the photoshow

43rd floor

Fri, 09 Dec 2011 16:02:53 -0500

I hadnt realized how much money goes to the arts from corporate sponsorship. I am envious of Whitney and her access to such priceless works of art, especially the huge collection of very well known photographers. I was so impressed by the big names on the walls, it was not what i expected at all. Her experience of buying art at auction on the daily made me want her job. She has knowledge of so many photographers and artists, and so much of that just comes with experience.

I felt very lucky to be allowed access to all the spaces that we saw. The private dining rooms were elegant, yet small, but with an amazing view of the city. We saw work from some of the biggest names in photography (Lee Friedlander, Harry Calahan, Julia Margaret Cameron, Henry Cartier-Bresson). I was happy to see so many photographs. When I think of a corporate space like that, I don’t necessarily think about priceless original photographs. It is good to see that it is appreciated.

I thought it was interesting when Whitney was talking about choosing artwork for these spaces. She told us about a man who had a Joel Peter Witkin photograph put up in his office and had it covered with a velvet cloth. I would think that this could happen a lot as most big name photographers deal with controversial issues. I think it would be difficult to choose what photograph should go where without knowledge of the people inhibiting that space.

Iain Baxter&

Sun, 04 Dec 2011 20:10:38 -0500

This show was a little hard to grasp because of how conceptual it was. Once i got into it though it was very thought provoking. It was interesting going through the show in the order that i did (Terada then Baxter&) because Terada’s work was so much more conceptually based, the ideas were much more abstract. It seemed that it would have been better to see Baxter& first as somewhat of a warmup for the next show to come.

All that said, i was really struck by the Baxter&’s work. He seemed to really be dissecting ideas that a lot of us think about. The N. E. Thing Co. project was very interesting. The portion of “Aesthetically Claimed Things” and “Aesthetically Rejected Things” really made me think. He took all these things prominent in either pop culture or the art world and labeled them as such. I did not get the feeling that it was a man choosing if something was one or the other, but that these things were just labeled as they were. Baxter& is not Rejecting or Claiming these items, he is representing things that we as a culture have either Rejected or Claimed.

The titles of these pieces were so important to each individual thing. Not only was it written in sharpie on each photograph (along with either a gold or red sticker) but the titles told us exactly what we were looking at. exactly. Baxter& was not held back by the concept of short titles. Heres an example: “ACT #107 Triangular Shaped Visual Sensitivity Information, Telecasted View of Moons Surface from inside Apollo 8 Spacecraft through Window as Seen on Canadian National CBC TV over Sanyo TV set 9”, in North Vancouver, BC Canada December 25 1968,” 1969. He is very thorough in his explanations of what we are looking at, he is not trying to hide anything, because it is not about the object as much as it is about how we have either accepted it or denied it a place in memorable history.

if you have 10 minutes...

Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:29:11 -0500

i know im behind on a couple bloggies.

but this interview is too good. you all should listen.

Martin Parr interview

Online Spaces

Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:45:52 -0500

The internet has changed photography completely. Thanks to internet we are subjected to a total overload of imagery all the time. We see pictures everywhere on the internet. So how can we know which ones should be taken seriously?

Blogs have changed the photography world in the way that artists get their work out there. We all are allowed to have online space, but it is what we do with it that will set us apart. I think that the design of a blog or website only has so much to do with how we percieve the artists work. The design and navigation of a website can make it more or less enjoyable, but in the end it will all come down to the work itself. It is important to be able to see the pictures in a large size so that we can really see them for what they are. If you are shown too many pictures, you can become overwhelmed and uninterested in the artist’s work. Another problem that comes to mind is the transfer of the color and quality of the images from one monitor to another.

I think artists can really benefit from using blogs. They provide a place to experiment with what kind of work they want to persue. They can get feedback from their viewers. They are able to show their veiwers (or can we call them “fans” in this context?) what they are working on this very moment. I think this is the beauty of blogs. You are able to show the world a photograph you took that very same day.

