Deadpan Photography and Claire Beckett

Ever since History of Photography last semester I have been interested in deadpan photography.

dead·pan   [ded-pan] Show IPA adjective, adverb, verb,-panned, -pan·ning, noun
–adjective
1. marked by or accomplished with a careful pretense of seriousness or calm detachment; impassive or expressionless: deadpan humor.
2. displaying no emotional or personal involvement: a deadpan style.

In seeing what my project was last semester I have become familiar with this type of style. I came upon this blog post by KEENPRESS Media that I thought was an interesting read. I disagree with their stance on deadpan, but I feel that there are a lot of people who feel the same way. Judging by the comments left on the post 5 out of 6 agree that deadpan is (for lack of better words) boring and lifeless. I would argue that this sort of style opens the door for the work to be interpreted with any emotion the viewer decides. Claire Beckett's work is considered deadpan imagery, and I feel that it exudes strong emotions. After all, the viewer will never leave thinking exactly what you want them to think or feel. Why not leave it up to them?

Alfredo Altamirano

This is actually a friend of mine who I have been following for awhile. He was an exchange student from Mexico and is now in Paris as a photographer. His pictures are much more staged and don't have much to think about, but they do jump out to me. It is always good to see a friend or a fellow student excel at what they like to do. Do you think that staged photography is as successful, as ambiguous photography? The photography that makes us question all elements involved in the photos or the ones we already know the answers to...?

Here is his website. I couldn't pull any of the actual pictures off the Internet.

http://www.alfredoaltamirano.com/

Quote that Shane e-mailed us...

More profoundly and at times negatively, the way art is experienced has changed. Conceptual Art has encouraged the assumption that every object, every picture, even every abstract painting tells a story – that it carries within it some kind of narrative, meaning or “subtext.” Equally ingrained is the more limiting expectation that all this meaning is primarily intellectual and easily reduced to language, that art as an entity is completely explainable. We owe to conceptualism years of one-lined artworks in all media – the “I get it” school of esthetic experience. This condition has caused a permanent confusion of content with subject matter, to the continuing detriment of both content and form. Too often, art that lacks an explicit subject is thought to be without content and dismissed.

Roberta Smith, The New York Times

I'd like to hear what people feel about this quote, it sounds like it would foster some good discussion.

Ideas

This is some work I have shot in the past week...It is some new ideas, continuing with the distortion aspect that I started last semester, and also with my underwater pictures. I am going to continue with that this weekend, but at the same time, I wanted to try something different to keep seeing what I could come up with. So I would love to hear your thoughts...

Matt Dallos

Matt Dallos, Park Forest Village.

I thought it would be a good thing to post about one of my inspirations for the project I am doing right now. This way you can explore more of his photos and read his statement again.

But pause and give each word meaning: Park. Forest. Village. Each holds a specific view of our culture's definition of nature. Mashed together it reveals one of our problems: we want it all.

I did some research on De Pere and I didn't find as strong of a connection, but I am still in the process, and I think I am uncovering what I was meant to. I went into this project with one thing on my mind "Shoot the houses that interest you". I thought by starting out with something simple I could grow more, and that's exactly what happened. Shooting for this series has been so different than my other projects. I am a very emotionally charged person, so it was different going into it a different way. While I can associate certain emotions with my images now, I can also remove myself from having those emotions. I realized this during critique this morning, hearing what others felt from my compositions that I didn't notice. I left critique with a lot of possibilities, yay!

Jacki mentioned in one of her previous posts not to settle, and while I have chosen to pursue this longer, I have this weird floaty feeling where I haven't really put my foot down on my ideas. It feels really odd, because I usually do that, but I can breathe more just having the option to go anywhere I want to go with this. It's a different feeling, but a good different. So Jacki, I appreciate your thoughts on that.

recents

These are some of my recent photographs. They look like crap on here for some reason, but I'll figure that out another time. So far I am feeling a little more comfortable with my idea behind my lighting than I did when I began this project. Since I do not feel like I have a good enough grasp on studio lighting nor do I have access to a soft box, I have been getting comfortable with unnatural lighting. I like it because it gives the picture a nice glow rather than a forced light or sunlight. I am still trying to figure out my subject matter. I know why I am shooting these, I just am still in my process of figuring out how to show it. Let me know how facial portraits impact you guys, how cropped off heads impact you, or collar bone area effectiveness. Gracias.

Lately

Roderick Henderson

Disclaimer: Mary has posted about Henderson's work, and I have a different question, so I thought I would still post what I had minus the images.

While perusing websites today I found Roderik Henderson's Island shots, and was fascinated by what he found. Henderson's space becomes his studio, in this case an elevator. The lighting in elevators has always interested me, but this one in particular really catches my attention. These photos feel like they are shot in a studio with the monochrome background with the way the light hits the subject. The fact that it isn't a studio inspires me to find spaces like this. I have always been more interested in finding situations rather than creating them myself as far as lighting goes. Chris, this reminded me of what you were talking about the other day and the light sources you are looking for. Jacki, check out his Transvoid series.


Question 1: Do you prefer studio lighting or "found" light sources?
Question 2: Why?

Greasent

This is Jacki trying something somewhat new. Feedback please.

Anastasia Cazabon

Grow yourself. Don't stay in one comfortable spot. Antasia Cazabon intrigues me because I don't consider her work particularly strong but she carries a specific style throughout her body of work. Although each of her photos are simple and quite different in space and lighting, she is consistent about what she shows and how she shows it. This purely motivates me to try more things. I think that my style is similar to hers in the marginalization and limitation she shows. As the viewer we know that there is a face- eyes, ears, mouth that is not communicating with us. I ask the question- why. Why don't we see the face? Why are the figures marginalized? Then I question my own work, similarly. This work makes me motivated to try something new. Yes, it shows me a more developed style and its potential, but it also makes me want to explore my own photographs. I think that the second photo is similar to Randi's recent photos. It has the same sort of idea/quality. Notice how the shadow plays a large part of the photo and our interpretation. Everything in the frame is recognizable/relateable but we cannot decipher one particular meaning from it.

Continuing from my last post, there is nothing extraordinary about the above photos. They are quite simple and could be easily recreated. But they are not telling us a story. Unfortunately, nothing we shoot will be original as we think. Therefore, don't stop exploring all ideas. Don't be comfortable with what you have created, don't be comfortable with what you ARE creating. Shoot more. This is a lesson for myself. Even though I know how I want to shoot, I shouldn't settle for that. This is the hardest thing to overcome because I want to settle for something. One thing that will determine my path. But truthfully, that is shit. Most of the work I've done so far has been shit and will continue to be shit until I really push myself to NOT SETTLE. As photographers we have nothing settled and everything is undetermined. I think this means that we need to be uncomfortable and feel unaccomplished in order to grow.

Are we growing?

Compete

Ok, so I have no artists for this post, but I wanted to throw this question out there anyway.

Adam Vanvossen and I were talking the other day out at the bar on $.25 wing night, and we were discussing each others' photographs, and discussing the upcoming Juried Art Show. We were also talking about how you should go about naming your work. We went back and forth offering our constructive criticism towards each other's name choices, etc...We also we're offering our compliments towards each other's work as well. Saying..."Oh no, yours is so much better then mine." Or, "I have no doubt you will win something in the art show." Then out of no where Adam says..."I feel threatened by you." I was stunned, because his concepts, techniques and execution have always impressed me. Then we continued to talk about how competitiveness is somewhat essential to make good art.

It is, at least I believe in our group it is, a very friendly and helpful community atmosphere. However I think we all still feel like this sense of competing with one another. We give so much praise, and I know we mean it, but when we leave, we think, "wow, she/he is really good... How am I going to top that?" I don't think our purpose is not to top each other, but it pushes us to always put something on the screen that people will be awed by (in an extreme circumstance) or moved by. It was cool to hear him say this, because i felt the same way towards him, and many of my classmates, but I didn't want to be the one to say it. Do you feel this sense friendly sense of competition when creating your art? Does it make you a better artist? Is this one of the only places you feel like you want the other people to be "semi-threatened" by you? Isn't this an occupation where, even though we all care about each other and each other's success, to make it, we need to keep competing?

