This week we will look at 2 important contemporary photographers from 2 different parts of the world. Through looking at their work we will investigate these essential photographic questions:
- What happens when a viewer sees a photograph without the necessary background to grasp what the photographer means to communicate?
- Is it the photographer's responsibility to engage the viewer visually in such a way that the viewer is invited to learn more about the work and discover meaning?
- How does a photographer engage a viewer visually when the photographer's work is more abstract or symbolic?
- Why is it that sometimes we look at a piece of art or photography and wonder why it is considered 'art'?
Monday assignment for in-class:
Without looking up anything about Gabriel Orozco and Hiroshi Sugimoto, look at the two works below. In the blogspot comment below, write about each photograph you see below. Answer these questions:
- What do you think the photographer's goal is with each photograph in terms of the relationship between subject-photographer and audience?
- Compare and contrast the two photos below in terms of communicating with audience, in particular you! Which one is more appealing to you? Which one would draw your attention more? Why?
- Does it appear that these photographers are both contemporary, current photographers? Why?
- If you were told that both of these photographers had an interest in 'found objects', what do you think that might mean? What do you think found object photography might be, in looking at the photos below (no cheating-do not look this up, let's see for fun if we can guess by looking).
- Finally, if both of these are somewhat representative of found object work, do you think it is ok to move things you find, or do you think you have to shoot what you find as is, without modification?
 |
| Hiroshi Sugimoto |
 | |||||
| Gabriel Orozco : Found Object Photography |
In my opinion, Sugomoto's photo is more appealing to me, due to the lighting and the way it seems to be set up; in contrast, orozco's picture is much more candid, more of a snapshot. However, due to the nature of both, orozco's photo communicates more (what is the object? where is it, and why is it next to a grate? what is orozco trying to say?), whereas sugomoto's photo is almost purely a demonstration of technique. I would guess that sugomoto is a more contemporary photographer, while orozco is a somewhat more old fashioned photographer, although these alone don't do very much to detail the nature of their work.
ReplyDeleteI think found object photography is based around the photography of random things that the photographer passes by, or finds interesting; sometimes the object itself, in combination with the setting, may provide enough intrigue, while other objects draw their appeal from being used in such a way that a photo becomes interesting. Following that definition, both photos are essentially found object photography, regardless of whether or not they have been manipulated.
I don't believe that found objects shouldn't be moved; instead, they should be used in a way that creates appeal in the photo, because a boring photo of an interesting object is still a boring photo.
1. The goal of the photographers is to play around with objects and make them look cool with their framing and lighting. The stick figure man that Sugimoto used really looked cool with the black background and intense shadows on the figure. It really helps to highlight the form. Orozco's photo of the rock on the grating in the road also sends a similar message. Placement is key in both photos.
ReplyDelete2. The stick figure one seems more appealing to me. It looks cooler than the rock in the middle of the street.
3. Yes. This is because they both focus on random objects rather than stage photos of beautiful scenery and the like.
4. Found objects are found objects. They are found objects.
5. If it's truly a "found object", then moving it probably isn't a good idea. Then it would be staged shot.
Hiroshi Sugimoto/Gabriel Orozco
ReplyDelete1. He wants you to picture yourself dancing/what you have been threw makes you what you are
2. I find the street more appealing since it is deeper and more intriguing
3. Is more contemporary/ current photography
4. I believe it means finding the meaning in everyday objects
5. I believe it is more amazing when you find something amazing that conveys a message without having to move it
1. Not entirely sure but it seems to be creating life in everyday objects. It seems like Sugimoto seems to breath life into the objects creating a sense of liveliness in the subject. Orozco seems stop something that could be moving and active, so freezing the shot.
ReplyDelete2. I actually seem more interested in Sugimoto's work not entirely sure why. The lighting is really eye catching and it just seems to have movement in the figure. The angle is really interesting and beside the subject there is nothing so the audience can plainly see what the subject is compared to Orozco which is a little harder to pinpoint the subject.
3. They remind me of modern art, so I would go to say that they are contemporary and current. Mainly because it is still art, but not solely still art, but with movement. Like modern art it is hard to understand and there is deep meaning behind what seems like nothing.
4. I think found object photography is just taking pictures of objects found around. Nothing in particular just something that just happened to be placed in an interesting spot with good lighting.
5. To move something is cheating, that would go against found object and probably be moving into still life which is stuff that is purposely placed with created lighting and such.
