Exam

Edwrd and Hilla Becher’s work feature photography that focuses on structures from Germany.  Their work chooses to focus on the conditions from Germany and showing a simplistic style that aims to only demonstrate what they want you to see.  It is interesting to note the work featured.  They work in the dead pan style and in my opinion they feature the more boring aspect of it, but they also execute it in a very good manner.  The images are simple and not much is going on between each one and so this helps to not allow the viewer to make unnecessary assumptions about what is going on.  Their photographs on Germany are photographs of just that and nothing more.  This forces the viewer to ask questions about themselves rather than the image.  It makes them question the traditional notions of landscapes as well as forces the viewer to make assumptions more heavily than ever done before.  The viewer sometimes finds them asking themselves what is going on and even asks themselves why do they care what the story is.  In post modernism there was an aspect which allowed highly conceptual work to flourish, but also work that really meant nothing.  Why would an image need a concept or why did there need to be a story.  Dead Pan achieves this aspect in that there isn’t anything nice to look at, but rather a straightforward representation on what is actually going on with nothing misleading supposed to happen.  To me this type of photography is rather boring because making assumptions or narratives about people and places isn’t interesting at all.  It also allows people to become more pretentious and forces people to draw conclusions where there aren’t really none because some people want  a story and want something to be there.  I think that their work epitomizes dead pan because much like ansel adams showed beautiful landscapes in a manner that did not need to be seen that way, the Becher’s showed reality how it was and not an idealized version like adams.  I think that showing reality as is is very important to photography because many people choose to question what is true and what is false in an age where things can be manipulated.  If they can be manipulated is all photography false?  The dead pan movement I believe is a response to this in that there is still truth to be seen and that not all life is fake. 

Thomas Struth’s work features architectural work and is part of the dead pan movement.  Struth attended university for architecture and it played a heavy part in his photography due to the amount of architecture his photographs depict.  It isn’t however like landscape or architecture photography done in the past because during the dead pan movement they tried to toss out what was before and do something different that resulted in Struth’s work.  A lot of dead pan was meant to take away bias and so many of it is straightforward and in my opinion boring.  Struth’s images have a highly voyeuristic aspect to each one in that you feel as if you are watching what is occurring rather than viewing the direct scene.  This is a completely new notion of how architecture is seen because rather than taking the image he is taking an image of the people within the surroundings.  To be a voyeur takes the intimacy between the image and the viewer away and rather forces us to become a watcher that isn’t really seen in many other photographs.  Although belonging to the dead pan movement his work in my opinion is about much more than straightforwardness because there is room to speculate.  The viewer has to question who the people are, what are they doing, where are the going, where are they from, and so on which forces the viewer to make assumptions or perhaps create narratives.  It isn’t just about being the voyeur overlooking a scene, but the viewer is given more power and simple observation.  An observer in this aspect is someone who isn’t really part of the scene, but forces himself to become a part of it.  This questions the notion on why Struth wants to depict his photographs in this manner and perhaps he is questioning people in general.  Perhaps people are sometimes watchers who have no business viewing things but choose to force themselves into these scenes.  I think that while his work is a lot better than most dead pan photographers it still isn’t as interesting as other movements of photography.  I like how he forces the perspective of the viewer to become a watcher because that adds a new element to photographs that isn’t seen before, but the surroundings aren’t always interesting.  I think as a critique of society and how we are always watching something happen is interesting, but it still forces us to ask to many questions or to make assumptions. 

Gregor Crewdson’s work features a dramatic lighting set up with photographs hat choose to capture the lives of American people.  Crewdson is known for his work in post-modernism as well as the large set ups he does in order to capture his images.  A lot of time goes on to create each individual photograph with each image capturing different emotions.  His work aims to represent the many different emotions that a person is feeling as well as choosing to show their lives in an almost fantasy matter.  The emotions he chooses to convene vary from the loneliness a person may be feeling to the depression they may be going through.  These types of emotions are prevalent in many middle class people and Crewdson wishes to show not an idealized version of live, but a more ordinary and standard depiction.  These depictions are sometimes a part of all life and with Crewdson’s grand setups it encapsulates the emotions a person may be feeling in a completely aesthetic manner.  His photographs are in fact interesting to look mainly for the lighting he chooses to employ.  The lighting plays a heavy part n that the dramatic nature helps the tone of each image as well as persuades the viewer to make assumptions on what is going on.  I believe his work is very good and that he is almost like a director in that he never actually shoots a camera merely directs what he wants to be captured.  He is able to accurately capture the emotions that a person may be feeling but he does it in a way that isn’t standard.  He chooses to almost show it like a metaphorical aspect of reality rather than a true representation of what loneliness or depression would look like.  I think that his work eally does encapsulate the lives of many people because while the top percent are very content with their lives and the bottom percent are probably miserable, the middle lives of people are in between these two emotions that are so ordinary in today’s world.  I think that Crewdson uses the technological aspect of photography to his full advantage with his use of lighting.  Not only does he mix a great conceptual image, but he employs the technological knowhow that requires the said photograph to work well.  Being able to plan out an image like that takes great effort and he shows a mastery over it. 

