When something is reproduced for so many times is that art?
No, i don't think that it is art anymore. Why, because the quality of that art may be reduced and its value is not that valuable anymore. The best analogy for that is the skin allergy. The more you rub the more it gets itchy.
What’s the importance of the mechanical reproducibility of the art?
It is important however because let's say for example, the "art" got damage and it is going to an exhibition and the organizers doesn't want that art to look bad, they ask for another "copy" of the art so they can still proceed the exhibition.
What was the impact on mechanical reproducibility on the society?
Most of the people may think that that art is the original work of that artist but actually it is the imitation of that art. People got fooled and faked because an imitation may look the same as the original but the quality and value of the work is not their.
Is photography art, or contribution to the art?
Yes, it is a contribution because according to the definition of the art, it is a matter of expressing someone's feeling in a form of art or abstract.
How and why Henry Pitch Robinson created Fading Away? What was the reason?
It depicted the death of the family and it gave it an emotional response to the viewers.
Photography has impacted the world of art and influenced some changes in the area of accessibility to art. If mechanical reproduction created revolution, what is happening now with the digitalization?
Digitalization reproduction was created by the innovation of mechanical reproduction. Digitalization will create another revolution in the advancement of digitization.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Photo Manipulation
I prefer to chose photos from the internet because I find it more interesting if I modify other's snapshot. So in order for me to do the editing, I used www.picnik.com. The reason for that is that it is easy and very simple to use. I know that Adobe Photoshop is the most popular photo editor but I didn't use it because I only want the color and definition to enhance. However though, Adobe Photoshop is a great tool for editing.
FIRST PHOTO:
ORIGINAL:
This is the original photo that i grabbed from the internet. As you can see, it is very plain and dead. What i did is I enhance the background which happens to be the sunset and make it more red. This process is adjusting the saturation and temperature of the photo using the editor. I adjusted the saturation to 75% and I randomly adjusted the temperature until I got my desirable red color. The reason for that is I don't want it to look so red and I don't even want it to look so pale. I even adjusted the sharpness of the picture to have a higher definition. As you can see on the original, the rocks are not very clear. So what I did is I set the sharpness to 60% and a strength of 30%. To much sharpness gives me an effect of a cutout subject so I made it only 60%. Too less makes it even more worse than the original. Basically the editing is just a matter of playing around until you get the desired outcome. I think that there is no formula to follow when doing the editing. I know that it depends on the picture and the quality of the picture.
To get an idea of what I'm talking about, here is the edited picture that i made.
SECOND PHOTO:
ORIGINAL:
For the second photo I did, it is also from the internet. The editing i did for this one is not similar but I gave it a try. I'm imagining this picture as a scene in a not so classic movie. So what I did is I reduce the exposure a bit, adjusted the saturation for 10% and temperature for 40%. For the shadow, i just play around until i got my desired outcome. And i adjusted the contrast for -10%. The original photo doesn't have a problem at all. I just want to imagine it as a movie.
EDITED:
FIRST PHOTO:
ORIGINAL:
This is the original photo that i grabbed from the internet. As you can see, it is very plain and dead. What i did is I enhance the background which happens to be the sunset and make it more red. This process is adjusting the saturation and temperature of the photo using the editor. I adjusted the saturation to 75% and I randomly adjusted the temperature until I got my desirable red color. The reason for that is I don't want it to look so red and I don't even want it to look so pale. I even adjusted the sharpness of the picture to have a higher definition. As you can see on the original, the rocks are not very clear. So what I did is I set the sharpness to 60% and a strength of 30%. To much sharpness gives me an effect of a cutout subject so I made it only 60%. Too less makes it even more worse than the original. Basically the editing is just a matter of playing around until you get the desired outcome. I think that there is no formula to follow when doing the editing. I know that it depends on the picture and the quality of the picture.
To get an idea of what I'm talking about, here is the edited picture that i made.
SECOND PHOTO:
ORIGINAL:
For the second photo I did, it is also from the internet. The editing i did for this one is not similar but I gave it a try. I'm imagining this picture as a scene in a not so classic movie. So what I did is I reduce the exposure a bit, adjusted the saturation for 10% and temperature for 40%. For the shadow, i just play around until i got my desired outcome. And i adjusted the contrast for -10%. The original photo doesn't have a problem at all. I just want to imagine it as a movie.