1) I think that the photographers goal is to get a specific message across to the audience as much as they can.
ReplyDelete2) The top one communicates with me more because it is very confusing to figure out what the object in the second picture is. At the same time, despite what the object is in the photograph, it tells a story and that story is easier to figure out than the first one.
3) Yes I think they are both contemporary and current photographers because they use color and both photos are very plain in the fact that they don't have much going on.
4) It might be a type of photography where the photographers shoot objects that they find and convey a message through them.
5) I think that it is okay to move the object to tell a specific story or convey a specific message. However, the photographer shouldn't move the object out of its habitat, meaning if a loaf of bread was found on a side walk, a photographer shouldn't move it to a grassy area.
1. I think that both photographers want to communicate a sense of mystery and curiosity that they themselves feel towards their subjects, which they want the audience to feel as well.
ReplyDelete2. The second photo speaks more to me simply because it feels like something I might stop and stare at on the street. While the black and white and Sugimoto's use of lighting definitely catch my attention, the contrast of the unfamiliar object in a very familiar place (a street) makes the photo very intriguing to me.
3. I feel like both photographers are contemporary because they have a sort of abstract quality (even if the subject itself is not abstract), which I tend to associate more with artists and photographers of this time.
4. I feel like found objects are objects that are ordinary but that people do not pay much attention to. I feel like these photographers then take these objects and give them a new quality, which is how they are "found".
5. I think there is more meaning when the subject is left where it is found, because I feel like where they are is a part of the story.
1-2) I believe the relationship between the object, the artist and the scene all relate in both photographs. However, there's a lot more going on in the second photograph. It contains leading lines and it's almost put on a path. In my opinion they both seem staged which is most likely something they have in common.
ReplyDelete3) It seems to me that both of these photographs are both contemporary in a modern form because it is made out to be what the artist wants it to be.
4)In relation to found objects, I almost feel like it relates to the artist. I believe it gives you an opportunity to learn more about yourselves and gain a learning opp.
5)I believe you can move the object you find because it makes it more personalized.
1. The photographer's goal in the top photo in my opinion is to show how society manipulates and molds each individual. All external stimuli shapes the individual. The photographer wants to communicate to the audience to not conform to social expectations and to be themselves.
ReplyDeleteThe photographer's goal in the bottom photo is to show that you cannot force something to "fit." You need to accept that the object doesn't fit and appreciate the difference. This parallels with diversity in society. You cannot expect everyone to be the same. It is okay to be different and people shouldn't be forced to fit in.
2. Both photos communicate to the audience to be themselves and not conform. The mannequin seems to be more interesting because it seems like the dark is drowning the depressed mannequin, who is being controlled.
3. They both seem to be contemporary photographers because they are addressing current social issues.
4. Found object photography may be taking pictures of inanimate objects to reveal truths about human nature.
5. I think modifications are okay because you want to communicate specific messages with objects and in order to communicate your message, you need to play around with the objects to make your point clear.
1) In Sugimoto's photograph, the figure is angled slightly downward, so it appears that the figure is sad. In Orozco's photo, the object appears to be dirty and un-cared for, and because of its location above the storm drain, it appears to be lost or neglected.
ReplyDelete2) Sugimoto's photograph is more aesthetically appealing because it has more defined lines and the shadows give the object character. Orozco's, however, is a bit less abstract and appeals more to the sense that there is more of a back story to the photograph because of the background which can almost be used as a sort of context.
3) They both appear to be contemporary pieces of art because they do not display what some people would call 'normal' subjects such as portraits or landscapes. They do not tell a direct story either. They create a sense of intrigue in the audience for knowledge of the actual story behind the art.
4) I think that 'found object photography' is when the photographer sees something of interest that appears neglected or forgotten and takes a photo of it.
5) If it is truly 'found' then the photographer would have just taken a picture of something they found, but circumstance rarely allows for the desired photograph to be shot without changing the settings, so I think it is acceptable for the photographer to move objects within the photograph so long as they do not add additional elements to the photo.
1.Sugimotos goal seems like he wants to show off the models features. Orozco wants to show off the realism of the object and its surroundings.
ReplyDelete2. I think Orozcos photo appealed to be more because it is alot more interesting than the other one. It has color and seems like their might be an actual story to it. The first one seems like an average picture of a little maniquen.
3. Both these photos seem current because the quality of the photographs seem alot better than ones of earlier time periods.
