some Final FINAL thoughts...

In the beginning of the semester, our class was presented with a number of questions to ponder , two of which included the following: Black & white vs. color? What makes a good photograph? After having spent nearly four months shooting solely in digital and in color, I have certainly had the time to explore and think about these essential questions but I am not sure if I can really offer any more of a concrete answer than I did in September.

In terms of black and white versus color photography, I am still for some reason or another drawn more to black and white. This course has certainly opened my eyes to the potential color photography has and there will always be some images that work better in color then in black and white. Take the work of Aline Smithson (portrait of the photographer’s mother), Chuck Close, Marilyn Minter and our very own Brittany Ogden (final project) for example. These artists’ work are much more effective and provocative in color because so much of what the photograph is about is color. Color is one of the primary subjects. Conversely, the work of Salgado, Taro and Weiss are all in black and white and attempt to convey the nuances, harsh realities or complete mundaneness of life whether it be abroad while at war or walking down the street in NYC. In these bodies of work, the human subject and “life” takes center stage and to me, color is not necessary because it can be distracting. Ultimately, it seems to me that color and black & white have equally important roles in photography but the roles they serve are incredibly different. Therefore, perhaps the question of “do you prefer black & white photography or color photography” is not even a valid one- how can you compare two things that serve different purposes? It’s synonymous with asking to compare apples and oranges- it just can’t be done. Do I think black & white is better than color photography? No, I just prefer it.

What defines a good photograph could endlessly be debated and overanalyzed. I do think that a good photograph must possess certain technical components (strong use of depth, or light, or focus or composition) but realize that what constitutes a good photo for some people may not similarly do so for others. In September I wrote, “Good pictures serve as a source of dialogue and debate; they have the ability to provoke discussion, interpretation and ultimately, illustrate how another person sees the world in which we live.” I still firmly believe in this. That is, this is my own personal definition of what makes a good photograph because I think it exemplifies the greatest ability of photography … to CAPTURE AND PROJECT.

Final Project: Figures in Space

Final Project Thoughts

I began planning my final project with the desire to create landscapes. I decided to present these landscapes as panoramas for a number of reasons. I was really impressed with th ePhotomerge tool in Photoshop and because Madelyn and I did not use this feature for our Cassonia project, I wanted to attempt using this feature. Additionally, I wanted to create images that were relatively large, which panoramas enabled me to do. My motive for including the figures was largely because I wanted an additional element besides just landscapes and thus, depicting people and how they interacted and altered a viewer's "reading" of the photograph seemed like a logical step to take. How to incorporate the figures was rather challenging. At the beginning of the project I was faced with a number of questions: How might positioning someone in the distance versus positioning someone in the foreground affect an individual’s understanding of the image? Do I want the figures to be actually doing something in the shot or be more subtle, and just “present”? Since I was shooting outside, altering the time of day was also something I considered. I was inspired by Tanja's (from the Bakery) landscape work and her unconventional horizon line. I decided to embrace this and present a trip-tych landscape with varying horizon lines. I then expanded upon this idea by deciding to shoot three different scenes in order to present three trip-tcyh landscape scenes in the form of a landscape (not as they appear on my blog). Presenting the images in this manner proved to be the most effective way for the audience to view each image individually but also as part of the collective body of work.

I ultimately chose to present the figures as components of the landscape, minimally interacting with the space whether alone or in a pair. I did not want their actions to be too distracting since the overall theme of my project was investigating how our perceptions of an image (ie a landscape) differs when people are included. I wanted the spotlight to be on the relationship between nature and human life, as opposed to just having the figure take center stage. I shot a number of times (nearly 500 images total!) and was incredibly satisfied with the end result. I am especially happy that I was able to re-shoot the pines scene because the snow adds a nice variety of color to the entire body of work. Overall, I am pleased with the final result of this project (could have matted a little better-- but isn't that always the case?). I am really fascinated with depicting space in general- How can the same space be represented in different ways? How can our conventions of space be altered? What happens when human life enters space? etc- and hope to continue pursuing this interest in my future photographic endeavors.

up close on Close

For me, Chuck Close represents one of the iconic artists of our time. His approach and style is markedly unique and incredibly aesthetically stimulating. Looking at his work up close or far away yields different experiences for the viewer and I think this duality or hybridity his work possesses is fascinating. His color work really enhances this concept because it intensifies both the individuality of each grid segment but also demonstrates the collectiveness of the segments. I also really enjoy the fact that he is so systematically and somewhat “mechanically” breaking up the surface of the human face, something so organic – applying redundancy to individuality? Interesting. As an artist, Close offers a wonderful perspective on the approach to depicting the human form which ultimately results in a beautiful, visually intense and provocative image.

Salgado

Salgado says, "My hope is that, as individuals, as groups, as societies, we can pause and reflect on the human condition at the turn of the millennium. In its rawest form, individualism remains a prescription for catastrophe. We have to create a new regimen of coexistence.”

His photographs honor and expose the most isolated, the most neglected and the dispossessed that blanket our world. Is it wrong to photograph the suffering in such a beautiful and aesthetically pleasing way? Definitely not.

Although the technical and fundamental components of the images he creates may be incredibly well executed and beautiful (in terms of composition, light, dept of field, etc), his subject matter cetinaly is not which is what is so ironic about his work. He is portraying such inequality and suffering in such an admirable way.

While it might be necessary to consider Salgado’s motive and what is trying to accomplish with these photographs, when I personally look at these pictures I don’t really care. Maybe he has an agenda and maybe he is trying to mislead his viewers but what he photographs is in large part, a reality that would not be explored if it were not for photojournalists like him.

I wonder if we begin to be so critical of such photographers and accuse them of being exploitative and not doing anything to actually alleviate the situation, would photojournalism still exist? I think it is important and crucial for people to act and do their part but even just photographing these events plays a significant part. Perhaps it is these photographs that inspire other people to act and combat the situation.



This discussion reminds me of a very distinct photograph (which I believe Meg showed us in the beginning of the semester but I’ve also discussed in a course while abroad); the one where a baby is about to be preyed upon by a nearby vulture- not sure who the photographer is. The class I first saw this photograph was a course about the media and so we were discussing the role of photojournalism. Should the photographer put down his camera to go rescue the baby? Or is it more important to document this harsh, and ugly reality? What’s more important and whose right is it to make the decision of what constitutes the photojournalists’ role? It’s an interesting question,that in my opinion, has no right or wrong answer….