That being said, a photographer that has caught my interest recently is Noah Kalina. His blog, i think, is much better than his website. It has a lot more work on it, and is updated (clearly) more often than the website. He is able to show ongoing projects, and they seem to create themselves over time. Also, the blog allows him to interject video work he has done. He has an interesting style and I think the blog has been a very good tool for him.

Noah Kalina. Blog.

House on FireChristian Patterson

Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:19:04 -0500

House on Fire
Christian Patterson

Falling FlowersChristian Patterson

Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:17:59 -0500

Falling Flowers
Christian Patterson

Crime Unseen

Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:15:20 -0500

I was very impressed by this show. I think in comparison to Our Origins it was a very strong, well thought out exhibit. Every piece was relevent. My favorite section of the show was the room off to the right. When you enter the room your attention is immediately drawn to the huge installation of 24 images taken by Deborah Luster. The piece was called “Teeth for an Eye”. There was no way to miss it when you walked into the room. The individual images were each 2 ft by 2 ft, and they were stacked 4 pictures high on the wall. Every image was taken in a place where a murder had happened. On the card next to the piece every crime was described. I thought this added a whole different level to the piece. Also the format of the pictures (being round) made for a very interesting perspective on these locations. They made you really look IN to the pictures, and you were put right into these locations.

In the same room, around the rest of the walls was a project done by Christian Patterson. This was by far my favorite piece of the show. He took photographs of locations and small bits that were related to a teen couple who went on a killing spree. He uses a few different mediums in the piece. All of the photographs are pigment prints. This gave them a very rich a vivid color. I think of “Falling Flowers” (i think my favorite one) of a corner of a room with floral wallpaper. Also “House on Fire” really has a huge range of vibrant colors that would not be acheivable with a classic c-print. I thought the project was very eerie and intriguing. You were shown the remnents of the crimes including an old telephone, a country road at night, bloody snow (which may have been set up by Patterson), and a shotgun shell.

I really liked Patterson’s style and the way he shot each scene. You all should check out his website and check out his other work.

http://www.christianpatterson.com/

Charles Shotwell

Tue, 15 Nov 2011 23:55:18 -0500

I really liked the Shotwell’s set up. He spoke to us about having access to such a space all the time. It sounds ideal to have an entire building dedicated to your work just yards from your home. His 3 story coach house serves as a facility perfect for his methods. He was very open and friendly from the moment we walked in the door and were sniffed out by the scruffy dog.

He emphasized attitude and talked about not getting defensive about your work. I remember him saying that you should commit to something and go for it full force: “Go out of your envelope and encourage others to do the same.” He talked about using your anxiety and depression about your work to create more and more. (“lets all get depressed and go take pictures”)

Shotwell’s work has a definite purpose. He has a very simple taste in imagery and takes his projects to a conceptual level. The series “Tableau” caught my attention the most. These scenes create an illusion of an object that is larger than life. This would only be possible with his table top method of shooting.

Conduit, Michael SirianniCheck him out, the work on his website...

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:12:00 -0400

Conduit, Michael Sirianni
Check him out, the work on his website is so different from what we saw at Gallery 400.

Intimacies at Gallery 400

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:06:00 -0400

This show was definitely shocking. When David warned us that it would be a little risque I didn’t really know what to expect. The curators John Neff and Lorelei Stewart spoke to us from the beginning when we entered the gallery. I thought it was nice to hear from the people who planned the show, but I wanted to be able to look at the work and form my own view on it before getting so much information from them. I thought they talked a lot, so much that I started to zone out a little and missed some of the things they said.

