mechanism- you take pictures of those in poverty to make you feel bad because secretly you think you are better than they are, and with rich people you focus on their flaws and demeaning them; trying to make them look bad or worse than you because deep down you are jealouse of them.
When discussing how in the early 1840s, the only professional photographers were the inventors; I decided that nothing has really changed, yea there are those who say they are "professional" but all they have done is studied and aced the final, amateurs are simply in the studing stage but they refuse to take the final because they refuse to learn anything.
When Sontag talks about photography as an art, I also agree with her; but at the same time I wondered if it was safe to explain that photography is only art to the photographer; simply because the photo only has real meaning to that one person.
Back to the "Photography as promiscuous sex" idea... WE ARE ALL CAMERA WHORES!!!!! The only form of contraception is not owning a camera, but yet you are still raped with exposure. The photograph is the child; Photoshop is the coverup for the protection that failed; and simply deleting the photo is like aborting it. Learning to practice safe photography is taking pictures of meaning and substance, not of how many bruises you got because you were dumb enough to stumble down the stairs after an overdose of alcohol, pictures like those are for telling the world how dumb you are, and what another person would see as /use for blackmail if anything.
When discussing families and pictures, I understand wanting to capture the little sweet moments of children before they grow up and become trouble makers, but at the same time, this can also be taken too far; no one cares about what your child's first bowel movement looked like (well maybe aside from the doctor, but that is only in extreme cases). I was talking to my aunt about how I have absolutely no pictures of my mom either pregnant with me or holding me as an infant. My aunt then told me about when she was pregnant with my cousin Seth and how she refused to have pictures of herself taken. She said that she was doing the week by week pictures after she found out she was pregnant with her first. Unfortunately, she had a miscarriage in week 7. Because of the miscarriage, she refused to take any pictures of her 2nd pregnancy, she said it created a sort of superstition. Now she regrets not having those pictures of her soon to be 7 year old son, but she is also glad she does not have them.
I love when Sontag states "It hardly matters what activities are photographed so long as photographs get taken and are cherished" I completely agree with that; if you cherish how dumb I think you look in your drunk picture, more power to you.
"Photography has become one of the principal devices for experiencing something, for giving an appearance of participation" says Sontag. Again I agree with her; why do we have to prove that we did something? That goes back to traveling; Why do people spend so much time taking pictures when they know that eventually they are going to forget what the picture's subject even was; people get so caught up into taking pictures that they waste the experience of the vacation or trip. I know that while I was growing up and going on girl scout trips I would always make my mom buy me a bunch of disposable cameras. Looking back on the photos now, I have no idea what they were about. I did go on one trip in which I forgot my camera. I LOVED IT!!! the freedom of not having to worry about leaving it somewhere, getting it wet, etc was liberating. Of course all the other girls had cameras and so I got copies of many of their pictures. Miraculously, in looking at those pictures, I can tell you that "Allie was standing on the ground below me and another group of girls, we were looking down at her over a ledge at hocking hills...." and so on about this one single picture that she took. She is right when she says that taking pictures can be an experience itself, but at the same time it should be based on priority of experience rather than proof. I also liked when she explained that the picture gives an avent a kind of "immortality" that we cherish forever, well that may be true in some cases, but what about the many pictures taht have been destroyed, cut, and burned simply because it's subject was of an ex, or a time that made the person upset? Why did we have those pictures to begin with?
Sontag talked about how a disabled person cannot act upon what he sees; this made me feel as if a camera makes people disabled as well. One can only see so much through a tiny view finder, and one can only capture so much of an image, so does a picture really capture an experience? My guess brings me back to the "small piece" idea; that it isn't the whole thing, but a trinket to remind you of it.
About the Peeping Tom movie; How ingenious!; capturiong the exact moment of how someone looks just as they are killed. Yes, very morbid, but at the same time very interesting. Many people would argue that it is insane and gruesom, but at the same time, how many people tried to be the first to get their hands on the photographs? Wanting to actually see the photographs makes them hypocritical, it is the same as wanting to take the picture in the first place. The same goes for the man who recorded the hanging of Sadam Hussein; many people found it horrible, but yet, those same people rushed right in to be the first to get the photos.
When Sontag discussed how cameras are more like guns, it reminded me of a riddle: "I stand in one spot, sometimes I move about, sometimes you know im there, sometimes you do not, all day, everyday I shoot people... Who am I?" Many people would say assassin, but the answer is "Photographer".
Upon reading the closing of the article, it made me realize some af the actural reasons why I enjoy photography;it can be good, bad anf far inbetween; it can show you something, tell a story, show other people what shocked you , shock other people, etc. Mainly because there are so many, many extremes to photography; it becomes an undying art; and with that comes many opportunities to advance in learning, like the film of a camera itself. I like most how the artistic idea of photography is not narrow minded, it is as broad as anyone will ever make it.
When Sontag was explaining that a photograph is meant to capture one's experience, I questioned whether it would be better to capture the experience for ones self rather than base it on someone elses experience. You can look at a picture from the Hubble Space Teloscope and say "look I've been to Mars, this is what it looks like" but in reality you have most likely not been, and therefore, who is to say that that tiny red square is really what Mars looks like? Sontag is correct in saying that photographs are just pieces of the world; one could gather every single picture ever taken of New York and still be missing key parts of it.
