Monday, October 18, 2010
Eirik Johnson
2008
"Johnson reveals the austere, quiet beauty that persists amidst the loss and decline of northwestern landscapes and towns. "
"When I was young, we would spend a lot of time out in the mountains on the coast and in rural areas. My memories were of getting out of the car on a logging road and hunting for chanterelle mushrooms in the fall, or going to watch the salmon come in to spawn in the Bogachiel River. Those are the sort of iconic, mythical memories I had. "
"Forestry, hydropower, salmon fishery—these were once the backbones that built communities. I wanted to address how communities are adapting and changing. "
Born in raised in Seattle, the Pacific Northwest region was important to Eirik. After living and teaching in Boston it was a homecoming of sorts to do a series on the Pacific Northwest. He emphasizes the beauty and decay of landscapes, industry, and communities. Not a lot of photography has been about industry and community in the Pacific Northwest, so Johnson was excited to do one.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Blogs 16-18
Blog Prompts #16, #17, & #18
“Landscape photography is the supreme test of the photographer—and often the supreme disappointment.” ~Ansel Adams
I love this quote! I often aspire to take really great landscape photos while i'm traveling or hiking, but they never turn out quite as nice as the ones printed on posters or on blogs. It truly is a disappointment, and it probably is because i'm not a good photographer.
“Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an illusion of reality with which we create our own private world.” Arnold Newman
This is certainly a thought-provoking quote, but i don't necessarily agree with it. Photography certainly is not reality, but at the same time it is not always a complete illusion created by the photographer. I know that photographers can visually and aesthetically arrange things to impact the viewer in certain manipulative ways- but i think that there is always some element of truth and reality in photos that is beyond the photographers control.
“Photography can only represent the present. Once photographed, the subject becomes part of the past.” Berenice Abbott
This is an interesting quote. On one hand, technically it is true that the moment a picture is taken it is in the past, but at the same time I think photos can create a great and true representation of the present culture and society. I guess it really depends on what you consider 'present'.
“Landscape photography is the supreme test of the photographer—and often the supreme disappointment.” ~Ansel Adams
I love this quote! I often aspire to take really great landscape photos while i'm traveling or hiking, but they never turn out quite as nice as the ones printed on posters or on blogs. It truly is a disappointment, and it probably is because i'm not a good photographer.
“Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an illusion of reality with which we create our own private world.” Arnold Newman
This is certainly a thought-provoking quote, but i don't necessarily agree with it. Photography certainly is not reality, but at the same time it is not always a complete illusion created by the photographer. I know that photographers can visually and aesthetically arrange things to impact the viewer in certain manipulative ways- but i think that there is always some element of truth and reality in photos that is beyond the photographers control.
“Photography can only represent the present. Once photographed, the subject becomes part of the past.” Berenice Abbott
This is an interesting quote. On one hand, technically it is true that the moment a picture is taken it is in the past, but at the same time I think photos can create a great and true representation of the present culture and society. I guess it really depends on what you consider 'present'.
Blogs 11-15
#11____Memory of a Place: Try to imagine a place from your past. Do you have pictures of this place? Describe this place as you remember it. What might a photograph look like of this place if you were to go back and photograph it? What would it look like in the past? What would it look like to you today? Where are you standing in this place? What other items are in this place? What colors do you see? Are there other people or are you alone? Make a “written photograph” of this place using words/description.
I'm imagining my basement as a kid. I'm sure I have a ton of pictures that were taken in it, but i'm not so sure about pictures specifically of it. I remember growing up there from when I was born until I was 12. It changed over that time, being carpeted, painted, and finished, but I always will remember it as my playroom. My sister and I created huge forts from blankets, slid down the stairs on our mattresses, built lego houses, watched hundreds of Disney channel movies on tv, and basically ran the area when we were young. I experienced many firsts there- the first time I used a computer, the first time my tooth fell off, the first time I had a sleepover. Thinking about it makes me really nostalgic about it. I have no idea what it would look like now- I'm sure the people that live there now have changed it completely from how I remember it. When I picture it in my head, even though it's been ten years since I've seen it- I can clearly see my sister and I setting up our play toys in the corner, or learning to play ping pong. In my head I see the white walls and white carpet, I place the chairs and bookshelves, tv and ping pong table, couch and workshop, computer room and bathroom are along with the storage area, but I'm more interested in remembering the things that when on there, like when my cousin drew all over the walls with crayon, or how my sister and I dressed up as Star Wars characters and tried to climb the support poles. I am remembering the stuff that happened there more than the physical appearance of the place, which i'm sure is what would happen if i was confronted with a picture of it as well.
