PDA

View Full Version : Discuss Misha Gordin's Photographs



Donald Miller
08-19-2006, 09:33 PM
I have long had an appreciation of Misha Gordin as a photographic artist. To me his images are rife with symbolism. What are your thoughts of these images?

http://bsimple.com/Liquid%20Shadow.htm

http://bsimple.com/doubt8.htm

df cardwell
08-19-2006, 09:46 PM
Donald, my friend, I'm not clever enough.

mark
08-19-2006, 09:49 PM
I like his work, but I think he leaves very little to the imagination of the viewer, but you are right, rife with symbolism.

copake_ham
08-19-2006, 10:01 PM
These are the kind of "images" that make me think that how can we now ever know what is really a "photograph"?

Before PS these images would have been very intriguing - now - maybe they are just PS tricks?

Sorry - too "slick" and "gimmickry" for my taste....

He does seem to like "tiny moons" though - is that a "symbol"?

blansky
08-19-2006, 10:07 PM
I think he takes photography to a different level.

He uses the medium as an illustrator would. He would be what I'd call an artist/photographer, where more mainstream work is perhaps
photographer/artists.

I like his work but it is too contrived/slickly produced/concept oriented for my taste. But I do think it is important work.


Michael

Curt
08-19-2006, 10:13 PM
He is more an Art Director than a Photographer. There is no doubt that they are well produced. I'm not into this concept but it would be perfect for someone who is.

bill schwab
08-19-2006, 10:18 PM
Misha is a great friend and has an incredible mind. Although he moved from Detroit several years ago, it is wonderful when he comes "home" to visit. He came late to the digital side and although digi would be an obvious choice for making his images easier, he rejects Photoshop as a means to create his work. All is still done via enlargements, cutting, pasting and reconstruction. The man in no way considers himself a photographer and is somewhat insulted when considered one.

B.

Gay Larson
08-19-2006, 10:40 PM
I find his work interesting in weird sort of way but I agree I find them too contrived.

Charles Webb
08-19-2006, 11:42 PM
His work shows great technical proficiency, but it is of no interest to me. Not being an artist myself, I would be hard to convince that there is no "PS" involved. Somehow everything is too perfect. I would call it different, but feel he is right to be upset when called a "photographer" Perhaps "Graphic Artist" may better describe his works in my eye.


Charlie...............................

Donald Miller
08-19-2006, 11:51 PM
My knowledge of Misha's work methods parallels that of Bill Shwab. Misha uses a pin registered easel in his work. I personally don't find any fault with his proficiency simply because it is more precise than my efforts.

MattKing
08-20-2006, 12:24 AM
When I first saw this I was really confused. I thought it was going to be a thread about photographs by:

Mischa Barton (http://www.theocimages.com/albums/Mischa/season3/001.jpg)

I guess I've watched too much "guilty pleasure" TV. :rolleyes:

bjorke
08-20-2006, 03:50 AM
I'm sure he has a nice car and a fabulous house. His work is so very much its own brand, it's certainly not something one could hire him to do or find a lot of commercial application for. Instead it seems designed to be sold in galleries -- not the sort that would sell Penn or Gursky, but the sorts one finds at malls or along tourist strips like Kalakaua Blvd. I don't find that his work is so much rife with symbolism as that it's rife with faux symbolism, that his imagery looks like it should mean something but in fact it doesn't. But it sells for $2300 a pop and makes for, you know, a nice conversation piece and fills more space than a similarly-priced Lladro figurine.

Plus, little green footballs likes him, (http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=25&q=http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/%3Fentry%3D1007&e=9797&sig=__SZu15LjY5Y5P7BAArUAsLLpjrNw=) and you know how they are about manipulated photos and all.

Sparky
08-20-2006, 04:15 AM
Scandalous~! Bjorke - you're so BAD. I like it. Though I'd say on the whole - that's a pretty accurate assessment, for me at least. It's as though the work was made from a fairly subtle and well-thought out list of specifications.

Where's the beef?



I'm sure he has a nice car and a fabulous house. His work is so very much its own brand, it's certainly not something one could hire him to do or find a lot of commercial application for. Instead it seems designed to be sold in galleries -- not the sort that would sell Penn or Gursky, but the sorts one finds at malls or along tourist strips like Kalakaua Blvd. I don't find that his work is so much rife with symbolism as that it's rife with faux symbolism, that his imagery looks like it should mean something but in fact it doesn't. But it sells for $2300 a pop and makes for, you know, a nice conversation piece and fills more space than a similarly-priced Lladro figurine.

Plus, little green footballs likes him, (http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=25&q=http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/%3Fentry%3D1007&e=9797&sig=__SZu15LjY5Y5P7BAArUAsLLpjrNw=) and you know how they are about manipulated photos and all.

Early Riser
08-20-2006, 09:38 AM
.....Instead it seems designed to be sold in galleries -- not the sort that would sell Penn or Gursky, but the sorts one finds at malls or along tourist strips like Kalakaua Blvd.

Plus, little green footballs likes him, (http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=25&q=http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/%3Fentry%3D1007&e=9797&sig=__SZu15LjY5Y5P7BAArUAsLLpjrNw=) and you know how they are about manipulated photos and all.


While his work is not my cup of tea, you are wrong about where his work has been sold. When I was represented by JJ Brookings in San Francisco, prior to their move to San Jose, there were plenty of Penn prints alongside Misha Gordin's.

Early Riser
08-20-2006, 10:12 AM
Bill, Misha has a nice house? Then clearly he's not an artist because as everyone knows all true artists are starving. Maybe if I skip breakfast my prints will have that much more significance.

Jim Chinn
08-20-2006, 10:17 AM
As someone else said, he is more artist/photographer than the other way around. In that sense he is carrying on in the best traditions of the Dada/Surrealists who used photography as simply a tool and not as an end to itself such as Man Ray, Herbert Bayer, Gyorgy Kepes and dr. Franz Roh as well as his contemporary Jerry Uselemann.

Q17
08-20-2006, 03:42 PM
Misha is a great friend and has an incredible mind. Although he moved from Detroit several years ago, it is wonderful when he comes "home" to visit. He came late to the digital side and although digi would be an obvious choice for making his images easier, he rejects Photoshop as a means to create his work. All is still done via enlargements, cutting, pasting and reconstruction. The man in no way considers himself a photographer and is somewhat insulted when considered one.

B.

Small world, Bill. Misha is a friend of mine, too, now living about an hour north of me.

I would agree wholeheardedly with the assessment of his dislike for discussion of camera technique. He is concerned only with representing his heart in a finished work, all else can go to heck.

My understanding is that he does a run of ten images in the darkroom and the process can sometimes take up to a week to complete these ten images.

=michelle=