When Sontag wrote about the pictures being in books, I agreed that it is a nice way to keep them, but not everyony will agree with the sequence, and it is extremely rare that anyone will ever spend more than 5 minutes looking at a picture book. Thats why I love walking into a friend's house and seeing their family photo album laying out in the open- why?- why have pictures out for anyone to see when you know for a fact that the viewer is going to have no idea of what the picture is about; let alone whom is even in the picture; without the owner guiding them through it.
When I read about the documentary photography, it struck me with the realization of how we demean all people in photographs... it is all one psychological defense mechanism- you take pictures of those in poverty to make you feel bad because secretly you think you are better than they are, and with rich people you focus on their flaws and demeaning them; trying to make them look bad or worse than you because deep down you are jealouse of them.
When discussing how in the early 1840s, the only professional photographers were the inventors; I decided that nothing has really changed, yea there are those who say they are "professional" but all they have done is studied and aced the final, amateurs are simply in the studing stage but they refuse to take the final because they refuse to learn anything.
When Sontag talks about photography as an art, I also agree with her; but at the same time I wondered if it was safe to explain that photography is only art to the photographer; simply because the photo only has real meaning to that one person.
Back to the "Photography as promiscuous sex" idea... WE ARE ALL CAMERA WHORES!!!!! The only form of contraception is not owning a camera, but yet you are still raped with exposure. The photograph is the child; Photoshop is the coverup for the protection that failed; and simply deleting the photo is like aborting it. Learning to practice safe photography is taking pictures of meaning and substance, not of how many bruises you got because you were dumb enough to stumble down the stairs after an overdose of alcohol, pictures like those are for telling the world how dumb you are, and what another person would see as /use for blackmail if anything.
When discussing families and pictures, I understand wanting to capture the little sweet moments of children before they grow up and become trouble makers, but at the same time, this can also be taken too far; no one cares about what your child's first bowel movement looked like (well maybe aside from the doctor, but that is only in extreme cases). I was talking to my aunt about how I have absolutely no pictures of my mom either pregnant with me or holding me as an infant. My aunt then told me about when she was pregnant with my cousin Seth and how she refused to have pictures of herself taken. She said that she was doing the week by week pictures after she found out she was pregnant with her first. Unfortunately, she had a miscarriage in week 7. Because of the miscarriage, she refused to take any pictures of her 2nd pregnancy, she said it created a sort of superstition. Now she regrets not having those pictures of her soon to be 7 year old son, but she is also glad she does not have them.
I love when Sontag states "It hardly matters what activities are photographed so long as photographs get taken and are cherished" I completely agree with that; if you cherish how dumb I think you look in your drunk picture, more power to you.
"Photography has become one of the principal devices for experiencing something, for giving an appearance of participation" says Sontag. Again I agree with her; why do we have to prove that we did something? That goes back to traveling; Why do people spend so much time taking pictures when they know that eventually they are going to forget what the picture's subject even was; people get so caught up into taking pictures that they waste the experience of the vacation or trip. I know that while I was growing up and going on girl scout trips I would always make my mom buy me a bunch of disposable cameras. Looking back on the photos now, I have no idea what they were about. I did go on one trip in which I forgot my camera. I LOVED IT!!! the freedom of not having to worry about leaving it somewhere, getting it wet, etc was liberating. Of course all the other girls had cameras and so I got copies of many of their pictures. Miraculously, in looking at those pictures, I can tell you that "Allie was standing on the ground below me and another group of girls, we were looking down at her over a ledge at hocking hills...." and so on about this one single picture that she took. She is right when she says that taking pictures can be an experience itself, but at the same time it should be based on priority of experience rather than proof. I also liked when she explained that the picture gives an avent a kind of "immortality" that we cherish forever, well that may be true in some cases, but what about the many pictures taht have been destroyed, cut, and burned simply because it's subject was of an ex, or a time that made the person upset? Why did we have those pictures to begin with?
Sontag talked about how a disabled person cannot act upon what he sees; this made me feel as if a camera makes people disabled as well. One can only see so much through a tiny view finder, and one can only capture so much of an image, so does a picture really capture an experience? My guess brings me back to the "small piece" idea; that it isn't the whole thing, but a trinket to remind you of it.
About the Peeping Tom movie; How ingenious!; capturiong the exact moment of how someone looks just as they are killed. Yes, very morbid, but at the same time very interesting. Many people would argue that it is insane and gruesom, but at the same time, how many people tried to be the first to get their hands on the photographs? Wanting to actually see the photographs makes them hypocritical, it is the same as wanting to take the picture in the first place. The same goes for the man who recorded the hanging of Sadam Hussein; many people found it horrible, but yet, those same people rushed right in to be the first to get the photos.
When Sontag discussed how cameras are more like guns, it reminded me of a riddle: "I stand in one spot, sometimes I move about, sometimes you know im there, sometimes you do not, all day, everyday I shoot people... Who am I?" Many people would say assassin, but the answer is "Photographer".
Upon reading the closing of the article, it made me realize some af the actural reasons why I enjoy photography;it can be good, bad anf far inbetween; it can show you something, tell a story, show other people what shocked you , shock other people, etc. Mainly because there are so many, many extremes to photography; it becomes an undying art; and with that comes many opportunities to advance in learning, like the film of a camera itself. I like most how the artistic idea of photography is not narrow minded, it is as broad as anyone will ever make it.
