Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,840   Posts: 1,582,591   Online: 994
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    97

    The by the way of. . . . . using prefab

    The "use and abuse" of prefabricated objects, ( things that exist already in the word made by others), things that we photograph, i.e. trees, building, people, cars, landscapes, any assortment of still life, etc. AND those materials photographers use (film, paper, dev. etc. . . ) made by others, HINDER "the artist" image or ability "to Image"?

    Moreover what exactly is the relationship between prefab society and prefab photography? And how does it effect, and affect image quality?

    would art history/ fine art photography be much different, If every image was constructed from scratch? I know the absurdity of this question, but I must ask. Do you feel hemmed in by "the prefab", or is the the prefab so enticing, its like crystal meth? or sex? or Both at the same time? Do you feel compelled by the prefab? or does it repulse you? does buying and using a modern camera and film repulse you? do you feel the need to make your own camera, lens, film holder, wet plate, etc. .. .AND make "your own" world to photograph? do you want to leave the world we live in? Metaphorically, of course?

  2. #2
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,505
    Images
    218
    I don't feel "hemmed in" by using a camera. The creation is in one's ability to see... to identify the subject and capture it in a way which communicates what you've seen to the viewer.

    For a few years,though, I've been working on images which don't require a photographic subject, though they're made on film and SG paper. I don't even use a camera/lens for them. In fact, I just posted this one to the Gallery:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cityscape1.jpg 
Views:	25 
Size:	801.1 KB 
ID:	92654

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    168
    This thread is very inspiring for me, because I have thought about the issue and never came to a real conclusion. At the moment I think I am not primarily concerned about using cameras, films or paper made by others, but I feel like my photography is sometimes restricted in that I can only image something that is present in the environment and reflects light, whereas a painter can image his/her own pure mind´s view. This in turn generates the need to physically move around to meet something that resembles that mind´s view and try to fit it in that original idea. As photographers are we always stuck with the crude real world?

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,840
    Quote Originally Posted by mauro35 View Post
    As photographers are we always stuck with the crude real world?
    Perhaps it would help to abandon the false belief that photography has anything to do with reality.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by pdeeh View Post
    Perhaps it would help to abandon the false belief that photography has anything to do with reality.
    I agree that in the end a photograph is not the real state of what it represents, because it is in fact a representation. What I mean is that compared to sculpture or painting for instance in photography we have to use light and light is reflected by something real, like objects. The tools are films, cameras and so on, but the subject was an object that reflected light. When a painter paints, the tools are colors, canvas...but the subject comes entirely from the mind, with no direct physical connection with something real. Even if I want to paint an object, the light from the object goes only to my eyes and then I completely create something new when I put some colors on a white surface, that color was not physically linked to the object (I´m thinking now about Magritte´s "this is not a pipe"). That makes photography the most physically tighten form of art in my opinion.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,840
    Quote Originally Posted by mauro35 View Post
    When a painter paints, the tools are colors, canvas...but the subject comes entirely from the mind, with no direct physical connection with something real. .
    You might want to talk to a few painters about this point of view.

    The idea of a "direct physical connection" is a bit slippery too, isn't it?

    Let alone the idea of a "real thing".

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by pdeeh View Post
    You might want to talk to a few painters about this point of view.

    The idea of a "direct physical connection" is a bit slippery too, isn't it?

    Let alone the idea of a "real thing".
    It would be interesting indeed to hear the point of view of a painter, related to the concept introduced by the OP of images made entirely from scratch. I myself am really bad at even drawing anything, but feel the need to represent my mind´s view with graphic arts. That was the reason why I approached photography. I wonder whether painters always manage to create the original idea they had in mind?

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    408
    between the lofty babble of "photography," whatever that might be, and anything "physical" there are individual instances of photography, namely, photographs. the importance of this discussion is inversely proportional to the (weight of) purpose and the (amount of) content of the photographs we think of at the moment we decide to join the discussion. let's have a look at the same one, then talk "prefab" again--

    http://www.desordre.net/photographie...ddie_adams.jpg

    hey, we could even talk "reality..."

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    16,878
    Images
    23
    the only thing photography has to do with is the imagination and brain if the person making the photographs.
    if the person want to connect that to prefabrication, so be it, but photography is about as close to non reality / illusion as it gets.
    Last edited by jnanian; 08-13-2014 at 05:26 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    California desert
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    944

    been covered

    I believe two gentlemen from Red Hook, Brooklyn, New York discussed this topic at length in their thesis for the Sam Houston Institute of Technology, Boca Grande Campus, in 1947. These scholars, Baldie R. Dash and Mr. Hooey, determined to the satisfaction of the university that reality does not exist and you can't photograph it. At least not in Texas or Alabama.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin