Research no.9: Good Ol' Sol.

I talked with Tom yesterday about questions from my critique I wasn't sure about. After transcribing my critique I felt like there were things he was trying to draw out from me, reaching for, but I wasn't able to grasp them at the time, I was curious what he was attempting to get from me, so we sat down with my images again. My set of three cubes, "cubed" is more engaging to me, if solely because I haven't figured out how it is functioning, what it is attempting to say just yet. Yes, my clear, bright images of 3D as 2D are more accessible, or more visually engaging, are beautiful objects, but I feel like since I've already worked through them in my head they have lost their appeal to me. "Cubed" seems to be commenting directly on those pieces, Tom and I discussed that it is actually almost mocking the "joke" that is within those pieces. Tom sent me this list, and it is oh so wonderful I have to post it. I often feel as if I need some sort of license to continue blindly, as I work in a fashion of figure it all out, envision it, create it. These sentences by Sol Lewitt immediately comforted me, and convinced me to dive in.

Sentences on Conceptual Art

by Sol Lewitt

1. Conceptual artists are mystics rather than rationalists. They leap to conclusions that logic cannot reach.
2. Rational judgements repeat rational judgements.
3. Irrational judgements lead to new experience.
4. Formal art is essentially rational.
5. Irrational thoughts should be followed absolutely and logically.
6. If the artist changes his mind midway through the execution of the piece he compromises the result and repeats past results.
7. The artist's will is secondary to the process he initiates from idea to completion. His wilfulness may only be ego.
8. When words such as painting and sculpture are used, they connote a whole tradition and imply a consequent acceptance of this tradition, thus placing limitations on the artist who would be reluctant to make art that goes beyond the limitations.
9. The concept and idea are different. The former implies a general direction while the latter is the component. Ideas implement the concept.
10. Ideas can be works of art; they are in a chain of development that may eventually find some form. All ideas need not be made physical.
11. Ideas do not necessarily proceed in logical order. They may set one off in unexpected directions, but an idea must necessarily be completed in the mind before the next one is formed.
12. For each work of art that becomes physical there are many variations that do not.
13. A work of art may be understood as a conductor from the artist's mind to the viewer's. But it may never reach the viewer, or it may never leave the artist's mind.
14. The words of one artist to another may induce an idea chain, if they share the same concept.
15. Since no form is intrinsically superior to another, the artist may use any form, from an expression of words (written or spoken) to physical reality, equally.
16. If words are used, and they proceed from ideas about art, then they are art and not literature; numbers are not mathematics.
17. All ideas are art if they are concerned with art and fall within the conventions of art.
18. One usually understands the art of the past by applying the convention of the present, thus misunderstanding the art of the past.
19. The conventions of art are altered by works of art.
20. Successful art changes our understanding of the conventions by altering our perceptions.
21. Perception of ideas leads to new ideas.
22. The artist cannot imagine his art, and cannot perceive it until it is complete.
23. The artist may misperceive (understand it differently from the artist) a work of art but still be set off in his own chain of thought by that misconstrual.
24. Perception is subjective.
25. The artist may not necessarily understand his own art. His perception is neither better nor worse than that of others.
26. An artist may perceive the art of others better than his own.
27. The concept of a work of art may involve the matter of the piece or the process in which it is made.
28. Once the idea of the piece is established in the artist's mind and the final form is decided, the process is carried out blindly. There are many side effects that the artist cannot imagine. These may be used as ideas for new works.
29. The process is mechanical and should not be tampered with. It should run its course.
30. There are many elements involved in a work of art. The most important are the most obvious.
31. If an artist uses the same form in a group of works, and changes the material, one would assume the artist's concept involved the material.
32. Banal ideas cannot be rescued by beautiful execution.
33. It is difficult to bungle a good idea.
34. When an artist learns his craft too well he makes slick art.
35. These sentences comment on art, but are not art.

