Friday, 18 November 2011
no pictures
Sorry I should probably add, that I will rarely put reference images up for the obvious copyright reasons. But I will usually put a link to the image.
So what is a personal view?
This is a completely open-ended question that has no definitive answer and entirely relies upon the interpretation of individuals.
An interesting area of photography where it is possible to pull various interpretations of a personal view is street photography. This is arguably to do with the nature of the images, that the everyday is something we are so used too. Especially when looking at a photographer such as Matt Stuart (http://www.mattstuart.com/) who captures fleeting moments of humor in the everyday that to the audience is so relate-able and offers up a strong level of immersion. This kind of view is a personal view on mass.
If we then took a different approach and looked at the work of Walker Evans subway portraits, ( http://www.masters-of-photography.com/E/evans/evans_subway3_full.html )
It is also possible to question the integrity of truth when discussing the personal view. This image for example does (in my opinion) covey photographic truth, this woman was on this train and this is what the scene looked like. Now I can say that knowing that the subject wasn't aware they were being photographed. If she was aware of the camera then we could argue that her looking away is in direct response to the presence of the camera, and because of the reaction does this warp the ideal of photographic truth?
The observers paradox is always a tricky aware in photographic terms because it means the subject is deliberately altering their appearance to alter the readers perception (usually to conform to social stereotypes and perceptions of class etc.)
The interpretation of the personal view I get from this body of work is that this is more the photographers gaze, and the photographers story if you will. Much the same as Richard Billingham series Rays a laugh, which is about personal as it gets. The series documents his life at home living with his farther. (bit more detail found here: http://www.americansuburbx.com/2010/07/richard-billingham-rays-laugh.html )
It is impossible to to discuss view, truth and street photography without discussing Jeff Wall and his mimic images. Most famously his mimic, Vancouver, 1982 which shows a scene of racial abuse. Whats interesting about these images is that they are completely staged and are fiction. The images are mimicking scenes seen by Jeff Wall and that he has re set up in his distinctive cinematic style. Despite being fake I find it really hard to deny the truth in the images, yes they are fiction but they are a representation of truth.
S.Howarth & S McLaren (2010) Street Photography Now, Some truths cannot be told except as fiction. Thames and hudson. pp180
If we look at Robert Frank image of the tram taken from the Americas series ( http://www.steidlville.com/books/695-The-Americans.html ) This image is incredibly powerful and really throws the issue of black, white segregation of the time at you. If this was staged would the meaning and power be diminished in some way? (I know it wasn't staged just making a point)
So there are just a few interpretations of what could be a personal view: there was the mass view (widely available) , the photographers gaze and representing a personal view through fiction.
This is a completely open-ended question that has no definitive answer and entirely relies upon the interpretation of individuals.
An interesting area of photography where it is possible to pull various interpretations of a personal view is street photography. This is arguably to do with the nature of the images, that the everyday is something we are so used too. Especially when looking at a photographer such as Matt Stuart (http://www.mattstuart.com/) who captures fleeting moments of humor in the everyday that to the audience is so relate-able and offers up a strong level of immersion. This kind of view is a personal view on mass.
If we then took a different approach and looked at the work of Walker Evans subway portraits, ( http://www.masters-of-photography.com/E/evans/evans_subway3_full.html )
Which again shows us the everyday, however there is a greater sense of distance in evans' images. These images were shot using a concealed camera, so the subject is unaware they are being photographed.It is also possible to question the integrity of truth when discussing the personal view. This image for example does (in my opinion) covey photographic truth, this woman was on this train and this is what the scene looked like. Now I can say that knowing that the subject wasn't aware they were being photographed. If she was aware of the camera then we could argue that her looking away is in direct response to the presence of the camera, and because of the reaction does this warp the ideal of photographic truth?
The observers paradox is always a tricky aware in photographic terms because it means the subject is deliberately altering their appearance to alter the readers perception (usually to conform to social stereotypes and perceptions of class etc.)
The interpretation of the personal view I get from this body of work is that this is more the photographers gaze, and the photographers story if you will. Much the same as Richard Billingham series Rays a laugh, which is about personal as it gets. The series documents his life at home living with his farther. (bit more detail found here: http://www.americansuburbx.com/2010/07/richard-billingham-rays-laugh.html )
It is impossible to to discuss view, truth and street photography without discussing Jeff Wall and his mimic images. Most famously his mimic, Vancouver, 1982 which shows a scene of racial abuse. Whats interesting about these images is that they are completely staged and are fiction. The images are mimicking scenes seen by Jeff Wall and that he has re set up in his distinctive cinematic style. Despite being fake I find it really hard to deny the truth in the images, yes they are fiction but they are a representation of truth.
"Mimic makes a persuasive case for the argument that some truths are best told as fiction. Rather than resign himself to the problem of 'near-misses' that plague all street photographers, wall imprinted the scene on his memory and later re-created it for his camera. He has reflected deeply on how his work fits into and extends a documentary tradition: 'I think in 1945 or 1955, it was clear that if you wanted to come into relation with reportage, you had to go out in the field and function like a photojournalist or documentary photographer in some way... I think that's what people in the 70's and 80's really worked on: not to deny the validity of documentary photography, but to investigate potentials that were blocked before, blocked by a kind of orthodoxy about what photography really was.' "
S.Howarth & S McLaren (2010) Street Photography Now, Some truths cannot be told except as fiction. Thames and hudson. pp180
If we look at Robert Frank image of the tram taken from the Americas series ( http://www.steidlville.com/books/695-The-Americans.html ) This image is incredibly powerful and really throws the issue of black, white segregation of the time at you. If this was staged would the meaning and power be diminished in some way? (I know it wasn't staged just making a point)
So there are just a few interpretations of what could be a personal view: there was the mass view (widely available) , the photographers gaze and representing a personal view through fiction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)