Observing the Overlooked

Response to Making vs. Taking

I found this project to be somewhat difficult initially but extremely rewarding and satisfying at the end. Being given the assignment to go out into the "real world" and just take pictures of color, regardless of subject matter, proved to more challenging than I anticipated. Green, brown and other dull earth tones seemed to be dominating our environment and so when I came across a strikingly bright blue or yellow, I was thrilled. The scanogram process was also a little challenging in the beginning. Knowing that I had to create diptych images, I felt like I was trying too hard in some respects to forge connections between the "taking" and the "making" images. Given the opportunity again, I would really try make images without being concerned about what I could match it with. The diptcyh I chose to matte and present was, in actuality, one where I paired the two images long after making them; one that struck me as being connected in several ways even though I had not originally intended for the two photos to be paired. It was the discovery of these connections and nuances that delighted me and made me value the assignment.

The "watch and wait" Leica

The Leica was voted “the top gadget of all time” by eBay and Stuff magazine in the UK last year, surpassing the iPod, Sony Walkman and Game Boy. This traditionally 35 mm camera seemed to be headed for extinction however and was only salvaged when the digital version, the M8, was created and hit the market. This shift was inevitable, as our society is rapidly progressing in a digital direction. We live in a world where speed and efficiency are highly valued.

Interestingly enough though, before this “digital era” it seems that the Leica could be considered the equivalent of the today’s point and shoot digital camera for the early and mid 20th century period. Being light and portable, this model enabled photographers to shoot rapidly and often unnoticed. It was a user friendly, film camera that made it possible to take massive amounts of photographs; Henri Cartier-Bresson produced 850 rolls of film in a span of 3 years while Garry similarly produced an astonishing amount. When he died in 1984, more than 2500 rolls of film were left behind. The Leica is notorious for being able to capture the “scars of the world” because of its quickness and mobility. It, as the authors describe, was the primary instrument for “watch and wait” photography. The Leica was clearly ahead of its time and was instrumental to so many photographers’ careers, which is perhaps why it was rated “the top gadget of all time”.

Making Vs. Taking

Monhegan Island

Summer 2007, while vacationing with the fam...

Free Shoot #4

Taking COLOR!

Remember this?

“Memory revises itself endlessly. We remember a vivid person, a remark, a sight that was unexpected, an occasion on which we felt something profoundly. The rest falls away”. What Gordon Bell essentially hopes to do, as demonstrated in Wilkinson’s article, is to create what he calls a “personal-transaction processing system”; a technological invention that is capable of tracking and recording our everyday activity in order to “enhance our memory”, provide us with truthful and “real” records and prevent “the rest from falling away. He of course, acknowledges the fact that the archive would not be perfect because it too has it’s own “memory” and will overemphasize certain events, places, and peoples. The “limitations of memory will intercede” for both humans and the computers but Bell believes that the two combined will create more accurate representations of who we are. Working on a similar project, Microsoft guru Eric Horvitz says, “It comes to understand your mind, how you organize your memories, by what you choose. It learns to become like you, to help you be a better you. Computers are going to become tools we work with and trust, rather than merely appliances”.

My response to the proposals set forth in this article? NO WAY, PLEASE NEVER, STOP!!! I do not want, nor need, a computer to help “me” become a better “me”. Our ability to remember was designed a certain way. Certain realms of technology can be used as aids to help us remember what we want to remember, whether it be photography, videos, sound recordings, etc but this idea of a continual surveillance and tracking system seems ridiculous. People can achieve self-awareness without the help of technology. This entire concept is analogous to the issue of couples genetically engineering their future children so that they are of a certain sex, possess particular qualities and have a specific appearance. Some things are just meant to be left alone, even if technology has the potential to be advantageous.

There are two specific incidences in the article to which I would like to draw attention, as I believe they embody my fear of technology taking over our lives. When Bell is presenting his personal archive to the author, an image of a boy pops up. Bell could not remember who this boy was. Why have an archive system that is supposed to “fill in the gaps” and serve as accounts of our life experiences if the images have no meaning to us? Another photograph appears on one of Bell’s screens and in this case, the photograph has two creases, from where it had once been folded. Do we really want to replace tangible images and objects with two-dimensional, computerized representations? Talk about eradicating sentimentality and value.

Perhaps I am being narrow-minded and am unwilling to see the benefits of such a system but to me it amounts to a world where people are stripped far too much of their own capacities and are forced to rely and interact with technology on much too large a level. Before you know it, we’re all going to be reduced to mere robots, situated at the mercy of computers and digital systems. I hope I’m not being too jaded…

Free Shoot #3: Picturing Portland

"Here is New York: Remembering 9/11"

In the first day of this class we discussed what makes a photograph "iconic" and one of the common threads among most of the photographs we were listing was that they all dealt with history in one way or another. September 11th entered our discussion when we asked if there was an image associated with this devastating event and the response was pretty much unanimous; there is not just one iconic picture associated with the attack. Why this is the case, the class was not too sure but we suggested that it might have something to do with the fact that sooooo many pictures were captured that day. Digital photography, whether using cameras or cell phones, is at the hands of thousands of people which enables mass production of images.