---

First published in 0-9 (New York), 1969, and Art-Language (England), May 1969

Crit Crit

::Critique Transcription::

- So if you had been following the blogs up until a couple weeks ago, you would be- you would not be informed. Um I'm just really frustrated with ::Tugs on clothing:: the nature of photography, um, how complicated it seems. So I wanted to revert to back to just like the very basics of how images are made, ::Touches Face:: um, how we actually read spacial relations um that what we're actually photographing is three dimensional but it cant be in an actual photograph, and um, making images that to some extent are of trickery but um that reference um both the surrealists and minimalism. Um so with these image they are both pinholes and, um, large format images, and I've been- uh for the most part everything that is there is in the actual image um, in the far right there is an um drawing in it is well, but the actual rectangles and prisms  are um made out of string and wire, :: Wiggles:: and after printing it um they are covered in cold wax uh,  which I want it- is a long process, uh I want to build up depth which will then create the actual actual 3D ness of the flat object...

4 seconds of silence

Kerry: So do you cover the entire image with the wax or just the specific parts you're trying to emphasize... on?

-Um I'm Uh using the entire- the entire image... -as I -as I continue, I wanna want to keep building on top of these images, so by the end of the semester there might- have different areas that are lighter or heavier, so yeah...

5 seconds of silence

Matt: The- so you said the sculptures are 3D?

-Mmhmm.

Matt: So it's not, it's not like an illusion of shadow, its an actual shadow?

- Yeah.

Matt: I'm really drawn to the aesthetics on that surface the uh wax, not the pinhole, but the large format, they look really surreal themselves the furniture... the... it's a really nice effect.

Tom: Ashleigh can you talk about the one closest to you?

-This one here? Um I wanted to actually be uh ::adjusts hair:: drawing with the actual wire, um and putting them on a space that recedes-they're on a  bookshelf- I'd create another element to just- because you can see the corners you can see the different planes that it is on- um mimic the same elements of uh like a cube made out of wire um but i wanted them to be very imperfect and uh organic to contrast with the very ::adjusts shirt:: strict nature of the other ones.

Tom: Why the three?

 -Oh um, they fit together well, I thought that they moved through the frame in an interesting manner.

Tom: What did - what are you doing that for? You know I mean, the top one, the three relate to each other, its like uh middle top bottom, you know, you're showing us different views ::pulls clothing:: of the same object correct? you know in the same space, so- why?

- Just as to further emphasize the spatial relations that you're even, you're above, and you're below, but that they're still all the exact same orientation, that  they're the same square -just to continue the reference of spatial relations.

Niki: Are you gonna continue that with- like these other images, that seem different, in seeing the different like perspectives, that those spaces you highlighted there?

-Yeah um i just put three pieces up- ::adjusts hair:: but other images that I have of are of these same set-ups going 180 degrees around them so I have different ways to work with them, um different heights and lowers- lowers that's not a word.

Ashley: What are you-

Tom: I'm sorry, on the third piece did you say that's actually a drawing or that's uh in the print?

-The one on the side is actually a drawing.

Tom: On the side, closest to you?

-Mmhmm.

Tom: A drawing ON the photograph after you printed it? - okay.

Arlie: That looks more like it's drawn on the wall than the other object to me. ::adjusts hair:: The other one looks like it was done after to me.

- Cool.

Arlie: The other one looks like, you you said that's wood and wire right?

- This is wood and string -this is pen drawn on the actual image.

Arlie: Maybe, maybe it's- well up close it, maybe its more obvious up close, but from here, it looks like the exact opposite-- which is cool.

Justin: You said these are shot with a large format?

- Mmhmm. ::sways back and forth::

Justin: I think I'd like to see 'em a lot bigger, like really get into the space of it better that way.

Erin: What do you hope for the drawing on the third one to accomplish?

- Um it's actually a pentaprism so it's exactly how our cameras make images-::adjusts shirt:: uh the light then internally reflects around it so it's just again referencing the nature of the camera and creating- 'cause it- these two- are so orderly and straight and I wanted to have a mix between both like not necessarily  machine made but a contrast between man made and machine made because these are all made by a machine- our cameras.

Rebecca: Is it important for your audience to understand that reference? Of the drawing?

-What the drawing is?

Rebecca: Yeah. Like what it represents.

- No, no I don't think its necessarily important, if you recognize it, you know it's bonus points but..

