IN PRACTICE: A Little Exposure Should Do You All Some Good

[THE DETAIL]

When I shot this, I didn't take notice of the stretching shadowy figure on the left hand side of the frame until I was editing and my independent study mentor, Mr. Von Wahlde, commented on how it contributes to the image. This simple component adds weight to the scene, what John Szarkowski might call an unseen meaning. Although the focus of this photograph is parimarily my mom's facial expression and concerning posture, the ambiguity and mystery of the left hand shadow brings in multiple components to this story. It starts a discussion between the two animate and human subjects (at lest in theory). In addition to this conversation, there is another one in the foreground between the inanimate birthday cake and neatly stacked plates. They are both about equal height on the table and are placed on either side of the main subject, as if posing an idea about present and future.

[SHADOW]

I came home late one night and as I walked through my garage, I noticed the shadows cast by the harsh indoor light on the stark, cracked wall and its hanging inhabitants. I pass this cross and shelf every day, but never saw them in such a striking view, with the right lighting; they either blend into the blur of my world at 7 in the morning when I leave the house or are imperceptable to my tired eyes when I finally return home at 9 in the evening. I think what made this shot a success was the high contrast between the background and the subjects (brown/black on white). There is a somewhat reverent aspect about the cross since it is closer to the light source. All its tiny details are thrown into clarity while the hanging platform is almost completely blacked out by shadow, which gives it a darker and sinister feel. The angular box is almost the complete opposite of the ornate cross which resides so complacently next to it.

[FOCUS]

This was really a test shot for my camera. These are my current photographic theory study books, and they were perched on my desk just so and at the spur of the moment I thought, "Oh, whatever, I just want something to show up on the display screen." As it turns out, the focal length of my lens, aperture, and aspect of the book I focused on happened to work in my favor. The corner of the book features the publisher, "Focal Press." How perfect. This image fades into a blur of confusion, giving depth to the image and importance to the prominent book corner.

IN STUDY: Nat'l Geographic archiving

I find this article so intriguing and glamorous, even though the job may not seem so. Cataloging and archiving thousands of photographs for hours and hours might get very banal, but looking into a whole other world through old photographs is like reading a fairytale to me.
The particular photograph stream that is featured is very well put together and inspirational since it makes the style of old world photography seem so soft and facile, and the subjects so distant and fantastical. To imagine that these photographers had no idea that decades later people would view their aesthetic decisions. Amazing.

IN STUDY: Diane Arbus

Reading about Diane Arbus from Sontag's perspective made me so curious I had to look at practically every photograph in her portfolio before I came to the conclusion that I love her work and the aesthetic she was able to produce.

(DIANE ARBUS)

I love this image in particular. Not only are the dynamics of her subject hilarious and a bit dramatic, but the story behind the shot is even more compelling. Apparently, Arbus circled her subject, trying to get the right angle until he became so exasperated that he shouted, "Take the picture already!" Her contact sheet shows that sometimes you just have to be in the right place at the right time and you'll get lucky. But as long as you're ready, the picture will come to you.

IN THEORY: Non-action Photographers

"Photography is essentially an act of non-intervention...The person who intervenes cannot record; the person who is recordings cannot intervene."

-Susan Sontag, On Photography

(JACOB RIIS)

Ever since vice and suffering were recognized as viable photographic subjects, photojournalists have not been able to take their lenses away. It is as if there is some magnetic pull, drawing people back to the suffering of others in order to incite compassion or cause people to recognize the injustice. Susan Sontag believes this habituation has only proven to deaden our response to the scurrilous side of human nature. Even though becoming familiar with famine, war, and death through photography has made people in general less sensitive to horrifying images, the initial impact of a truly powerful photograph can never be forgotten. You can never anticipate the impact a photograph will have before you release the shutter.

However, what can you do the second before you capture that image? What is the photographer's responsibility in participating in events? Should they let them unfold, let history take a more "natural" course? Or should the camera serve as a reminder that there is no such thing as fate and nothing is permanent until it is captured?

