Theoretical Positions Response

I liked the idea of doing this through bullet points rather than a paragraph. Consider it artistic liberty.

The following are theoretical positions within photography:

• Realism and conventionalism
• "Does photography get closer to the truth than do painting and other forms of representation?" Two answers: realism and conventionalism.
• Realism: Include Dominique François Arago, Daguerre, Edgar Allan Poe, etc. Photography is the best medium through which to portray reality. Photography gave credibility to writings (e.g. Life magazine). What is portrayed in a photo was really there at one point in time - it cannot be fantasy because it actually existed. Uniquely transparent.
• "Few people realize that the meaning of a photograph can be changed completely by the accompanying caption, by its juxtaposition with other photographs, or by the manner in which people and events are photographed." - Gisèle Freund
• Conventionalism: Include Joel Snyder, Ernst Gombrich, Nelson Goodman, etc. Photography is no more better than any other medium because of "our ignorance of the historical developments in the invention and refinement of photography" (Joel Snyder). The methods seem natural to us now, but each way of taking a picture has been invented. Viewers are unaware of the representational system within their own culture. In addition, nowadays pictures are constantly being edited and tweaked, then completely transformed with programs like Photoshop.
• When I first read the argument of realism, I was in full support. After all, a photograph is a photograph. It really WAS there. But then I read the conventionalism point of view, and it reminded me of all the things we do to alter photos. Even if they are small, insignificant tweaks - the fact is, they are still tweaks. More so than the invention of photography or refinement of it, I think it is the manipulation that I've seen and done myself that convinces me that photography is not as "real" as we may think.
• Modernism and postmodernism
• "Early modernity is characterized intellectually by a belief that science could save the world and that, through reason, a foundation of universal truths could be established." Includes: democracy, capitalism, industrialization, science, urbanization
• Postmodernity rejects modernism. Seeks a just and egalitarian society. Emancipation from poverty, despotism, and ignorance. It is much less positive than modernism. Deconstruction guards against modernism.
• Michael Foucault: "knowledge is power that is too often used by a powerful few to impose their ideas of what they consider to be right and true on the majority"
• Modernism: 'work'. Individual at the center of the universe. Postmodernism: 'text'. Self is merely an effort of language, social relations, and the unconscious.
• Not really sure which one I prefer, except I really do prefer to be more optimistic, thankyouverymuch.

• More specifically in photography
• Modern: fashion photography < art photography. Desire to keep photography pure. Symbolist over narrative, realism over instrumentalism.
• Postmodern: exemplifies the political, cultural, and psychological experience of a society. content over form. Possibilities for mass-produced image with the knowledge of mechanical reproduction. Readily adaptable.
• Marxist theory
• critical social documentary, ordinary cultural artifact. words are needed to go beyond what the photograph itself offers.
• "Photography deals with surface appearances, and surfaces obscure rather than reveal the actual complex social relations that underlie appearances."
• So, Marxist theory is all about exposing corruption, and Marxism believes that photography hides rather than exposes. Though why, I'm still a little unsure.
• Feminist theory
• "Instead of changing the system, get women access." 
• "Sex is different than gender." Sex is what you are biologically ascribed. Gender is a sociocultural (political according to the article) construct that is used to define what a man or woman should be. The article says this is because of a hierarchical model: it is always better to be one thing over another. This gender construct is commonly one of the obstacles for those with gender dysphoria.
• "Feminism is instrumental." The article says to be feminist is a political choice - to resist and change the status quo.
• Photography and politics can not be divorced from each other. I can't help but agree. What influences a person's thought is going to influence his or her art, because art is a representation, even abstractly, of ourselves. Barbara DeGenevieve points out that art shows what was important in that time. By leaving out women, we insinuate that women were not important in society. When they are portrayed, it is from what men desire women to be, and what place in society, culture, and ethics men have ascribed to them.

Why would you give us such a long reading right before break? For shame....

"Who Cares About Books?" - Reading Response

Reading Response
"Who Cares About Books?" - Darius Himes

Himes's article is both interesting and easily digestible. One of my favorite parts was when he talked about whether or not books would disappear (the answer is no), and how he gave an example of a child talking about his or her favorite bedtime book: no one ever mentions their favorite PDF. The wonderful thing about books is that they are more accessible than exhibitions - they are portable, and be viewed in whatever order and multiple times, and are easily shared. Photography as a medium lends itself to book format: it is 2D, easily printable and resizable. Some photographs are taken with the intention of being displayed in a book, not an exhibition - which I find completely fascinating. I would think that many people would love to see their artwork in a gallery. But then, I guess you can reach more people through a book, and while the gallery may end, the book will always exist. Himes reminds us that books should enhance and complement the photos that are contained in it, so that it isn't just a book with photos in it, but that the book itself becomes a work of art. I think that this is something that should be kept in mind as we use Blurb for our books, because we have the opportunity to truly make our beautiful within the pages of a book. This article was really interesting, and I appreciated how relevant it was to our current work.

