Monday, 17 March 2014
Tuesday, 11 March 2014
Presentation work.
Charlotte Cotton.
The Photograph as contemporary art 'DeadPan Chapter', below is the chapter I wish to present to the class next week.
Roland Barthes - Camera Lucida
La Chambre Claire - Roland Barthes.
In 1980 Roland Barthes wrote La cambre Claire translated Camera Lucida. The book was a personal and sentimental essay into his perception of photography and the photograph itself, an emotional journey which found him searching for the true essence of a photograph or as Barthes calls it the "Punctum", our very own trigger within a photograph which is unique to each individual, Barthes records this as being "Fascination? No, this photograph which i pick out and which I love has nothing in common with the shiny point which sways before your eyes and makes your head swim; what it produces in me is the very opposite of herbitude; something more like an internal agitation, an excitement, a certain labour too, the pressure of the unspeakable which wants to be spoken..."
Barthes within camera Lucida then goes on to describe the moment he realised when particular photographs had a punctum for him. Namely the images of:
These images gave Barthes cause to pause and he realised they attracted him as they had a "kind of duality..." he describes the above photograph as "Here on a torn up pavement, a child's corpse undo a white sheet; parents and friends stand around it, desolate: a banal enough scene, unfortunately, but I noted certain inferences: the corpse's one bare foot, the sheet carried by a weeping mother (why this sheet?), a woman in the background, probably a friend holding a handkerchief to her nose."
In 1980 Roland Barthes wrote La cambre Claire translated Camera Lucida. The book was a personal and sentimental essay into his perception of photography and the photograph itself, an emotional journey which found him searching for the true essence of a photograph or as Barthes calls it the "Punctum", our very own trigger within a photograph which is unique to each individual, Barthes records this as being "Fascination? No, this photograph which i pick out and which I love has nothing in common with the shiny point which sways before your eyes and makes your head swim; what it produces in me is the very opposite of herbitude; something more like an internal agitation, an excitement, a certain labour too, the pressure of the unspeakable which wants to be spoken..."
Barthes within camera Lucida then goes on to describe the moment he realised when particular photographs had a punctum for him. Namely the images of:
 |
| Koen Weesing Nicaragua. 1979 |
 |
| Koen Wessing: Nicaragua. 1979 |
Barthes realised these images held something for him, which he did not find in Wessings other photographs of Nicaragua.
Barthes felt there was a written rule for viewing a photograph and decided to name and give structure to this rule. He decided a photograph contains "Studium an Punctum." Studium is the content of a photograph, the interest, what initially draws you to the image, be it the geography, structure, faces, gestures or the actions, it is a taste for the photograph. The second element Barthes describes as the punctum "... this prick, this mark made by a pointed instrument" He feels he photographs are punctuated with sensitive points "Sting, speck, cut, little hole- and also the cast of a dice." Photographs to Barthes can be one or the other and sometimes both.
John Berger - Ways of Seeing
Interesting program John Berger - Ways of Seeing.
John berger opens by saying "...it isn't so much the paintings themselves which I want to consider as the way we now see them, now in the second half of the 20th century, because we see these paintings as nobody saw them before. If we discover why this is so we will also discover something about ourselves and the situation in which we are living"
Initially we have an artist who is commissioned to create a painting, when originally created there is a place for this painting, be it on a mansions winding staircase, a cathedral, office building, library, etc. So the painting is commissioned and the painter creates his work of art in and around where it is to be hung, they are one and the same.
"Its uniqueness is part of the uniqueness of the single place where it is" - John Berger
Take the religious Icon as an example, worshippers used to travel thousands of miles to look upon the painting, not seeing the artwork but seeing god within it and all around the painting.
Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel Ceiling. The original painting was commissioned by Pope Julius II, it is almost 70 feet above the chapel floor, its sides are curved and it is 5,800 square feet. it took michelangelo 4 years to paint. It has nine central panels which tell us the tale of the early history of our world, the creation of Adam, adam and Eve, the life of Noah. It is be a sight to behold, too be in complete awe of Michelangelos' artistry, too see his work in situ, to and feel soak in the atmosphere of the chapel.