EDITED:
Monday, April 18, 2011
DIANE ARBUS AND CINDY SHERMAN
DIANE ARBUS AND CINDY SHERMAN
SIMILARITIES:
Diane Arbus mastered her technique of using a square format, which emphasizes the subject more than the photograph’s composition. She also used flash lighting, which gives her work a sense of theatricality and surrealism. She began at that time to explore the subjects that would occupy her for much of her career: individuals living on the outskirts of society and “normalcy,” such as nudists, transvestites, dwarfs, and the mentally or physically handicapped. Her own evident intimacy with the extraordinary subjects of her photos resulted in images that engage the sympathy and collusion of the viewer and elicit a strong response.
The subject of sexual fetishism, sadism, misogyny is Sherman’s work. The subject of sexual fetishism, sadism, misogyny is Sherman is essentially a conceptual artist using photography rather than a photographer in love with the medium. Once she transitioned to color, this distinction informed her work in a negative way. You can't lie in living color.
ARTISTIC OBJECTIVE OF THEIR PHOTOGRAPH
Arbus’s unrelentingly direct photographs of people who live on the edge of societal acceptance, as well as those photographs depicting supposedly "normal" people in a way that sharply outlines the cracks in their public masks, were controversial at the time of their creation and remain so today.
Sherman is essentially a conceptual artist using photography rather than a photographer in love with the medium. Once she transitioned to color, this distinction informed her work in a negative way. You can't lie in living color.
WORK UNIQUELY FEMALE IN PERSPECTIVE
Arbus studied under Lisette Model. Model encouraged Arbus to concentrate on personal pictures and to further develop what Model recognized as a uniquely incisive documentary eye. Soon after Arbus began her studies with Lisette Model, she began to devote herself fully to documenting transvestites, twins, midgets, people on the streets and in their homes, and asylum inmates. Arbus's pictures are almost invariably confrontational: the subjects look directly at the camera and are sharply rendered, lit by direct flash or other frontal lighting. Her subjects appear to be perfectly willing, if not eager, to reveal themselves and their flaws to her lens.
Sherman’s repertoire of images has included movie stars, centerfold nudes, fairytale characters, victims of disasters, and historical figures. Some of her portraits have produced comic or grotesque effects with plastic body parts, dolls, and her own made up body.
PHOTOGRAPHY OF DIANE ARBUS
PHOTOGRAPHY OF CINDY SHERMAN
INTERPRETATION
My interpretation on their photograph is that it is very bold and purposely intended for guys. In my opinion, their photographs can attract guys if it is on a men’s magazine. I said that because most of their models are half naked and/or naked. However, it contains a deep meaning and very difficult to understand.
SOURCES:
http://www.masters-of-photography.com/S/sherman/sherman_articles4.html
http://www.masters-of-photography.com/A/arbus/arbus_articles1.html
SIMILARITIES:
Diane Arbus mastered her technique of using a square format, which emphasizes the subject more than the photograph’s composition. She also used flash lighting, which gives her work a sense of theatricality and surrealism. She began at that time to explore the subjects that would occupy her for much of her career: individuals living on the outskirts of society and “normalcy,” such as nudists, transvestites, dwarfs, and the mentally or physically handicapped. Her own evident intimacy with the extraordinary subjects of her photos resulted in images that engage the sympathy and collusion of the viewer and elicit a strong response.
The subject of sexual fetishism, sadism, misogyny is Sherman’s work. The subject of sexual fetishism, sadism, misogyny is Sherman is essentially a conceptual artist using photography rather than a photographer in love with the medium. Once she transitioned to color, this distinction informed her work in a negative way. You can't lie in living color.
ARTISTIC OBJECTIVE OF THEIR PHOTOGRAPH
Arbus’s unrelentingly direct photographs of people who live on the edge of societal acceptance, as well as those photographs depicting supposedly "normal" people in a way that sharply outlines the cracks in their public masks, were controversial at the time of their creation and remain so today.
