http://www.urbanautica.com/post/46061591048/jim-naughten
Usually when doing these reflections, I try to find images that ignite something in me that I feel compelled to say, so this time I thought I'd use an image that is not particularly working for me and try to flesh it out.
There's a picture of a person of African descent. The ground desolate, the sky is clear, and the clothes are odd, not to mention that the person wearing them does not look comfortable. The top button of the shirt is fastened, which conveys either a sense of professionalism or uptightness. The red accessories I find to be weird, but then again fashion is not my thing. According to the description, German missionaries are responsible for bringing this style over starting in the 19th century.
I don't find this picture to speak well of German missionary clothing choices. Fashion and the subject's dejected facial expression aside, this is the desert, and button-down polo shirts and dress pants are not desert attire. Better clothing would cover almost the entire body to protect the skin from the sun and be light to allow heat and breeze to pass through. I'm presuming that the natives had perfectly good, well-adjusted clothes to begin with, and didn't need German missionaries messing everything up.
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Monday, March 18, 2013
Google Reader Response #8
http://www.lenscratch.com/2013/03/the-2013-alexia-foundation-winners.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lenscratch%2FZAbG+%28L++E++N++S++C++R++A++T++C++H%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
Once again pulling from Lenscratch. This body of work depicts fire rescues in slums or factories of Bangladesh. When I was first scrolling through them, I thought that they were all taken on the same day, but according to the descriptions, they were taken over the span of four years. That makes it even more upsetting for me because that makes fires like this a reoccurring theme rather than a freak accident that has been dealt with.
Modern building standards take fire exits into account, but crowded Bangladeshi textile factories don't. Too many people plus too few exits make fires even worse. The last picture shows some of the unidentified bodies, wrapped up and ready for burial. The DNA tests they receive post-mortem is, I'm guessing, the most modern investment they've been given. It's a shame that level of investment was not given when they were still alive working in the factory. The other pictures show fire fighters responding to the situation or fellow workers risking their own lives before the officials arrived. Even though poor conditions lead to these events too often, there's still a level of dignity among the workers and slum dwellers as they help each other through tragic times and look through the burnt remains.
Once again pulling from Lenscratch. This body of work depicts fire rescues in slums or factories of Bangladesh. When I was first scrolling through them, I thought that they were all taken on the same day, but according to the descriptions, they were taken over the span of four years. That makes it even more upsetting for me because that makes fires like this a reoccurring theme rather than a freak accident that has been dealt with.
Modern building standards take fire exits into account, but crowded Bangladeshi textile factories don't. Too many people plus too few exits make fires even worse. The last picture shows some of the unidentified bodies, wrapped up and ready for burial. The DNA tests they receive post-mortem is, I'm guessing, the most modern investment they've been given. It's a shame that level of investment was not given when they were still alive working in the factory. The other pictures show fire fighters responding to the situation or fellow workers risking their own lives before the officials arrived. Even though poor conditions lead to these events too often, there's still a level of dignity among the workers and slum dwellers as they help each other through tragic times and look through the burnt remains.
Monday, March 11, 2013
Chapter 4 Reading Response
This chapter discusses photography less as an art form that artists do and more as a social tool integrated into the fabric of our lives. For example, it is difficult to do much of anything without an ID, and that requires a picture of yourself, so you must submit both your image and your information the archives to be able to navigate through various institutions.
Photography of the body is inevitable tied to body politics. Since most industries were run by men, it is no surprise that pictures were largely created for a male audience. Also, the industry of photography existed and still exists in the economic system of capitalism, meaning that there is economic incentive to create pictures that will sell. Photography seemed particularly suited to objectify people, particularly women, because pictures only show the surface and turn the subject into an object to be looked at. Since pictures are social constructions, the dominant pictures in a given society are a reflection of the people in charge who have the resources to publish on a large scale. They also say something about the culture's values, as something in a picture must have been important enough to visually capture and distribute.
