The big secret in the art world is that today nearly everyone agrees that art is a dirty business, though few speak out for fear of banishment from the ultimate insiders’ club. It’s high time the art market was cleaned up: by the government, by self-regulation, but above all by a resolve among club members to straighten out a trade that, when measured against any other legal industry, is downright criminal
- Batchen combines Foucault and Derrida to argue that photography, like writing, is more than an inconsequential medium. Photography is, by definition, the writing of light. It is a paradox, a “message without a code” in which both nature and culture are directly implicated in a mutual play of power dynamics. Batchen advances the notion of “photopower” to reinvest photography with the value it lost to positivist aesthetics.
I only ever take one picture of one thing. Literally. Never two. So then that picture is taken and then the next one is waiting somewhere else.’ Let me get this straight, I say, astonished: each image he has produced is the result of one single shot? He nods. And what happens, I ask, if you don’t get the picture you want in that one shot? ‘Then I don’t get it,’ he answers simply. ‘I don’t really worry if it works out or not.
I figure it’s not worth worrying about. There’s always another picture.’ He makes his genius sound almost accidental, I suggest. He thinks about this for a while. ‘Yes,’ he nods, smiling. ‘There’s probably something to that. The “almost” is important, though.’
So what last night’s sale proves, more than anything – if it needed proving once again – is that the prices of pictures tell us almost nothing about their worth as art. The very fact that a 1969 Bacon, or a 1907 Klimt, or 1909 Munch, sells for many times what someone might pay for a 1912 Cubist Picasso tells you how out-of-whack things have become.
This; is why I price my prints the way I do, my current CCP entry has a price tag of, $33,333.33. Because all art is worthless; great Art priceless, I feel.
Source, Blake Gopnik on Art
- As it turns out, laypersons usually have a much better understanding of photography than critics or theorists. Whenever I talk to people who are not part of the world of photography, many of the concerns that appear to give theorists or photographers endless nightmares simply don’t appear to exist. Too many photographs? Who says so? Can there be a thing such as too many photographs, and why would that even be a problem?
Well blow me down, I have seem to have grown my collection of tumblrs quite a bit of late. This I suspect may in part be due to having the tumlblr app on my phone.
Regardless of the reasons, here are three more tumblrs I created, all with very specific ideas in mind and these ideas I feel translate onto the web better than any other ‘medium’.
Room c511 at Footscray Park campus of Victoria University, has a view, and is a view that I see irregularly but often enough to marvel at its changes.
And lastly; facing North: Scenes from my back step.
What is the future of the artist in a digital interactive age? Will artists this century be intensely individualistic and enigmatic visionaries, or managers of the creative activities of crowds?
Source:- The Guardian
Just putting it out there
By Vincente Valentine on flickr
Bill Henson Untitled 2005/06 , type C photograph, 104 × 155 cm. Purchased with funds provided by the Photography Collection Benefactors Program 2006 © Bill Henson
Looks like a trip to Sydney is on the cards these school holidays.It’s often, to my way of thinking, what you don’t see in the photograph that has the greatest potential to transmit information
-Bill Henson, 2004Bill Henson: cloud landscapes brings together 14 works from the Gallery’s collection that traverse Henson’s oeuvre in order to give insight into the shifts and continuities throughout his expansive career.
Showing recent works alongside a small selection from the Paris Opera Project1990/91 and the ‘Mahler’ series 1976-, the exhibition highlights Henson’s sustained interest in depicting landscapes as well as figures, while drawing out the importance of music.
Henson has become known for his brooding alchemical blacks, which he combines with reliefs of colour and bright light. The consistency in the work is his musing on the infinite capacity of imagination and indeed the likelihood that depicting what-we-cannot-see (namely, the dark) induces imaginative states or reveries.
A few weeks back I made a book using blurb’s software and shared the results here. Since then the book has arrived. Sadly, I was not 100% happy with the end product. As I am entering the book into a competition I wanted to be 100% happy with it, so I fixed all the things that were bugging me and made a tighter edit. The text was poorly positioned on some pages and there were still too many images. The book has now been republished, leaner and tighter with a final teaser on the last page.
One of the first submissions for the show came from photography ‘Teacher’ Stuart Murdoch, who has been photographing his backyard since 2010.
Murdoch’s showing three very different works shot from an identical perspective that might best be described as an iPhone Triptych, revealing the passing of time through subtle devices such as chairs apparently dancing around his backyard.
Three of my images have been chosen for @mobilephotonet BACKYARD exhibition as part of the @headonphotofestival! The official exhibition launch is this Sunday at 2pm, If you’re in Sydney please come along!The exhibition will be open to the public from 11am on Saturday the 18th May. The official launch (drinks and nibbles) is the day after at 2pm on Sunday (19 May). If your living locally we’d love for you to come along to the opening and please feel free to bring family and friends.The exhibition will open on weekends from 11am to 5pm and runs through to Sunday 23 June.
Over on the incoherent light tumblr, the question has been asked about how to define vernacular photography. Prompted in part because “…the last few years have seen a groundswell of projects…”
I wondered myself about this and hopped over to wikipedia, as you do, to see if I could find and answer and was surprised to see that the short stub on it had minimal citations or references. I was mortified and wanted to correct this oversight.
Well here we are 48 hours later, I have found a handful of references, some going back as far as the 1990s.
To respond to the definition of vernacular photography I can only summarise. To first understand the vernacular in photography one needs to categorise art photography as they are often seen at opposite ends of the machine made image spectrum.
Getting an agreement on the definition of art photography is like getting the whole world to love one another, or the Liberal party agreeing with The Labour party, or The Republican party agreeing with the Democratic party. With no answer to this, there is no answer to the definition of vernacular photography. I can see the logic, however I have neither the time nor patience to spell this out.
One final question though, why didn’t the author of the incoherent light do a bit of searching, I did. It wasn’t hard. I’m sure their local library would have some of the papers I accessed via my library system here in Australia? Hell even americansuburbx.com has several references to vernacular photography!
Sometimes I think blogs like incoherent light or even conscientious, are just reinventing the wheel, trying to create link bait, or heaven forbid just plain lazy?
[image from the wiki commons]