I think we can say we will all offer help to each other if needed or asked, and encourage one to do their best with making their ideas reality. I just thought it was an interesting thing to realize and to hear someone else say it to.

Inspiration or Discouragement?

As you can see, Chris has put up all the these photos/paintings of pictures he has found by artists who have created pictures that are similar to some of our work. I am going to be doing the same about Jacki's work a bit. But when I do that I would you to think about this question...When you see these pictures, do you get frustrated or discouraged, or do you feel like it is a way to motivate you and makes you want to "best" that artist. After seeing Chris's post of the paintings, and the arch nemisis I had last semester, I can say now that I look at these things and immediatly start studying what makes my work different/better/worse/similar to these other artists' work. Last semester, I felt like I had been kicked in the stomach, because does this not make my work original anymore? Then I studied mine hard, and even though, orginally, I wanted to give up on my whole idea, I started looking at his and I felt like mine grew on me even more. I started to become protective almost of my pictures. I wanted to make them the best they could be, and knew that I had done mostly everything in my power to make my signature on my art. So, when you see works that are so similar to yours, how do you react? Does that negative or positive feeling stick with you, or does it change as time goes on, and the more you look at your artwork and your competing artist?

Here are pictures I found when I was researching, by Roderik Henderson. It reminded me so much of the ideas we were throwing out to help Jacki add that "surprise." It also reminded me of the pictures she has taken already. That ability to want us to develop a relationship with the subjects in her pictures. I always feel the need to want to know so much more when it comes to her photos, and I am so intruiged by the way she views people. I think Henderson does this well also.

importance of research III

This one is for Ben.  *We should really get the intermediate students to use this blog*

There are a lot of different possibilities to move forward wi

th aesthetically when dealing with long exposure light-controlled situations.  Jan Wöllert and Jörg Miedza have become masters at dealing with long exposure LIGHT DESIGN.  I'm emphasizing the "design" because this obviously took some careful and precise planning and a lot of experimentation.  But with every great photograph there is a starting point.  Usually when you deal with a stationary camera with moving light source(s) the common starting point is setting up your camera and just attempting to get a good trail of light.  As you move on there is the potential to design and stage situations that create a very unique and "unreal" situation.  

if you want to check out more of these, their website is here

importance of research II

Another artist that Mary can use as a great reference is Alyssa Monks.  Alyssa is a painter that is great at creating photo-realistic situations.  It's obvious that the subject matter is extremely similar.  The more import things to take note of is not the subject matter (although it may be), but more importantly what this medium does for the situation in comparison with Mary's photography.  Does it do anything?  Does it create a different feeling?  Or does this subject matter really stay the same regardless of the medium?Another thing to refer to is the lighting situation.  This spotlight that highlights the face creates a nice bright head with a desolate background.  

Anyways... I've been looking into different mediums for inspiration lately because a lot of photographs have been annoying me.  Whether or not it works for other people is a different topic, I just get a different feeling from these paintings compared to Mary's photography.

importance of research I

After the critique today I wanted to bring up the importance of research and allowing your peers to enter your creative process.  Obviously it's up to you whether or not you choose if their words will have any significance, but being open to ideas and building off of fellow photographers is a great opportunity to have.  Basically, I like what we are doing.  

There are a couple of photographers that I wanted to bring up, but could not think of their names on the spot.  Anthony Kurtz is an artist that can relate to what Gina is somewhat moving towards.  Simply viewing his works could be a great reference as well as a good kicker to get her project jump-started and headed in the "right" direction a little faster.  He is in this situation where a police force is executing a typical raid, but he did not just take these wide, easily distinguishable photos the entire time.  Kurtz shoots medium range

shots as well as detail shot to expose great color and reveal the aggressiveness behind what is truly going on.  There is obviously going to be a certain aura in a situation like this, so why not document that along with what is truly going on.  It is important to note WHAT is making the atmosphere and not focus on WHO the entire time.  Explore both, and use them as tools.  Kurtz has a library of photographs were he explores everything that a situation has to offer.  Here are a two more from different collections of photographs that I urge you guys to check out.  He documents the situation, the people, the location, and really works with all aspects of the environment around him to create a body of work.