I thought it was interesting that they chose to put all the video pieces in the same room. Originally I thought there was something weird about it, but after getting to watch some of them it made more sense. Some of the videos needed to be watched in full in order to understand what was going on (Exorcism in January). Others could be just watched in segments, and you would get the jist of it (Sirianni’s CTRL). Lorelei answered my question about the placement of the videos by saying that she wanted the viewer to see those shocking things first. I think this was really effective in keeping that imagery in the back of the viewer’s mind as they entered the more hidden rooms of the gallery. You left that main room with a grimy and slightly violated feeling. These werent images of cliche intimacy, they were experiences of intimacies with a camera (and sometimes another person) that all had an undertone of creepiness. why did they make the show so creepy? Intimacy can be a very beautiful thing but these videos didn’t show that side of it.

However, I can’t forget to mention the photography that was shown. The works by Letoya Ruby Frazier provided a breather from the unclean pieces in the other room. Her images with her mother suggested a strong, intimate relationship that only a mother and daughter could have. They just looked so at home together. I especially liked the stop motion video entitled “Momme Wrestle”. There was a playfulness about it, and I liked the visual quality of the pink wallpaper and the method of stop motion.

As for the images in the far back room that inspired the show, they are all amazing images, but I am not sure that I think of them in relation to this show. I thought the idea behind it was an interesting one, but I wouldnt have connected some of the things if the curators hadn’t filled us in so completely. I thought the show needed (or maybe we just got) too much explanation.

Antonio Perez, Photojournalist

Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:18:53 -0400

Hearing Antonio Perez talk about photography was so wonderful. His outlook is so positive and he has such a “go get em” attitude about what he does. He told us to get ourselves out there and show our work to everyone, and he meant everyone. He said that we shouldnt just show our work to the people who are high up, but also the people who are in the middle. You never know, those people could be looking for your exact aesthetic.

Perez was so inspiring to me, and helped me to think in confidence about my work. He said “Make photos personal, go back to the things you love.” I have found this to be a very important aspect in photography. The things that are close to us are the things we see in a certain way, and that perspective is unique to every person. We should all be drooling over our photographs, we should have an inner drive to photograph, and the end product should be something we never want to look away from.

Perez also talked about the importance of persistence. He spoke specifically of a photograph of a man and his son with all their Bulls gear around them on their front step. His persistence is what brought him to that photograph. When he was turned away at the Bulls game he didn’t just put the project out of his mind thinking “oh well, less work for me!” instead he problem solved and got the job done.

Another thing about him that stood out was his humble quiet nature. I loved how soft spoken he was, letting his photographs do a lot of the talking for him. He was so genuine and caring. He spoke of his subjects with a fondness that showed he cared more about the people in the photographs than the photographs themselves.

“FIND WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, THE MONEY WILL COME LATER.”
-Antonio Perez

Steven E. Gross

Wed, 05 Oct 2011 02:45:53 -0400

In a previous post (which i just deleted) I said a few things that reading back didn’t sound very good. It was nice to meet Steven, he seemed like a really interesting and adventurous guy. I was also really impressed with his space, and collection of cameras and equipment. He certainly has been doing very well for himself. I just get a bit confused when it comes to commercial photography, but I really think Gross blurs the lines between wedding and documentary photography. I liked his style and the eye that he has for small moments in a crowded, social setting. I liked his attitude toward his freedom as a creative worker. Yeah, he is being hired but he says “fuck you” to traditional standards in wedding photography, and follows his own aesthetic.

The only thing I was a little bothered by was how up front he was about how important it was to “pay the bills”. One of the first things he said was that it paid the mortgage. Is this something that should bother me? Because that is the goal, to make bank. But that’s not the main drive for my photography, so it is difficult to hear. It is a bit of a reality check.

I want to say, more power to ya, Steven. You started out in the same boat we are in now, and you made it to the top.

