Showing posts with label On Art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label On Art. Show all posts

11/30/2015

FOLLOW ME ALSO ON MY NEW BLOG...



I have started a new blog. Solely about photography. A collections of my thoughts, opinions and ideas about photography. After about 35 years in the business there should be quite a lot of them. Some even based on facts... 

You can find the new one here: The Constant Photographer

12/12/2014


THE MOST EXPENSIVE PHOTO


If I knew what art is, I would keep it to myself.

[Pablo Picasso]


Those who are interessted in art photography may have seen it already:

Peter Lik Print Sells for $6.5 Million, Shattering Record for Most Expensive Photo

Australian landscape photographer Peter Lik has taken the crown for most expensive photo ever sold. “Phantom,” the picture shown above, was sold to a private collector for a staggering $6.5 million. The record was previously held by Andreas Gursky’s “Rhein II”, which sold for $4.3 million back in 2011.[http://petapixel.com]

"Phantom"                  Photo: Peter Lik www.lik.com

I will not comment on the photograph now - any definition of "art" is anyway a subjective one. Perhaps only this: I personally prefer it definitely to Gursky's picture...

For me the really interesting about this story are the discussions, which can be found on various art criticism pages and Photography Blogs on the Internet ...



Let‘s start with the official announcing from Peter Lik‘s website:
“Phantom” Sells for an Astounding $6.5 Million 
Peter Lik has officially made art history by selling the most expensive photograph ever – setting a world record. An official press release was issued today, outlining details on the $6.5 million sale of masterwork, “Phantom.”
  One of Peter’s all-time, favorite places to shoot lies in the Southwestern region of the United States, where he is continually drawn to Arizona’s Antelope Canyon – a slot canyon carved out by natural flowing water over the course of millions of years. It is here, in a subterranean cavern, that Peter captured “Phantom” – a stunning, black & white depiction of a ghostlike figure.
  The private collector, who purchased the $6.5 million “Phantom” in November 2014, also acquired Lik’s masterworks “Illusion” for $2.4 million and “Eternal Moods” for $1.1 million. With this incredible $10 million sale, Lik now holds four of the top 20 spots for most expensive photographs ever sold. He already has a position in the ranking with a previous $1 million sale of famed image, “One.”
  For over 30 years, Peter has followed a calling to capture and share the most beautiful places on earth. A myriad of awards and accolades mark the career of a dedicated and talented artist – a man who came from humble beginnings in his native Australia. This historic moment only further proves that Peter Lik is undoubtedly a true leader in the world of fine art.
"This historic moment only further proves that Peter Lik is undoubtedly a true leader in the world of fine art."  Well, that's a powerful statement, isn‘t it? But many others don‘t see it this way: 
The Most Expensive Photo in the World, or the Best Marketing Stunt?
As with his 2010 piece, One, the purported sale was to a private collector, and therefore there was no way to verify the claim. Rumors have swirled for years that Lik’s investors “buy” his works at absurd prices as a marketing stunt to generate interest in his work. Lik has multiple galleries in the US and in his home country of Australia, and aggressive sales tactics are a hallmark of the galleries’ style. [petapixel.com]
Let's set aside the discussion what's art and what's not. Let's see how the price of a work of art is "made":
Sara Friedlander, Vice President, Head of Evening Sales at Christie’s explained that the price of a photo in the art world is based on an amalgamation of uniqueness, provenance and scale. [petapixel.com]
Side note: Really? Size matters? And what about technique? (you know, there is a x-rated joke about size and technique ;-))

A somewhat different, less commercial access has Jörg Heiser, editor of the art magazine „Freeze“:
1. Reflects the artwork its time?2. Is the artist  tusing he material skilfully, intelligent and/or in a imaginative way?3. If the resulting artwork original, funny or witty?4. Is the artwork touching or surprising me, do I learn something new? 
As I said earlier, I do not want to evaluate Lik's picture. This is done by others. Like Jonathan Jones, the art critic of the British newspaper The Guardian. And there it will be really funny:
Peter Lik’s hollow, cliched and tasteless black and white shot of an Arizona canyon isn’t art – and proves that photography never will be. [theguardian.com]
The same critic has written about a year ago the following:

Photography is the serious art of our time. It also happens to be the most accessible and democratic way of making art that has ever been invented. 
But the photography that meets the critieria of the art world is just a tiny sliver of the camera's artistic riches. From news images to the Hubble telescope, Photography is the art of real life – however manipulated. And real life creates true art. [theguardian.com]
So can we take such rankings like "The most expensive photograph ever" seriously? And can we take art critic seriously (aside from that that they can "make" an "Artist" or can prevent an artist's career)? IMHO: No.