Erin: I like the idea behind the drawing but I find it a little distracting maybe it's just my nature but i like everything orderly and perfect but i just I'd like it maybe in a different area..but--

- Is it distracting because it is the only one that has a drawing on it or is it distracting just because it--

Erin: I think that's part of it but I'm just, I love the image as it is but I- it takes away a little bit--

Tom: What do you love about it?

Erin: I think I just, like i said the nature of all the lines and the way its so crisp and perfect and um definitely with the two images that are large format- they just work together well and i think that in that way they're so organized.

Will: Ashleigh, I think there is a nice play going on between the two objects I guess one being the table and the lamp, which seems like it could be painted on the back wall from where I'm seated right here it seems very flat, whereas your sculpture which is supposed to look flat, i mean you said its 3D but it sort of evokes like a 1D or 2D drawing, that one sort of jumps off a lot more- it seems more animated than the actual - I'm confusing myself right now, but the flat sculpture seems a lot more interesting and animated than the actual physical properties of the table.

Griffin: Yea I think the middle one is the most accessible for me too, like when i first saw it it messed with my eyes, like I thought you had drawn that on there- um I really like the table with the objects on there and I really like how you involved the light coming in from the window in to your shape-  I don't don't know, I just feel like there is some kind of like other worldly something in there, some kind of crazy time warp going on- I just cause it is the whole sort of surreal- Yeah you definitely are successful when you say the surrealist thing that you mentioned in our spiel.

Arlie: Are you trying to trick us?

- Not necessarily, I want you to be aware that the camera is a trick but um like if I were to display these in a gallery I would include a list of materials- ::gestures wildly:: I wouldn't hide what I made it out of, I'd put string on there, as a list of what it was created from, I would treat it is as if I was labeling a sculpture more so they're actually documenting a sculpture rather than um just silver gelatin.

Jeff: I think that the- if you're talking about how the camera relates to this sort of space uh 3D space, and uh flattens it out that the- these could go further- like right now they're attacking sort of two planes, the three dimensions, you know, like in a way your photograph is making you know a sort of cube so it's making a 6-sided object in the way that your frame makes sides -that back wall is a further side, your lens is a side, so I think you could you could make that go further so it doesn't look so graphic on it but starts to attach itself to the frame more-- uh I feel like that's what you're trying to sort of evoke with the drawing, I feel like the drawing is kinda cramped in there, um, I think that's why it's a distraction to some people cause it doesn't have it's own sort of placement -sort of shoved inside- um I -I really like the middle one, and the end one, because that's what you're starting to do, you know, you're playing with gravity in a way, you're playing with some sculptural things, how you know like how - in sculpture there's a lot of how a piece relates to the floor to wall, or in a corner, you know how it relates to the space, and I think that you could do that like maybe if it like attaches to three walls and the ceiling, you know how how much--

-Im sorry, are you talking about the actual objects inside attaching to the wall or the drawings?

Jeff: Yeah i think that they're- I think that they're right now kind of in this really weak space thing you know they're very flaccid, they're not really trying to talk about the space, you know its sort of like them being sort of slapstick you know and that they just fell off, out of their position, which could be funny but i think that it could go further you know, umm i think if you treat the space that you're creating as a you know more dimensions than just the physical versus the flat  I wanna see how- how can the flat become physical, or kind of what you're doing with the wax sort but I think you could do it with the objects you're making in the space, like if that like makes sense-

-A little bit, yeah.

Jeff: 'Cause you are kind of in this weird inter dimensional space...

-Yeah.

Jeff: I want to see that activated more.

Tom: Jeff, whats the difference between sculpture thats made for the camera and sculpture that functions as photography, that is represented exclusively as photography is there a difference in the way that space is used between the two -um you know as someone that you know works in that way?

::fidgets with book::

Jeff: Um yeah there's absolutely a difference i think that the camera you know you're sort of, you're already selecting the space and how you're going to treat everything it's it's like your -you know its like it'd be reconstructing the walls in the gallery or making your works site specific and uh you know that would be the relationship with but the camera is a frame you know just as the gallery is a frame um so thats why i think you could play more with that you know uh it exists for the camera, it doesn't exist for the wall you know.