Gillian Wearing’s work varies in many different ways.  Her series that deals with her family is in a very conceptual style.  This work features her as she superimposes herself as a main family member, like her mother, brother, or even herself at a younger age, or as a member of her extended family, like her uncle and such.  The Reason for this is because she wants to convey the idea that sometimes we are a part of people and to her she is a part of the people she cares about the most which is her family.  She knows that no matter what she is a part of her family as well as they are a part of her.  She uses the concept to achieve what she wants to be seen.  She uses these highly convincing images that make us question who is being captured or perhaps begs the question how much of us are part of someone else’s life.  Another aspect of her photography is the focus on complete strangers holding up signs.  These feature a more straightforward idea, but it still has a conceptual background.  In each she asks complete strangers to write down anything and the result is a look deeper into people and who they really are.  Some people, like the man from the example, depict their social or economic standings.  The man for example looks to be a business type individual who writes, “I’m Desperate.”  Which begs the question who he is and why he I desperate.  These examinations choose to go further and personal into people’s lives and make us give up our preconceived notions of judgment and really ask what is going on in each image.  Her works feature recurring themes such as a sense of self or an identity.  I believe her work achieves what she sets out to do simply because she is able to use the concept of identity and twist it in a way people don’t expect.  I think her work is pretty good in that as documentary work it chooses to look at an individual and let them say what they want instead of allowing the viewer to make up complete assumptions from nothing.  They allow us to create assumptions, but from the text and not from thin air.  I think that her work if it were new today and never before seen would still work just as well as if it were back then because it is done in a way that isn’t boring. 

Ken Josephson’s work features photography that is highly conceptual.  It forces us to examine our perceptions on reality and how we choose to view things.  He uses his ideas which force a person to examine how they are meant to view things as well as what is meant to be seen.  It takes the notion that the photographer has complete control over the viewer in that the photographer only makes you see what they want you to see and takes it to the extreme level.  It isn’t simply about forced perception or a questioning of reality, but rather an examination on life and what is seen and what we choose not to see.  Some of his work from the examples shows him taking a very simple image as he holds something up to the lens.  The technical aspect of his photography is very simple in that he doesn’t pay much attention to lighting, composition, or framing, but simply wants his idea to come across.  In post modernism this was a very important part of it because work started to become more conceptual than ever before seen.  Ken josephson’s work takes the concept of perceptions and completely flips that table in a manner that hasn’t been seen often.  I like his work, but the aesthetic aspect isn’t as great.  I wish he would have put more thought into what was being seen, but perhaps this is meant to look like simple snapshots rather than highly aesthetic photographs.  Perhaps his hand is meant as a reminder to the viewer that it is indeed fake, but he still wants you to question what is going on.  I think Josephson is highly successful in that the viewer’s perceptions are put into disarray and they are forced to re-examine just what is actually going on in each image.  He doesn’t use any manipulation which is something I find impressive, because while his ideas could be done better with actual manipulation, the fact that he chooses to use none speaks volumes for his skill in thought.  He was able to think up a solution for how we will be able to question reality and follows through in photographs that are highly believable and yet still allows us to know what is going on.  It also reminds me of some surreal paintings in that he isn’t trying to hide anything, but rather show what is being shown.  He chooses to alter our mindsets and hides or shows things behind ach photograph not normally seen. 

Zeke Berman’s work, like Josephson, forces us to question reality, but he does it in a way that allows tricks to played on our minds.  Berman’s work is a lot more different to Josephson’s work, but there is still that notion of perception and how we choose to look at things.  Optical illusions are one of my favorite things and I am a big fan of Escher so seeing his work is really cool.  Berman chooses to force us to question what is seen and what is supposed to be reality much like josephson, but he does it in a manner that I believe is superior to Josephson.  It is normal for an optical illusion to force this question, but to see it in a photograph is something highly extraordinary.  I think it speaks volumes for him as a photographer because not everyone is able to think in that manner let alone execute it as well as he does.  The photograph is almost like a puzzle in that you have to choose what you see and perhaps some of it will be completely missed.  I think his work is really good and at a time where digital manipulation is everywhere today I think it still holds true.  We as a society have become numb to these types of manipulations, but Berman is able to convincingly show what he wants.    I like his work in many ways as well as probably a lot more than Josephson because everything that josephson did wrong berman does right.  To me the arm in josephson’s photographs can get annoying, but the viewer is meant to find the illusion in Berman’s work.  While some are more simple, others will make you question how he did it.  A person’s perceptions are very important to them and so if they are messed with it can create odd situations where reality can be questioned.  When reality is questioned we are forced to ask what is actually real and what is a fantasy and I believe there is something necessary in always questioning reality.  I believe some people are fine with the way things and that these people are way too comfortable and instead should examine their lives and ask why they aren’t questioning reality.  I think once you start to ask these questions you will elevate in wisdom as well as be able to look at things in a different manner that you haven’t been able to before. 

Richard Prince’s work features heavy appropriation which was primarily used in the beginning parts of post modernism.  Appropriation was a very popular form of art and it has been used by many different artist and Prince’s work features almost like a critique on what life is.  Prince began his work by seeing magazines as he would cut them out and put them together to create a completely new idea never before seen.  He dabbled in many different aspects of how to manipulate his imagery, but his goal was still to shown to depict life and what we think it is.  Appropriation in this manner can be used in a highly effective manner, but in my opinion Prince’s work isn’t anything special or extraordinary.  In the digital age you see a lot of appropriation and many of it is not successful while some of it, a small part, really is successful and works well.  I think that appropriation as a tool is highly effective, but Prince’s work doesn’t depict life in the aspect that is believable.  I think many artist after him were able to create much better work and that his work isn’t that good.  Of course this is my opinion and that perhaps others are able to see what I do not.