24 October 2010
The Photo as an Invitation: a response to Susan Sontag
"Photographs . . . are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation, and fantasy."
(Sontag 23)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Prior to taking this course, photography for me has been about capturing what I perceive as beautiful. I have always loved taking my camera out and photographing beauty in angles or points of view that we don't normally capture with our eye while we go about out lives. The aim was to produce a photo that was aesthetically pleasing and that offered a new point of view on what we see every day. That was the extent of it.
Having been in this course for eight weeks and having been exposed to the work of professional photographers, artists and even my classmates, my photographic aim has a new perspective and angle of its own. The quote above from Susan Sontag's chapter In Plato's Cave, sums up this change. Now when I set out to take pictures I am thinking of the discussion that will surround my final product. What reactions, misinterpretations, arguments, insights, fantasies, etc. will result in my photos being viewed. My idea of photography now extends beyond the photo itself and into the world in which it now exists. Who will view this photo? What will they think? What will they say? The photo as an invitation is my new photographic aim, and it is from that perspective that I now point and shoot.
Evidence of the Past - Susan Sontag's In Plato's Cave
This selection from On Photography put photography in many frames, if you'll excuse the pun. From souvenir, to evidence of historical moments, to rite of family life and even as a defense against the unknown, photography's accessibility allows it to, like the reality it captures, remain unable to be summed up.
I think the ideas that resonated with me at the moment are those dealing with "converting experience into an image, a souvenir." While in Cincinnati over the weekend for the Palette Club art gallery trip, I felt compelled to use my digital camera, even when I wasn't particularly interested in the subject matter. Now, this may have been due to the fact that up until the 15 minutes before we left ODU campus I thought the trip wasn't happening- but I felt I had to record the experience in order to bring it back and prove to others that it happened. While there, I wished I had taken my 35mm and some film because of the richness of images there were in this place that is largely unfamiliar to me. I saw so much worth photographing, worth "making into art," that my feelings of wanting quickly became gratefulness that I hadn't brought the 35mm-- because I would have spent all of my time (and that of the people who came with me) stopping and recording. So, I was relegated to tourism photography- proving the existence of the now past. Having made this conscious decision, I was reminded of Songtag when she equates the "photography-trophies" of the cosmopolitan vacationers to those of the "lower-middle class." Though it was only an hour and a half trip south to another city, there was a sense of exploration and of witnessing the "new" which lends itself so well to photography whether the subject is one of the wonders of the world, or just a street you hadn't yet seen.
I think the ideas that resonated with me at the moment are those dealing with "converting experience into an image, a souvenir." While in Cincinnati over the weekend for the Palette Club art gallery trip, I felt compelled to use my digital camera, even when I wasn't particularly interested in the subject matter. Now, this may have been due to the fact that up until the 15 minutes before we left ODU campus I thought the trip wasn't happening- but I felt I had to record the experience in order to bring it back and prove to others that it happened. While there, I wished I had taken my 35mm and some film because of the richness of images there were in this place that is largely unfamiliar to me. I saw so much worth photographing, worth "making into art," that my feelings of wanting quickly became gratefulness that I hadn't brought the 35mm-- because I would have spent all of my time (and that of the people who came with me) stopping and recording. So, I was relegated to tourism photography- proving the existence of the now past. Having made this conscious decision, I was reminded of Songtag when she equates the "photography-trophies" of the cosmopolitan vacationers to those of the "lower-middle class." Though it was only an hour and a half trip south to another city, there was a sense of exploration and of witnessing the "new" which lends itself so well to photography whether the subject is one of the wonders of the world, or just a street you hadn't yet seen.
Why are you taking that photograph? - Response to "In Plato's Cave"
The one thing that really stuck out to me in this article is how photography is an art that is so readily available that people are not taking the time to understand why they are taking a certain photograph or even trying to understand why photography is an art. I know that I am guilty of this at times when I go to a concert or am out with my friends we are all taking pictures to document that we were there and what we did. Also, there are people who just take a lot of photographs because they can and they want to share them with all their friends and family on social networking site such as facebook. Sontang used the example of going on vacation or when parents take hundreds of pictures of there little children documenting that something really did happen (Sontag 8). Then she also goes on to say that it is just social standards that are being set and that even if someone didn’t want to take pictures at a big event then they would be seen as not being normal (Sontag 8). When thinking about it in this manor why do we need to prove that we did or did not do something? Just like if someone were to go on vacation people will take a picture of everything that is happening and not really enjoy the time while they are on vacation. They will be behind the camera so much that they really don’t get to enjoy the time away from work. Also, it does not help that camera’s are so available and that the camera industry is saying that anyone can use their product and so people are not understanding the art of photography they are just taking photos to take them and trying to prove they were somewhere or trying to brag about a situation. It would be really hard to get everyone to change his or her view on photography and I would not do that. But, it is just interesting to think about why are people taking a certain picture, are they taking it because they want to or because they feel social obligated to take the photograph in that particular situation?
21 October 2010
"In Plato's Cave on Photography"
At first when I realized this reading was from Plato, my reaction was negative, all I could think of was, seriously Plato, is this a Philosophy class or Interdisciplinary Studies? I am obviously not a Plato fan. However, due to the fact I have no choice but to read the article, I tried to put my negative views behind me and dive in head first, who knows maybe because its about Photography I would have a change of heart? Happy thoughts, I can only think of happy thoughts.