I personally think that (essentially) nothing is off limits from the camera. With the exception of watching someone mourn, turning down bountiful and interesting subjects is like being off the record; it just rarely happens. No matter what faith you might profess or endorse, man's ability to destroy, corrupt, and maim are undeniable parts of the human experience. To deny these facets of reality the lens turns photography into more of a commercial ideal than an art form. By following the demands and wishes of the greater majority which might say "No, that isn't appropriate for the public" a photographer would stunt the credibility and power of their photographs. Photographers have jobs very similar to journalists. They must hold people accountable for what they do by showing them consequences and possibilities.

IN THEORY: Personal Space, Propaganda?

The idea that photographic opportunities are extensive and readily available, now more of right of passage for anyone who has grown up in the late 20th and early 21st century and has motor skills, has become a subtle yet unchallengeable pillar of American culture. Of course, humans have always been intrigued by images, even those that we compose in our heads, since a facet of truth is always related to expressing or capturing it in image form.

This thought occurred to me today while I was working in my high school library, sitting in a hard standard issue desk chair with my shoes off, reading up on Sontag. As I watched a student draped in a Guatemalan flag take pictures of a friend with his point and shoot, I wondered if it even occurred to him now astronomical the act he was performing was.

Obviously it wasn't to him. He was just digitally recording time, immortal until deleted, space frozen in a limbo between artistic vision and reality. His friend, who held her hand up in protest to the camera imposing on her personal space, unwillingly sat through this charade until he lowered the camera and turned it off, not realizing that as long as you are in public, personal space seems to deteriorate and becomes a blurred line of limits and risk taking.

Her reaction is what really intrigued me; she seemed to be protecting something from the lens, as if the camera held a power she wished to defy, to deny anything and everything she could. Like the primitive cultures who believed taking your picture would capture part of your soul forever. Maybe we haven't moved out of this mentality. Maybe with the proliferation of images in our lives we are trying to retain something from the camera, something that can be just ours.

So the question becomes...

How much are you willing to show?

How much are you willing to take?

IN PRACTICE: Action, Motion.

IN THEORY: A View on Posed vs. Unposed Photography

(1)

(2)

I have here two very distinct photographs that both focus on children. Now, disregarding the quality and any personal taste you might impose on the particular images, one cannot help but notice the very different attitudes and scenarios presented by these two separate images. (1) is, obviously, a posed shot, while (2) was most likely "candid," if you will. Although both are using the same category of subject, they make very different statements and relationships between the subject and their surroundings. Despite the fact that these two photographs might have had different intentions or purposes, the question arises about the legitimacy of studio photography and a more "natural" breed of images.

Photographer and author of The Photographer's Eye, John Szarkowski, defines photography in terms of something that is found, captured, rendered immortal, and held a certain unseen meaning, one that even the photographer might not know. Photographs hold the power to inform, to relate reality, and essentially make relationships between things in the world that might not have previously been there. Looking at studio photography in this light, there seems to be no value; the photographs are fostered out of the need for an image, not for a specific rendering of a scene to communicate a message.

However, this view is flawed in many aspects. Studio photography is just as much art as naturalistic photography is. Although the images may not suddenly happen upon the photographer, they must use their artistic vision to convey an idea in a limited amount of space, with the proper lighting, subject placement, and symbols. Though it is usually modernly used for advertising and fashion magazines, posed photographs can have just as important a function as those that are not posed, as they still must stay within the bounds of reality yet try to suggest something more meaningful or creative than what is in the frame.

Szarkowski would most definitely be a fan of (2) because the relationship formed between subject and foreground gives one the feeling of infinity and naive infancy. In my opinion, it is the stronger of the two images because it suggests things beyond the limits of the frame. Inclusion of the sky, the shadow, and the tire tracks are all key elements to understanding the child's presence on the beach. The child's form, as well, is important to the statement being made about the experience of being a child, of being a human child none-the-less. The most important thing to remember, however, is that these elements are perceived by viewers, even if the photographer wasn't aware or did not intend it at the time this was taken.

