webbits2.htmlTEXTttxtÿÿÿÿ<L­qAa­q]­Ò‘More Amazing WebBits

More Amazing WebBits

In response to a question posed in a PhotoShop newsgroup...

Many people agree with John Szarkowski (former curator of photography at MOMA) that the creative motor behind photography is technology. As new processes and equipment became available individuals who would not normally have had an avenue of expression became great artists. Would Henri-Carier Bresson have become a great photographer if he had lived during the age of glass plates? I think not. Similarly, I wonder if a young Edward Weston would enjoy legendary success today. The market for someone obsessed with producing finely crafted black and white work isn't exactly white hot.

One could easily argue that PS and everything associated with it is the next motor in photography. That leads to your annoying question: is prior knowledge of photography a burden or a blessing? A new wave of photographic creation will by definition encompass a new way of seeing. Most of what we see today in digital imaging involves the use of a new tool on old ideas. There's the Magritte crowd: "Yeah, I'll put a dog's head on a cow!" There's the nostalgia crowd: "Groovy, I'll blend a photo of a naked girl with this rough texture and tint it sepia!" There's the Kai Krause Poseur: "Cool, a little fractal here, a little define edges there, a touch of Ripple filter and voila: Art." (these guys did a lot of solarizations in the 70's). There's the "To Go Where No One Has Gone Before" Trekker: Question: "Do you know it's three in the morning?" Reply: "Yeah, so?" Question: "What couldn't wait?" Reply: "I almost got my filter factory thingy to work, a few more days and I'll be able to double reverse every pixel with a half gainer to boot!" Question: "What's the point?" Reply: "uhhhhh..." There's the born-again retoucher: "Gasp, I can't believe I can see my light stand in the photo,I'm dead meat at tomorrow's presentation. But wait! I can overcome this obstacle... a little cloning, a little more, once more; praise the Lord, I'm Saved!" And of course, my favorite, the Rauschanberg Wannabe: "Copacetic. I'll add this face to the backround, Overlay an angel in the corner, Multiply the hands over the face, Import another sun underneath. Hey, I've already got twenty-three elements in the photo and I'm not even half finished. Copecetic." (Many of you are closet Live Picture abusers; you know who you are)

Will prior knowledge of photography help? If you're talking tech, definitely. A professional photographer has wrangled all his or her life with color, composting, masking, perspective, and on and on and on. These kinds of concepts are critical in high-end PS work; amen to those who already have this knowledge. As a professional photographer my photo skills clearly helped me make the (not yet finished) leap into the "professional" digital world. It will clearly help you. And yet....sometimes I look at what I've made on my screen and say to myself, "Behind every derivative digital dork pict like this lies an idiot of profound over-ambition who confuses technical skill with creativity." As I hit the delete key the term "rasterbator" often comes to mind. Perhaps photographers have too much visual baggage with them when they sit in front of the screen. I don't know. Sometimes I think that the next Henri-Cartier Bresson in photography will have never touched film - his (or her) images will be something new; they'll show the world within a completely different construct.

Mitch

More Webbits or back to Stone's Throw

2 ScanMan 2.2\¡îø@­Q webbits2.htmlTEXTttxtÿÿÿÿTEXTttxtÿÿÿÿ­qAa<LPLttxt!l@(ÑUÒªY® ªY® ³î# 2_!842styl €ÿÿ_$L