Now in the 21st century the days of pilgrimage are gone, we can see these images anytime we desire, we only have to go on the internet and Google the artist or artwork and it is immediately there, framed within our computer screen, in the confines of our own home. Photography changed this by making art accessible to everyone. We no longer travel to the paintings to see them in their original setting, the camera has reproduced them, and we can now see them in millions of different places, each with its own setting. Once they are in a new setting their context changes, it is now used in the context of your own life.
Here is another example Leonardo Da Vinci Mona Lisa:
Painted in Florence between 1503 and 1506, it is thought to be of Lisa Gherardini, wife of a Florentine cloth merchant named Francesco del Giocondo, it is believed to be of her because of an alternative title or this image "La Gioconda".The portrait was never given to the person it was commissioned for and leonardo took it to France, eventually it returned to Italy by Leonardo's student and heir Salai. ( It is not known how the painting came to be in François I's collection.) Information taken from the Louvre website. It measures 77 cm × 53 cm which is comparatively small in how it is perceived by myself, someone who has never laid eyes on the Mona Lisa as a work of art.
In 1962 this paintings insurance value was $100,000,000. which equates to $780,000,000 or In Pounds sterling 470,130,000 today making it priceless. It hangs in a room by itself in the Louvre. Today its meaning has changed purely because of its price, its market value. It has survived time, its genuine and valuable.
"...but only if art is stripped of the false mystery and the false religiosity which surrounds it. This religiosity usually linked with cash value, but always invoked in the name of culture and civilisation, is in fact a substitute for what the paintings lost when the camera made them reproducible" - John Berger
In moving a painting from it intended original place and reproducing the image for commercial reasons, we change the message and the context the artist originally intended.
We can isolate certain parts of a painting:
Here again is Michelangelo's The creation of Adam, one of many fresco's painted on the Sistine Chapel. yet this image alone has been isolated and reproduced many times and for many different themes.
all the above are copies of the original painting, yet each has a new context, meaning; meaning is interchangeable and can be used for many different things and can be manipulated. The above image is no longer unique, its uniqueness is lost by reproduction. Images can now be used, to infer different meaning, experience. The above are now no longer paintings but representations and mere objects.
very interesting analogy of how our perceptions of a painting can be changed through our own subjectivity and context to the point of ambiguity.
John berger opens by saying "...it isn't so much the paintings themselves which I want to consider as the way we now see them, now in the second half of the 20th century, because we see these paintings as nobody saw them before. If we discover why this is so we will also discover something about ourselves and the situation in which we are living"
Initially we have an artist who is commissioned to create a painting, when originally created there is a place for this painting, be it on a mansions winding staircase, a cathedral, office building, library, etc. So the painting is commissioned and the painter creates his work of art in and around where it is to be hung, they are one and the same.
"Its uniqueness is part of the uniqueness of the single place where it is" - John Berger
Take the religious Icon as an example, worshippers used to travel thousands of miles to look upon the painting, not seeing the artwork but seeing god within it and all around the painting.
 |
| This is not the Sistine Chapel Ceiling. It is a reproduction, a photograph on Google. |
Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel Ceiling. The original painting was commissioned by Pope Julius II, it is almost 70 feet above the chapel floor, its sides are curved and it is 5,800 square feet. it took michelangelo 4 years to paint. It has nine central panels which tell us the tale of the early history of our world, the creation of Adam, adam and Eve, the life of Noah. It is be a sight to behold, too be in complete awe of Michelangelos' artistry, too see his work in situ, to and feel soak in the atmosphere of the chapel.
Now in the 21st century the days of pilgrimage are gone, we can see these images anytime we desire, we only have to go on the internet and Google the artist or artwork and it is immediately there, framed within our computer screen, in the confines of our own home. Photography changed this by making art accessible to everyone. We no longer travel to the paintings to see them in their original setting, the camera has reproduced them, and we can now see them in millions of different places, each with its own setting. Once they are in a new setting their context changes, it is now used in the context of your own life.
Here is another example Leonardo Da Vinci Mona Lisa:
Painted in Florence between 1503 and 1506, it is thought to be of Lisa Gherardini, wife of a Florentine cloth merchant named Francesco del Giocondo, it is believed to be of her because of an alternative title or this image "La Gioconda".The portrait was never given to the person it was commissioned for and leonardo took it to France, eventually it returned to Italy by Leonardo's student and heir Salai. ( It is not known how the painting came to be in François I's collection.) Information taken from the Louvre website. It measures 77 cm × 53 cm which is comparatively small in how it is perceived by myself, someone who has never laid eyes on the Mona Lisa as a work of art.
