The more one knows about an artist or a particular work of art by an artist the closer the bond. Insight, the combination of seeing while learning to read or interpret a work of art provides depth and conveys purpose. This “statement” must on some level connect both artist and viewer. Art should always be a purposeful creative expression. Its conveyance is both external and internal. Visual expression should be tactile, and must be felt and not just seen, to seduce an emotion.
Art is different things to different people. In general, art is the way we depict our society, the way we convey our feelings and our thoughts. My view is that, art should have a lasting or timeless quality and an aesthetic appeal capable of connecting one generation to another.
Far too frequently popular culture is trendy and disposable; attempting to be hip by being superficial with little knowledge of the past and a shallow understanding of the present. Art trends have become increasingly reliant on commercial fads to elicit emotions, as if having little to say and shouting it, further dulling the senses. This sound of no one listening is void of critical thinking. The result is the further dumbing of societies, as if searching for the lowest common denominator from which to profit.
Contemporary art falls into one of two broad categories. Pop art reflecting and projecting commercial fads and trends, feeding upon itself, constantly changing, greased by the wheels of commerce. While pushing boundaries, it remains reliant on proven themes of marketing. These works while often-clever are rarely memorable.
The second form of contemporary art is derived from individual artists who are driven to interpret and express. Here the approach is more personal; the desire is to connect and to create lasting value. The artist is searching for the ability to speak to succeeding generations and to strike a universal cord of consciousness. This should be the goal of any serious artist.
The arts are interwoven without regard to their dimensional existence. The visual arts share many of the same qualities. Consider the use of line, form, space, texture, perspective and lighting, these are shared elements of visual expression regardless of the medium.
Photography without question is the most widely used and relied upon tool of visual expression. Consider for a moment the impact the camera has on our daily lives. The camera entertains us, it informs us, and it documents our societies. The camera creates a visual history. Virtually everyone in contemporary society either owns or has access to a camera. The camera has become so common place that we take it for granted. Rarely is the camera compared to the painter’s brush or the sculptor’s chisel. In the hands of an artist the camera becomes a tool for visual interpretation.
Photography is a unique blend of science and technology. The knowledge and the use of optics in Europe have evolved from the 12th century. By the middle of the 16th century, the Camera Obscura with the use of mirrors was known to have been used as an optical aid in painting. It is no coincidence that during this period that a more natural perspective is achieved both in portraiture and landscape painting, calumniating in the High Renaissance. I’ll mention two examples from which to draw comparisons. Gothic Art starting around 1150 is perhaps best known as the Age of the Great Cathedrals. Paintings from the period were stylized religious depictions. Subjects were placed within the paintings without thought of perspective. Detail was lacking, lighting was flat and shadow less. Simon Martini’s The Road to Calvary, circa 1340, is an excellent example of this non-realistic approach to representational painting. Conversely, Hans Holbein’s The Ambassadors, painted in 1533, displays a remarkable use of lighting, detail and realistic linear perspective. The artist left us a clue as to his use of optics. The distorted skull could only be achieved by projecting the subject. Early “cameras” were simple optical projectors. For centuries scientists, had known of the Divine Proportion. Stated mathematically through the Fibonacci sequence. Albrecht Dürer in 1525 produced his famous woodcut entitled Lute. Using analytical linear perspective, he was able to accurately depict a curved object. While it was possible to create, a natural perspective using mathematical ratios, the process was extremely slow. The use of optics as a means to render correct linear perspective with relative ease of use appears to have been the preferred method.
Some three centuries later another optical advancement occurred. The Camera Lucida patented in 1806 featured a prism with two hinged reflecting surfaces. While the Camera Lucida required some experimentation, and was difficult to master, its major advantages were its portability and the ability to function under a wide range of lighting conditions. Although it proved to be a great optical aid principally in the rendering of landscapes, its awkwardness led one of its users, William Henry Fox Talbot to realize the need to fix the image permanently on a chemically treated surface. The beginnings of modern photography. If someone is interested in exploring in greater detail the impact optics played in linear perspective and its application to classical paintings I would strongly suggest investing in David Hockney’s book Secret Knowledge.
Photography literally means light writing. Experimentation had begun in the 1820s. The quest to permanently fix the fleeting image of the Camera Obsura or the Camera Lucida had drawn together artist, scientist, and intellectuals. In January 1839, an announcement was made in an official bulletin published by the French Academy of Sciences. Louis Daguerre, a French painter, is credited with creating the first photographic method called Daguerreotype. Previously, Daguerre had formed a partnership with Joseph Niépce; their goal was to produce a fixed image by exposing light to a chemically treated metal plate. Niépce’s prior independent research into what he referred to as heliography had produced what must be considered the first photograph in 1827. The image was titled View From His Window At LeGras. Niépce’s process required an eight-hour exposure, hardly practical, simply a beginning. Louis Daguerre in 1838, some five years after the death of Joseph Niépce, produced Boulevard de Temple, Paris. Daguerreotype images required exposure times ranging from a few minutes to one hour depending on the quality of light. The Daguerreotype method’s greatest strength was its ability to produce a finely detailed image. The drawback was the method’s inability to produce duplicate prints.