Q: Do pictures sometimes seem more real than reality, and how does that affect our perception of reality?
Google Reader Response #7
Photomation
http://www.americansuburbx.com/2013/02/review-gunter-karl-bose-photomaton-2013.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Americansuburb+%28ASX+%7C+AMERICAN+SUBURB+X+%7C+Photography+%26+Culture%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
I found this post intriguing because the pictures here were taken without a photographer. Between 1928 and 1945, machines were set up in public places in Germany that allowed people to take pictures of themselves anonymously, like modern-day photo-booths. In such a case, the intention lies solely with the person being photographed. They decided to get in and how to pose, and the machine took care of the shutter.
Without a human photographer, the person can probably be themselves more naturally, as long as they are comfortable in the photo-booth. The machine handles the mechanics of taking the picture, but the subject has complete control otherwise. They don't have to worry about looking silly in front of people or being judged by the photographer, because machines don't judge, they just take the picture. It could be thought that the participant is both the photographer and the subject, similar to a camera set to a timer and set on a tripod. The article states that this set up lends itself to a narcissistic appeal, which may be true, but I think that narcism has too negative of a connotation. Rather, I think this is more like a visual journal: a private expression of yourself that is for yourself, only in picture form. But be careful that your visual journal does not get posted on an internet blog in the next few decades.
http://www.americansuburbx.com/2013/02/review-gunter-karl-bose-photomaton-2013.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Americansuburb+%28ASX+%7C+AMERICAN+SUBURB+X+%7C+Photography+%26+Culture%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
I found this post intriguing because the pictures here were taken without a photographer. Between 1928 and 1945, machines were set up in public places in Germany that allowed people to take pictures of themselves anonymously, like modern-day photo-booths. In such a case, the intention lies solely with the person being photographed. They decided to get in and how to pose, and the machine took care of the shutter.
Without a human photographer, the person can probably be themselves more naturally, as long as they are comfortable in the photo-booth. The machine handles the mechanics of taking the picture, but the subject has complete control otherwise. They don't have to worry about looking silly in front of people or being judged by the photographer, because machines don't judge, they just take the picture. It could be thought that the participant is both the photographer and the subject, similar to a camera set to a timer and set on a tripod. The article states that this set up lends itself to a narcissistic appeal, which may be true, but I think that narcism has too negative of a connotation. Rather, I think this is more like a visual journal: a private expression of yourself that is for yourself, only in picture form. But be careful that your visual journal does not get posted on an internet blog in the next few decades.
Monday, February 25, 2013
Google Reader Response #6
Beyond the Barrier
http://www.lenscratch.com/2013/02/beyond-barrier.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lenscratch%2FZAbG+%28L++E++N++S++C++R++A++T++C++H%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
I thought this would be a good post after our previous discussion, since these are not strictly "real" photographs, rather a blend of photography, drawing, and digital technology. I can't pin-point what anything is in these pictures, except for perhaps the ruins in the last two that still look like they came out of a movie set. However, the pictures do not look fake either.
The description states that the artists were inspired by science fiction, itself an interaction between the real and not-so-real. In science fiction, there must be enough science that the story is still believable to the degree intended. The imagination can then push the boundaries of reality, but must stay rooted in it, creating new worlds and possibilities that can appear very distant or just above the horizon.
The pictures here achieve much of the same. They balance both reality and mystery to the point where they appear both familiar and unfamiliar at the same time. It's an intriguing bit of photography that still has me asking, "What is that?" or wondering how it was created. This type of photography I think is most effective at communicating raw idea or concepts without too many words getting in the way.
http://www.lenscratch.com/2013/02/beyond-barrier.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lenscratch%2FZAbG+%28L++E++N++S++C++R++A++T++C++H%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
I thought this would be a good post after our previous discussion, since these are not strictly "real" photographs, rather a blend of photography, drawing, and digital technology. I can't pin-point what anything is in these pictures, except for perhaps the ruins in the last two that still look like they came out of a movie set. However, the pictures do not look fake either.