In 1962 this paintings insurance value was $100,000,000. which equates to $780,000,000 or In Pounds sterling 470,130,000 today making it priceless. It hangs in a room by itself in the Louvre. Today its meaning has changed purely because of its price, its market value. It has survived time, its genuine and valuable.
"...but only if art is stripped of the false mystery and the false religiosity which surrounds it. This religiosity usually linked with cash value, but always invoked in the name of culture and civilisation, is in fact a substitute for what the paintings lost when the camera made them reproducible" - John Berger
In moving a painting from it intended original place and reproducing the image for commercial reasons, we change the message and the context the artist originally intended.
We can isolate certain parts of a painting:
Here again is Michelangelo's The creation of Adam, one of many fresco's painted on the Sistine Chapel. yet this image alone has been isolated and reproduced many times and for many different themes.
 |
| Ipad case. |
 |
| Purse |
 |
| Cufflinks |
"The art of the past no longer exists as it once did. It's authority is lost. In it's place there is a language of images. What matters now is who uses that language and for what purpose..." Berger (1972:33).
Wednesday, 5 March 2014
Dusseldorf School of Photography & Bernt, Hilla Becher
The Düsseldorf Academy was founded in 1773 by the Elector Palatine Carl Theodor than Electoral Academy of painting, sculpture and architecture. Between 1819 and 1859 the academy under Peter von Cornelius and Wilhelm von Schadow developed the Dusseldorf school of painting.
The work of the art school was defamed and blackened during the post during the Degenerate art campaign brought about by the Nazi party on their election in 1933, the use of photography under the nazi party was mainly for propaganda. All Photography was strictly censored, and the heart fell out of German photography. In the 1950's and 1960's the academy once again regained its importance as a well respected centre of education and art. Photographers at the time borne our of post WW2, were keen to look forward as photographers, never looking back because of the history gone before them.
The 1976 Bernd Becher attended the Dusseldorf Academy, later Becher and his wife Hilla went on to form the Dusseldorf School of Photography. Again like the predecessors of the Neue Sachlichkeit and Neue Sehen, they wanted to produce objective photographic art, realism.
Bernd and Hilla Bechers photography always takes the same format, they either measure 30 x 40 cm or 50 x 60 cm and depict industry, be this buildings or machinery. Some of their typologies include Gasometers, blast furnaces and lime kilns to name a few of their bodies of work.
The Bechers used to wait unit they had the exact same weather conditions, they would carefully examine the site and would ensure the same distances and ensure the item being photographer filled the frame at the exact same difference as all the other images within the body of work. All external disruptions of distractions are avoided to ensure the viewer sees only the aesthetic of that which is being photographed. All their images are arranged as a typlogy and exhibited as a tableaux in the form of a grid (as above).
The Bechers work made the name of the Dusseldorf school in the 1970's as they where such prominent figures in the photographic world of this era. So in 1976 they started to teach photography at the Dusseldorf Academy and Bernt Becher took up the first professor of photographic art at any German academy. Their first students were:
"Staring out from the revival of documentary photography, of which the Bechers were such impressive masters, and against a backdrop of pictorial experimentation that transcended the medium, three generations of artists have now massively expanded the photographic vision and have advanced their creative art far into the realms of digital imagemaking. At the same time some have burst asunder the traditional restrictions on format and have moved beyond display cabinets to take over the walls of museums and art galleries." - Lothar Schirmer (Gronert 2009:7)
Bernd and Hilla Bechers photography always takes the same format, they either measure 30 x 40 cm or 50 x 60 cm and depict industry, be this buildings or machinery. Some of their typologies include Gasometers, blast furnaces and lime kilns to name a few of their bodies of work.
 |
| Winding Towers 1965-98 |
 |
| Gas Tanks |
 |
| Water Towers USA- 1988 |
The Bechers used to wait unit they had the exact same weather conditions, they would carefully examine the site and would ensure the same distances and ensure the item being photographer filled the frame at the exact same difference as all the other images within the body of work. All external disruptions of distractions are avoided to ensure the viewer sees only the aesthetic of that which is being photographed. All their images are arranged as a typlogy and exhibited as a tableaux in the form of a grid (as above).
