untitled ('70s nude) 2001 six images
Four of us were standing around a co-worker's computer discussing this piece last night. The issues were: (i) are the images better or worse once you learn they're appropriated? (ii) is reflecting on the period-piece, "Our Bodies Our Selves" aura of the photos vis a vis current photography enough to make them good art now? (iii) isn't it interesting how art photography of the '70s can become vaguely sleazy Ebay fodder of the '00s and then become another kind of experience through the distancing of appropriation? and (iv) how would the girl feel if she learned these pictures of herself were being published? One woman remarked that she's never let a boyfriend photograph her nude, to avoid anything like this piece ever happening.
It's good to know that my summer 2001 show has reached an audience, especially in an office and after hours. I have not physically received these images yet, in fact I have not even paid for them. The kind seller e.mailed the images (1,2,3,4 and 6) to me on spec. Today I confirmed that I would purchase his entire lot of 8 (two unrelated images are not reproduced here) at the price he requested. I'm also pleased that they have stirred some viewers to ask new types of questions. I have been collecting found images (vintage vernacular photography) primarily of machines and constructions sites from e.bay since January 2000. I had planned to exhibit them as serial found art documents in conventional gallery spaces. However during recent studio visits I've had, the machines did not engage the viewer the way a few of the images of human subjects have. My intent in working with appropriated materials is to offer semiotic investigations, to offer a subject for analysis and question.
I would like to back fill these images now with some information and opinion that may help lead us to answer the four above ref’d questions.
i) Neither better or worse as images, they are the same. The seller could not determine the identity of the original photographer. They still retain their anonymous authorship by the original photographer. Just as Carl Andre’s brick pieces are still bricks, and would do a fine job as bricks if the occasion or need arose. However they now have a secondary identity as conceptual art in addition to their original art photography identity.
ii) These images can be evaluated as art photography in the style of a passed period. I think they are very successful in that context (great contrast on the model and nice texture in the natural back drop). Their success as art photography alone is not enough to make my conceptual piece successful or “good art”, but it helps.
iii) The huge, general section of e.bay I prowl for images offers a sub group for risqué (only) images for sleaze. These were not found there.
iiii) Since we do not know the identity of the photographer we also do not know their gender or their relation to the model. The internet is full of sites and newsgroups supporting the photography of amateur (non professional) couples. Some obscure the identity of the subject with tiles, masks, black bands or cropping. The result is invariably grotesque pornography. Better to abstain.
An inkling of the changes in our society since the “Our Bodies Ourselves” ‘70s is embodied in this piece. The model is not the same person now that she was then and neither are we.
I'm posting this here because it relates to ebay photo-collecting:
Many thousands of people now own a digital camera. Many thousands more sell their personal items over the internet everyday. Suddenly everyone is a photographer and all homes are studios. The second issue of Useful Photography is a collection of photos that have been taken from http://www.ebay.com
The pictures in Useful Photography #002 show the surprising creativity of the amateur photographer. The result is, for example, a pair of blue slippers against a leopard print background, or a photo of a fan that also shows the feet of the photographer. A speaker set, photographed from the front and back, shines with pride on a green billiard cloth.
Useful Photography is the result of a shared fascination of photographers Hans Aarsman, Julian Germain, Hans van der Meer, art director Erik Kessels and artist Claudi de Cleen who decided to make a magazine from their joint collections. Useful Photography #001, published last year, showed photos taken from sales catalogues, text books, introduction manuals, packaging etc. As in the first issue, Useful Photography #002 tries to find out what happens when functional, anonymous photos with which we are confronted daily, are taken out of their context.
You can order Useful Photography # 002 exclusively at: http://pages.ebay.nl/promo/artimo.html or visit: http://www.ebay.nl. After March 3rd, the magazine will also be available in book shops for € 20,- .
On http://pages.ebay.nl/promo/artimo.html it’s also possible to bid on a special edition of Useful Photography # 002; a collection of prints combined with a unique, bound single copy, signed by the makers of Useful Photography: Hans Aarsman, Claudie de Cleen, Julian Germain, Erik Kessels and Hans van der Meer.