By Kelli Connellfrom the “Double Life” series

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:28:29 -0400

By Kelli Connell
from the “Double Life” series

Kelli Connell's Double Life

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:28:00 -0400

I think it is most interesting to think about Kelli Connell’s work in terms of two sides of the self. These (supposedly) two women are interacting on a very intimate level, and because their faces are the same face it suggests a very intense sense of knowing. They know eachother far beyond the way that you and I know each other. They are in fact the same person. This work is completely set apart from all other attempts at such photostitching, in that such a strong gaze can be found in every photograph along with seemless editing. It seems that the woman looks into her own eyes with such genuine emotion, showing feelings that some of us can’t even bring to the surface. Along with these returned gazes, are many distant ones that would suggest turmoil in the couple’s relationship. Connell shows us such quiet moments that can be read as introspective, that is to say that one figure may represent certain feelings and the other is the opposing view, almost like a devil and angel on her shoulder. In many of these photographs I see one woman comforting the other, to me this represents the mind just trying to keep itself going.

I think about this work and it is hard to compare with one specific artist. I think of Cindy Sherman in the way that these SEEM like self-portraits, but they are not. For Sherman, her self-portraits don’t seem to be of her but of many different women. The two artists are polar opposites in that respect. Also, with its strong feminist subject matter my mind travels to Barbara Kruger with her graphics and editing techniques. But Connell’s work seems to be in no way any negative stance on the male gender (although it does not suggest anything opposite either). So then I think of them solely in their visual elements, and I think of Larry Sultan. His aesthetic includes the same delicate lighting situations, soft reflective moments, and intimate relationships based on a kinship and support system. Although most of his subjects are blankly staring, there is a certain closeness felt toward his subjects. In this same way, there is a closeness between photographer and model in that she represents Connell herself.

It was so nice to hear the artist talk about her work. I really enjoyed learning her process of cutting up contact sheets to choose the right combinations of photographs. This step is probably the most fulfilling for Connell. The methodic and mechanical nature of the process, I can guess, is theraputic to her. This step seems so primitive within the sequence of an art that has become so technology based.

Dad on Bed, 1985By Larry Sultan

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:27:00 -0400

Dad on Bed, 1985
By Larry Sultan

Art Institute Visit

Tue, 20 Sep 2011 03:14:20 -0400

I love that every semester at least one of my classes takes a trip to the Art Institute. This last trip was exciting, but also a bit of a let down. The images by Ralph Eugene Meatyard were creepy and mysterious; i loved them. They all had a silent quality, almost like a chilly gust of wind. The mystery behind them is what made them so intriguing. The viewer is allowed to create any kind of narrative he/she pulls from their subconscious (as most of them are untitled). The amount of images added to the anonymity of the people in the photographs, you see them in so many different forms they almost take on a creature-like persona. I felt like i looked at photographs of a hundred different people, but in reality it was probably only four or five. The small size of the images was perfect for the amount that was shown. It brought out their complexity and really put you into the setting with these faceless people.

I was really confused by Matt Keegan’s work: scattered snapshots we’ve all seen before, nailed to a sheet of maroon metal, on two seperate walls, with what seems like 5 books (turns out its 1 book) with no clear connection to said snapshots. I see that this was meant to be some kind of tribute to both Chicago and New York, but visually it was very displeasing to me.

I am pretty indifferent toward Paterson’s work. I can respect the idea behind it and what she is trying to bring to the surface. But for me this work is more about questioning art as a whole. More specifically, questioning the authenticity of photography as a medium. She could be playing with us, or she could be for real. I think that is what makes this work so challenging, the fact that we cannot know whether or not these are actually images of specific locations where light never reaches.

I really enjoyed Heather Rassmussen’s images representing various disasters from around the world. Wait, read that back? That sounds bad. But they were bright and well lit, resembling some kind of claymation set. I could see them turned into stop-motion. What caught my eye was the graphic, geometric design of the work. There is something so pure and fundamental about the planes of a box. They are sturdy and harmoneous when organized amongst each other correctly, but when one wobbles or gets crushed, the entire structure is destroyed. This work was extremely metaphoric. These items look like childrens’ playing blocks, but they represent such a heavy and pressing issue that our world is faced with. We should be more careful. This makes me think of the care that Rassmussen put into meticulously forming every box and carefully setting every scene.