4. it means they are both interested in taking photos of objects that they find somewhere. Thats what found photography means to me. Taking photos of items you find somewhere that are not your own.
5. i think that with the aspect of found photography that is okay to move the object because not only do you discovered it, by moving it someone else gets to experience the found object and if people continue to move it, it could make it all over which would be cool.
1) The photographer in the upper photo was trying to go for a simple photograph that would allow the viewer to make their own decisions about how they feel about the photograph. The second photograph has a great balance of color and symmetry involved. The ball grabs your attention and then you become curious about where the arrow is pointing at.
ReplyDelete2) The second photograph draws my attention much more than the other photograph because there is much more going on in the photo where as the other picture is very plain and straight to the point.
3) I cannot tell by the photographs whether they are new or old but the second one seems to be older than the first one because the colors are not bright and it looks like a very old ball.
4) If the photographers both had an interest in found objects i think the first person might have an interest in the body where as the second person may have an interest for photographing things that make you think.
5) I think it is ok to move things and not have to just shoot things where you see them.
1. Mr. Sugimoto) I think the nature of these dolls lends them very well to photography, as the photographer is able to adjust the dolls limbs and head to convey a specific mood, or it conveys a mood about a subject depending on how the doll was arranged. For example, Mr. Sugimoto angles the head down, with the hands of the doll out. This, combined with the black and white conveys a sense of ending. At least to me, it looks like the dolls is taking a bow. '
ReplyDeleteMr. Orozco) This photo conveys a hopeful mood. Its use of low contrast, combined with the lines on the ball and the arrow pointing forwards shows that even though it it damaged, it can still roll on.
2. I think to me the photo with the doll stood out more I could relate to the message it was trying to convey more. Both convey positive messages using a slightly depressing scene, but I understood the message that Mr. Sugimoto was trying to send across easier than I did the bottom one.
3. I think Sugimoto is a modern photographer while Orozco is not. Orozco's use of low contrast is something that I do not think many modern photographers?photography enthusiasts appreciate, and was a style more common in older times.
4. I think found objects photography is where the photographer captures pictures of objects found naturally without any adjustments.
5. I think whether or not to move found objects depends on the message the photographer is willing to convey, and how authentic the picture needs to be.
ReplyDeleteIn the first photograph the goal seems to be out contrasting darkness and light, using the element of shadows on the object to show the relationship. The second photograph the relationship with the subject and photographer seems more distant, like the photographer randomly came across this subject and just took a picture, to the audience it feels somewhat random.
The first photo is way more appealing. It uses light and shadows in a unique way and seems to have a meaning. while the second photo seems to random to me. Its confusing, i cant quite tell what it really is. It doesnt seem to be trying to communicate anything it just seems like a moment the photographer came across.
Yes, they both seem like contemporary photographs. They aren't traditional, not a family or a landscape. These seem to be more modern because they use light and color to enhance the photo, in the first one. Also they are just more random and up for interpretation by the viewer, there isn't a clear concept or right way to understand it, the meaning is up to the audience which makes it seem more contemporary.
I think found object photography is the idea of finding a random object in a setting and capturing the image where it is. There isn't necessarily manipulation or conceptual thinking, its about being in the moment and capturing whatever is found. I think, for that reason, you have to leave the object as is, once you move it it is no longer found object photography because it was choosing both the subject and the background.
1. life in general.
ReplyDeleteSugimoto: life in emotion (sadness, cruelty, happiness)
Orozco: life in banal things (things that don't have a deep meaning)
2. Hiroshi's photo, because i personally love the use of back and white. Even tho he did not use a subject in his picture, Humans can feel represented. This picture shows a lot of emotion, and lighting plays a huge role in making this emotion stand out to the audience. Also I love this picture because it can have many different interpretations.
3. It is hard to say. Gabriel's picture look older than Hiroshi, but this can be due to photoshop. To me, both picture look contemporary but Hiroshi's is newer.
4. it can mean many things. for example those photographers could be walking down the street and see something they like and take a picture of it, or it can also mean that they took those pictures and later played with them.
5. I thing you should take the picture as it is because thats reality, and it should not be moved.
1.
ReplyDeleteHiroshi Sugimoto
The goal of this picture might be telling the audience about the photographer's mood, feeling like a toy, being lonely in a dark corner.
Gabriel Orozco
The goal of his picture might be showing a strange view -as it is in the photo, that tells the audience the photographer's mood
2.
