I got through about as many comments as I could before ADD started to hit!
Originally Posted by bjorke
To answer your thread query - I do not think APUG is about "physicality" or "tactile photography" per se. I do think it is a meeting place for those who believe that tactile photography is the "purpose" of the art.
We here use "digital techniques" to both show and discuss our work - with the belief that we do so as a convenient "compromise" to how we would prefer to share our product.
I think most here would prefer to sit alongside each other and show our photos in their printed glory (or our physical chromes projected via light onto a screen).
Alas, we cannot do that here. But at the same time, we can reach so many more with our "compromised" virtual photographs and hope to preserve the "tactile photograph" as opposed to the "digital image".
a. Of or relating to the body as distinguished from the mind or spirit. See Synonyms at bodily.
b. Involving or characterized by vigorous bodily activity: a physical dance performance.
c. Slang Involving or characterized by violence: "A real cop would get physical" TV Guide.
2. Of or relating to material things: our physical environment.
3. Of or relating to matter and energy or the sciences dealing with them, especially physics.
I don't know "PUNK" "DO YOU FEEL LUCKY?" "WELL DO YOU?"
Is APUG actually about physicality?
Everytime I find a film or paper that I like, they discontinue it. - Paul Strand - Aperture monograph on Strand
I am not unnecessarily talking about physicality in terms of handling prints or exchanging them as Michael is making a comment on.
What I meant is that some photographers try to incorporate physicality into their work and constantly figuring out how to do it in a meaningful way. Using historical processes is one instance where photographer can influence how actual prints come into being.
Of course APUG is not about physicality per se. But I think it has a lot to do with it, and this notion comes to the surfaces, especially when people try to articulate what it is that they like about analogue processes.
Also as for your #2, while it is true as to photographers have a lot to do with what kind of images they make, yet to me where there are technical implications, there are aesthetic implications.
What do you think?
Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington
I think the real world interaction that comes from this site is the real attraction of APUG as compared with other online photo discussion sites--print exchanges, postcard exchanges, the Traveling Portfolios, regional formal and informal gatherings, the APUG Conference, etc. The reason for this is that the emphasis in discussion is on photographs and prints, and not "images" taken abstractly in the sense that the medium is not important and that an image on a screen is the same as a traditional print is the same as a reproduction in a magazine. The physical medium is part of the content and the meaning of the work, and I think many APUG participants recognize that.
damn right! Sounds like that spot in woody allan's movie where a young girl is interpreting a very dark painting in a gallery and woody asks her what she is doing Saturday night and she says "committing suicide" and he then asks "what about friday?"
Originally Posted by jstraw
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
RE: physicality and tactile qualities...
I've participated on and off in a discussion on fredmiranda.com about what creates the almost 3D look in some photographs.
A lot of people there really believe it's 99% from their choice of lens. And typically these are people who have adapted Leica and Contax lenses to their digital cameras.
I've come to the realization that while lens factors, like microcontrast and sharpness can help, so much of it is compositional. Choosing lighting that highlights surface textures, choosing compositions that emphasize perspective convergence or foreground-middleground-background relationships, choosing a depth of field that creates isolation from a background. Certainly lens factors and format factors can help, but a lot of this comes from creating the right kind of photo in concept.
So I think that a tactile quality is possible in a print or even on a web image even without cutting it up, hammering nails through it, or burying it in the ground. The concept and execution are what really bring photos to life in a tactile, tangible way.
Paul, my carbon prints have a raised relief...I guess that gives them a tactile quality.
Other than that, and the qualities you mentioned, I have no need to turn my photographs into scuptural pieces to get any message across...tho I certainly don't mind others doing so -- whatever works.
The concept of burying ones photographs, then digging them up later is an interesting concept. I find conceptual art interesting -- it is just that somtimes I think many can just as well stay conceptual and not be actualized. A good example is the fellow who had the concept of stringing bras across the Grand Canyon...a great idea, but one that fortunately did not get actually done. (being turned down by the Park Service was an important part of the art piece!)
Last edited by Vaughn; 06-06-2007 at 10:56 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Seeing David Goldfarb give a conference on culturally untranslatable Polish dolls as they relate to an avant-garde writer of the early 20th century? Priceless!
Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb
Using film since before it was hip.
"One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal
, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11
My APUG Portfolio
In a secondary sense, yes.
Is APUG actually about physicality?
Does a lazer cut Ikea cabinet bought in Vancouver (which is identical to one bought in Chicago) resonate 'character' like a hand made Amish, Mexican, or Indonesian cabinet? Of course not, and photographs resonate with the hands of the photographer that produced them as well. Ultimately though, it's the clarity and purposefulness of the artists message that wins in the end.
Oh, and community!!!
Note to self: Turn your negatives into positives.