Finally, the definition of an art critic I've found somewhere on the web (sorry, don‘t know where anymore):

An art critic is nothing more than a conscientious objector who goes down into the battlefield long after the war has been waged and pokes the wounded.

Exactly to the point.



 Update 14/12/2014

The story is - not unexpectedly - causing quite a stir (at least in the world of photographers;-)). 

First of all, the response from Sean O'Hagan, another art critic of The Guardian:

Especially Lik‘s  self-appointed titel of a "true leader in the world of fine art" is challenged more then once:
As 'fine art' Lik’s work has been ignored by major art galleries and dismissed by critics - when his photos have gone up for public auction, they have not sold well. Lik’s photographs have no secondary market or value.This makes the '$6.5m canyon: the most expensive photograph ever' claim all the more questionable - that's the story - it has nothing to do with art but everything to do with the truth and marketing.
One can find a lot of stories about Lik (eg here and here).  Taken aside the quality of his photographs he seems to be first and foremost a "true leader in self marketing"...



12/11/2014

SLOW DOWN

The real voyage of discovery consist not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes. 
(Marcel Proust)



Our today's society can‘t do anything with the little ones, with tranquility and spirituality. Everything is huge, flashy, pushy. Perfection and flawless behavior are expected in all areas.

Our aesthetic ideas are reflecting this world: smooth, flawless, characterless. White porcelain, concrete, metal, edges, corners, straight lines, disclaiming everything soft, natural and rounded. Instead of sensuality there is sterile beauty. The aesthetics of the industrialial, the machine-crafted, the useful is prevailing -  an aesthetic of chilliness.

This idea of perfection don't let us find our innere peace. Have we reached a level of perfection, then we need to strive for even greater perfection. But we will never achieve this impossible goal - and we are blaming ourselves.


It is incredibly difficult to break free of this quest for perfection. We require error-free photograph. But "error-free" does not exist. Where is the soul, the feeling? With all our measuring, thinking, pondering we kill our creative side. Photos are reduced to products. Photography is suddenly no longer a image of our soul. As we are focusing exclusively on the technical aspects it in fact gets meaningless and unimportant. The majority does not want any soul but photos that look as if they were made by machines. Custom-made commodity.



We need an aesthetic concept where the given is accepted, a concept that works with nature, a concept of artistic interpretation of what is given and of the humble. An emotional art in which the artistic intention has priority and includes the "error" as part of the aesthetic whole with. A photograph, which goes beyond the golden ratio and the perfect aperture, where not the non-sterile perfection but the transient, the incorrect counts. We need to have room again for the small, ugly, unheeded. For simplicity. For the broken, holey, rusty. Photography as a reduction, as an admiration for the small, hidden things of life.

We must (re) learn to appreciate the moment in all its facets. We need to (re) learn to look at the little things in life, realize that it does not make us happier chasing after money, to have the latest camera, a big car. We need to (re) learn to accept what happened and to enjoy it, so "imperfect" the moment may be. We need to (re) find a photograph that gives us the freedom to photograph what we want most, what is important for without being forced in the corset of photographic rules and conventions, without squinting out what "the market" requires or what is "mainstream" or "contemporary" at the moment.


We need a photograph that lives by humility. Not spectacular sunsets, grossly enlarged (but meaningless) images or artfully arranged beauties, but reduction to the essentials, the play of light and shadow, to structures, on the capture of changes and the ephemeral. A quiet, slow photography.

We must (re) learn to allow "errors". Iris reflections, burned, boozed shadows. If the image is corresponding with our sense at the end, if it reveales its soul, we should accept "failure" as a part of the picture, even use them deliberately. Nothing is perfect - especially in photography.