#12____Memory of a Photograph: Which photograph from your past do you remember most? Describe this photograph. Describe how it makes you feel when you remember/think about this photograph. How have you changed? How has the place in this photograph changed? What would a reenactment of this photograph look like? Would you act or look differently if you reenacted this scene today?
A photo I can remember from the past is a picture of my sister and I sitting on a piano bench with our teddy bears in our laps. Our heads are just peeking over the top of the bears, and it reminds me of how much my sister and I used to play with each other. We used to do everything together and we used to love those teddy bears. We both still have them, so I don't know how much that's changed, but we definitely have grown apart in terms of spending time together. My sister lives in Seattle now, and we haven't lived together for about six years. I think its been about ten years or more since we regularly hung out, since we always fought in high school and she didn't really want to have much to do with me. However, this photograph reminds me of how much fun we used to have. We don't live where the photo was taken, so that adds another layer of nostalgia to it, but I don't see a reenactment coming anytime soon. If we were to do it, we would laugh and have fun- sort of mock it, but we wouldn't probably think much about what it actually meant.
#13____Pay attention to the number of ways in which you encounter humans’ interaction with nature and the physical land. Write these down. Using these as inspiration, describe an idea for a piece of “land art” that you might create that would be documented by a photograph.
I love land art! I remember watching the Christo and Jeanne-Claude video four or five times in different art classes, and I always have loved how they did things. I also really like the Spiral Jetty and other land art pieces. I think it would be a lot of fun to create some land art. In my ceramics course this last summer I made a couple hundred rock sculptures to lay out in nature, and i'd really like to do more land art. I would like to either tweak nature a little so that you don't notice at first, or do something crazy and drastic that immediately stands out. I think it would be a ton of fun!
#14____Unknown vs. Familiar Space: When photography was invented, it became a way to document and reveal the specific aspects of both familiar and faraway places. Imagine a familiar place. Imagine a faraway place. How would you use photographs to convey the difference? Can you imagine any places that have been “touched” very little by humans? How might you photograph them?
I am very familiar with photos of places faraway, as I spend a significant amount of time gazing wistfully of pictures of far off places I would love to see like New Zealand, Chile, and Croatia. The photos of these places makes me really want to go to those places and see them myself. I hope that when I finally am able to go to these places I won't be disappointed. You can learn a lot about a place from a photograph, and since I am drawn to mountains, waterfalls, and scenic beauty- when I look at a photo of beautiful places it makes me very interested in the place. I guess a difference between a photo of a place close to home and a place faraway is the sense of familiarity and understanding that comes with a place near home, whereas the wonder and curiosity of a place faraway. When I think of photos of nearby I think of scenes from my life, and they don't seem that special or interesting. When I think of photos of other places they seem so exciting. Photographers certainly are able to inspire wonder at close places and boredom and familiarity at faraway places, but I think it's quite challenging. I don't know exactly what I would do. My ideas of photos of the two places are so different I literally can't think of something they have in common. I guess when I think of photos near home I think of photos of everyday life, and when I think of faraway photos I think of grand places or different cultures, and I can't seem to be able to get those places to seem familiar in my head.
#15____In-Camera Collage: Collage brings together two or more items that were previously separate. The resulting piece usually visually references the fact that they were once separate entities. Imagine an important place in your past. Imagine an important place in your present. Imagine who you were in both of these past and present places. Describe how you might use a slow shutter speed and/or double exposure to capture two moments in one image that tell a new narrative about these important places and how they relate to who you are and were.
I think an example of a collage like that would one that showed a passing of time between the picture taking place. I can't obviously take a picture where I will look physically different in the two shots unless I waited months before the second picture, but there are other ways to show a change. Emotions can change quickly, and a shot with a double exposure or slow shutter speed can impart two separate emotions at once. For example, I could be looking super angry on one shot, and really sad on the other. Maybe a head turn would add effect. The shot could be about how sometimes I mask sadness by being angry. I think it's easier to be angry when something upsets you than to allow yourself to be hurt about it. It's a defense mechanism, and I think it could make an interesting subject for a photo.