An article featured in today's NY Times was an interesting one to read after this discussion in class. A new exhibition at the New-York Historical Society, entitled “Here Is New York: Remembering 9/11,” opened today. It claims to be exclusively about memory and consists of two galleries containing "1,500 inkjet-printed photos taken six years ago during those apocalyptic days ... They are reminders of hidden pressure points and buried sensations". The article continues, "The photos, without credits, titles or dates, from 790 contributors, range from the amateur to the professional, from the clearly posed composition to the frenzied snap of a moment in which hysteria had to be kept at bay. This was probably the most photographed series of days in history. Was there anyone with a camera who did not try to capture some moment, staring in disbelief, anger or sorrow?" This article speaks to what we discussed in class; digital photography has enabled hundreds of people to capture images regardless of their photographic knowledge or experience. So while there may not be just one image associated with Sept 11th, is that necessarily a bad thing? I say we embrace the power of photography because, as this exhibit demonstrates, it allows us to capture various emotions, sights and experiences from hundreds of perspectives. Photographs have the ability to serve as reminders of our past- and whether it be through just one image, or thousands of images, should be irrelevant.
*Photographs are some of those featured in the exhibition

Reflecting on "Looking Down"

Despite the strange “what the hell is that girl doing” stares I received from my fellow Bowdoin students, I enjoyed taking pictures looking down. It is an angle I have rarely used in my approach to a photography assignment and as the project progressed, I found it exciting to discover various ways to create interesting and unique images looking solely at what is below me. Never before have I paid such attention and detail to the ground on which I walk, the vast materials that make up the foundation of this ground, and the wide range of trash and other miscellaneous objects and structures that blanket our world. Capturing this all in a unique way was most challenging and I hope that my pictures lead the viewers through sort of a rediscovery process; I hope the collection of images reveal a new way of observing, challenge current assumptions of Brunswick’s landscape, and stimulate responses to things which seem so ordinary.

It was certainly difficult at first to work with a more narrow depth of field and no horizon, but I tried to resolve this issue by shooting close up so that the minimal depth of field that did exist was enhanced. I found myself taking a lot of these “zoomed-in” pictures and I think the results are more interesting and provoking than had I taken the images at my “eye-level”. Another common thread throughout my photographs is the presence of line and geometric shapes, which ultimately create “blocks” of color, textures and patterns in the photos. A lot of my pictures can be divided horizontally, vertically, diagonally, etc and why I am drawn to this form of composition, I am not quite sure. One last similarity among my photographs is the location of where they were shot. The majority of my pictures were taken in areas I spend most of my day. The cluster of photos around Pine St. for this assignment is therefore, not too surprising!

Color vs. B&W

Color is just another technical aspect a photographer can employ to create an image. Just as a photographer can utilize light or alter the focus of his lens, color is a tool that can be used to highlight a certain aspect of the picture, provoke a response and add another dimension to the work. Despite these advantages, I prefer black and white photography (at this point in time anyways). Color can certainly be visually alluring and fascinating, but I think it also has the potential to distract from the subject matter.

Photographer Andri Cauldwell tells us, “to see in color is a delight for the eye but to see in black and white is a delight for the soul”. Seeing in black and white is a delight for the soul because it is something we do not experience all that often. We, as human beings, are not capable of seeing in black and white on our own. It is only with a camera that we are able to transform our world of color into a world of black and white which, in some respects, makes the art of black and white photography more valuable and appealing. Without color, the image is more “raw”, forcing the viewer to focus even more on what has been captured and consider the reasons for doing so. I think that with black and white photography, the subject matter tends to be where the emphasis lies but with color photography, the color has the potential to capture this emphasis.

Free Shoot #2

looks like Professor Kolster is also partaking in our "Looking Down" assignment through his ongoing Daily Post project!

Looking Down Brunswick

Looking Down

What makes a good picture? "Something kicked my gut inside"

Reading responses to “one of the most important questions in the world of photography” reaffirms my conclusion that there is no one right answer. As my eyes moved from line to line, I found myself agreeing with a lot of the respondent’s replies and a common theme, for the most part, seemed to emerge with which I couldn’t agree more. Good pictures extend beyond the technical components of an image. As Arthur Rothstein notes, “technical process in photography has reached the point where the means for producing good photography is available to all” and thus, good, and especially great photography is something more than the photographer’s composition, use of light, focus choice and depth of field.

Rather, a good picture must have the capacity to provoke and communicate emotion; it must be effective. A picture that reveals something beyond what is immediately presented to the viewer, one that “bares the aspects of people and their environment with unequalled revelation”, and an image that impacts the viewer on some emotional level all exemplify what makes a great photograph. Images that are stimulating and generate a response- whether it be mentally or physically- constitute the “great” ones. One respondent said, “the first time I saw it […] I caught my breath and something kicked my gut inside”. When a two-dimensional picture has the ability to trigger a response like that, how can it not be considered great?! There is no equation for what makes a picture good, they just are.

Free Shoot #1