We must (re) learn to give more room to feelings in our photography. More important than all considerations are intuition, the meditative sinking and the experience of the moment. We need to make images that are not staged and "conjures up" by technology. We need to (re) learn not to take pictures with the head but from the gut. More important than the concrete is an image that appeals to the subconscious. The pursuit of greater technical perfection leads to nothing, is killing the imagination and freezes us.

9/20/2014

THE COLOURS OF DECAY


It was a long bureaucratic procedure, but at the end the Department for Arts & Culture of the Lower Austrian Government acquired six pictures from my "The Colours of Decay" series for its art collection. I did the pictures for this series between 2009 and 2011 at locations in Lower Austria and when i did the printing two weeks ago I realized that some of the object don't exist anymore. They are gone, destroyed, were dismantled or have fallen into complete disrepair. So this pictures are more a less a historical cronicle too... 


Railroad Scrapyard Strasshof, 2010

Spinning Mill Teesdorf, 2011

Trautmannsdorf Castle, 2011

Trautmannsdorf Castle, 2011

Cement plant Kaltenleutgeben, 2009

Cement plant Kaltenleutgeben, 2009





THE COLOURS OF DECAY
THE COLOURS OF...
Die Farben des Verf...
Von Chris A. Dematté
Photo book

8/18/2014

GETTING INDEXED



Visual ideas combined with technology combined with personal interpredation equals photography. [Arnold Newman]


   Once there was a time when this sentence has its validity. Once there was a time when quality was more important than quantity,  the quality of a picture was more important than the quality of self-marketing. As a photographer you had a solid (year-long) education, in some countries (e.g. in Austria) a master craftsman degree was required for having a photographic business. The measure of your success was the quality of your work. And not the number of "clicks" your photographs are achieving, not your ranking on search engines.

Then came the Internet. And digital photography. And the phrase "If you buy a violin you own a violin. If you buy a camera you're a photographer" became a (sad) reality . Worldwide newspaper publishers are firing veteran photographers and are replaceing them with iPhones. In art not the quality of a photo is decisive, not the statement, the aesthetics, but the sales price only . Photo orders are only rarely awarded according to criteria such as quality, reliability, visual ideas and their implementation. Much more important today the "search algorithms", "keyword density", "meta tags", "canonical link elements". etc. In science there exist the rule "Publish or Perish". For a photographer applies accordingly: "SEO or perish". And so you spend hours and hours with "contextual advertising" or "behavioral targeting". And it stays on one end to perhaps 20% of its time to get creative. 

Brave new world ...

7/23/2014

WHEN YOU HIT A WALL, JUST KICK IT IN





Two weeks ago we where attending the Opening week of Les Rencontres d'Arles again. Quite an expierence. Sometimes a strange one. Ok, everybody has his own taste, I know very well that my work is not at all part of the mainstream, part of what is called "contemporary" (whatever this may mean...). But if there are about 50 exhibitions (we visited not all of them) and you can hardly find two or three you like, well then there must be something wrong. For me this year Arles has moved so much in the direction of "Zeitgeist" that there not much left over of what i would call „decent“ photography...


Many "Experts" are complaining that the market for art photography has completly broken down, that galleries are struggeling to survive. Well, for me that is no wonder if you look at the shortlist of the awards presented in Arles, if you look who has won e.g. the Photobook Award, the "Best of Portfolio Review" etc. If i would be a collector I wouldn't buy one single piece. Yes, it may be that in the art market "the name" is counting a lot. But at the end even collectors which are following this trend, should not get crunch only but at least some basic quality. Imho.

It is time to kick this wall in, it is time to give art photography the value back that it deserves. With quality. Not with rubbish...

4/12/2014

THE SOUND OF SILENCE

Another lost soul...

As I have the same feelings but couldn't write it better I want to reshare a blog entry by photographer Cole Thompson (I hope he don't mind)
Btw, his blog is realy worth reading


Cole Thompson:
Words Are Very Unnecessary, They Can Only Do Harm

In the beginning ws the scene, and teh scene was good.

But not everyone could see the scen, and so man invented photography so that all could enjoy the beauty.

And then other men invented th art expert. The experts did not think it was enough to simply see the beauty by the scene, they needed to describe the scene and tell us what it meant.

And that was not good.
_ _ _

We like to say that a picture is worth 1000 words. So why do some feel the need to dscribe an image with a fw paltry words?

