Is Photography Over?

So this lecture was really interesting to watch, I really enjoyed the fact that there were two different panels of people because it allowed this question to be answered a many of different ways.

The first question the mediator asked was if there is something in photography that is over and what is it? That made me think to myself and drift a little away from what I was hearing to come up with my own answer. I came to the conclusion that photography will never be over, but the traditional practice of photography is being replaced by the digital process so in a sense we are starting anew with the digital camera/photography. However, we cannot say that "analog" photography is over because while the mass majority of people are using digital DSLR camera's there are still those who use film (me included) and hold onto the chemical practices.

Corey Keller is the assistant curator of SFMOMA, and her argument I definitely agree with as well as Jennifer Blessing (why did I choose two woman?). In any case they made very clear points about the ontological identity of photography. Blessing made a point to say that the she belongs to one niche of photography-being contemporary (conceptual) photography and to lump all kinds of photography into one solid mass would be to miss calculate. By miss calculate I mean that you cannot describe or theorize one thing when it is made of many things, you must break it apart and start with each individual piece.

A lot of the discussion fell off the band wagon and trailed onto other topics, knew that was coming, but it was interesting to hear what all these different people from different walks of life educated in the art world came to understand. I can't remember who said this but they said, "photography is a forward thinking medium" and this really made me think. What does he mean? Is he talking about the literal forwardness of photography or the ever moving change in photography? I understood this to mean that photography has come to be something of a cataloguing machine, it represents our history and propels us forward. With out  images as pictures, images as history where would we stand now? To answer my own question, we would probably still be building things that fell apart and non complacent about racism, terrorism and all the other ism's.

On a totally different tangent I want to bring up one more thing that Corey Keller said. She stated that there was a decline in quality in the prints being made. The photograph looked awesome on screen but then when it was printed it wasn't desirable anymore, also saying that people now don't know what a good print looks like or even how to achieve what they see on screen. This is a true statement because after working in the digital lab for about 2 years I have seen some of the most horrendous prints and being such a fan of analog printing (having taken b&w AP photo for 4 years in high school) it really shows the lack of care that people have with digital printing. If someone were to make the same print in the darkroom it would have to be perfect before leaving because after spending so much time, why would you walk away with a mediocre print? If there is something in photography that is over then it is the relationship between the creator and the creation, we have lost touch with what it is we are actually doing. It has become a ubiquitous form of everyday life.

Photography's Expanded Field

Photography's Expanded Field by George Baker is putting to terms how the digital world has transformed the world of contemporary art. One of the main themes was that in todays world, photography has become "infinitely malleable" because our definition of image based work always goes back to being refered to as photography. It's like saying a poster with text on it is photography when obviously it is something completely different, it speaks differently then how we render the photograph. Baker uses the phrase, "photography itself has been outmoded technologically and displaced aesthetically" (122). His argument is that while some artist still revel in the old forms of photography and image making there is a new counterpart to the photograph being a video, a moving scene or some kind of motion embedded in the imagery. He uses the term "insufficient" for describing the photograph as a bridge to video/film/moving image. I don't think that Baker is saying that the photograph has lost it intrigue but that now we are seeing the trend of images that are directly linked to something in motion, or have been set up like a moving image although remaining static.

He mentions a few artist like Rineke Dijkstra and Cindy Sherman as two end of the spectrum. Rineke Dijkstra includes a video (sometimes) next to her image of the same person and allows the image and video to work as a team almost as though one is your reference point and the other is your in between. Baker made a really interesting point that seeing the final outcome of an image makes you wonder how the artist got to the point of saying, this is the image, and this is how I am going to portray my subject-and seeing this along side a video allows you to see the intermediate steps of choosing the right expression, pose and whatever else. I had never thought of a moving image as the precursor to the static image before and it seems...instinctual?

Ruth Drawing Picasso by Rineke Dijkstra

The other end of the spectrum he insinuates is Cindy Sherman and Philip-Locra diCorcia graze the lines of cinema while still only using the static image. Cindy Sherman's Film Stills are a great example of how you can achieve the look of cinema and motion in an image without actual motion. We are allowed to see a "clip" if you will of the action, Baker says a hiccup of indecision--not so sure I agree with that.  The next point that Baker is trying to make is that there is this duality of dedication in photography to both cinema and photography which he then asks if it is now an "expanded field of operation" meaning that we have more image based outlets to use and it has forever expanded what we think to be a photograph. 

Hustlers by Philip-Lorca diCorcia

Philip-Lorca diCorcia is an image based artist but as you can see, his work is very cinematic and is often compared to Gregory Crewdson for his lighting aesthetics. Baker says, "the image as suspended between neither narrative nor fully static" (127). Baker says that there is an inherent war between the construction of  a narrative while being disrupted by the mediums "stasis." He uses this word over and over again in order to bash it into our heads as an undisrupted image, a photographic term used to describe a non-moving object (in our case, the photograph). 

Rosalind Krauss author of, Sculpture in the Expanded Field is on-page debated with in the essay by George Baker using her essay as a primary source of information to pick apart and glue back together. They both have ideas that work together but I think Baker is simplifying what she has already said. 

"Thus to paraphrase Krauss one last time, "[Photography] is no longer the privileged middle term between two things that it isn't. [Photography] is rather only one term on the periphery of a field in which there are other, differently structure possibilities" (136). This quote seems to say that the practice of photography in the contemporary art world today is given many different arena's or outlets for play. Then Baker asks the question or rather states that our practices have deconstructed and potentially opened the medium to many different facets of life. The photograph is no longer just a photograph when it is put to audio, or made into an installation and this is exactly what the expanded field of photography means. The photograph is being outmoded by other forms of technology but will never cease to exist because without the static image there is no record of our history, no understanding of our cultures. While there are still newspapers, online new sites and magazines in print we will not see the demise of photography to the video. 

Words Without Pictures

In the first essay by Christopher Beford, "Qualifying Photography as Art, or, Is Photography All It Can Be" speaks about the specificity of language and critical theorizing of photography and the lack of awareness of the dialect used to critique photographs. He uses both Thomas Demand and Fried as his centering point, comparing their views on the critique of photography and what it means to interpret a photograph. The very large difference Bedford points out is that Demands' practice is based upon his control rather then the photographic practice or technical processes which allows the viewer to direct their attention to it as a whole.

  "The photograph is simply the incidental conclusion, the polished index of a more complex back-story to be researched and unpacked by the viewer/critic. In this sense, the photograph is not independently productive of meaning, but is rather the document that records and implies the extended process behind the image."


I think this is a very concise quote, it says a lot without saying much at all. Photography is just an index of a past moment and until it is "unpacked" it remains just an object for viewing rather then something of theoretical meaning.




On to the next one.

I had to. And I love Jay Z.

The next essay called "Online Photographic Thinking" by Jason Evans is about the online medium of photography and its many facets of expansion. One of the first things he mentions is that the digital versus analog debate is more or less just different sides of the coin. Though that is not the main idea of the essay I just wanted to mention and underlying theme I keep reading in EVERY essay. He talks about the volume and diversity of imagery there is to find via the internet (tumblr, flickr etc.) and this is the time to be a photographer because there are so many different ways to be creative now that we have this wonderful platform that starts with "www."

www.thedailynice.com
www.thenewscent.com
www.kevinbeckphotography.com
www.tinyvices.com
www.squareamerica.com

I have now spent 2 hours looking through these websites and I highly encourage everyone to.

This is my new favorite website (For all you book/zine lovers out there)

http://vimeo.com/37862257


www.haveanicebook.com