Anna: I'm afraid that if you list the materials you'd be using it would make it more about the sculpture than about the photograph and the way the camera works um so because people always photograph their sculpture  um and they list the materials they use and show it in a magazine or whatever, that is what its about, its about the sculpture its not about the photograph, i don't know, just a thought..

Tom: Ashleigh, are you more interested in illusion or representation?

-Can't, can I be interested in both?

Tom: Of course you can, but which one is more important to you?

-Uhh representation - I feel like the representation is - I feel like that's the cyclical nature :: gestures spastically:: because the the representation is half the illusion.

Tom: Well they definitely uh live together in a multitude of ways but there's a big difference between the two - an illusion is alluding to something that is real, representation is the presentation of the real right? Ummm so in in in this work you're using both and thats why I'm interested in your -Im wondering which one is more important to you because you know there's some reason you're choosing to present this uh you know type of work, through photography other than you're a photography major, right? ::fiddles with hair:: So umm and you know the illusionistic qualities could be pushed much further uh definitely in terms of your spacial work being the strings and the frames and everything being the- with the drawing, I think you could really amp that up in a big way orrr you could continually you know um make us believe that actual representation is illusion... you know there are like two different ways you could go with this work, both with those two words being you know I guess equally important --but right now it's kind of in this in this mid space, you know you're tricking me, you're referring to the camera, which tricks us which, you know you're showing us in real space though an architectural perspective drawn way  you know you're talking about a lot of different things and using a lot of different devices but you're not using all of them to go in a specific direction i feel like- like right now you're showing, your showing me elements of a larger project in  a way, umm and so so so Im just interested in ................. your feelings about the difference in the depiction of representation and the illusion um..........and um where you want me as a viewer to um be with this work.

-Okay.

Tom: Are you trying to trick me?!

-No, No- I mean you're being tricked yes? ::caps pen, gestures wildly:: but that's up to you if you actually want to be tricked. It's all--

Tom: What do you want me to be?

-I want you to think about it, Is what I want you to do, I want you to actually question why you guys use cameras, what that facilitates for yourself.

Jeff: I think the trick could be stronger I think that that I think- :: fiddles with fingers:: I don't think anybody is really convinced, that you're- you know, no ones tricked in any real degree I think, you know from back here you know we start to think oh maybe yeah that could work as a trick you know maybe I am a little convinced of that but I think that the stronger you - if that's one aspect you make it stronger, and people will really start looking because they're fooled, you know they want to figure it out, and that I think gets you to your investigation of this difference how illusionistic is it you know-

Tom: Did you look at any of Eva Hesse's um string sculptures? ::sways back and forth:: You know I think that -I've never experienced one of those in person, I've only experienced them through um a printed image, I'm thinking it becomes beyond problematic because of this space that she is kind of referring to and exploiting and denying to us adds to that confusion and I think what Jeff was talking about kind of different walls you could be using and everything, I think her work is one for you to look at more in terms of I guess your own fight between reading those as spacial string structures and flat images and how successful they are on both ends and um cause i think that that may be uh uh a tangible example of what you're talking about the different walls and everything.

Jeff: Yeah

-::adjusts hair, walks out of frame:: I would say that less than, less than Eva Hesse I would be trying to reference like Karel Malich I think I probably butchered that name, but um he does like the wire sculptures-- they're represented in the gallery space less as wire sculptures, but as drawings in space that are not necessarily ...