I'm imagining my basement as a kid. I'm sure I have a ton of pictures that were taken in it, but i'm not so sure about pictures specifically of it. I remember growing up there from when I was born until I was 12. It changed over that time, being carpeted, painted, and finished, but I always will remember it as my playroom. My sister and I created huge forts from blankets, slid down the stairs on our mattresses, built lego houses, watched hundreds of Disney channel movies on tv, and basically ran the area when we were young. I experienced many firsts there- the first time I used a computer, the first time my tooth fell off, the first time I had a sleepover. Thinking about it makes me really nostalgic about it. I have no idea what it would look like now- I'm sure the people that live there now have changed it completely from how I remember it. When I picture it in my head, even though it's been ten years since I've seen it- I can clearly see my sister and I setting up our play toys in the corner, or learning to play ping pong. In my head I see the white walls and white carpet, I place the chairs and bookshelves, tv and ping pong table, couch and workshop, computer room and bathroom are along with the storage area, but I'm more interested in remembering the things that when on there, like when my cousin drew all over the walls with crayon, or how my sister and I dressed up as Star Wars characters and tried to climb the support poles. I am remembering the stuff that happened there more than the physical appearance of the place, which i'm sure is what would happen if i was confronted with a picture of it as well.
#12____Memory of a Photograph: Which photograph from your past do you remember most? Describe this photograph. Describe how it makes you feel when you remember/think about this photograph. How have you changed? How has the place in this photograph changed? What would a reenactment of this photograph look like? Would you act or look differently if you reenacted this scene today?
A photo I can remember from the past is a picture of my sister and I sitting on a piano bench with our teddy bears in our laps. Our heads are just peeking over the top of the bears, and it reminds me of how much my sister and I used to play with each other. We used to do everything together and we used to love those teddy bears. We both still have them, so I don't know how much that's changed, but we definitely have grown apart in terms of spending time together. My sister lives in Seattle now, and we haven't lived together for about six years. I think its been about ten years or more since we regularly hung out, since we always fought in high school and she didn't really want to have much to do with me. However, this photograph reminds me of how much fun we used to have. We don't live where the photo was taken, so that adds another layer of nostalgia to it, but I don't see a reenactment coming anytime soon. If we were to do it, we would laugh and have fun- sort of mock it, but we wouldn't probably think much about what it actually meant.
#13____Pay attention to the number of ways in which you encounter humans’ interaction with nature and the physical land. Write these down. Using these as inspiration, describe an idea for a piece of “land art” that you might create that would be documented by a photograph.
I love land art! I remember watching the Christo and Jeanne-Claude video four or five times in different art classes, and I always have loved how they did things. I also really like the Spiral Jetty and other land art pieces. I think it would be a lot of fun to create some land art. In my ceramics course this last summer I made a couple hundred rock sculptures to lay out in nature, and i'd really like to do more land art. I would like to either tweak nature a little so that you don't notice at first, or do something crazy and drastic that immediately stands out. I think it would be a ton of fun!
#14____Unknown vs. Familiar Space: When photography was invented, it became a way to document and reveal the specific aspects of both familiar and faraway places. Imagine a familiar place. Imagine a faraway place. How would you use photographs to convey the difference? Can you imagine any places that have been “touched” very little by humans? How might you photograph them?
I am very familiar with photos of places faraway, as I spend a significant amount of time gazing wistfully of pictures of far off places I would love to see like New Zealand, Chile, and Croatia. The photos of these places makes me really want to go to those places and see them myself. I hope that when I finally am able to go to these places I won't be disappointed. You can learn a lot about a place from a photograph, and since I am drawn to mountains, waterfalls, and scenic beauty- when I look at a photo of beautiful places it makes me very interested in the place. I guess a difference between a photo of a place close to home and a place faraway is the sense of familiarity and understanding that comes with a place near home, whereas the wonder and curiosity of a place faraway. When I think of photos of nearby I think of scenes from my life, and they don't seem that special or interesting. When I think of photos of other places they seem so exciting. Photographers certainly are able to inspire wonder at close places and boredom and familiarity at faraway places, but I think it's quite challenging. I don't know exactly what I would do. My ideas of photos of the two places are so different I literally can't think of something they have in common. I guess when I think of photos near home I think of photos of everyday life, and when I think of faraway photos I think of grand places or different cultures, and I can't seem to be able to get those places to seem familiar in my head.
#15____In-Camera Collage: Collage brings together two or more items that were previously separate. The resulting piece usually visually references the fact that they were once separate entities. Imagine an important place in your past. Imagine an important place in your present. Imagine who you were in both of these past and present places. Describe how you might use a slow shutter speed and/or double exposure to capture two moments in one image that tell a new narrative about these important places and how they relate to who you are and were.