My approach to research has often been to continuously use blogs and photo-sharing sites that are available online.  I also like to physically print out what I am working on, and sit with them for a while before I feel like my prints are satisfactory.  How to do you research?  Also, how do you apply your research to your work?

1st Meeting

Shane mentioned putting up "minutes" from our meeting, so those who couldn't be there knew what we covered. It was a super casual meeting that didn't have much structure, so I am not sure what all to put on here, but we do have an itinerary for next week, so I think it will be more structured then, yet still relaxed and casual. Here is what I have though...

* Started around 7:30. Brought Chinese and Ben and Sam so kindly got drinks
* We started things off just by talking about our classes and seeing how everyone was doing.
* Conversations started between different groups talking about what they are trying to accomplish and frusterations.
* The food was enjoyed and conversations continued.
*We moved all to one table and continued our conversation about our desires and what we were "trying" to accomplish with out photography.
* Suggestions were thrown out when people were struggling and needing that spark to get an idea, or different approach.
* We discussed how to shoot "everything" and what that all entails.
* Jacki and I decided to make an itinerary, and decided that girls pair up to make snacks/dinner for each meeting, and the guys will pair up and bring beverages.
* We made the meeting time for Thursday at 7:30 every week. Reminder emails will be sent out on Tuesday. Rotation will occur with food and drinks.
*Everyone packed up and decided if we were going to go do a photo shoot at our dirty dance club of a bar that night.
*Stood in the hallway for awhile and played hackysack with Jacki's gloves.

MEETING=Success

New 2/17

Please CRITIQUE these.

not quite, but kinda

This is not exactly what I have been working on, but as I was getting ready to mess around with my cameras and I snapped these while waiting. I'm not sure if I would really want to move forward with anything similar to these, just thought that they were kind of interesting. I have been working on my lighting and color with this contraption so I will have to post those next week! As for now, here are some randoms. I usually work with people; these just happened to grab my attention.

Again, these are not as crisp as what I'm working on. They are just random shots that came out before a shoot. I like the first one a lot better. Just the combination of the vintage look + emptiness really gets me thinking for some reason.

Laura Letinksy and Peter Fraser

In response to the question I asked in my last post, I do think that photographs can be strong without people. I feel as if the majority of the population wouldn't think so.. (so screw them right?) I really enjoy the still life photographs that Laura Letinsky shoots. They hint at human presence but none are present. I think it's fascinating to see how much we leave behind. I am doing a project in sculpture centered around that thought.




One of my other favorites is Peter Fraser's Everday Icons.




I am attracted to simplicity, but still interested in the pattern, texture, line and composition. I would really like to explore this, but there's a part of me that doesn't think I should. The answer to my question before could be that it's personal preference whether or not one can connect with this type of imagery. It seems to simple. How do you feel about Letinksy and Fraser's works?

Franz Marc

This may seem elementary. But Franz Marc is worthy of our attention. I have been thinking of his paintings lately and they continue to amaze me. I think it is an important lesson that we realize we don't have to know what exactly is going on within the frame. I guess that's not the right way to word it.....rather, we DON'T have to explain the whole photo to the viewer. I think that a strong photo makes people ask questions. The more questions asked, the more the viewer dwells, the more they interpret. Even though I know what is contained in Franz Marc's work, I'm intrigued by his use of color and line; it seems undefined. This is an important lesson for myself in particular because I WANT, so badly, to tell my viewer what I'm about. But this is not important. Just as I could not follow my work to a gallery in New York (hopefully one day!) and tell everyone the reason for it, I cannot do so here, either. For myself, the most important thing to do is to let go. Let go, in the sense of let different intrerpretations happen. I often enter a critique thinking I know what my photos are about/should be about. But at the end of all the feedback it becomes something new and different. I think that we should really listen to one another. I often don't let those new interpretations lead my direction, but why shouldn't I? I respect Franz Marc's work in an abstract way. I know what each may represent but my eyes stay with his work for a while because it is somewhat unknown.

Monica, after reading your post and looking at your new photos, I thought they related to Franz Marc as well. I think that it is particularly present in the last one. Use of color and line are engaging. I don't think people need to be present for a strong photo to happen. But I will comment on that later.