Diving in head first with only thinking happy thoughts became my muse. Before I knew it I was finished with the first page. Wow! That wasn't so bad, I told myself. Basically, it seemed to give me a better understanding of photography. As a photographer our eye allows us to see the world in ways we have never seen it before. The photographer is no longer confined to the cave, or our world as said in the article. Since the development of photography has been established, we can now literally hold the world in our hands. We can photograph everything, everyone, everywhere and then compile it; thus we can "collect the world" (3).
Being able to "collect the world" (3) in a physical sense even if it is on paper, is amazing because each one of these photo's, represent many different things, places, people and the photo has been taken from different photographer's eyes, as well behind the lens, creating the shots. This is the beautiful thing about photography, everyone has his or her own style, likes and dislikes; and as the photographer, they control their scene and they are able to dictate from hiding behind the camera.
Photographs can be timeless. Its interesting how time doesn't stop, or go backwards, all it does is continue to progress forward but yet a photo does show the past. People can look back at their family history. They trace their lost relatives, maybe even those their parents talked about but they never met. Then while looking at the photo, they can make up their own story about the relative. Over the years photographs have made huge progressions in helping people with more than just recalling family history, in 1871 photographs became a tool used as surveillance. Photo's were even taken at crime scenes; they became physical proof of events that had taken place. It perks my interest to the difficult process those men must have gone through in the beginning to process the prints, where now our crime scene investigators and other law enforcement agencies use digital cameras, making documentation a whole lot easier. It makes me wonder how much time and effort had to go into the process just to solve a case.
Throughout the years, photography has made many advancements, some good others bad. Photography is thought to be as popular "as sex and dancing" (8). Maybe this isn't such as bad thing, unless we buckle down and start talking morals and such. But what about parents who purposefully don't photograph their young children, this supposedly "is a sign of parental indifference" (8) causing children as they grow older miss school picture days. If that isn't bad enough, what about these sickos who are into pornography? This started from photography. It is one thing for someone to have impure thoughts or fantasies, not saying it is morally right, but we have made it easier for people because now they can look at photographs or movies even of their pornography of choice, whatever it may be. Let us recall the movie Peeping Tom referred to in the article about the psychopath who kills woman with his camera as he photographs them, without touching them (13). This is insane.
I think photography is very powerful. This can be good and it can be bad as said before it can be used as a sinful act. Of course the good things in photography are much more important to discuss. I have to end on positive note. Think positive, think positive, thinking positive. Photo's allow us to keep memories alive, no matter how old they are. They become a book in a sense. I know that some of my own family pictures fire some memory from way back when. Just looking at a photo I get a small glimpse of my past. "...photographs fill in blanks in our mental pictures of the present and the past" (23) and its wonderful to have those kinds of memories. Let the wonderful, positive memories live on and the negative horrible attributes of photography die.
12 October 2010
The mud puddle days.
This here is a photo that I hold near and dear to my heart. In such case, I would call this my "picture perfect moment" only because is captures that rare memory that I once had with one of my brothers and my mom. This photo vividly shows the lovingly bond that we once shared as a family at one time prior to my parents divorce. I believe I was probably around 5 years old when this photo was taken, I am not quite sure. Even though I cannot quite remember the exact moment when this picture was taken, I am able to remember the warmth, comfort, and playful love that is captured. I do think that this was taken during the day. A rough storm had passed, and my brother and I went out to go play in the puddles. I only remember this because there were a couple of photos similar to this of us playfully stomping around in mud puddles. I also do believe that this photo was shot with a manual camera that my dad purchased over in Vietnam. My mom always loved taking pictures with that camera. I would post the other photo but It's back at home somewhere in my room, and this is the only one I have access to on my computer. But growing up... I never had the greatest child, so when coming across photo's like these of my family it allows me to forget the hurt, and once again embrace the love. I have this photo propped up on my desk back at my dad's. It reminds me that even though there is a distance between my mom and I. Looking at this photo, closes that gap between us. It gives me a nostalgic feeling. It takes me back to those mud puddle days.
to critique this photo: It's very light so there definitely should be some burning action done to the background and near around my mom's shoulder. I also think that it is a bit blurry and the coloring is a bit off. There also is a high amount of contrasting within the skin tones. If whoever had taken this photo would've took a step back or two. It would've given the photo some more framing and allowed the image to have some space.
11 October 2010
It's a Hair Dryer . . .
I chose this photo of my dad, from 1969; It has, of course, brought many giggles since then. My dad is using a "fancy" new-fangled hair dryer and his friend Bob (on the right) is waiting patiently for them to go to some party or dance.
Between age and the nature of film and prints from the time, this picture's colors are a bit of a wash- I believe this copy may have been touched up slightly after my dad scanned it. Since the main focus of the image is this crazy hair-dryer contraption, it is fitting that Bob, sitting more upright, creates a diagonal which draws the eye down. This effect is increased by the lightness of my dad's skin versus Bob's dark hat and coat. The cigarette Bob is holding adds a slight balance to the frame with the dot of light white in an overalll dark area. As this is more of a snapshot than anything, the lamp is quite cut off. There is enough there to show it is a lamp, but that is about it, which leaves the frame with an abrupt ending for a border. This does though, in some way, create an interesting visual space in which you can imagine the frame extending to include more of the room, allowing the imagination to fill in the details. The patter on the quilte behind the two of them also helps them stand out, without it almost the entire shot would be very neutral colors and it would drastically affect the ability to see the subjects of the photo.