During the same period of time, in England, William Henry Fox Talbot was working on what he described as photogenic drawing. Talbot began his research in 1834. The technique was later referred to as Calotype or Talbotype photography. Early experimentation revolved around science and the beginning of modern chemistry. No one contributed more to this process than Sir John Hershel, who in 1819, discovered hyposulphite of soda or hypo. Hypo stopped the continuing action of light on silver deposits therefore stabilizing the image. Hershel freely shared his knowledge with early photographic pioneers around the world. Another contribution Hershel shared with Talbot was regarding terminology. Hershel preferred the term photography instead of photogenic drawing. The term photography is believed to have first been used by Brazilian Hercules Florence and the German astronomer Johann Von Maedler. Herschel was the first to use the terms negative and positive referring to inverse and reverted images.
With Daguerre’s announcement in January 1839, Talbot was forced to publish his findings. Talbot had done little or no research since 1837. His announcements were made within weeks of Daguerre’s both to the Royal Society and the Royal Institution in London. An additional announcement was sent to the French Academy of Sciences in Paris. Where Talbot’s methods varied from Daguerre’s was in the use of materials. Talbot used chemically treated paper on which to produce his images. The images could be reproduced. The advent of modern film.
The disadvantages to Talbot’s approach were twofold. First, the image was not as clear or as detailed as Daguerre’s. Second, they would fade with time. The problem of fading would persist until the late 19th century. Paper however did offer aesthetic choices. One could alter and affect the printed image through manipulation. Density, tonality, and hand coloring of calotype prints made it a creative pursuit. While Daguerre and Talbot share much of the credit for the development of photography hundreds of lesser-known individuals from around the world contributed to its advancement. For more information on this topic, I recommend Naomi Rosenblum’s book titled A World History of Photography.
As technological advancements increased, the many uses of photography became apparent. Consider the variety of subjects that had been the domain of traditional visual artist, particularly works of drawing, etching and painting. Prior to photography, the desire of the artist had been to reproduce the subject in the most realistic manner possible. Technique was more important than interpretation. What could be more realistic than a well-done photograph? Its practical application was broad ranged. Journalism, portraiture, exploration, city and rural landscapes were now subjects for the camera. So, where did these new technological advancements leave the traditional visual artist? They were left to explore their inner imaginations. It is my belief that the freedom to grow from the representational to the interpretive was nurtured by the advancements in photography. Consider French Impressionist painting and the many movements it spawned. Every aspect of the post 1860 era in French and European art changed dramatically, the choice of subject, composition, perspective, hues, lighting, and application flew in the face of tradition, freeing the creative spirit. Visual artists travelled from the representational to the interpretive to seek their individual expression.
The earliest photography could hardly be traditional and seemed marginally representational but it was creative. Starting with Joseph Niépce and Louis Deguerres, these earliest photographic works seem surreal. Due to their extremely long exposure times they seem representational of what became influential to other artists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Examples Niépce’s View From His Window At Le Gras, 1827 and Marc Chagall’s Paris Through My Window, 1913. Consider the rectangular plane to the left of both images and the hauntingly surreal cast of shadow and light. Again, consider the surreal dreamlike shadows in Daquerres Boulevard DeTemple, Paris, 1838 with Giorgio De Chirico The Melancholy and Mystery of a Street, 1904. The visual arts are interwoven by the cycles of time and the universal patterns of thought.
In the 1870s Americans started a great westward movement. While the Lewis and Clark exploration, through the use of “traditional” artists, provided a glimpse of the American West an accurate study had never been commissioned. American landscape photography owes its western heritage to those adventurers employed by the government sponsored Hayden surveys. Their task was to document the vastness and beauty of the American landscape with the use of their cameras. A.J. Russel, William Henry Jackson, and Timothy H. O’Sullivan were among the most notable. Their style was straightforward with clarity and purpose. By romanticizing a land of timeless beauty, they motivated families to relocate, searching for a better future following the American Civil War. They also left a photographic legacy that would inspire others for generations to come.