Ana Mendieta. At the Art Institute. Ana. Mendieta. It was so thrilling to see her work in person. It was heartwrenching to see the outline of her figure repeated so many times, because of her death at 36. The image that sucked me in the most was one of the “silueta” images. With the outline of her body filled with white flowers and a border of green shrubbery surrounding it, it was such a funerary image to me. I think it is so eerie that so much of her work referenced mortality and death and the fragility of our existence, when her life ended so early. Her work is so dark. Especially “Untitled (Blood Sign #1)”, the video installation. The sounds of the water provide a blanket of comfort from the horrific imagery on the opposite wall. The quality of her images was so raw, it was not about the photograph to her, it was about the action.

“In Mendieta’s work, art becomes the sheer, absurd impulse to impose your presence — which can include a female presence — on the world. Art becomes a kind of accidental side effect of being born to act, and of being conscious of your special presence as the person acting.”

-Blake Gopnik, Washington Post. In “‘Silueta’ of a Woman: Sizing Up Ana Mendieta

Silueta, Ana Mendieta

Tue, 20 Sep 2011 02:46:00 -0400

Silueta, Ana Mendieta

Our Origins

Mon, 12 Sep 2011 22:41:23 -0400

Our Origins at the Museum of Contemporary Photography was an interesting viewpoint on the beginnings of our existence. The show demonstrated both subtle likenesses between us and nature (most prominently primates), and put things into perspective on a cosmic level. It addressed the many degrees of human existence, but I thought it mostly showed us the foundations of our existence as a whole planet. There were examples of dinosaur (and human) tracks from millions of years ago, along with plant specimens that have been around for hundreds of thousands of years. Not only were we shown how we as humans interact on an intimate level (I think of the photographs upstairs with the tiny lab-grown organism) but also how we view our spot in the universe (with the video in the stairwell, also the punched out photographs of stars, and even the graphite drawings of the photocopied book pages).

One piece that specifically caught my attention was one of Rachel Sussman’s photographs entitled “Welwitschia Mirabilis #0707-2241 (2,000 years old; namib naukluft desert, nambia”. It is a large, color photograph of a pile of leaves sitting curled up in a rocky, dusty landscape. It is surrounded by a few small patches of other life. The sun is harsh and bright, causing dark shadows under the long, green leaves. The plant appears dead in its mannerisms, but its’ colors suggest life. The sand serves as a light background to the light colored plants. These pastels, in addition to the soft, light cyan sky are the majority of the picture. The dark shadows on the plant stand out so intensely, almost to suggest this is a study of the plant in its survival techniques in such a harsh landscape. What first struck my interest was the quality of the photograph, in that it looked like a painting. The focus of the plant itself is a bit soft, the only focus really is on the very foreground, on the rocky ground. I wondered if the soft focus was from wind blowing the leaves slightly during the exposure but after a second look, they seem too sturdy to be disturbed by the wind. This photograph is interesting because it documents a plant that not many have had a chance to see. It is interesting that this plant is still around even after 2,000 years. Its age, and wilted qualities give it a personality of a wise old man.

first one

Thu, 08 Sep 2011 23:41:00 -0400

Mein name ist Stephanie Eckermann.

I am from Des Moines, Iowa. I am interested in pictures, I like biology, I love to ride my bike, I love to draw, I like to paint, I love taking and making pictures. I love going to school, I love my dad and my mom. I love my three siblings and two nephews. I love going to exhibits, and looking at contemporary art. I like looking at old art too. I enjoy very minimal things. I love color photographs. I love working in the darkroom, there is something about it. I like making things with my hands. I love looking at things made by hand. I like talking to people about things made by hand. I like talking to people I dont know. I will talk a lot in this class. because I really like talking about art, especially photographs. I can’t read very fast, I’ve never left the country, and I prefer [BLUE] pens to pencils.

you can look at some of my pictures here:
http://stephanieeckermann.wordpress.com/