. . . Ok, that's all I can do, I'm starting to laugh again.
Daddy's Girl
This is one of my most cherished possessions let alone photos. Last August my dad passed away, so I keep pictures up of him all over my apartment. I love this picture the most, because I love art and am and artist. This photo encompasses two of my great loves; art and my dad! (Minus the fact that he is holding a cigarrette).To critique this photo: I love the fact that it captured a moment between me and my dad doing art, and that we have no clue that the photographer is there; we seem to be in our own little world. I wish the white pole of the table was out of the picture, I think it distracts from the image of us. I like how the background seems to disappear, highlighting the figures. I think the framing of the shot could have been a bit better; either closer to get rid of the white pole or further so it seems more balanced.
My G
I keep a photograph of my grandpa Ralph McCloud. He passed away in 1995 and the only memories i have of him are fading memories of a kindergardener. Though i was at the age of 5 when he left, i can still remember playing baseball with him and watching the St. Louis Cardinals on telivision every week. I can not post the phot up bacause it is at my parent's home in Dayton, Ohio, but if i could, you would see him sitting on the couch in his Blue Cardinals jacket, with a white button-up t-shirt holding a cup of coffee. i believe the reason why i have kept this photo of him for so long is because it symbolizes everything i remember about him. In memory, i think of him as a Cards fan; he always wore his button-ups and had coffee with him. This is what i remeber and it is the reason why this photograph is so dear to me.
My favorite photo
I have had this photo hanging in my room since I graduated from high school. It’s a shot of (from left to right) my friend Jason (19), myself (18), and my twin cousins Richard and Ronald (both 21). This was taken by Jason’s mother at my graduation party. We had just finished a water-balloon fight and were about to play touch football. It’s interesting for several reasons. First in my mind being my Ohio State t-shirt. I had been accepted to the school, and given a scholarship. Years later, plans have changed and I’m not there anymore.
To critique this image a little, I would say that it could have been an even better memory if it was an image of the actual water-balloon fight or the football game that was about to happen. Posed snapshots like these are nice, but not nearly as powerful as a true candid image. Sticking with this pose, I wish that the photographer wouldn’t have turned the camera vertically. Leaving it horizontal would have made it easier to fit us all in the frame, without awkwardly cropping off Jason’s arm or Ronald’s elbow. It would also help with the huge negative space above our heads. Seeing that we are all about the same height, there really isn’t a reason for the negative space in the image. As far as critiquing the background selection, I actually prefer the background in the image compared to other options like brick walls, parked cars, etc. A different aperture choice would have burred the background a little more, resulting in a more pleasing composition (I know this camera likely didn't have the choice of aperture, or the photographer likely didn't know how to select it). Finally, the camera height is just about right. It might be a little bit lower than our eye level, but almost imperceptibly so. (No wonder, the photographer is about a foot shorter than we are.) It results in an ever-so-slightly dominant feeling coming from the subjects. Two of us had just graduated high school. We were on top of the world. (At least for the day.)
My Favorite Photo
This is one of my favorite family photos. I took this at a memorial day parade about 4 years ago. My cousin Seth and my uncle David seem to be the subject of a lot of my photos, but this is one that really makes me happy. it reminds me of how close my family is to each other. Imm an army brat, and so almost all my photos tend to reflect that. I really wish that i had an extremely powerful, tear jerking story behind this one, but it was just a snap shot after a parade that my uncle and I had participated in.
To critique the picture: it's too dark, but I think that if I would have used flash, then it would have ruined it. I also wish that I was a little bit closer, the trees in the background tend to distract a little bit. However, I do like how the trees are blurred in the photo, making the photo speciffically about them. I also like the contrast between my cousin and uncle, my cousin, lighter; reflecting his young and innocence; whereas my uncle is darker; reflecting his not so innocence and age. When I first developed the picture I wished that they had smiled, but now I'm glad that they didn't because it would have looked too staged. I like the candid idea and the memory of my family's closeness.
Daughters Love for her Father
When we were given this assignment I was thinking about all the different pictures that I have and which one was my favorite and I couldn't think of one. So I started to go though some pictures and found this one. It is of me running though the Columbus airport to give my dad a hug because I had not seen him in more than a month; he had just gotten back from being in Sweden visiting his family that lives there. I love this picture because it can show how much I love my father and I couldn't wait to see him. This picture also represents a lot of my childhood because my father would travel a lot and I can always remember getting so excited to see him. Also as a side note, this can not happen now because you are not allowed to go back in the terminal where the plains let you off.
The two things that I think that make me like this picture a lot. First, is that the camera is down at my level and I would not like it if my dad was taking the picture from up above. By being at my level you can see the excitement in my face. Also, I really like how he got me running and you can tell because my hair if flying back. Something that is wrong with the picture is the lighting. You can tell that there was a flash used because I am all light up while the background is really dark. Also it does not help that I am wearing a white dress, but with the flash almost makes my face look a little ghost looking. There is not much contrast to the photo, and it was probably just the setting that we were in and how there was not much light to begin with. I also would have liked to seen the picture just a tad bit more zoomed in or moved over because it is a little busy on the left with all the people and then there is nothing on the right of the photo. So maybe if my father was standing a little more to the left and was angling the camera to the right it would not have that effect. The other thing that I think would make this picture look better is if my father wouldn't have cut off part of me leg. But, overall I really like this photo because every time I see it I will some and think about all the memories that go along with the picture.