::End Transcription::

During my critique I said UM at least 33 times, tuck my hair in 5 times, pull/ tug on my clothing 5 times, sway around twice, and gesture spastically or fiddle with my pen/ book 4 times. Overall, my behavior is not incredibly distracting, but I would like to nix those um's entirely. I thought I could talk about my work more naturally in a conversational manner, but as somebody else mentioned, talking- while standing- in front of my peers is harder for me than addressing strangers, and it took me a couple minutes to settle down, resulting in my stumbling for words during my opening statement. I also failed to address all the points I am attempting to make, and even incorrectly spoke about some of the ideas I am trying to convey. During my next critique I will either write down a statement to read, or rehearse a statement much more thoroughly to the point of total memorization. Even in retrospect, I am still unsure of what Tom wanted me to say about my first image, the three pinholes matted together vertically. He repeatedly asks me what I am trying to get across there and I stumble awfully for an answer. When Anna or Arlie asks me about tricking the viewer I respond that I would list my materials, and I think this throws the class for a loop, I was unclear with my words and insinuated that I was attempting to document sculpture, I am not trying to treat my sting sculptures as actual art pieces, they are items to be used within an image. The photograph is the art- I am not documenting the string as art. Near the conclusion I realize my time is up as the alarm had gone off 4-5 minutes earlier, I cap my pen and seem to shut off further commentary by Tom about Eva Hess and the way her work functions on both a 2D and a 3D level, I walk over as if to take down my prints, and appear dismissive. I do think having a book to write in was effective in keeping me from fiddling more, but I hardly wrote anything I could read, I was so nervous that my handwriting is shaky and unintelligent. At a couple of points I am gesturing to images or just generally talking with my hands in an over animated manner, I should practice what my mother would have me do when young and clasp my hands behind my back.

Taping the critique was incredibly insightful, but more so than making me aware of how I look to viewers it was invaluable to have a record of what people said. While being critiqued things sound negative that are actually not at all, and having the ability to watch things multiple times allows you to fully grasp the root of people's suggestions.

Artist Research no.9: Karel Malich

Karel Malich is a largely unknown Czech sculptor, categorized into Ostkunst, or eastern art. Up until the Gorbachev years this term was used negatively, referencing a regressive idea. His work is most synonymous with American "antiform" due to his choice of materials, rope and wire. It is wild to think of Malich creating work unilaterally with these artists as he was in complete isolation, from 1971 to 1980 he was not allowed to leave the country or exhibit any work. He emerged from the Constructivists in the 60's and moved towards a minimalist approach. His sculptures intrigue me most in the way that the function more as drawings in space/ air, than as physical objects. They are crafted from hand painted wires, and then bundled together and knotted.

Research no.8: Resin and Encaustic

I don't know if the cold wax I am currently using will allow me enough layering to create the depth I am looking for. I am researching methods of utilizing clear casting resin instead. Resin is the product of coniferous trees,and is the hydrocarbon secretion of many other plants. However it is highly toxic as you must mix it with hardeners and turpentine. Health cautions must me observed, users should wear ventilator masks and gloves. Resin shrinks some while hardening, which it does by heating up due to chemical interactions, and hardens from the inside out. It needs to be poured over a porous surface, so I am interested in how it will react to fiber prints. It causes bubbles that are undesirable during mixing, so one should be conscientious of this while combining the hardener. The bubbles can be heated out by passing a orange flame over them, sucking the oxygen up to the surface. They can also be vibrated out.

Encaustic on the other hand utilized hard beeswax and a hot surface, many literally melt the wax with an iron and apply it that way. I have also seen people use a pancake grittle as a palette, like this.

Research no.7: Cold Wax

I am interested in layering mediums on my prints to help create an illusion of depth in a flat object, by literally making it 3D. Tom mentioned cold wax to me, rather than the cheap candle wax I had been using. This medium does not harden like candle wax, but is still able to be melted. It is usually used to thicken oil colors and make them more matte. It is comprised of unbleached beeswax, alkyd resin, and odorless mineral spirits. By mixing it with more OMS it can be thinned to to a consistency in which it can be applied with a brush. It is very flexible, and does not crack, and crumble like hot wax, it is also less messy.

Wax painting first began in Egypt, Greece and Rome over 2,000 years ago. Beeswax was heated to a molten state and mixed with pigment and mastic, dammar crystals, or caranauba wax. This was applied to canvas, stone, paper, or wood panels, and passed over heat to fuse the paintings. After it dried it would be polished with soft fabric to shine. It was completely archival, and protected the painting from moisture, allowed for collaging, and produced rich texture.