The Bechers work made the name of the Dusseldorf school in the 1970's as they where such prominent figures in the photographic world of this era. So in 1976 they started to teach photography at the Dusseldorf Academy and Bernt Becher took up the first professor of photographic art at any German academy. Their first students were:
- Tata Ronkholz
- Volke Dohne
- Iris Salzmann
- Angelika Wengler
- Candida Hofer
- Axel Hutte
- Thomas Struth
- Thomas Ruff
"Staring out from the revival of documentary photography, of which the Bechers were such impressive masters, and against a backdrop of pictorial experimentation that transcended the medium, three generations of artists have now massively expanded the photographic vision and have advanced their creative art far into the realms of digital imagemaking. At the same time some have burst asunder the traditional restrictions on format and have moved beyond display cabinets to take over the walls of museums and art galleries." - Lothar Schirmer (Gronert 2009:7)
Jörg Sasse
Jörg Sasse
BIOGRAPHY
Jörg Sasse has embraced the manipulative power of digital technology in his re imagining of photography, altering images until their original sources are barely identifiable. Sasse scans found photographs—usually land- and cityscapes—and digitally changes them in ways that imbue narrative, changing and blurring light or physically altering the composition, before turning the images into a negative that he then uses to make his prints. Though a student of Bernd and Hilla Becher, Sasse’s practise is a fundamental questioning of the documentary power of photography. “Did classical photography ever reproduce what was in front of the camera?” he asks. “Seeing and thinking, thinking and seeing—who can keep the two apart?”
I am fascinated by his questioning of photographs and using our own perceptions of a questionable reality. Sasse's use of found images, to then manipulate these images and change them into new photographs, and then for these photographs to look authentic and credible.
I find two things interesting about Jorg Sasse work. Firstly originally being a student of the Dusseldorf School, who's teachings and school exemplifies the wonder of an image as it is. To photograph, as with Neue Sachlichkeit as distant relations and the Bechers as tutors, Sasse's choice to make use of found images and manipulate these images, the end result being an image you could look upon and not realise was manipulated. It has the same style and feel to other students from The Dusseldorf school.
BIOGRAPHY
Jörg Sasse has embraced the manipulative power of digital technology in his re imagining of photography, altering images until their original sources are barely identifiable. Sasse scans found photographs—usually land- and cityscapes—and digitally changes them in ways that imbue narrative, changing and blurring light or physically altering the composition, before turning the images into a negative that he then uses to make his prints. Though a student of Bernd and Hilla Becher, Sasse’s practise is a fundamental questioning of the documentary power of photography. “Did classical photography ever reproduce what was in front of the camera?” he asks. “Seeing and thinking, thinking and seeing—who can keep the two apart?”
I am fascinated by his questioning of photographs and using our own perceptions of a questionable reality. Sasse's use of found images, to then manipulate these images and change them into new photographs, and then for these photographs to look authentic and credible.
 |
| Jorg Sasse 8246, 2000 |
 |
| Jorg Sasse 1063, 2001 |
 |
| Jorg Sasse 1698, 2011. |
I also find interesting the images below, Jorg Sasse 1073 from 2007 is an almost exact resemblance to Albert Renger-Patsch, Buchenwald in November 1936, I will not say a copy of the original, but being from a similar background within photography, and Renger-Patsch being one of the most famous photographers in German history, it makes me question and examine these two images.
I would love to find out, however there is no information to be found. I can only surmise.
 |
| Jorg Sasse 1073, 2007. |
 |
| Albert Renger-Patsch. Buchenwald in November 1936 |
Saturday, 1 March 2014
Unit 9 work so far.
I have been out and about photographing the local bus stops, I get a few funny looks but I am getting used to this by now. My idea is to photograph Bus stops from in and around the Oldham & manchester areas, from rural saddleworth to inner city Miles Platting and Moston. In the hopes to do a social documentary project, presenting the final photographs as a large tableaux style typology. In theory this sound's interesting. It is to provide evidence of the social demise of an area through the state of its Bus shelters. Here are some pf the edited images taken so far:
Problems:
- Keeping my car out of the reflections
- Grain in images due to poor lighting conditions on some of the days (will need tripod).
- Distance from Bus stop to otherside of the road, especially in rural areas, very narrow space and sometimes cannot get in the whole of the area to be photographed.
- Finding them empty.
 |
| Water Towers |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)