The two things that I think that make me like this picture a lot. First, is that the camera is down at my level and I would not like it if my dad was taking the picture from up above. By being at my level you can see the excitement in my face. Also, I really like how he got me running and you can tell because my hair if flying back. Something that is wrong with the picture is the lighting. You can tell that there was a flash used because I am all light up while the background is really dark. Also it does not help that I am wearing a white dress, but with the flash almost makes my face look a little ghost looking. There is not much contrast to the photo, and it was probably just the setting that we were in and how there was not much light to begin with. I also would have liked to seen the picture just a tad bit more zoomed in or moved over because it is a little busy on the left with all the people and then there is nothing on the right of the photo. So maybe if my father was standing a little more to the left and was angling the camera to the right it would not have that effect. The other thing that I think would make this picture look better is if my father wouldn't have cut off part of me leg. But, overall I really like this photo because every time I see it I will some and think about all the memories that go along with the picture.
Sorry, I Couldn't Help Myself, I liked the Icing off You're Piece of Cake!
I chose this photo of Kayla, my best friend and classmate from High School because when I saw the photograph it brought back so many good memories. Looking at the photo now a good five or more years later, I can recall that this picture was taken during Spirit Week. Our class must have been chosen to wear pink and black as our class colors. I don't remember why today was so special that we had cake in class but I guess if I remember correctly we had some pretty awesome teachers in High School, that it really didn't have to be a special day to bring something sweet to class, just as long as you shared with the teacher of course. This photograph has a nice composition overall;
it is taken up close and vertical which fits the frame perfectly.
Personally, if the photographer (me) would have gotten any further back,
I don't think the subjects expression would be seen in the way this
photograph has captured it. The girl, Kayla, obviously has gotten
overly excited over the cake that she has forgotten her manners.
The icing is covering her lips as though she was a little girl again,
getting into mommy's makeup and applies way to much to her puny lips. I'm sure if the orthodontist
saw this picture as well she would have a thing or two to say to Kayla. unfortunately for many
reasons the lighting in the picture is a yellow color. This can be caused by many different things.
First, she is wearing a baseball hat. Hats tend to to keep likes out of your eyes and since lights are
usually in the ceiling this is obviously causing an issue. Secondly, looking at Kayla's face gives us
another reason for why there is a lighting issue. She is a heavy makeup wearer. Even if I didn't
know personally that she was, I can see the mascara and eye liner caked on. However, since I also
know she likes to go extremely heavy on concealer and her foundation not mention she uses a shade
that is way to dark for her skin. By knowing this, I know that her skin normally has an odd coloring to
it; which shows in the photo.
KT
07 October 2010
Me & My Boys
I chose this photo from my parent's house because it is one of my absolute favorites! Pictured from left to right is my cousin Luciano (6), my oldest brother Angelo (8), me! (4), my older brother Mario (6), and my cousin, and Luciano's younger brother, Carmine (5). Every summer our two families went on a beach vacation together to some new location, and with there being just 4 years bewteen the five of us, we were each other's buddies and best friends. It's obvious that this was a snapshot while walking on the beach in the late afternoon, as our parents failed to dress us in coordinating outfits, but rather allowed us to rock the early 90s garb. This photo was taken in the summer of '91 in Myrtle Beach. We've tried to recreate this photo now that we are older, but none of the attempts ever turn out quite as perfect as this one!
Now, from a technical point of view I would comment on the lack of contrast in the overall picture. There is a dull overcast over the whole photo, which is not simply due to the weather but perhaps improper cmpensation for the natural light, i.e. too small of an aperature or absense of a flash. This photo was obviously cut to fit a 3x3 inch frame, so I am not sure what was included in the original. I do however wish the photographer (most likely my father) did not cut us off at the ankles. With our group embrace, I think the overall composition would have been stronger if we saw the full frontal profiles of our bodies. While I am lookin at this photo with a critical eye, I am noticing other compositional elements that I never have before. For example, the pyramidal arrangement of our 5 bodies, with Angelo, being the oldest and tallest, forming the pinnacle. Luciano's body turns in from left to right closing off our tight knit group. Carmine's bent arm direct our attention back to the strong diagonal formed by Mario's head, up to Angelo who is looking back down on the two of them, reciprocating the diagonal implied line. The landscape behind the five us us also seems to mimic this pyramid, with each side tapering towards the photo edge, and rising diagonally toward the center top of the photo, which is ultimately hidden from our view. All of the lines keep the viewer focused on our five young faces.
29 September 2010
Photographer's Eye
I love to take pictures. I am sure that there are many who do, but one thing I lacked in my photographing is the meaning behind why I was taking the picture. It is true that anyone can take a picture, but not everyone can create artwork our of that picture.
After the reading and being in this class for the past few weeks, I now understand and agree with the fact that a photo should be able to tell a story, rather than just look like a nice composition. We must pay close attention to the detail that is involved with the shot that we are taking. We must ensure the clarity of the picture and express the importance of the point we are trying to get across with the picture. Every detail, to include how the film is processed is relative to the outcome of a viewer's point of view of a picture: edges, orientation, framing, balance, hierarchy, and so forth.
The main thing that caught my attention about the article was simply the amount of time that one has to put into getting the right visual of the message they are trying to convey with the picture. I believe pictures should show a timeline.