IN THEORY: Uniqueness and the Photographers Dilemma

Photography would probably be deemed the most democratic of visual art forms because of the relatively accessable nature of the craft and its tools. The subject does not originate in the imagination and the essential materials needed are few, unlike the typical nature of painting, sculpting, or videography.

Proof of this can be seen everywhere, from the many hip, young teenagers with heavy digital SLRs hanging about their necks to their 70 year old grandparents with point-and-shoots of their own. However, what sets apart the photographic work of amateurs from that of professionals and distinguishes "good" images from "bad" images? How important is the photographers message in comparison with how it is recieved and interpreted by their audience?

In the mind of photographic theorist and critic John Berger, the value of a photograph or any form of visual medium resides in its CONTEXT and UNIQUENESS. The last is an important concept, one that has troubled many artists (as well as many angsty teenagers.)

So, how exactly do you project your individuality and ideas through a medium that has so many participants, so many viewers, and so many experts' legacies? And how exactly is this uniqueness identified or obscured in photographs?

The concept of uniqueness derives from how certain photographs offer new ideas, a new perspective on a familiar subject, or open our mind's eye to new realities. This uniqueness relied partly on how it is packaged and shown to the audience. Limited printings, exhibits, and books all frame photographs in a context and create a world into which they are born, giving weight to an image's uniqueness and ultimately setting the photograph(s) apart from other bodies of work. These contexts can add or detract from the value of an image by helping the viewer realize the photographer's vision or taking the spotlight. In example:
-A famous photographer's name might bias a viewer's opinion on their work
-Inversely, an obsure name might detract possible praise by the majority or shy people away from recognizing their work
-Charging high prices for prints or making only exclusive physical prints might make certain works prestigious for no reason or obscure the purpose of the image for monetary gain

All these situations include a compromise of value for some other abstract or petty matter such as respect and money, which I think should not be the object of photography; pride in your work and capturing a truly moving, revealing, or captivating image should be.

Independent Study Proposal

Photography has played a very important yet unrecognized part in mankind’s history. The goal of my study is to examine this importance as well as the practical application of the photographic image in the modern, digital age. I want to gain a better understanding of how photography has developed since its origins in the 1800s and how this evolution has impacted man’s understanding of the world around him, specifically in the world of journalism.

Photojournalism is a rather anonymous branch of photography. As news and other participant media have become a web based field this is less and less the case, making photojournalism an important and powerful facet of modern society. In order to understand the growing importance of the digital image, I will be studying the history of the field and using it to inform my own photographic studies, namely, by becoming familiar with the technology that makes it possible, such as a digital SLR and photo editing technology.

I will be using a myriad of resources to learn about photojournalism, both in theory and practice, including books, essays, blogs, and other Internet media. I have purchased the following books which I will read and annotate throughout the year:

• On Photography, Susan Sontag
• After Photography¸ Fred Ritchin
• Photography: A Concise History, Ian Jeffrey
• American Photography and the American Dream, James Guimond
• Beyond Photography, Jack Tait
• On Assignment: Projects in Photojournalism; From Initial Planning to Final Selection of Photographs, Tony Spina
• Basic Critical Theory for Photographers, Ashley la Grange

In addition to reading these books, I will be following these photography blogs regularly:

• After Photography
• The Imagist
• NY Times Lens Blog
• The National Geographic Photo blog

I have also made my own blog on which I will post photos and corresponding critical analysis or theory. I will update this blog three times a week, probably Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Each week will focus on a specific concept or topic that I encounter in my reading and research.

Every day, during my designated study period I will either be reading the books I have purchased, examining online photo exhibits, working on the blog, or becoming familiar with my digital SLR and/or Adobe Photoshop/Lightroom. I will be reading and studying photographic theory as well as examining the work of specific photographers. I will also reserve time during the week to take and edit photographs.

My long term goals for the year are to build up a portfolio of work, publish three-four photography books of my personal work and research/reflections, and set up a photography exhibit. The books will be self published and reflect the best or most interesting work from the portfolio I develop throughout the year. The exhibit can be held at Westhill, either in the media center, art department, or hallway, and I can personally explain and present the work shown.