Assignment 5 - Virtual Essay

Long time, no see!

Today's entry I'm going to compare and contrast the works of Jacques-Mandé Daguerre, with photograph(er)s of present day.

As a reminder, Jacques-Mandé Daguerre was a pioneer in still photography using a method he and partner Joseph Nicéphore Niépce used called daguerreotype. You can read my first blog post for more information.

Choosing Daguerre is turning out to be a little tricky because one could say that all photography is like his because he was the first. However, Daguerre seemed to have focused on portraits and landscapes. These categories seem pretty broad but he literally did portraits and landscapes.

The following are five images I'm going to try and break down for you:

1. This is from Jerry Spagnoli, who lives and works in New York City. He takes portraits of people using a dageurreotype like camera and also uses the old methods to develope them.

I believe this man's name is James Ivory. I don't know much about him but this photograph is similar to the works of Daguerre because it's very old-timey. I can't tell if it's just the subject that's making it feel that way. The angle of the photo and also where the person is in relation to the actual photo is similar. The photo is still grainy but with the technology of today, there is still some detail. Also, by ‘detail’, I mean only his face is detailed. The rest of him is out of focus.

2. This is a photo of Barack Obama's inaguration. I didn't know it was also by Jerry Spagnoli until I started reading up more about it but anyway..

Kinda of looks like an Instagram, no? More about that below.

This is an almost unreal photograph! I love the blue sky (although probably photo shopped in) and everything looks old again. The building looks scratchy as with other Daguerre photos and the people are blurred probably because of the long exposure. However these people probably weren't moving too much and not quick enough so they were captured. I think the sky is clear not only because maybe it was a nice day but because of the long exposure. If you look at other Daguerre landscape photos there are never any clouds. The only thing sharp in this photograph are the buildings because buildings don't move!

3. This is from local photographer Mike Robinson.

Because everything in this photo doesn't move, he was able to capture, in detail, the bridge and the tree. This photograph is really light and has almost no real colours. This photographer also uses and older style of processing his pictures, which is also likely influenced by Daguerre. He also mostly does portrait and landscape photography, which you can see from the link above.

4. This is a portrait of Patty Smith by my favourite Annie Leibovitz.

I’ve talked about Leibovitz’ work before, and although it is a body of it’s own now, her older material reflected a Daguerre style. It is black and white; even though I’m sure colour film existed at the time, she chose to do this portrait, self portraits, and other modern photos in black and white. There are only real details on the face and some on her clothes. Even though it's a little grainy, her face and shoulders are the focal point of this photo. There isn’t anything in the background as with all portraits from Daguerre’s time.

5. You!

There’s an application (App) for iPhones called Instagram where users can take a photo with their phones and run it under filters to make it look old-timey. It’s popularity comes from the amazing photos it surprisingly takes as well as it lets you share your photos between other users over the phone or social networking like Facebook or Twitter. Now anyone with an iPhone can take pictures that look like they’re from the past. Landscape photos using Instagram often resemble that of a Daguerre photograph. Objects that are further away are more blurry and grainy that the objects that are closer.

*The first photo is by Julia Hurford. The second was found at OkayGreat, and the third was found at Nuwomb.

Assignment 3 - Group Blog Project

*By Justin Wong, Drew Urbonavicius, Dylan Tilston, and Alexandra Mero

Alterations are not allowed in press photography, but they are one of the tools used in contemporary art photography? Why?

After weeks of learning about press type photography it is known that it is very strict when it comes to publications. Although some photographers have modified their images, it is still changing the truth behind the photo.

On the other hand, contemporary art photography is considered to be more freestyle. The photographer is not limited and by no means is bound to any boundaries. They have no restrictions to what they would like to do with their art. The purpose of alterations in contemporary art is to give the audience a different or a new perspective of how the picture is to be read. The freedom that photographers have includes manipulations such as adding or removing or even moving objects and subjects into place. They can even changing the lighting effects or the color scale to bring in different moods. These alteration tools give artists their own personal touch when they spread their images to others.

Compare photographs of Sommer, Adams and Klett versus Parkeharrison, Muniz and Crewdson.

When taking a look at the two categories between the six different artists, distinct differences can be seen. The first group of artists that consists of Sommer, Adams and Klett, we noticed that their choices of prints are mainly black and white. Even though this group of photographers had the choice of colored film, they used the lighting on the scenery to give them the different shades. After looking at the images, it seems as though the main choice of shots consisted of portraits of people, landscapes and structures.

Alternatively the other group of photographers that includes Parkeharrison, Muniz and Crewdson contains pictures that are colorful. Their style of photographs is usually deliberately arranged. For example, Muniz is well known for capturing his artwork that is made from unique materials such as chocolate, puzzle pieces and sugar. Crewdson brings together a combination of different elements to recreate visual renderings of houses. Parkeharrison’s choice of shot consists of fixed objects but at the same time they attempt to bring out the feelings of the photo itself.

What happened to the photography? Is this its future?

When asked what happened to photography, we believe that photography is changing as time goes by. In other words, it is evolving. With the help of technology and the pace that it is growing at, this is the future of photography. Alterations and manipulations are much easier to be done nowadays compared to when Stieglitz captured his first photography.

Discussion Week 9

What's the role of photo journalism?
The role of photojournalism is to give the public a visual of what's going on. Preferably unbiased and as true as possible. Photojournalists are responsible for providing clear, truthful, and accuate images to their readers.

Are there rules that photojournalists should follow? Why? Why not?
Absolutely! There are rules to follow with any kind of journalism, sometimes a photo can tell you more than a written article ever could. A photojournalist must always be showing the truth. A photojournalist should also never doctor their photos unless it is to improve the actual photo.

Is the ethics of taking journalistic photos different than the ethics of writing a news story?
Absolutely not! Before I started at George Brown, I was in journalism and it was always easier to tell the truth with writing than to tell it in a photograph. The photographer should have the same principles like a writer journalist. They also have to be careful of what to include and exclude from their photos.

What's the impact of altering press photographs? Should they be edited (at all) in postproduction?
I can't stress enough how much photos have to tell the truth as much as written articles do, but I also believe a little bit of altering is okay. Only if it involves making it a better photograph.
For example, I was on a tour of the Toronto Star building a few years back and they showed us a picture of a man who was in a car and the glare from the window made it hard to tell what he looked like. The person who was working on the photo simply made it easier to see his face. Other than the glare, nothing was added or taken away.


I'm still having a hard time figuring out what group was supposed to do this week and where there information is :(