After the reading and being in this class for the past few weeks, I now understand and agree with the fact that a photo should be able to tell a story, rather than just look like a nice composition. We must pay close attention to the detail that is involved with the shot that we are taking. We must ensure the clarity of the picture and express the importance of the point we are trying to get across with the picture. Every detail, to include how the film is processed is relative to the outcome of a viewer's point of view of a picture: edges, orientation, framing, balance, hierarchy, and so forth.
The main thing that caught my attention about the article was simply the amount of time that one has to put into getting the right visual of the message they are trying to convey with the picture. I believe pictures should show a timeline.
Reflection
The Photographer's Eye
My Reflection
I was initially struck by the words and ideas of Hawthorne Holgrave. Photographs become the remembered reality. What power lies in an artisit and/or photographer. Master manipulators. They can have the power to persuade, make beautiful, make ugly, be truthful, or conceal any given situation and as humans we tend to remember and hold strong to images over factual details. Then some believe or used to believe that photographs would be factual instruments. Perception thus can be a very sneaky thing.
I had an issue with some parts of the article in regards to painters. I, myself am a painter and I believe that both photography and painting have unique ways of capturing an essence of a person. I do not believe one can do it better than another. I know that may not be what the author was saying but painting can also express what is seen, what the painter sees and that creative touch and share a part of the subjects soul just as well as a photograph can.
In as far as those photographers who are amateurs "just taking photos" and those who know their craft: I think it is great to know all the technical aspects that can go into taking a great picture and telling a wonderful story. However, on some aspects I think one can over think these things and that sometimes the amateurs could take excellent shots because they are not constrained by technical issues and can give the photograph a fresh eye or view.
However, I also do like the control a photographer can have in creating a picture, and being able to remember a memory forever. By taking a photograph in a certain way, to tell a certain story, shown at a certain view point, and so forth can make one remember an event how they want to or the way they felt about a particular moment and that will last a lifetime. It is pretty inspirational and powerful.
My Reflection
I was initially struck by the words and ideas of Hawthorne Holgrave. Photographs become the remembered reality. What power lies in an artisit and/or photographer. Master manipulators. They can have the power to persuade, make beautiful, make ugly, be truthful, or conceal any given situation and as humans we tend to remember and hold strong to images over factual details. Then some believe or used to believe that photographs would be factual instruments. Perception thus can be a very sneaky thing.
I had an issue with some parts of the article in regards to painters. I, myself am a painter and I believe that both photography and painting have unique ways of capturing an essence of a person. I do not believe one can do it better than another. I know that may not be what the author was saying but painting can also express what is seen, what the painter sees and that creative touch and share a part of the subjects soul just as well as a photograph can.
In as far as those photographers who are amateurs "just taking photos" and those who know their craft: I think it is great to know all the technical aspects that can go into taking a great picture and telling a wonderful story. However, on some aspects I think one can over think these things and that sometimes the amateurs could take excellent shots because they are not constrained by technical issues and can give the photograph a fresh eye or view.
However, I also do like the control a photographer can have in creating a picture, and being able to remember a memory forever. By taking a photograph in a certain way, to tell a certain story, shown at a certain view point, and so forth can make one remember an event how they want to or the way they felt about a particular moment and that will last a lifetime. It is pretty inspirational and powerful.
John Szarkowski
The Photographer’s Eye
Within this reading, Szarkowski discusses how photography provided an outlet of processing that was based not on “synthesis but on selection. Paintings were made, but photographs were taken.” I find this statement made by Szarkowski to be very true to it’s meaning because it has challenged our “traditional habits of seeing” something for what it really is. Szarkowski says in his book that the first thing a photographer learned was that photography itself deals with the actual and that the world itself is an artist of incomparable inventiveness that must be clarified and recognized. I think that this means that the world is filled with an endless amount of opportunities that are waiting to be presented on a blank canvas. I think that this is why we love the images that have different or multiple meanings. I suppose this is also why we love how at no matter what second that photo is taken, it is always going to belong to that second and that there will be no other photo like it. He also says that the factuality of pictures, no matter how convincing, is different than the reality itself. I think that when people view art whether it’s photographs, painting, sculptures or whatever. They create their own opinions and interpretations based on what they as individuals see. What the artist intended is relevant and obviously very important but viewers often have a different thought-process and may even a different interpretation of what the artist is trying to convey. Still, Szarkowski makes it easier for us to understand this. He says that it is the photographer's problem to see not simply the reality before him or her but the still invisible picture, and to make his or her choices in terms of the latter. This is an artistic problem and that the photograph does not and could not lie.
JENNIFER
The Photographer's Eye
"an army of photographers who run rampant over the globe,photographing objects of all sorts, sizes and shapes, under almost every condition, without ever pausing to ask themselves, is this or that artistic?"
While reading this article written by John Szarkowski, i came across this quote and it stood out to me. Painters have slayed themselves over their works for hours upon days, centuries before the ability to snap a camera. Before photography, an artist went to work with brush and pallette in hand and nothing less than a vision in mind. Upon the arrival of photography, it eliminated the greuling work and concentration, not to mention talent, that went into painting. The ability to capture a point to paper in a miniscule amout of time, greatly popularized photography. By the late 18th century, photography had become a sinch do to the elimination of the wet plate. This made photographs easily accessible and had given the ability for anyone to do if they had a camera. Anybody could be a photographer. I feel that the quote meant that as long as one possesed a camera, it did not matter if they had the talent.
