There is a particular collection of photographs in this group that seem to draw from a Surrealist perspective. I don’t think it is intentional but it is very interesting when a group of people who are just starting to know each other all come up with a similar vision.
Surrealism was an artistic movement that started in the 1920s as a manifesto written by author André Breton. Painting did not come into the movement until later. The basic idea was to allow the unconscious mind to reveal itself in artistic expression. It was felt that conscious thought repressed the unconscious mind and therefore restricted the imagination. The pioneering psychiatrist Sigmund Freud was also an influence on the movement.
Let me point out which photos work this way and maybe you can take this energy and develop it further. Although, the contradiction is that if you actually TRY to make it happen, it become s a product of the conscious mind once again. The question then is, how did people like Salvador Dali manage to capture their unconscious mind to then be able to paint in a photorealistic manner, that requires great skill. [There were experiments with ‘automatic writing’ that allowed the artist to make images directly from the unconscious mind.] This takes us back to my description of Intuitive vs Disciplined Shooting, and the importance of utilizing both of these strategies in your work.
The first photograph that works this way is the clouds above the stairs by Minami Okajima.
Perhaps it is her great use of contrast that makes this seems sort of unreal. Clouds also show up in any number of surrealist paintings. But all in all it looks almost like a dream. She has another shot that seems almost normal at first but here is something strange about it.
It is this quiet space that has a lot of ‘feel’. The chairs in the room mimic the chairs in the painting that almost looks like a mirror. It is just ‘off’ enough to take my mind into that dreamworld. I don’t know if I can explain it, but if I could then maybe we wouldn’t need photography.
[quick definition: The photograph is what is on the paper (or screen). The image is what is formed in your mind.]
Another shot that falls into this category is this by Coleen Kennedy The carousel is another one of these unreal places where children are allowed to let their imagination take them on a horse ride. It is also a locale for some creepy movies that also derive some of their essence from the surrealists. The inclusion of the other ride in the right side middle ground of the photo and the far away horizon all contribute to the success of this photo.
Morgana Sugzdinis presents a similar locale with a different attitude. This one seems more positive. This is a great example of talking a photo of something interesting but giving us a view that we would never have seen even if we were there. It presents her own unique view of the world. And this one is perfectly toned, something that is missing from most photographs posted and something that was part of the topic. The tonality throws it back in time, adding to the atmosphere of the shot.
And the last of the surrealist shots has a woman floating in a dream world, also by Morgana Sugzdinis. This is one of those exceptions to the ‘do not center your content’ rule because she has extended the foreground so that you eye is not glued to the middle. The balance of irregularly shaped trees on either side of the background also keep the eyes moving.
The next compelling photo by Ian Aubry is seemingly simple, but it has that ‘feel’, that emptiness that transcends what is in the photograph. I have seen hundreds of train pictures but this one captures that quietness better than most.
And I have to come back to Minami Okajima for her shot of a food counter. It is deceptively simple and perhaps it is this reduction of the space that makes it work. Here you see how it is possible to take something or someplace that you see all the time and make a viewer stop and contemplate it. This instills awareness in your viewers. By the end of this class you will look at everything differently than you did a few weeks ago.
This shot gives me a good segue into the next photo by Ian Aubry that has a restaurant theme.
This is a beautiful intersection of shapes and lights and darks that all create a mood. The contrast in this photo adds drama. The payoff is the crumpled piece of paper and half-filled cup on the table, leaving evidence of the last people who were in that spot. If you look hard enough you will find a person or three at the far back of the space, but it is the emptiness that prevails. [p.s. I was just taken here for a espresso macchiato yesterday!]
And here is another beautiful interior space shot by Dymond Scarborough with extraordinary light. It is not how anything looks as much as about how the space feels. This is a place where you can spend some time (unless you are scared, which is another possibility).
Dymond pulls off another interesting photo at night with this wide landscape. She controls her viewer’s eye by placing interesting content at both extreme corners, and we keep bouncing back and forth. The light on the trees and that beam in the center top make a triangle of interest. This is a well structured photo.
Since we in the nighttime now, we can look at two shots that are very atmospheric. The first by Dymond Scarboro very cleverly counterbalances the moon with a streetlight. The light on the trees enhances their shapes and the curved wire adds another unique brushstroke to the canvas.