Sherman is essentially a conceptual artist using photography rather than a photographer in love with the medium. Once she transitioned to color, this distinction informed her work in a negative way. You can't lie in living color.
WORK UNIQUELY FEMALE IN PERSPECTIVE
Arbus studied under Lisette Model. Model encouraged Arbus to concentrate on personal pictures and to further develop what Model recognized as a uniquely incisive documentary eye. Soon after Arbus began her studies with Lisette Model, she began to devote herself fully to documenting transvestites, twins, midgets, people on the streets and in their homes, and asylum inmates. Arbus's pictures are almost invariably confrontational: the subjects look directly at the camera and are sharply rendered, lit by direct flash or other frontal lighting. Her subjects appear to be perfectly willing, if not eager, to reveal themselves and their flaws to her lens.
Sherman’s repertoire of images has included movie stars, centerfold nudes, fairytale characters, victims of disasters, and historical figures. Some of her portraits have produced comic or grotesque effects with plastic body parts, dolls, and her own made up body.
PHOTOGRAPHY OF DIANE ARBUS
PHOTOGRAPHY OF CINDY SHERMAN
INTERPRETATION
My interpretation on their photograph is that it is very bold and purposely intended for guys. In my opinion, their photographs can attract guys if it is on a men’s magazine. I said that because most of their models are half naked and/or naked. However, it contains a deep meaning and very difficult to understand.
SOURCES:
http://www.masters-of-photography.com/S/sherman/sherman_articles4.html
http://www.masters-of-photography.com/A/arbus/arbus_articles1.html
Monday, April 4, 2011
Virtual Essay
Richard Larios, a famous Filipino photographer. His style is simple but somehow unique. He is a landscape and artistic photographer and have a different approach on his technique.Larios take the advantage of the lighting. Here are some of his photos.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Press photography versus Art photography
PRESS PHOTO 1
This picture of Jewish woman challenging Israeli security forces as they remove illegal settlers in the West Bank.
Photographer: Oded Balilty (Associated Press)
PRESS PHOTO 2
A fireman rescued a critical infant during the Oklahoma bombing
Photographer: Charles Porter
Source: www.oklahomacitybombing.com
ART PHOTO 1
A photo of a bridge reflecting on the water
Photographer: Greg Rodgers
Source: www.lexingtonkyphotographers.com
ART PHOTO 2
Photo of the Yellow Stripe Hwy outside the Monument Valley.
Photographer: Michael Reichmann
Source: www.luminous-landscape.com
Main Differences between them
The Press photography is different from the Art photography because in Press photograph, you can visually see what its meaning. In other words, what you see is what you get. Press photographs often used by the media to express visually what is going on in other parts of the world. Most of the Press photographs are not edited because its intention is to deliver the news visually.
The Art photography has a deeper meaning compared to the Press photography. In Art photographs, the photo could mean two things because it’s taken artistically. Maybe some viewer of the Art photographs cannot see the abstract of the photo compare to the photographer who did the shot and see it differently. Compared to the Press photographs, Art photographs can be edited, retouched and revised. It is because its purpose is not to demonstrate a current event but to present an artistic photograph.
Like what Charles Caffin said “There are two distinct roads in photography - the utilitarian and the aesthetic: the goal of the one being a record of facts, and the other an expression of beauty.” In other words, one is intended for media and the other one is for exhibit.
Similarities between them
Both type of photography shares one common feature, artistic views. Art photographs are taken artistically as well as the Press photographs. It is easy to take a photo but incorporating its meaning is hard to do. Photographers of the two types visualize each scene so that they won’t mess up. That is why both types are taken artistically and having its meaning intended for different purpose.
Altering Press photograph
As mentioned above, Press photographs should tell the truth and intended to tell a story. Altering a press photograph is like quoting a word. You shouldn’t add extra words nor erase some words on the quote because that is not the original quotation anymore. Same analogy applies to the press photography. It is not necessary to be altered, edited, and revised.