People ask me "what are you saying with your image?" and I rspond: "look at it, what is it saying to you?"

The words from Depeche Mode's "Enjoy the Silence" echo in my head:

          All I ever wanted
         All I ever needed
         Is here in my arms
       Words are very unnecessary
       They can only do harm

Enjoy the image, enjoy the silence.

*

Thanks, Cole. My sentiments exactly. 


1/06/2014

AGAIN... PHOTOGRAPHY: IS IT ART?

It is a never ending story: Can photography be art? Can a photographer be an artist? And: What is "art" anyway? As you may have noticed that is a question I concerns myself quite often.  Today I stumbled over an (older) Guardian article [you can find it here] about this question. Especially interesting I found some of the comments...

*...but I know that if I decided to become one I would fail in my bid because it is not about the quality of photographs but the quality of your contacts in the art world, and I simply could not be bothered to kiss all those arises.*
*Painting is an art....photography a trade*
*Photography most certainly can be art. My problem with so much contemporary fine-art photography is that so much of it seems like bloody snapshots. Without much aesthetic consideration for form and colour. And blowing the picture up to near-mural size does not add profundity.*
*I agree photography is easy to do. You just have to know when to push the button, that's all there's to it... ...Yup, that's all there is to it, just like all there is to painting is knowing where to put the paint. Simple really.*
*A lot of the comments above remind me of people criticising paintings by saying ' my 5 year old etc '...This naivity misses the point in exactly the same way with photography as it does with painting : it's the intentionality of the artist that counts > and the fact that anyone could copy a Monet isn't relevant.as it was Monet's vision to re-invent the medium that was his gift.*

It's not a Gursky. It's only 2100x1400pixel...

So i was looking for some definitions...
For photography to have its place in the world of Art, it must have within it that quality of having been achieved by the hand of a competent Artist, along with the hand of a technically competent photographer. Many technical photographers do magnificent work in the way of recording what the world has, but only Artist-photographers can do work that can hold its place in Art salons and Collections. [Robert Balcomb]
The best definition so far I have found in the highly recommendable book of Alain Briot, Marketing Fine Art Photography:
Art is a matter of personal opinion and the world would be a boring place if we all agree on what is beautiful and artistic.

Fine art photography is first about the artist, second about the subject, and third about technique.

The photographer must consider himself an artist in order to create art.

Because art is first about the artist, it is essential that the artist control the work. What the audience wants is to see a specific artist views the world, and this can only take place if the artist assumes full control of the creation of a work of art.

A fine art photograph is done with the goal of creating a work of art. Creating a fine art photograph means creating an image that goes beyond the literal aspect of the scene or the subject photographed. It means creating an image that shares a personal vision, a message, or a metaphorical aspect. It means creating a photograph, not only taking a photograph.

A fine art photograph is not just documentary.
What a fine art photograph shows must be different from what was seen by observers presented when it was taken. The purpose of a fina art photograph is to share the photographer’s personal vision of the scene or subject.And the person who took the photograph must be present in the image, metaphorically speaking.When looking at a fine art photograph we must know the photograph was created by an artist and not just a camera. Art is the expression of the artist’s personality, vision, and inspiration. A fine art photograph is a vehicle through which the artist shares his vision with his audience. To considered art a photograph cannot be purely documentary. It must primarily be expressive. This expression must reflect the artist’s personality, inspiration, vision, personal style, and, most importantly, emotional response to the subject. The photograph cannot just show what was in front of the camera; it must also show what the photographer felt.

The image represents an interpretation of the subject, has an emotional content and multiple layers of meaning.

Post-processing is a requirement in order to express the artist’s vision. 
The camera is a machine, not a thinking, feeling human being. In order to express an emotional response to the scene or the subject through our photographs, we must step in, so to speak, and modify what the camera „saw“ and recorded.
Technical mastery is placed at the service of artistic inspiration. Technique is not an end in itself, therefore the goal is not to develop technical mastery for its own sake. Using good techniques alone does not result in the creation of art.

The selling potential of an image should not be considered while the image is created. During each phase of the image creation the focus needs to be the expression of the artist’s vision and his emotional response to the scene and the subject.