"Remembering and Forgetting Conceptual Art" - Reading Response

"Remembering and Forgetting Conceptual Art" by Alex Klein

Alex Klein explores what place photography holds in the world of conceptual art. Traditionally, a photograph has been a means of documentation, and is almost always used in a way that it is an image that stands in for an idea. Klein draws from Jeff Wall's description of conceptual photography as "images [that] are consciously employed and constructed as the antithesis of the highly skilled modernist photograph." That is to say, when conceptual art first started becoming popular, it was seen as lacking of style, dry, and boring. However, over time the artists who once had their work described in such a way have become very famous and revered in the art world. Ultimately, we must look at what a photo is "about" versus what it may be "of", and we often have to look outside the photograph itself to find its true meaning as the artist intended.

A Picture You Already Know: Discussion Questions

1. Do photos have more meaning in a group? (When photos are shown, are they usually part of a collection or one photo? Does the repetition take away from the photos?)
2. Are there any purely objective art forms? (How the viewer brings their own perspective to the image)
3. Does this new knowledge of repetition put photography as a medium in question?
4. Will there ever be a new photograph?
5. If there was a new photograph would we recognize it as new, or would it not be considered art because it is not in the realm of what we already know and accept as photography?
6. Is there a way to make the technology of photography your own, or is photography doomed to be the easiest medium to master and the hardest to have personal vision?
7. Do you agree that repetition is a defining aspect of photography? Why?
8. Is there an image that can stand on its own, or do you crave to know more about the photographs that were taken with the one shown/displayed?
9. Do you find yourself always comparing your art to other artists, or do you compete against yourself and your own work?
10. Can you stand on your own morals or must other artists define whether your art is good or not? Is that necessary?

Reading Response: "Too Drunk to Fuck"

In this article, Mark Wyse dissects the 'feelings of anxiety' that accompany photography - anxiety regarding the confrontation of the desire of photography. What do we desire to do with our photography, what makes you want to take that photograph? He examines repression in the art of photography, using two main examples: Nan Goldin and Christopher Williams. Goldin's photography is all about the connection she has with her subjects, her desire for them and her fascination. On the other end of the spectrum, the desire that Williams holds is much more removed and hidden. He makes his photography more about the camera, the photograph itself, the process, as opposed to the subject being photographed. Though clarifying that he is not saying that Goldin's style is better than Williams' or vice versa, Wyse is clearly more intrigued by the lack of transparency of Williams' photographic style. Wyse ends with the following:

Photography has shifted from being a discourse on trying to understand the world to a discourse on trying to understand ourselves. This has always been the case, only now it is more transparent--or less so. This is how the neurotic writes.

Reading Response for Creative Suite 5/6 Info

Facts I've learned!

• Spot healing doesn't require an actual reference point. It's like magic!
• TIFF and PSD files both preserve layers, but PSD files are more efficient.
• If I want to print an image, it is better to use CMYK.
• You can rotate your cropping border; and you can crop using the marquee tool (Image>Crop)
• When resizing an image, uncheck the "Resample Image" box; Bicubic smoother for enlarging, Bicubic sharper for shrinking.

Bedford Reading Response

Bedford argues that authorial intent is still very important and that in photography it is sometimes very hard to identify. Artists such as Demand that put a long and arduous process into their work, with photography only as a concluding document that signifies the work, get more recognition than those who do many 'invisible' adjustments. No framework for understanding photography currently exists, so many art critics do not understand exactly how to critique a photo. They must look at it superficially, which does not necessarily show the edits and thoughts and process that the artist put into it, because photography is inherently lacking in what often is revealing about the artwork - the handiwork. Without the ability to understand the authorial intent behind the artwork, photography will continue to be viewed harshly and without true understanding by art critics. Upon development of this framework, it can receive the recognition it deserves and take its place among the other mediums of contemporary art.


Dear Mizter Bedford,

I wuld liek to offer you a nice toasted bagel wif creem cheez

Luv Batman

Response: Is Photography Over?

"Is Photography Over?" Published by SFMOMA

Though I wish some of the artists responding had been less technical in their opinions (looking at you, Walead Beshty), I think different examples given were interesting. The Copperheads by Moyra Davey, explained in George Baker's response, was particularly interesting given that it gave me some enlightenment into the meaning of a photographic body of work in a way that I could understand and appreciate. Generally it seemed the artists agreed that photography isn't dead in the sense that no one will do anymore photography, but that photography is destined to change and return and be revitalized, and that process is something to embrace and rejoice. One of my favorite responses was by Philip-Lorca diCorcia, who provided some profound insight into what photography is today. One quote by diCorcia that I particularly enjoyed:

After years of questioning the nature of photographic truth we have arrived at a place where truth is measured by the degree of the lie and the only thing positive is a double negative.

This quote is representative of what many of the respondents said: That much of photography today is an attempt to see what cannot be seen, to reveal more than reality as a photo is meant to reveal. I enjoyed the thought, because it gave me some ideas about where I might want to go with my photography this semester - do I want to stick to the real, the classic purpose of photography? Or do I want to play on the idea of what's not there?


Also, to Brooks, I apologize this is more than 7 sentences.