Any suggestions/ideas/comments would be freaking sweeeeeet!
The [ ] Project
A Project of Deception
The Paradox Project
Deception Point
Force 5 (i dunno where that one came from)
Full Fathom Five
Sense
Shit i really dislike naming projects. There is so much pressure to have a name that its relevant and at the same time kind of intelligent sounding. I would rather call it something completely nonsensical but yea...
Monday, November 9, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
So i need a title....
Trying to think is dam hard right now. The exhibition is still without a title and i neeeed one...
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Some notes and stuff
Reading stuff/notes/stuffstuff:
-"My work is over when i have managed to get beyond the mirror" - Jorge Molder in Face: The new Photographic portrait. Ed:William A. Ewing
-"To say that 'the camera cannot lie' is merely to underline the multiple deceits that are now practiced in its name." Marshall McLuhan 1964. page 86 of the above.
-"Photography pretends to show reality. With your technique you have to go as near as to reality as possible in order to imitate reality. And when you come so close then you recognise that, at the same time, it is not." Thomas Ruff 1993. Page 104
-"If you stand in front of a customs officer, you try and make a face like the one in your passport. So why should my portraits be communicative at a time when you could be prosecuted for your sympathies?" Thomas Ruff 1993. page 119. I found this one really interesting especially as it came from 1993! I feel that it is even more true now...
-Jason Salavon -"The class of 1967" 1998. All the male and females fomr this year overlayed on top of one another kind of in the style of Bernd and Hilla Becher..
-Axel Antas -"White Portrait" 2002
White out, a void where the face should be...
-"I am visable, I am Image." Jean Baudrillard, 1993.
-Eva Lauterlein series called "chimeres" - Spooky and haunting images of people who look totally disengaged, robotic almost...
-Douglas Gordon "Monster" 1997
-"The visable world is no longer a reality and the unseen world is no longer a dream." W. B. Yeats
-Helen Sear from the series "twice...once" 1998-2000
Epic series in whice two portrait images were superimposed creating bizzare and starngly penetrating portraits that look like victims of some sort of strange surveillance experiment. "What is secret and hidden is also ghastly". Look up Freud's notion of the "Unheimlich"
-"My work is over when i have managed to get beyond the mirror" - Jorge Molder in Face: The new Photographic portrait. Ed:William A. Ewing
-"To say that 'the camera cannot lie' is merely to underline the multiple deceits that are now practiced in its name." Marshall McLuhan 1964. page 86 of the above.
-"Photography pretends to show reality. With your technique you have to go as near as to reality as possible in order to imitate reality. And when you come so close then you recognise that, at the same time, it is not." Thomas Ruff 1993. Page 104
-"If you stand in front of a customs officer, you try and make a face like the one in your passport. So why should my portraits be communicative at a time when you could be prosecuted for your sympathies?" Thomas Ruff 1993. page 119. I found this one really interesting especially as it came from 1993! I feel that it is even more true now...
-Jason Salavon -"The class of 1967" 1998. All the male and females fomr this year overlayed on top of one another kind of in the style of Bernd and Hilla Becher..
-Axel Antas -"White Portrait" 2002
White out, a void where the face should be...
-"I am visable, I am Image." Jean Baudrillard, 1993.
-Eva Lauterlein series called "chimeres" - Spooky and haunting images of people who look totally disengaged, robotic almost...
-Douglas Gordon "Monster" 1997
-"The visable world is no longer a reality and the unseen world is no longer a dream." W. B. Yeats
-Helen Sear from the series "twice...once" 1998-2000
Epic series in whice two portrait images were superimposed creating bizzare and starngly penetrating portraits that look like victims of some sort of strange surveillance experiment. "What is secret and hidden is also ghastly". Look up Freud's notion of the "Unheimlich"
Artists Statement - SITE 2009
“They Say the Camera never lies. It lies everyday.”
-Caesar Romano
The photographic image has long been treated as a direct and literal representation of reality. [SLICE] explores the nature of truth within the photographic image. It questions and distorts our reliance and assumption on the truthful and unbending nature of the mechanically produced photograph.
In our everyday life we interact with the photographic image, we use it to tell us about the world, to report on events, times, space and locations inaccessible to us. We hungrily consume the photograph in order to learn, to discover, to seek out, the “truth” of a situation.
But how do we feel when this truth is distorted, warped, bent or even horrifically misused. How does this change the nature of other photographs that we view? Do we question what it is we are seeing in a photograph anymore? Are we happy with the notion that what we see may not be what actually took place? With so much visual stimulus persistently bombarding us in contemporary society it seemed critical for [SLICE] to explore the constantly shifting nature of truth within the image.
As Andre Bazin notes in The Ontology of the Photographic Image(i) , the photograph provides us with a “…hallucination at the same time as it delivers fact.”(ii) The photographic image offers the viewer a slice, a frozen moment of the real, delivered to us as a tangible object, something that can be held in our hand, pinned to a wall or stuck in a book. However, the event depicted by the image is something that does not exist in that same time or space as the photographic print itself.