12/07/2013

ON BEING AN ARTIST - SOME STATISTICS



I am looking to some photographer's blogs on a daily base. Today I found an interesting article at Mike Johnstone's "The Online Photographer" blog (a blog i highly recommend btw.) about some statistics on photography. Here are in extracts some points which made me think a lot about being a photo artist...

  • As of today, there are an estimated 7.129 billion people in the world.
  • 6.786 billion of them have digital cameras.
  • 804 million people are having a show. This number fluctuates. The average number of prints sold per show is .007.
  • Approximately 2.6 million of the planet's residents spend some appreciable amount of time looking at other peoples' photographs.
  • Slightly fewer than 1.3 million people have a book out.
  • Cumulatively, about $44,800,000 was spent for photographs in 2012, which sounds good at first, but roughly half of it went to 21 photographers in L.A., NYC, Toronto, London, Paris, Rome, Milan, Berlin, and Tokyo.

If I would have known about this stats... well, to late anyway. ;-)

11/24/2013

HAVE A LOOK

Some times ago i donated some of my works to the "Postcard Show", an fundraisng exhibition featuring small works by established and emerging Irish and international artists for the Sirius Arts Centre in Cork, Ireland.

Yesterday I got a nice email from Roseanne Lynch, a photographer from Ireland, who has bought one of my images at the "Porstcard Show". Roseanny is doing really amazing work by herself, so have a look at her website and blog...

www.roseannelynch.com 

www.roseannelynch.blogspot.com

Photo: Roseanne Lynch

And, Roseanne, I am sure that my print has gone to a good home... ;-) Thnxs very much.

9/18/2013

Vadim Gushchin Exhibition 
THE ART OF CREATING ART...


Being in Moscow I visited today (again) the "Lumiere Brothers Center for Photography" to have a look at an exhibition which description sounded quite promising...



Quite an interesting exhibition with about 80 photographs of trivial everyday objects. Technically well done, nice lighting...it reminded me on my first year at the photographic college when we had to do a lot of this things to learn about lighting technics...


But then I came across a quote of Vadim Gushchin...

"I am - an artist.  I mean, I consider myself as an artist more than a photographer, although, of course, and I am also a photographer, because what I do is photograph."

Here we are again... The big question "What is art?"...

And then I found this on the gallerie's website:
"Staying in the genre of still life, the photographer developed his unique architectural style - clear, concise and extremely expressive. Meticulously examine the possibility of visual, Guscin created a real "saga about the subject" - a philosophical register of the material world around us, "poetic catalog" of things, in fact the same - thinking about time and about the person.".
And this reminds of a story a colleague once told me: He was sending some of his pictures to a famous museum in Paris, but they where returned to him on the ground that they didn't fit into the museum's portfolio (another saying for "we don't like your work"...). After some times my colleague asked a friend who called himself "philosopher" to write some text fot the same pictures. He got this text (and admitted that he didn't understand half ot what his philosopher friend had written) and sent the pictures together with the text to the same museum - and this time they where exepted...
Maybe beeing sucessfull in art doesn't need some unique work but just good (self-)promotion?
Here are some more examples of Gushin's work:



Don't misinterpred me: I like his work. Technical clean. Nice done prints... But is it "art"?


I personally like Guy Boudin's sentence about photography and art much more:

"Whether or not I create art is not of importance. For me, photography is a mean of expressing my wonderment at objects or certain people, a way of celebrating the poetry of nature or the melancholy of passing time."



7/02/2013



Les Rencontres d'Arles 2013
WHAT IS "CONTEMPORARY" PHOTOGRAPHY?


Today at the portfolio review at the Arles Photo Festival I got some strange (at least for me strange) "feedback": It is not contemporary photography...

So after some time - and after some very positive feedback by other reviewers - I started to think: Actually what is "contemporary photography"

Well, there is an easy definition: The word itself comes from the Latin "con" (=with) and "temporarius " (=of the time, from "tempus", time) and has the same meaning as modern. But this couldn‘t have been the meaning of his remark. I mean, I am not the youngest one anymore, but I am still living, so i consider my pictures as „done in this time“...

After some hours of thinking and chewing over this question I  found in an internet forum an answer:

Contemporary photography is whatever the critics are telling us to pay attention to this week. They come up with something new every week because, if they didn't, they'd be out of a job.

From one of the exhibitions at Les Rencontres d'Arles 2013
Is this "contemporary photography"?