My main question is: Do we limit the interpretations of our photographs by telling too much within the frame? Even if you consider Franz Marc's work a bit kiddish, look at how he uses color and line to keep the viewer engaged. He is not telling a story, or maybe he is, but I feel that it is open to interpretation.

yikes

This is a little preview of what tomorrow looks like for me... after reading Chris's post on Holm's I have a new approach I am itching to try. I bet everyone was expecting me to do what I said I was going to (as it should have been) but I got side tracked. I was enamored with the reflection that Jacki had in her images at crit and decided to search for different ways to achieve that. I am not sure where to go. I made my images small because I posted a lot, if you click on them they will open larger (all of the ones we post will open to their original size if clicked on).






My mind is burning, please answer this question for me: If people are not present in the image is it less strong than those that do?

...

This is what I have created...Shane and I have talked about how I need to have a camera around my neck at all times, and capture all those moments that are emotionally meaningful to me. Again, I really don't know what I am shooting. I just am going to start shooting everything, literally. I can imagine that is the only thing that is going to spark imagination in me. I am fascinated by hands and what they do, and the creation they allow. There is such a loving tender things about hands, but also something super destructive. These are two opposite things, yet brought about by the same thing. Something odd to think about it.

I stop myself from pursuing what could be something great, because I become fixated by ideas, and what I want to create. What I see in my head...Not allowing myself to open my eyes to EVERYTHING around me that could allow me to be great. I believe that people are restricted by wanting something specific, and not allowing to see all of the things that surround us. We could all be artists if we could see what surrounds us everyday. I wasn't looking for anything last semester, and I got something that I am so proud of. This semester it hasn't come yet...and I think thats what frusterates me. I know it shouldn't, but it does... I need to open up my eyes and just see what is presented to me. Allow myself to listen...Allow myself to just be.... We are all type A personality, because we think we know what we want...We don't...Most of the time what we want doesn't work, and from that we find what does... Why do still try to control, even though our control proves us wrong mostly everytime. I am trying everything...and this is a start. I also have an underwater disposable camera that I am going to try. Everything...something will come...I just need to be open, and shoot. I know this...It will only come if I have the motivation and face my fear of making mistakes. That is the start to whatever will come, and I am going to do my best to listen...to my classmates, to my teacher, and to my camera.

Corey Holms

From the first moment I was able to get my hands on a camera until the day I entered intro to photo I had a habit of shooting detail shots. I cannot say that it has completely left me (I use it with video often), but shooting a "beautiful" shot is not as important to me. Now I am not saying that I would be alright with shooting a sloppy photo; I just do not get the same feelings looking at a close up of an object/subject if there is not real purpose other than advertising or something like that. That being said - Corey Holms rules.
There has been a recent trend in photography that involves photographers dropping food coloring into a glass and shooting it as it spreads... pretty... but also pretty boring. Some people are exceptionally good at it while others are not so good, but that does not really matter because doing that stuff sucks if you are actually doing it for portfolio work IMO. Corey Holms took this a step further and experimented a little more than the other photo-duplicators. There are two things that grab my attention about this guy:
1. He makes detail shots interesting (instead of just taking detail shots of everyday things)
2. His experimentation with a common shot led him to something unique

(doesn't the picture above remind you of something out of Dexter?)

If you are good at doing detail shots, find a way to make them interesting/unique. Do not go take detail shots of things that we see every day. Save that for ad campaigns or gifts unless there is true concept or meaning behind it. I started intro to photography taking detail shots. I think my first couple ones were cliche - like of a golf ball waiting to be teed off and a dead dandelion... boring. When I finally found my way in intermediate photography I did not let detail shots leave my mind. I more or less waited for a situation where I thought that it would be necessary for me to use them, similar to what Corey Holms has done here. These almost seem scientific.
His process, that probably started with him doing the stupid shots of food coloring through the glass, led him to experiment with different substances. He mixed foot coloring with different oils and other liquids with various consistencies to create pattern and textures within an otherwise typical shot. This is an appropriate use of detail shots.

Have you often found that your ideas stem from something that begins as a recreation, but turns into something that becomes your own do to your process bringing you in different directions along the way?