Altering Art photograph
Compared to the Press photography, art photographs can be altered. It is necessary to get it edited and revised because the photographer may not be satisfied or happy on the shot he made. Besides, its purpose is to portray an artistic image and the photographers should do their best to make their shot presentable on appealing.
Friday, February 4, 2011
The Role of portraits in the early days of photography and portraits today
Main Differences and Similarities between Portraits in the Early Days of Photography and Portraits Today
Back in the days, portrait was only for people who were rich. They use it when one of their family members died. They then give or pass that portrait to the other member of the family and it was developed black and white. It was hard for the photographers to take a good shot of the subject because they need a longer time to process the shot and it wasn’t that good quality. As a result of that, the subject has to stay still just to get a good shot. Also back then, you must be knowledgeable in order to hold a camera and only photographers are allowed to take pictures. Before a portrait is taken, it should be in a studio where proper equipments are necessary to make a nice shot. Nowadays, everyone has a camera. Because of that, if someone wants to get its portrait shot, they can do it right away. The good thing nowadays is that the subject doesn’t have to stay still for a long time because the shooting can be done in second or so and they can get a good quality depending on the megapixels of the camera used.
The photographer and the subject of photographs in the past and today
Photographer back then were professional artist who were knowledgeable and passionate on their career. They have to be professional because the costs of the equipments were very costly and not everyone can afford. In addition to that, cameras back then were hard to operate and only the knowledgeable photographers can use it. These professional artists have their own studios were they do their job. Their subjects were wealthy family who wants their portrait shot. In this day and age, a person who wants to be a photographer doesn’t have to be professional and passionate. They just have to take a snap shot of something they want to shoot. This photo shooting done by unprofessional person doesn’t have to be in a studio because they have this portable and hi-tech digital or analog camera that they can bring anywhere. Unlike the subject back then, subjects nowadays where just random things they see.
The impact on technology on the portraits in the past and today
There wasn’t really an impact on technology on the portraits in the past. Maybe because the technology back then was not yet popular. However, today’s portraits have been impacted by the technology. These days, portraits can be edited, retouched, cropped and other stuffs by simply using some technological advancement such as Photoshop and other computer programs. The amazing feature of the Photoshop is that it can make the portraits today (which is colored) to be black and white to imitate the portrait back in the days.
(Photo edited to black and white effect using Photoshop)
Back in the days, portrait was only for people who were rich. They use it when one of their family members died. They then give or pass that portrait to the other member of the family and it was developed black and white. It was hard for the photographers to take a good shot of the subject because they need a longer time to process the shot and it wasn’t that good quality. As a result of that, the subject has to stay still just to get a good shot. Also back then, you must be knowledgeable in order to hold a camera and only photographers are allowed to take pictures. Before a portrait is taken, it should be in a studio where proper equipments are necessary to make a nice shot. Nowadays, everyone has a camera. Because of that, if someone wants to get its portrait shot, they can do it right away. The good thing nowadays is that the subject doesn’t have to stay still for a long time because the shooting can be done in second or so and they can get a good quality depending on the megapixels of the camera used.
(An old portrait of a family)
The photographer and the subject of photographs in the past and today
Photographer back then were professional artist who were knowledgeable and passionate on their career. They have to be professional because the costs of the equipments were very costly and not everyone can afford. In addition to that, cameras back then were hard to operate and only the knowledgeable photographers can use it. These professional artists have their own studios were they do their job. Their subjects were wealthy family who wants their portrait shot. In this day and age, a person who wants to be a photographer doesn’t have to be professional and passionate. They just have to take a snap shot of something they want to shoot. This photo shooting done by unprofessional person doesn’t have to be in a studio because they have this portable and hi-tech digital or analog camera that they can bring anywhere. Unlike the subject back then, subjects nowadays where just random things they see.
(Portrait photography before)
There wasn’t really an impact on technology on the portraits in the past. Maybe because the technology back then was not yet popular. However, today’s portraits have been impacted by the technology. These days, portraits can be edited, retouched, cropped and other stuffs by simply using some technological advancement such as Photoshop and other computer programs. The amazing feature of the Photoshop is that it can make the portraits today (which is colored) to be black and white to imitate the portrait back in the days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)