Maybe you can help me out and post your suggestions what is the meaning of contemporary photography...

6/12/2013

Alexandr Rodchenko:
REVOLUTION IN PHOTOGRAPHY




Alexandr Rodchenko was one of the most important innovators in photography, a adventurous artist who was active in the young Soviet Union and remained faithful to his work even when the disillusionment took over.In Vienna there is now a great show dedicated to him.

"Every new sight triggers a revolution," wrote Aleksandr Rodchenko in 1920. He was then 29 years old, the Russian revolution just three years young. Rodchenko had already made a name for himself​​as futurist painter, as an activist and especially as a graphic artist, his collages for posters, book covers and newspaper titles where celebrating the social upheaval of the early Soviet Union.

In photography he saw the best way to criticism the old world and bring the messages of a new and better one. With photography he was able to tranlate the impetuous demands of Russian Constructivism - technical language of form, geometric abstractions, radical rejection of romanticism or naturalism - but also his lyrical ambitions into black and white.



Soon he administered his own photographs to his collages, began an extensive series of portrait photoagraphs - his friend Vladimir Mayakovsky was tight from the start his model - and developed his own form of pictural language, which became a major contributor in the history of photography.



This chapter is adressed in the exhibition „Alexander Rodchenko - Revolution der Fotografie“ in der Westlicht Gallery in Vienna. With about 200 works, nearly all vintage silver gelatin prints and collages, which almost goes beyond the dimensions of the Gallery in  the Vienna Westbahnstraße, it is nevertheless just a part of what was shown some years ago in the Moscow House of Photography and then toured several major museums.


11 June - 25 August 2013

ALEXANDER RODCHENKO

REVOLUTION IN PHOTOGRAPHY

Westbahnstraße 40
1070 Vienna

6/05/2013


THE  GOOD AND THE BAD

In the last few weeks I have visited a few photo exhibitions and galleries. I‘ve been to the International Centre of Photography in New York, the Multimedia Art Museum and the Lumiere Brothers Center for Photography in Moscow, and the Museum for Fine Art in Boston, MA. I have seen a lot of really good photographic work. And i have learned a lot about "how to do and how not to do" a photo exhibition...

THE GOOD...
The exhibitions at the ICP where (almost) perfect. Almost - because there was so much information beside the pictures one can hardly assimilate all the informations...
There where two exhibitions: "We Went Back: Photographs from Europe 1933–1956 by Chim"*)  and "Roman Vishniac Rediscovered"**)
Both exhibitions featured a lot of additional informations on the photographers and the envirenment the created their work. There was amply room for the hanging and a perfect lighting.

At the ICP, New York
At the ICP, New York
At the ICP, New York
Not long after my visit to New York City i returned to Moscow. And there again I found at the Lumiere brothers Center for Photography a very good exhibition (actually there have been three, but the other two I have already seen at a earlier visit).

At the Lumiere Brothers Center for Photography, Moscow

Again very good pictures in a convenient environment. A lot of informations about the photographer and his work. If you are in Moscow in the next three weeks I highly recommend to visit the Lumiere Brothers Gallery - the exhibition is running until June 30.


...AND THE BAD.
A big disappointment was the exhibition at the Museum of Fine Art in Boston, MA, "East 100th Street" by Bruce Davidson. Bare walls, bad lighting, no informations about the photographer, the background... One should expect something much better then this from a highly prestigious museum like the MFA.

At the MFA, Boston, MA

A famous name and some photographs (even if they may be really good) don't make a good exhibitions. 

*) David Seymour (born Dawid Szymin, 1911-1956), or Chim (pronounced shim, an abbreviation of the surname "Szymin"), was a Polish photographer and photojournalistknown for his images from the Spanish Civil War, for co-founding Magnum Photos with Henri Cartier-Bresson, Robert Capa and George Rodger, and for his project "Children of War" with UNICEF that captured the plight of children in the aftermath of WWII  He became president of Magnum after Capa's death in 1954 and held this post until his own death in 1956 by Egyptian machine-gun fire in the aftermath of the Suez crisis. 
**) Roman Vishniac (1897-1990) was a Russian-American photographer, best known for capturing on film the culture of Jews in Central and Eastern Europe before the Shoa.