Photography has had many uses and application. Let us look at the artistic application viewed from a pictorial perspective. Pictorialism championed aesthetics through the choice of subject matter and careful composition. Pictorialism’s desire was to capture or create visual and emotional impact. While all photographic images are a form of documentation, pictorialism conveys a romantic timeless quality capable of speaking to succeeding generations. Photography as art.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries a great debate was occurring. Photography had been considered more craft than art by the traditional world of fine art. The photo secessionist of the era wanted to separate themselves in thought more than style or genre. Led by Alfred Stieglitz and F. Holland Day and whose notable members included Clarence White and Edward Steichen, together they and others formed the Photo Secessionist Movement. Technique and subject matter were secondary, if photographers considered themselves to be a secessionist they were. Sharp, clear, straightforward images were shown alongside images using romanticized soft focus. The shared belief was that photography was an art form. Photography was an expression, it conveyed feeling and mood, it could touch an emotional cord. It was the Europeans who first acknowledged photography as an art, the struggle for acceptance occurred in America. To alter popular opinion, photographs were now being shown alongside paintings and drawings in galleries and exhibitions. Alfred Stieglitz was the first in America to exhibit works of French Impressionists and Pablo Picasso. He believed strongly in Georgia O’Keeffe and provided Ansel Adams his first east coast exhibit. Edward Steichen organized the first one-man exhibitions in America of Matisse and Cézanne. The secessionist pioneered the acceptance of photography as fine art.
The Modernist movement occurred between 1920 and 1940 the period between the World Wars. For the first time, the full potential of photography was being explored. The “New Vision” used a variety of styles, approaches, and techniques. Photography once again shared much in common with the other visual artist form this era. Influenced by Cubism and the aesthetics associated with Dadaism and Surrealism the modernist sought visual experimentation. Close ups, unusual angles, solarization, photo collage and montage were among the most commonly used techniques. The condition of the human psyche, political and social conflict, a new respect for machine technology lay at its base. The modern world required a “new vision”.
Again, Europe took the lead; however, this time the influences flowed from central and eastern Europe spreading quickly throughout the industrial world including Japan and North America. In America, the “New Vision” found a following with West Coast photographers. West Coast Modernism meant Precisionism emphasizing the material properties of the real world and the absolute unqualified objectivity of the camera. Clarity, detail, the use of light and shadows were incorporated into organic designs. The Modernist replaced the notion of 19th century dreamy romanticism. Popular “artistic” pictorial photography had become lazy or retro in thinking, satisfied to revisit in style and theory impressionist painting of the 1860s and 1870s. West Coast Modernism was a reaction against what Edward Weston and Ansel Adams referred to as the fuzzie wuzzies. The photographic medium proved to be well suited for capturing with precision the full range of form and texture.
In 1931, a brief collaboration of artists was formed the now famous F/64 Group based in San Francisco. They perhaps more than any other association of photographers left a lasting and memorable legacy. Their philosophical approach was passed to students and admirers influencing the aesthetics of photography to this day. Formed by Edward Weston and Ansel Adams its members included Imogen Cunningham, William VanDyke, Sonya Naskowiak, Henry Swift, and John Paul Edwards. Their first exhibit opened November 15, 1932 at the M. H. deYoung Museum in San Francisco.
While an artist must seek his or her own expression, the admiration of others is only natural. There are four 20th century photographers whose philosophy I admire. The first is Edward Weston, the one photographer who best represented both the soft focus romantic style of the pictorialist and the willingness to adapt philosophically to the new modernism. Edward Weston was a major influence in west coast “Straight Photography” combining precision with sensual realism. His images spoke with passion revealing the power of line and form. Two examples, first Pepper No. 30 taken in 1930, the famous embrace, and Toadstool taken in 1931, a study in rhythmic sensuality. He converted the ordinary so as to seem more real, more erotic.
Perhaps the most recognized photographer in history was Ansel Adams. His work dates from the late 1920s. Adams’ sensitivity and respect for the transient aspects of nature lay at the core of his creations. He viewed nature not through the means of traditional composition but by the quality and patterns of light. Adams’ clarity was derived through his interpretation and his affirmation of life. His conveyance spoke of a much larger organic design. Through photography Adams linked modern man to nature’s pristine past. His message will remain timeless.
Minor White’s work was highly imaginative. His work dates from the late 1930s. White’s images incorporate a psychoanalytical view that reflected his own spiritual concerns. White’s poetic photography was often expressed using metaphors. His use of abstract images extracted from nature’s patterns of light and shadow, texture and form created a visual manuscript. He believed that a photograph should be “read” as a work of literature. White confirmed the differences between expressive and creative photography. He realized that an image was a mirror or reflection of the photographer. His landscape from Southern Utah Moon and Wall Encrustations taken in 1964 and Ritual Branch from Rochester, New York taken in 1958 remain influential. They display White’s expressive interpretation pushing the boundaries of understanding and challenging the viewer to think.
Henry Callahan’s work began appearing in the early 1940s. His range of experimentation included the use of collage, multiple exposure, camera movement, sequences and minimization. Callahan often used very high contrast to eliminate texture, tonal scale and detail. By eliminating the three-dimensional quality his work becomes highly stylized. Two of my favorite works by Callahan are Weeds in Snow, 1943, and Grasses in Snow, date unknown. These are examples of extracting more visual impact from something simple and understated, creating lines of grace and elegance, eastern in their aesthetics.