The description states that the artists were inspired by science fiction, itself an interaction between the real and not-so-real. In science fiction, there must be enough science that the story is still believable to the degree intended. The imagination can then push the boundaries of reality, but must stay rooted in it, creating new worlds and possibilities that can appear very distant or just above the horizon.
The pictures here achieve much of the same. They balance both reality and mystery to the point where they appear both familiar and unfamiliar at the same time. It's an intriguing bit of photography that still has me asking, "What is that?" or wondering how it was created. This type of photography I think is most effective at communicating raw idea or concepts without too many words getting in the way.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Chapter 3 Reading Response
"Sweet it is to scan"
This Chapter started to move away from the discussion of photography as art that artists do and towards a democratic practice. As user-friendly cameras entered the mass market, it became easier for average people to take pictures of relatively average events. This process was pioneered by Kodak, which did the messy specialized business of developing photographs that everyday people took. It is even easier today with digital cameras when all you need is a computer to download your pictures. Many photos taken today and shared digitally are done so not so much because of their aesthetic appeal, but to hold memories. In this case, looking through your old photographs may be like looking through a journal. When we do something special, fun, or memorable, we want something to remember it by. Attractions such as theme parks and national parks even have special places with scenic views laid out specifically for people to pose for pictures. In this case, not only is the photograph a construction, but we're constructing the real world with photographs in mind.
Q: Does focusing on taking pictures of something diminish the experience as it is actually happening? Can we focus too much on recording our experiences rather than living them?
This Chapter started to move away from the discussion of photography as art that artists do and towards a democratic practice. As user-friendly cameras entered the mass market, it became easier for average people to take pictures of relatively average events. This process was pioneered by Kodak, which did the messy specialized business of developing photographs that everyday people took. It is even easier today with digital cameras when all you need is a computer to download your pictures. Many photos taken today and shared digitally are done so not so much because of their aesthetic appeal, but to hold memories. In this case, looking through your old photographs may be like looking through a journal. When we do something special, fun, or memorable, we want something to remember it by. Attractions such as theme parks and national parks even have special places with scenic views laid out specifically for people to pose for pictures. In this case, not only is the photograph a construction, but we're constructing the real world with photographs in mind.
Q: Does focusing on taking pictures of something diminish the experience as it is actually happening? Can we focus too much on recording our experiences rather than living them?
Monday, February 18, 2013
Google Readers Response #5
http://www.lenscratch.com/2013/02/vera-saltzman.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lenscratch%2FZAbG+%28L++E++N++S++C++R++A++T++C++H%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
This post from Lenscratch creates an interesting link between old age and youth. The pictures are of mature or elderly women holding a childhood doll of theirs. We associate dolls with childhood and innocence, and old age with experience. The fact that each lady still has their childhood doll adds a level of nostalgia to the pictures, and reminds us that these older women were also once young children. In a way, they still are, as we don't become someone completely different as we mature. Rather, each version of ourselves is built on the experiences of our past. I noticed that there are no Barbies being held, so back a generation ago, the cult of thinness had not yet infiltrated the culture. What kind of dolls would the next generation be holding, and what would that say about our societies values?
This post from Lenscratch creates an interesting link between old age and youth. The pictures are of mature or elderly women holding a childhood doll of theirs. We associate dolls with childhood and innocence, and old age with experience. The fact that each lady still has their childhood doll adds a level of nostalgia to the pictures, and reminds us that these older women were also once young children. In a way, they still are, as we don't become someone completely different as we mature. Rather, each version of ourselves is built on the experiences of our past. I noticed that there are no Barbies being held, so back a generation ago, the cult of thinness had not yet infiltrated the culture. What kind of dolls would the next generation be holding, and what would that say about our societies values?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)