Hiroshi Sugimoto's work is more appealing to me, but I think Gabriel Orozco's work will gather more attention. To me the toy man is very affecting, I can feel the photographer trying to tell the story of it, how lonely it is, and the inner darkness of it.
3.
Yes, both photo have object from current time.
4.
They shoot the photo randomly, or they find the object instead of creating it.
5.
No.
1.) I think Sugimoto's goal in his photograph is using the figurine to represent sadness; however at first look it seemed as if the figurine was stretching its arms behind him absorbing the blackness. I believe Orozco's goal is display the roughness of a country and the usage of anything they can find to have fun and enjoy themselves with.
ReplyDelete2.) Sugimoto's photograph is more appealing to me, and draws my attention more because the subject of his photograph is more distinct versus Orozco's photograph has a subject but the eye draws away from the ball.
3.) Yes, they do seem like contemporary and current photographers because they are taking pictures of things other than nature, landscapes and portraits.
4.) I would believe this means everyday objects that can be widely seen but aren't necessarily photographed. I think found object photography is taking pictures of objects found anywhere.
5.) I think it would not be ok because then it isn't how you found it diminishing the idea of "found object."
I think the photographer's goal is with the first photograph in relationship between subject-photographer and audience is to symbolize the abilities of the human body related with movement and life. The second photograph can be related with the start of life where life just find a way forward, this is symbolized by the yellow arrow.
ReplyDeleteThe first photograph is more appealing to you because for me it related to the freedoms that a person can achieve and it somehow related to liberty. For me the second one is less abstract and lies on an specific idea: therefore, i prefer the one by Hiroshi Sugimoto.
It appears that these photographers are both contemporary and current photographers, especially Sugimoto, because his photograph is kind of modern and probably photoshop has been used to edit the photographs.
If i were told that both of these photographers had an interest in 'found objects', this might mean that these object have a story behind and the photo does not just express what you can see but something beyond that.
I think it is ok to move things you find because you can make it look natural and it's not always necessary to shoot what you find without modification.
1) Hairoshi- his goal is to have the audience relate emotionally to the picture because the picture showing that there is a darkness or sadness in every person.
ReplyDeleteGabriel- his goal is to have the audience put themselves into his pictures because this picture might show a poor street or different life. In putting yourself in the surrounding of that ball or picture what would you feel?
2) For me the first picture I think I understand more in what the photographer is trying to communicating, and that everyone has times where they feel everything is falling apart, but there is always is still brightness in their lives or future.
3) Yes they are more contemporary mope modern because older photographers like Ansel Adams focused more on landscapes or family portraits. While these photographers take and object that they just found and made it into a story that people can relate to in many ways.
4) Found object might be taking a picture of an everyday object and turning it into something more. Also it could be finding an object and taking a picture at an angle that could be interesting or changing the lighting.
5) I think that it is ok to move the objects because found object is about using everyday objects and making them into stories that the audience would have not thought of on their own. So if they could not move the object then the photographer would not have had the chance to show people a new meaning of the object because the picture would be a picture of an object that they see everyday and it would not have a story or different meaning.
1. I think both Hiroshi and Gabriel are both trying to show life, but in different ways. Hiroshi is showing the more emotional side of life, what we go through, how we feel. Where as Gabriel is showing the environment, our surroundings.
ReplyDelete2. Both photos are very different visually, but Hiroshi's photo appeals to me more because the object he photographed stands out, it is the only thing in the photo. With Gabriel's photo, the colors are all very similar.
3. I don't think either Gabriel or Hiroshi are current/contemporary photographers. They may still be photographers, but I think they are both older generation.
4. I think a found photographer would be a photographer who takes pictures along the way, on the go. Someone who just goes out with there camera without a plan and ends up taking a bunch of pictures anyways.
5. I feel like you shouldn't move the object because even if something could be better in a different position or place, its cooler that it is in its original spot.
1 I think the photographer need to communicate with the subject and the audience, and make audience understand what the meaning behind the photo.
ReplyDelete2 I don't really know what these two photo communicate with me but I think the second one is more appealing to me, because it looks really interesting, and i want to know what photographer want to said in this photo.
3 I think this two photographers are both contemporary, because the thing they shot is really cool, and the color is really unusual.
4 I think it means they found the objects in different places, and take pictures of them.
5 I think the photographer should not move the things you find, and leave it what they were.