I think an example of a collage like that would one that showed a passing of time between the picture taking place. I can't obviously take a picture where I will look physically different in the two shots unless I waited months before the second picture, but there are other ways to show a change. Emotions can change quickly, and a shot with a double exposure or slow shutter speed can impart two separate emotions at once. For example, I could be looking super angry on one shot, and really sad on the other. Maybe a head turn would add effect. The shot could be about how sometimes I mask sadness by being angry. I think it's easier to be angry when something upsets you than to allow yourself to be hurt about it. It's a defense mechanism, and I think it could make an interesting subject for a photo.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Judith Joy Ross
Judith Joy Ross
Born (1946) in Pennsylvania. Her black and white portrait photography is know for the emotional qualities she is able to capture from her subjects. People say that her photos are so 'unassuming' that they require multiple viewings to fully understand them.
She uses an 8x10-inch Camera and a process known as printing-out paper prints (which needs no enlarger) to produce highly defined negatives and prints with a wide range of gray tones. The paper is exposed to the negative in sunlight for a few minutes to a few hours. Later, Ross tones the prints shades of brown and gray (Wikipedia).
The picture I selected, 'Frank Mancini and Joe Wessel, Freeland, Pennsylvania' shot in 2004 is interesting because it takes two very ordinary-looking people, and makes them into something special. I thought the way that the figures match up is pretty funny- how both of them are standing similarly, with their arms at their sides and their legs outwardly spaced. Their matching potbellies also tie them together, along with their glasses and interestingly befuddled expressions. I like how the setting is a nondescript area that could likely be a neighborhood. Everything else is blurred, which also created more of an interest in the two men.
http://www.pacemacgill.com/judithjoyross.html
Born (1946) in Pennsylvania. Her black and white portrait photography is know for the emotional qualities she is able to capture from her subjects. People say that her photos are so 'unassuming' that they require multiple viewings to fully understand them.
She uses an 8x10-inch Camera and a process known as printing-out paper prints (which needs no enlarger) to produce highly defined negatives and prints with a wide range of gray tones. The paper is exposed to the negative in sunlight for a few minutes to a few hours. Later, Ross tones the prints shades of brown and gray (Wikipedia).
The picture I selected, 'Frank Mancini and Joe Wessel, Freeland, Pennsylvania' shot in 2004 is interesting because it takes two very ordinary-looking people, and makes them into something special. I thought the way that the figures match up is pretty funny- how both of them are standing similarly, with their arms at their sides and their legs outwardly spaced. Their matching potbellies also tie them together, along with their glasses and interestingly befuddled expressions. I like how the setting is a nondescript area that could likely be a neighborhood. Everything else is blurred, which also created more of an interest in the two men.
http://www.pacemacgill.com/judithjoyross.html
Blog entries 8, 9, 10
Please respond to the following three quotes.
“My portraits are more about me than they are about the people I photograph.” ~Richard Avedon.
“You don't take a photograph, you make it.” ~Ansel Adams
“All photographs are there to remind us of what we forget. In this - as in other ways - they are the opposite of paintings. Paintings record what the painter remembers. Because each one of us forgets different things, a photo more than a painting may change its meaning according to who is looking at it.” ~John Berger
These quotes address the idea of the role of the photographer in a photograph. Avedon and Berger both write that photos record more of what the photographer wanted the image to say, and what that says about the photographer than about what exactly the image is of. Ansel Adams says that the photo is made, not taken, which also talks about how a photo is more what the taker makes it than what the subject is in real life. I agree that photos can lend a lot of information of the photographer's perspective when taking the image. However, I think that there are times when there is no thought process from the photographer other than capturing something that was before them. The photo still says something about their perspective, as it places them in a scene, but if they had no plans beyond the framing of the shot and what was focused on, which also talk about the photographer's design, i think that they are a little more distanced than what these quotes were saying.
“My portraits are more about me than they are about the people I photograph.” ~Richard Avedon.
“You don't take a photograph, you make it.” ~Ansel Adams
“All photographs are there to remind us of what we forget. In this - as in other ways - they are the opposite of paintings. Paintings record what the painter remembers. Because each one of us forgets different things, a photo more than a painting may change its meaning according to who is looking at it.” ~John Berger
These quotes address the idea of the role of the photographer in a photograph. Avedon and Berger both write that photos record more of what the photographer wanted the image to say, and what that says about the photographer than about what exactly the image is of. Ansel Adams says that the photo is made, not taken, which also talks about how a photo is more what the taker makes it than what the subject is in real life. I agree that photos can lend a lot of information of the photographer's perspective when taking the image. However, I think that there are times when there is no thought process from the photographer other than capturing something that was before them. The photo still says something about their perspective, as it places them in a scene, but if they had no plans beyond the framing of the shot and what was focused on, which also talk about the photographer's design, i think that they are a little more distanced than what these quotes were saying.
