art
Here are the first three images of my new series. Many more to come.
Being in a drawing class has defiantly secured my feeling about photography. That is, I better stick to it if I want to continue practicing art. While it has not been that bad, it has had challenges. A result of the class however, I am starting to build yet another body of images, (only snapshots, but still interesting to see, based off what I am drawing. Here are some:
Like the discussion of the SF MOMA Panel, the class discussion moved quickly away from the idea of whether or not “photography is dead,” and instead quickly took up the topic of “how do we become famous.” I’ll touch on whether photography is dead or not in part 2.
For now, I have some thoughts on being successful. I’m a science, turned English, turned art major, in that order. Conveniently that is also the same order that the pay grade follows for each respective subject. If I wanted to make money, I would have stayed where I was two majors ago. At least that’s what just about any person listening to my store may say, and while its true that a science degree (a specialized one at least) will pay more, our discussion was one interested in grandeur, and is precisely what I want to comment on. In science, the “my art is exhibited in the top 5 world galleries” equivalent would be an astounding new discovery made that impacts day to day life, such as Rosalind Franklin’s discovery of DNA’s structure. The same is for English, there are many, many writers yes, but world acclaimed writers that will go down in history, not all that many, Neil Gaiman, J.K. Rowling, J.R.R. Tolkien are the first to come to mind. There is a reason why scientist and English professionals become professors, because that position allows them to make a fair living, while they mull away on their own private works on the side. Is it any different for art? I think not. That all being said, I am not advocating that we stop trying to pursue being part of the elite, it is the pursuit to be better that drives us forward. Perhaps instead we should look to opening new doors, like Colberg suggested. Instead of looking towards those same five galleries everyone else is, maybe we should be looking for new ways to call attention to our work. Indie bands have their own micro worlds and followers, Prop builders have entire independent showings for makers to present their work, the RPF being the best and biggest example. I do not have a clue to go about starting new ways for photographers, but it seems like a good place to start anyway.
The second area of discussion we touched on was with the advent of technological advances putting a more than half way decent camera in everyone’s pocket, what separates us (people who consider ourselves photographers in both a professional and artistic view) from them? Education, yes and no, I had taught myself how to use a camera in M mode long before I thought about being an art major and started taking photo courses. Anybody can do that, and if all anybody wants to do is shoot head shots or landscapes meaninglessly, then there’s hundreds of online courses for that. What about the art side? I did not really understand how I could use my photography as a means for expression and influence until I began my art degree. In that respect an art education can provide an upper hand. Just because someone has the tools to build a boat, does not mean they can do it. Sure, everyone is a photographer, sure everyone can send photos to one of the many corner lot Walgreens, but I am willing to bet that those photos will not be better then any one of us who actually practice photography.
Photographers still have a place, we are the people who see what others don’t, we document the real world happenings for sake of preservation, and analysis, we create new worlds to better convey the one we live in. Photographers are still relevant. Photography is not dead.