The auction for the special edition closes on March 2nd.
hgjghjghjghjfgjyutyutlksadjf;tkxnvxm,cvndgfslk;f
|
- bill 7-22-2001 7:04 pm
Four of us were standing around a co-worker's computer discussing this piece last night. The issues were: (i) are the images better or worse once you learn they're appropriated? (ii) is reflecting on the period-piece, "Our Bodies Our Selves" aura of the photos vis a vis current photography enough to make them good art now? (iii) isn't it interesting how art photography of the '70s can become vaguely sleazy Ebay fodder of the '00s and then become another kind of experience through the distancing of appropriation? and (iv) how would the girl feel if she learned these pictures of herself were being published? One woman remarked that she's never let a boyfriend photograph her nude, to avoid anything like this piece ever happening.
- tom moody 7-24-2001 6:11 pm [add a comment]
It's good to know that my summer 2001 show has reached an audience, especially in an office and after hours. I have not physically received these images yet, in fact I have not even paid for them. The kind seller e.mailed the images (1,2,3,4 and 6) to me on spec. Today I confirmed that I would purchase his entire lot of 8 (two unrelated images are not reproduced here) at the price he requested. I'm also pleased that they have stirred some viewers to ask new types of questions. I have been collecting found images (vintage vernacular photography) primarily of machines and constructions sites from e.bay since January 2000. I had planned to exhibit them as serial found art documents in conventional gallery spaces. However during recent studio visits I've had, the machines did not engage the viewer the way a few of the images of human subjects have. My intent in working with appropriated materials is to offer semiotic investigations, to offer a subject for analysis and question.
I would like to back fill these images now with some information and opinion that may help lead us to answer the four above ref’d questions.
i) Neither better or worse as images, they are the same. The seller could not determine the identity of the original photographer. They still retain their anonymous authorship by the original photographer. Just as Carl Andre’s brick pieces are still bricks, and would do a fine job as bricks if the occasion or need arose. However they now have a secondary identity as conceptual art in addition to their original art photography identity.
ii) These images can be evaluated as art photography in the style of a passed period. I think they are very successful in that context (great contrast on the model and nice texture in the natural back drop). Their success as art photography alone is not enough to make my conceptual piece successful or “good art”, but it helps.
iii) The huge, general section of e.bay I prowl for images offers a sub group for risqué (only) images for sleaze. These were not found there.
iiii) Since we do not know the identity of the photographer we also do not know their gender or their relation to the model. The internet is full of sites and newsgroups supporting the photography of amateur (non professional) couples. Some obscure the identity of the subject with tiles, masks, black bands or cropping. The result is invariably grotesque pornography. Better to abstain.
An inkling of the changes in our society since the “Our Bodies Ourselves” ‘70s is embodied in this piece. The model is not the same person now that she was then and neither are we.
- bill 7-24-2001 11:39 pm [add a comment]
I'm posting this here because it relates to ebay photo-collecting:
Many thousands of people now own a digital camera. Many thousands more sell their personal items over the internet everyday. Suddenly everyone is a photographer and all homes are studios. The second issue of Useful Photography is a collection of photos that have been taken from http://www.ebay.com
The pictures in Useful Photography #002 show the surprising creativity of the amateur photographer. The result is, for example, a pair of blue slippers against a leopard print background, or a photo of a fan that also shows the feet of the photographer. A speaker set, photographed from the front and back, shines with pride on a green billiard cloth.
Useful Photography is the result of a shared fascination of photographers Hans Aarsman, Julian Germain, Hans van der Meer, art director Erik Kessels and artist Claudi de Cleen who decided to make a magazine from their joint collections. Useful Photography #001, published last year, showed photos taken from sales catalogues, text books, introduction manuals, packaging etc. As in the first issue, Useful Photography #002 tries to find out what happens when functional, anonymous photos with which we are confronted daily, are taken out of their context.
You can order Useful Photography # 002 exclusively at: http://pages.ebay.nl/promo/artimo.html or visit: http://www.ebay.nl. After March 3rd, the magazine will also be available in book shops for € 20,- .
On http://pages.ebay.nl/promo/artimo.html it’s also possible to bid on a special edition of Useful Photography # 002; a collection of prints combined with a unique, bound single copy, signed by the makers of Useful Photography: Hans Aarsman, Claudie de Cleen, Julian Germain, Erik Kessels and Hans van der Meer.
The auction for the special edition closes on March 2nd.
- tom moody 2-28-2002 7:06 pm [add a comment]
hgjghjghjghjfgjyutyutlksadjf;tkxnvxm,cvndgfslk;f
- hjghj (guest) 1-02-2003 5:10 pm [add a comment]