In [SLICE] the figure within the images is caught in the middle of a sudden movement, frozen forever in that split second of time that it takes for the camera’s shutter to fire. This figure acts as a metaphor for the isolation and removal from time and space that is inherent in every photograph, this hallucination that Bazin speaks of and what Barthes calls “madness”(iii). Through the use of this figure and the ambiguity of its presence in the images [SLICE] makes the viewer question exactly what it is that they are seeing and their assumptions of the photographic image. It creates a paradox, questioning and commenting on the power of truth at the same time.
[SLICE] does not attempt to make a judgment or final decision on the outcome of the nature of truth within the photograph, for that would be impossible and recklessly self-limiting. Instead, it is intended to make the viewer explore, discover and question their ideas about reality within the frame and the long held perceptions of the photograph as an indexical signifier of truth.
(i) Bazin, Andre. “The Ontology of the Photographic Image.” (1967) in Trachtenberg, Classic Essays on Photography, 242.
(ii) Kriebel, Sabine T. “Theories of photography – A Short History” in Photography Theory Edited by James Elkins 17-19. New York: Routledge, 2007.
(iii) IBID
-Caesar Romano
The photographic image has long been treated as a direct and literal representation of reality. [SLICE] explores the nature of truth within the photographic image. It questions and distorts our reliance and assumption on the truthful and unbending nature of the mechanically produced photograph.
In our everyday life we interact with the photographic image, we use it to tell us about the world, to report on events, times, space and locations inaccessible to us. We hungrily consume the photograph in order to learn, to discover, to seek out, the “truth” of a situation.
But how do we feel when this truth is distorted, warped, bent or even horrifically misused. How does this change the nature of other photographs that we view? Do we question what it is we are seeing in a photograph anymore? Are we happy with the notion that what we see may not be what actually took place? With so much visual stimulus persistently bombarding us in contemporary society it seemed critical for [SLICE] to explore the constantly shifting nature of truth within the image.
As Andre Bazin notes in The Ontology of the Photographic Image(i) , the photograph provides us with a “…hallucination at the same time as it delivers fact.”(ii) The photographic image offers the viewer a slice, a frozen moment of the real, delivered to us as a tangible object, something that can be held in our hand, pinned to a wall or stuck in a book. However, the event depicted by the image is something that does not exist in that same time or space as the photographic print itself.
In [SLICE] the figure within the images is caught in the middle of a sudden movement, frozen forever in that split second of time that it takes for the camera’s shutter to fire. This figure acts as a metaphor for the isolation and removal from time and space that is inherent in every photograph, this hallucination that Bazin speaks of and what Barthes calls “madness”(iii). Through the use of this figure and the ambiguity of its presence in the images [SLICE] makes the viewer question exactly what it is that they are seeing and their assumptions of the photographic image. It creates a paradox, questioning and commenting on the power of truth at the same time.
[SLICE] does not attempt to make a judgment or final decision on the outcome of the nature of truth within the photograph, for that would be impossible and recklessly self-limiting. Instead, it is intended to make the viewer explore, discover and question their ideas about reality within the frame and the long held perceptions of the photograph as an indexical signifier of truth.
(i) Bazin, Andre. “The Ontology of the Photographic Image.” (1967) in Trachtenberg, Classic Essays on Photography, 242.
(ii) Kriebel, Sabine T. “Theories of photography – A Short History” in Photography Theory Edited by James Elkins 17-19. New York: Routledge, 2007.
(iii) IBID
All planned out yo...
Self explanatory i think...
ok maybe not. this is gallery space here at KCAI and iv just sorted out the prints that are going where in the space.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Money money money
Ok so i have just realised how woefully under-thought-about i have been in terms of dimensions and frames and all that jazz. I just picked this proportional size for the images and thought "oh yea that'll be sweet"...fail...epic fail.
So i have a frame that is 22x28 inches, its cheap (only cost $22USD) but there are several problems. One, using this frame means i am going to have to crop my images down to fit this size, it is smaller proportions than as it is in camera. I like the format of the standard in camera frame, the images were shot and frame to this so it makes sense to keep the standard (i want to say 35mm) dimensions.
The other option would be to crop the images down to the panoramic, 16:9 kind of style of image (reminiscent or Aaron Hobson etc) I think this is the only way i would like to crop them...but then this means making custom frames OR getting them professionally framed...hence the money money money.
Pano style
Vs.
Totally uncropped - as shot.
Vs.
Cropped to fit 22x28 inch frame
So i have a frame that is 22x28 inches, its cheap (only cost $22USD) but there are several problems. One, using this frame means i am going to have to crop my images down to fit this size, it is smaller proportions than as it is in camera. I like the format of the standard in camera frame, the images were shot and frame to this so it makes sense to keep the standard (i want to say 35mm) dimensions.
The other option would be to crop the images down to the panoramic, 16:9 kind of style of image (reminiscent or Aaron Hobson etc) I think this is the only way i would like to crop them...but then this means making custom frames OR getting them professionally framed...hence the money money money.
Pano style
Vs.
Totally uncropped - as shot.
Vs.
Cropped to fit 22x28 inch frame
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)