Another subject that stood out to me was under the section of "The Thing Itself." The quote, "the world intself is an artist." To become a great artist of photography, one must not see the world through his own eye, but must become intuitive with the world around. The naked eye cannot grasp the truth and beauty of its surrounding. With photography, anything can be depicted and have meaning to it of some sort just aslong as the artist can view his camera the right way.
I have really gained an interest in photography after reading this passage. It has opened my eyes a little more to my surroundings and made me realize that anything is possible in regards to taking a photo. A camera holds the truth of the world, for it can show an angle and perspective that can not be seen without. Every day objects can hold meaning to them if they are photographed at the correct perspective and have the right angle of light. I have also gained more understanding as to how to use a frame to eliminate possible distractions and give relation to objects that normally wouldn't have relation otherwise.
photography rocks! LOL sort of
While reading this article written by John Szarkowski, i came across this quote and it stood out to me. Painters have slayed themselves over their works for hours upon days, centuries before the ability to snap a camera. Before photography, an artist went to work with brush and pallette in hand and nothing less than a vision in mind. Upon the arrival of photography, it eliminated the greuling work and concentration, not to mention talent, that went into painting. The ability to capture a point to paper in a miniscule amout of time, greatly popularized photography. By the late 18th century, photography had become a sinch do to the elimination of the wet plate. This made photographs easily accessible and had given the ability for anyone to do if they had a camera. Anybody could be a photographer. I feel that the quote meant that as long as one possesed a camera, it did not matter if they had the talent.
Another subject that stood out to me was under the section of "The Thing Itself." The quote, "the world intself is an artist." To become a great artist of photography, one must not see the world through his own eye, but must become intuitive with the world around. The naked eye cannot grasp the truth and beauty of its surrounding. With photography, anything can be depicted and have meaning to it of some sort just aslong as the artist can view his camera the right way.
I have really gained an interest in photography after reading this passage. It has opened my eyes a little more to my surroundings and made me realize that anything is possible in regards to taking a photo. A camera holds the truth of the world, for it can show an angle and perspective that can not be seen without. Every day objects can hold meaning to them if they are photographed at the correct perspective and have the right angle of light. I have also gained more understanding as to how to use a frame to eliminate possible distractions and give relation to objects that normally wouldn't have relation otherwise.
photography rocks! LOL sort of
Photography vs. Photographic Art
One of the issues that I struggle with, and that John Szarkowski explores in his article The Photographer's Eye, is the art of photography. As a art form, photography is and has been an accessible medium. It is not limited to only those who have been trained at an art school or academy; it is not limited to only those who are successful in other mediums such as drawing and painting. Especially with the dawn of the Digital Age, any one and every one can pick up a camera and many times take a successful photo. As a future art educator, I tend to take a teacher's perspective, and with that I would consider this accessibility one of the great things about photography. It does not limit the art world to only those who are considered talented artists, but can bring in the outsider and give them an appreciation for a fine art. But, how do we then categorize and praise one photograph as a piece of art, and turn around to simply acknowledge another. That is where Cartier-Bresson's Decisive Moment comes into play: knowing the precise moment to press the shutter bottom, when the objects within the frame are in the perfect arrangement, the elements and principles of design art considered (balance, rhythm, line, etc.). While any one can take a photo, not every one considers design in doing so... which is what separates one from from another as being a piece of art. This is where having an artistic eye is conveyed through your print, because you have considered the frame, the objects within that frame, the vantage point, etc. So while photography is an accessible medium and just about any one can partake it in (which is one of the greatest things about it), there is still a separation between photography and photographic art.
Perspective, perspective, perspective.
I found the reading to be very helpful. I was most in tune with the section titled "Vantage Point".
I think that the position of the camera in relation to the subjects can create a unique perspective and totally change the mood of the photograph.
Think of the classic rock & roll band performance picture. Think of a band you know that is widely liked. Odds are that picture was taken from ground level pointing up at the stage. The perspective is spot on; a mega-god of rock is playing their collective heart out night after night, living a life that many can only dream of living.
Now, pretend that you do not know who they are. What does the picture say to you, what emotion does it bring? I wonder who they are and if they are any good or just making fools of themselves.
How would you communicate their super-star power? I would change the perspective totally. I imagine putting the camera on the stage, the subjects between the lens and the arena full of metal-heads. I would place the camera at stage level to keep the god-of-rock perspective that shooting from the arena floor brings, yet show the viewer that they must be good because they can sell out the venue. I would still wonder who they are, but I think that not being able to see their faces, just the silhouettes of their bodies against the sea of stage-lights, flash bulbs and lighters leads the viewer to want to know more about who they are. Maybe will lead the viewer to look at the image a little longer, trying to figure out just who the band is.
Yet another possibility is to place the camera at a high vantage point, far from the stage, shooting back towards the massive structure of metal, lights and speakers. A wide-angle lens allows the viewer to feel like they were there, a member of the audience of thousands that could barely afford nosebleed tickets to hear the band. This perspective immerses the viewer in the scene. It is how they would have seen it if they were there.
I think that the vantage point from which a photograph is taken is quite possibly one of the most important things when composing a photograph as it can subconsciously lead the viewer to feel a certain way about the subject.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)