Blog Entries 5-7
Blog Entries #5, #6, #7:
#5.
“Photography records the gamut of feelings written on the human face, the beauty of the earth and skies that man has inherited, and the wealth and confusion man has created. It is a major force in explaining man to man.” ~Edward Steichen
I like this quote a lot. I think it's a good representation of what photography is. Photos really can capture feeling of people's faces, sometimes even better than you can in person. Because the image is only an instant of an expression, you can sometimes glimpse an expression that was quickly hidden in real life. Photography also allows us to concentrate longer on an expression and analyze it more as to interpret the thoughts behind them. The statement about how photography explains man to man is very appropriate, and i think that photographers really help people think about the human condition and people's place in the world. By capturing images of everything around us as well as people themselves.
#6.
In your opinion, when is it beneficial, ethical, or appropriate to digitally alter photographic portraits? When do you think it is inappropriate or ethically wrong?
I think that digitally altering portraits is kind of fun to do for personal use. For example I like changing my hair color to rainbow in photoshop. I think that it is fine as long as it serves a good purpose, like creating drama or effects that couldn't be done without altering. When it gets inappropriate is when the manipulator specifically does it for a bad reason, like to emphasize physical qualities in a person that aren't real with the intent of passing them off as real and influencing the people who view them.
#7.
Pay close attention to the types and number of photographic portraits you see in one day. Where did you see them? How do you think that the content of the portrait changes based on the context in which you see the image (news, facebook, magazine, advertisement, television, youtube, etc)? In other words, what is the difference between the portraits you see on facebook vs. those on the news? What is the difference between the “viewpoint” of the photographer in each situation? What is the difference between their “intents”?
There is a huge difference between the way people view photos on billboards or ads or the news, and the ones of your friends on facebook and other personal websites. Because you know certain things about a person in advance, when you view a portrait of someone on facebook or other personal website you treat the photo as a more casual, accurate depiction of a person. Even if you don't know the person at all, just by knowing that the picture is something that they chose to represent themselves gives you a more intimate idea about themselves. Their intent in posting each photo is to tell the viewer something about themselves, and the intent in viewing the picture is to learn something about the person. In advertisements and other commercial portraits the viewer understands that the photographer has more of a viewpoint and input into the image. Likely, the person portrayed did not have that much input into the image, and therefor no one considers those types of images as accurate representations of the person.
#5.
“Photography records the gamut of feelings written on the human face, the beauty of the earth and skies that man has inherited, and the wealth and confusion man has created. It is a major force in explaining man to man.” ~Edward Steichen
I like this quote a lot. I think it's a good representation of what photography is. Photos really can capture feeling of people's faces, sometimes even better than you can in person. Because the image is only an instant of an expression, you can sometimes glimpse an expression that was quickly hidden in real life. Photography also allows us to concentrate longer on an expression and analyze it more as to interpret the thoughts behind them. The statement about how photography explains man to man is very appropriate, and i think that photographers really help people think about the human condition and people's place in the world. By capturing images of everything around us as well as people themselves.
#6.
In your opinion, when is it beneficial, ethical, or appropriate to digitally alter photographic portraits? When do you think it is inappropriate or ethically wrong?
I think that digitally altering portraits is kind of fun to do for personal use. For example I like changing my hair color to rainbow in photoshop. I think that it is fine as long as it serves a good purpose, like creating drama or effects that couldn't be done without altering. When it gets inappropriate is when the manipulator specifically does it for a bad reason, like to emphasize physical qualities in a person that aren't real with the intent of passing them off as real and influencing the people who view them.
#7.
Pay close attention to the types and number of photographic portraits you see in one day. Where did you see them? How do you think that the content of the portrait changes based on the context in which you see the image (news, facebook, magazine, advertisement, television, youtube, etc)? In other words, what is the difference between the portraits you see on facebook vs. those on the news? What is the difference between the “viewpoint” of the photographer in each situation? What is the difference between their “intents”?
There is a huge difference between the way people view photos on billboards or ads or the news, and the ones of your friends on facebook and other personal websites. Because you know certain things about a person in advance, when you view a portrait of someone on facebook or other personal website you treat the photo as a more casual, accurate depiction of a person. Even if you don't know the person at all, just by knowing that the picture is something that they chose to represent themselves gives you a more intimate idea about themselves. Their intent in posting each photo is to tell the viewer something about themselves, and the intent in viewing the picture is to learn something about the person. In advertisements and other commercial portraits the viewer understands that the photographer has more of a viewpoint and input into the image. Likely, the person portrayed did not have that much input into the image, and therefor no one considers those types of images as accurate representations of the person.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)