The next shot by Kevin Pizzini is even more obscure but still paints a landscape (or perhaps even an encounter?) in our mind’s eye. Another example of the photo creating an even larger image in our mind.
Following this collection of diffuse photos we can look at this leaf by Coleen Kennedy where the itself is soft and delicate, just like the subject. This is a good example of Form supporting Content. The beads of rain talk about a very specific time. This reminds us of the Romanticism that was popular in photography 100 years ago. All it needs is some subtle warm tone or sepia tone and it would be perfect.
An interesting example of obfuscation is seen in this shot by Keriann Blumenstock. The curtain fractures the landscape behind. This reminds me of some of the early cubist work, some of which was inspired by the ‘camera vision’ that was new at that time.
The final commentary is on some of the self-portraits. The first by Morgana Sugzdinis is seen from above. This is a powerful tool for altering expected appearances. And someone in the comments questioned why she seems to be fully clothed in the water. Something for us to ponder...
And the final portrait is this face by Lauren Myers. It has all the power of a Nat Geo cover, with a stare that is intriguing and beguiling. See if you can get your self-portraits up to this level of mystery and passion. Ah yes, passion, the next step when we add color to the mix.
Thank for all your work on this topic. You should all go back an add some toning. You will have to hand in the best of these for your Final Reviews.
[hint: the level of your grade is related to the number of prints that make it to the Teaching Points blog.]
notes:
• Loose the shots of singular objects, or anything centered. Your photos should have multiple points of interest to keep your viewer’s eye moving through the picture space.
Multiplicity
Some people talk about honing their photos down to one specific point of interest. I would suggest that this leaves your viewer with nowhere to go. I recommend setting up shots so there are several points of interest so you can guide you viewer’s eye through the picture space, and consequently, shift their mind from one subject to another, setting up relationships; between lines and curves, darks and lights, or between people and the emotions they evoke, or between specific ideas or ways of evaluating things. [physical, emotional, conceptual]
• Loose the animal pix. Some of them are pretty cool pix, but in the end they are still only cool pictures of animals, and that identifiability ruins it.
Generic vs. Specific
Almost everyone has a dog or cat, but this is one subject you will never see in an art gallery. It is too personal and too cute. These are the kinds of photos people share with their friends on-line but they are too generic and that is why these become snapshots. This is not a photography class or a class in how to make better shots to share on-line. It is an Art class and we are interested in photos that one would see in a good gallery. [p.s. I I have a house full of cats and I take pictures of them all the time. But I would never display one as artwork, and I am not particularly interested in seeing shots of a cat belonging to someone I do not know.]
• There should be a payoff of some meaningful content that you want to share, something that might also be of interest to someone else. This could even be getting your viewer to contemplate something they have never seen before, or something they see all the time but have never bothered to actually stop to look at.
Personal vs. Public
Some of you speak of memories associated with the photos. Some of these memories are too specific and too personal. When they are so personal that no one else can access that information, then the photos become snapshots, and there is no communication. What has to happen is a blend of personal memory and public accessibility in an attempt to share life experience.
• You have to follow the same rules for self-portraits as you do for any other art photo; you should not be a singular object in a nondescript space, centered in the frame, easily identifiable. That defines a head shot and they are not interesting, just informative. Pictures of your feet are NOT self-portraits.
Photo Clichés (additional)
Avoid vintage cars or old trucks decaying in the woods. Refrain from shooting tabletop setups with toys or sic-fi figures.
• Don’t forget all of these tips when we move to the next topic. Everything builds on top of the previous.
Internal vs. External
Get out of your apartments and go photo hunting. First of all, indoor lighting is terrible and flat. Second of all you have to make a greater effort than that.
If you are driving in a car and see something you want to shoot, stop and get out of the car! Take the time to fully investigate your subject.
“Making art is not the ability to draw (or operate a camera) – it is about being able to see what other’s cannot.”
A Path to Success
I want to applaud everyone who, in addition to what they did well, also noted what they felt they failed at, and then offered solutions on how to fix this. This is the most helpful commentary and true self-evaluation.
Thank you for all of the good work - - -