Last year the Anderson Gallery had an exhibit titled "The Divas and Iron Chefs of Encaustic" featuring the work of Kristy Deetz, Peter Dykhuis, Lorraine Glessner, Cheryl Goldsleger, Reni Gower, Heather Harvey, Jeffrey S. Hirst and Timothy McDowell. Below are some examples of their work.

Artist Research no.8: Erik Desmazieres

I went to an exhibition of Erik Desmazieres' work at the Jepson Center in Savannah, GA. This was intensely beautiful, highly detailed, and other worldly. Born to a French diplomat, Erik is one of France's best known contemporary print makers, He utilizes the intaglio method in combination with aquatint. This usually involves a copper plate being covered with an acid- resistant ground. The artist then draws with a needle, and immerses the plate in an acid bath which eats the lines into the plate. Aquatint involves sprinkling a powdered resin which melts and clings to the plate prior to the acid bath, resulting in a porous ground that creates tone and texture in the final print. His work reminded me of a more sophisticated Escher in it's surrealist nature, but also seems to be influenced by Durer, Bresdin, and Goya.  He utilizes space and light to confuse the viewer and create fantasy worlds.

Artist Lecture no. 3: Brian Ulrich

 I found this lecture to be rather interesting, but by far this was my favorite statement, "if you use an 8x10 film camera you can take photos of junk and it becomes art." He somehow implies that the very nature of large format adds value to his images. Even when I asked about this specifically Brian goes on to discuss why he won't participate in consumer culture and buy digital, but he never mentioned the nature of his large, night exposed, images being better suited for the high quality of large format film. I find this concept baffling, even as one who utilizes and prefers film. I thoroughly enjoyed his sense of humor and his light hearted take on such a serious subject matter. I was again taken aback when he said he never gets model releases or property releases. It seems that someone gaining such prominence would be more conscious of ethical concerns. Photographers do have a right to snap away in public but in private stores we do not, it would be such a shame to not use his images because he doesn't have permission. I really enjoyed how he discussed his approach to work, and the way he transitions from one series to another. He mentioned how he composes a street photography shot, and then waits for something interesting to walk across his "trap." This is a brilliant approach to this type of photography. I always feel so intrusive when I photograph strangers, you don't want them to think, "what is she doing? She just followed me click- click- clicking away!"

Artist Research no.7: Michael Guidetti

Wow. I remember when I found this guy off of www.FECALFACE.com which is where I get almost all of my art knowledge, but I was straight up flabbergasted by the brilliance! His use of multiple mediums is seamless, and really flows with his ideas. This is really what I am moving towards, illustrating the 3-D world in a 2-D realm.

Research no.6: Cheap Prints!

It's this simple guys..

1. Click on the link embedded in the title of this post.

2. Be transported to the Richmond Camera Pro Lab sign up

3. Fill out simple information, no business/ income/ verification of professionalism required!

4. Check e-mail for account user name and password

5. Log in to http://www.richmondprolab.com/index.html and you are ready to save a ton of dollars, so you can spend it on things like....

Just be honest with yourself and admit there is nothing you want more than a beer Koozi with YOUR face on it.

Here is a list of prices you pay now:

This is the money you could be saving if you got GEIC- I mean Richmond Pro Lab:

And who doesn't love metallic prints? You can't even order them anymore through their regular online system, so here's how much those would run you:

Next day turnaround is no charge, they provide you with a soft proof profile and a profile for sending your prints in digitally. They have extensive resources pertaining to color management and how to get your prints ready to send. They also will send you 2 - 8 x 10's for FREE so you can compare to your monitor and make necessary adjustments prior to ordering again, they will also send you their own color targets that you can also download online so you can compare to your monitor and calibrate if necessary. I've always found other in town shops to be prohibitively expensive, but have used ELCO in the past. This is still cheaper, and you'd still have to pay shipping.

This is ELCO's straight to print service:

There you have it.. Cheaper, faster printing, done locally, with Koozi options!

