John Mackay

Although I have seen ready recognition of the influence of African sculpture in Picasso’s work I have never seen any mention specifically made of Picasso’s Camera with it’s cracked lens given to him by the Italian futurist Gino Severini around 1905.

"The box camera’s cracked lens caused the facial plane in Picasso’s photo-portraits to be broken themselves, and raised slightly on one side. Attributes he would soon utilize and transpose to his early sketches and preparatory drawings for the seminal LES DEMOISELLES D’AVIGNON."

Edward Steichen viewed the photos on a studio visit and sent several to Alfred Steiglitz, two of which were published in Cameraworks. Steichen would later say: "The images were like the meeting of a shepherd and a mermaid on the trunk of a Buick.”

UPDATE: 18/06/2006

Fresh from the Glowing Red Cheeks Dept. is the embarrassing realisation that this appears to have been a prank all along. See comment #3 below.

I see photographers who are quite prepared to accept manipulation of landscape photos as being acceptable in that it makes no difference. However, how many of these same photographers are prepared to pre-disclose this manipulation to viewers of their apparently representational photos? I imagine the answer, is very few indeed. I feel that it is this situation that speaks to the minds of us as photographers.

Are we in fact, as photographers, deceiving ourselves? Specifically, if manipulation was no fuss then why not pre-disclose it to viewers. Heck! Why not celebrate it out loud. Tell everyone how we overlay dramatic skies, reverse images, clone out distractions or pop the colours. The truth is, that as photographers we never do this because we know in our hearts and minds that people will think less of it—we want to hang-on to their adulation. Don’t believe me? Then tell people as they view your images how you’ve manipulated them and watch their reaction. “There’s nothing wrong with the laying on of hands to muscle the world into order,” Szarkowski said in an interview. “But there is something quite unique about the photographic idea of standing in the right place at the right time and accomplishing the same thing.”

The stark truth is that we want people to believe that the scene, as depicted, really existed before the camera and we were there! In concordance to the Szarkowski ideal that it was our prowess as a photographer to capture the decisive moment, the prefect scene with the perfect skies and the perfect light. In the process we are deluding the naive viewers and ourselves. We do this not to deliver better than real but to have their adulation. We do this not because we despise people or are self-interested but because better than real has become the visual ecstasy of westernised democracies, and we as photographers are the drug dealers feeding it’s addictions—giving the people what they want.

Real is just not enough anymore

NOTE: This was originally my reply to a post titled: Manipulation of landscape images by Brian Southward in the Philosophy of Photography forum  at photo.net.

Epson has released two new flatbed scanner models including the Epson Perfection V700 PHOTO and the Epson Perfection V750-M PRO. Both of these scanners offer resolution enhancements 4800dpi to 6400dpi optical resolution utilising a Dual Lens(TM) System. Additionally, the Pro version offers a Fluid Mount Accessory for wet mounting unmounted films and a new MF film strip holder that has been increased in size to permit scanning of 120 film up to 20cm in a single length which should keep the 6x17 panorama photographers happy.

Owning the Epson 4870 for the last eighteen months or so I will be interested to see the actual resolution advantage this new scanner provides. I personally feel that the 4870 only provides around 1200dpi of excellent quality resolution or a 6x enlargement. Even if the new scanners only provide a similar resolution advantage this will still translate to around 1600dpi or circa 26" prints from 6x9 or 38" prints from 4x5".

Further Reading

• Read Vincent Oliver’s Epson V700 Photo scanner review over at photo-i.

Unlike conventional photography Christopher’s Guests & Tetrarchs are formed using sunlight with a technique combining that of the camera obscura and pinhole photography. After drawing a life-size silhouette of the sitter’s shadow onto sheets of aluminium foil, Christopher then pricks thousands of tiny pinholes within the outline of the shape which serve as the camera’s lenses.

He then places the foil on top of a large home-made camera and loads colour photographic paper at the back. Sunlight then shines through, recording many images of the sun and sky simultaneously, thus forming the shape of the figure on the paper behind.

Photographer Bill Westheimer writes “there are chakrahs in our hands, Jesus had nail holes in his palms, and a sign of worship is to stand with your palms raised. Fortune tellers read palms. Handwriting is analyzed to expose deep secrets. Man’s thumbs differentiate humans from lower species. Our hands are one of our most perceptive senses and still are used as a tool and a weapon, they can caress or crush. Hands build weapons yet heal the sick. Hands contain our absolute legal identities in the fingerprints. We control our world with our hands, and our hands are shaped by our world.”

Discover the Personalities of Hands for yourself.

The Russian emigrant conceptual artist team Vitaly Komar and Alex Melamid are responsible for the projects they titled “The Most Wanted paintings” and “The Least Wanted paintings”. intended to reflect the artists’ interpretation of a professional market research survey about aesthetic preferences and taste in painting. Intending to discover what a true “people’s art” would look like, the artists, with the support of the Nation Institute, hired Marttila & Kiley, Inc. to conduct the first poll. In 1994, they began the process which resulted in America’s Most Wanted and America’s Least Wanted paintings, which were first exhibited under the title “People’s Choice.” Their research resulted in data on the preferences of peoples of numerous countries concerning their attitudes about landscape painting.