Artist Lecture no. 2: Paula Lerner

I attended the artist lecture of Paula Lerner put on by the Central Virginia Chapter of the ASMP last Thursday and just found out today it would be an appropriate blog post. I will not be posting any of Paula's images as she has a very strict copyright over her images and educational use is not allowed, actually when you go to her portfolio as I hope you will, you agree to a Terms of Use in which all Fair Use and Educational Use are expressly forbidden. I've embedded her URL above, so please do go look at her work, it is all incredible. The lecture I attended was about multimedia in photography, essentially combining sound with your still images. The images are not videos, they may pan across the screen, zoom in or out, but they don't actually function like videos, or stop motion. They were so visually powerful and striking in conjunction with audio, whether ambient noise or recorded monologues, I remember these as video. I actually had to go back to her website to investigate my memory's faults. She has travelled to Afghanistan 3 times to document activities of BPEACE, the Buisness Council for Peace. Much of her work revolves around women's issues. Her piece the Women of Kabul was published on the Washington Post website in 2006 and received a Webby award. She spoke on the techniques she employs to capture sound, the importance of ambient sounds such as feet pattering, sewing machines humming, livestock clucking and mooing, to couch intensely rich imagery.

This is a new medium beginning to show itself commercially as well as in photojournalistic realms, the Washington Post sponsors www.MediaStorm.com which also has many examples of this type of work.

Artist Lecture no. 1: Penelope Umbrico

Wow. She is just so darn clever! I found it interesting to hear that she was a trained painter, a lot of her work seems much more rooted in form and shape than in recognizable objects. She seems to use the camera more as a machine to record, with no artistic hand than as a tool for art itself. Works like the Honeymoon Suites, Broken Sets, and The Ends of Things seem much more relatable to painting than photography. Her work was slightly exclusive, and it was nice to hear her say she was aware of this, it is not readily available for any viewer, one has to do a bit of digging to understand everything they are looking at. Without statements a lot of her work is misconstrued and possibly brushed over. She spoke intelligently and assertively, she seemed completely aware of all the reasons behind her work and themes they represented. I was really interested in the ideas of consumerism she approached with clippings from home decor magazines, this unconscious desire to purchase items that 1,000's of other people have, in order to attempt to live your life as the magazines portray them.

Image 1: Penelope Umbrico, Ends of Things Photography

Image 2: Penelope Umbrico, “Bed/Pillows/Paint”, magazine pages, house paint, 2006-07 

Image 3: Penelope Umbrico, Broken Sets (Ebay) Photography

Image 4: Penelope Umbrico, Broken Sets (Ebay) Photography

Image 5: Penelope Umbrico, Honeymoon Suites Photography

Image 6: Penelope Umbrico, Honeymoon Suites Photography

Artist Research no.6: Duane Michals

'I am a reflection photographing other reflections within a reflection' - Duane Michals

Duane Michals explores the limits of photography, and constantly satires the art world. His images are not necessarily showing an emotion or an idea, but how this emotion feels. He began photography in the time of portraiture and documentation, but his work is far from representational. He never formally learned photography, and says this contributed to his success because he never had to "unlearn" anything. When he did start commercial photography for fashion he hardly ever shot in studios, preferring to capture his subjects in their own environment. He never claims to be a photographer, and compares his work to poetry most readily, but also eastern religions, quantum physics, painting, and philosophy.  He incorporates text into work often, and it often serves to question the authenticity of photography itself. He wrote "How Photography Lost its Virginity on the Way to the Bank"

in 2007, it criticizes the art critics, the art market, and many photographers, especially those who confuse fashion with art, he calls them fartsters. Here are a few more gems from the book:

• Never trust any photograph so large it can only fit inside a museum;
  
• The announced demise of the decisive moment is premature; and
  
• Museums should never exhibit photographs of visitors looking at art in museums to visitors who are looking at art in museums.

All images copyright Duane Michals

Here are some more smart things he said:

“If we use observable fact to dictate what the possibilities of life are, then we are stuck with those that believe the earth was flat. It’s like saying when we shut off the radio, the music no longer exists because it only came from the tubes within.”

“You can’t go through life bowing your head and accepting what someone in supposed authority tells you. That’s being an automaton. The great marvel of being alive is that one does have the right to ask questions and be audacious in the questions.”  

This one is the smartest:

“To photograph reality is to photograph nothing.”