While at first glance this may appear to be yet another post that has little to do with photography I would like to point out that I think it stands as a ready available indicator of what influences purchasing decisions for art. Specifically, I think the results can also to some extent be extrapolated to those who practice the art of photography.

I’m not going to suumarise or provide any interpretation here as I know you’re not lazy

Seriously, I’m sure you’re keen to do your own analysis on the results.

The uber cool Utata is a collective of salon-style photographers, writers, and like-minded people who share a compelling interest in the arts. Founded on Flikr, Utata have now created their own voice and identity and this is one site you want to have amongst your favourites. Utata is a fast growing community and actively seeks photographic essays, writings and ideas.

So, if you think you’ve got what it takes then check it out. Even if you don’t I recommend checking it out anyway as you can always lurk in the shadows--like me.

If art were food, Dennis Ropar would be the new McDonaldsâ„¢. Where twenty years prior, Richard Prince appropriated the advertising art of the day in order to leverage it against the American national identity, Denis Ropar instead appropriates the novelty of strange and almost forgotten mannerisms of 40′s and 50′s pop-art.

Like consumerism, the Ropar brand seeks to convince the historically naive twenty-something’s, that frequent the likes of the Euro Trash Bar, that he’s authentic and new whilst surreptitiously appropriating the American pop-art genre—the catalyst of mass-consumerism— as his own brand.

Additionally, Ropar deliberately avoids burdening his young punters with the need to think by keeping his fundamental message simple, unambiguous and idealistic. Brand Ropar doesn’t pussy around inviting punters to reflect on consumerism—he’s selling the Ropar experience. The Ropar factory carries the fight to the masses by leveraging the EBay vending machine and bids us to take-up the anti-consumerist ideal by buying his stencilled canvases replete with stencilled signatures.

Ahhh…. the irony

Postnote: My apologies to anyone who read the complete hash that I posted orginally— it should actually make sense now

In his series entitled The Impressionists’ Salon photographer Neil Folberg recreates the works of Renoir and other impressionists but instead of painting Renoir’s The Luncheon of the Boating Party or Monet’s Water-Lily Pond he photographs them and where relevant using everyday people which, according to Sabine Moder from Art MoCo has included Morisot’s great-granddaughter to pose for a portrait, much the same way Morisot did for Manet. Seeing some of the great impressionists work through the lens of a camera is at once familiar and yet strange.

You can check out his photos over at the Robert Klein Gallery

The debacle currently unfolding over James Frey’s piece of literary SPAM entitled A Million Little Pieces (AMLP) and the subsequent fall-out over Oprah Winfrey’s unqualified endorsement has that whole post-modernist feeling of deja-vu.

Specifically, I refer to Oprah’s book club recommendation ten years ago of Marlo Morgan’s then claimed ‘non-fiction’ book ironically titled Mutant Message Down Under. Like Frey’s book it too used an invisible cloak of authenticity to leverage its sales appeal. Authors and publishing houses, like the marketeers of p*nis enlargement creams, endure little downside to this deceit. Publishing houses continue to reap the benefits of sales in relative corporate anonymity whilst their illegitimate authors retire into wealthy obscurity. Doubleday’s apology for the tens of millions of dollars that Frey duped them into making will not likely be extended to refunds. Nor will they be dropping the book or its author, thereby continuing to wring sales from this and his second book both of which enjoy top ten status in the New York non-fiction best-seller list.

So, just where does the truth lie? For the author of AMLP, I think the truth lies somewhere in his inescapable and addictive ego. For some addicts, AMLP will represent a symbol of new hope and for other addicts James’ fabricated truths and half-truths will further embed the despair at the dishonesty surrounding their own lives. For the parents of addicts, their truth will be the insight they believe that they’ve discovered into their children’s demons without having to actually visit with their children’s minds.

For me however, James’ book speaks to the million little lies of mass consumerism, intent on diluting society’s tenets of reality to the point where reality disappears in helplessness. Not only are we finding it increasingly more difficult to determine fact from fiction but like lab rats we’re slowly being conditioned to give-up trying.

How many aspiring authors embroilled in this crisis of the real entertain ideas of appropriating reality to create a world where truth is stranger through fiction? In the abscence of obvious sanction how many authors are leaning towards this post-modernist lie so successfully leveraged by the Frey’s, Khori’s, Demidenko’s and Morgan’s of the world?

More importantly, how many aspiring authors will also deliberately seek to hijack the dreams and prejudices of the weak in the quest of fifteen minutes? For instance, with Frey’s post-modern and largely un-proven message of abandoning step-programs, just how many addicts will succeed? Tragically, how many addicts in their attempts to live Frey’s message will fail and never recover?