Sensing and seeing pictures after paintings

I’ve been drawn to looking at Hopper’s work. I’m not exactly sure but I am primarily looking at his work for the quietness, but also for the intense isolation tinged with lonesomeness.  So it’s interesting to me to begin to notice these “scenes” out in the real world so to speak.  So I’m asking myself – how to compose a photograph to be possibly nearly as emotive as the constructed images of Hopper’s paintings…  yet clearly be “of the world out there”.

Early Sunday Morning 1930 – Edward Hopper

Oil on canvas 35 x 60 in.

Whitney Museum of American Art, New York

East St. Louis, Illinois, 2003

From the series “Approaching Nowhere” by Jeff Brouws.

copyrighted by Jeff Brouws.

Some of Brouws work comes close to reminding me of that quietness…

3:54 PM. Sunday Afternoon – Matt Niebuhr

I walk by this building above quite often – maybe finding it in the right light with the right activity level – might just get closer to what I’m searching for – an update so to speak on the “Sunday Morning” feelings in the Hopper painting…  it’s just not there yet.

Drug Store,1927 – Edward Hopper

Edward Hopper

Gils Maricopa – CA HIGHWAY by Jeff Brouws

I haven’t seen Brouws’ work in person – so I wonder what the prints might look like.  But the images seem promising at least in the web versions.

For me, it’s not in the painterly treatment of a photograph -but perhaps more in the spare, pared down detail, the coloring and the perspective yet flatness that a photograph can produce that lend it more of that emotive quality I’m after.

Painting / Photo Battle #1 [ in the spirit of the "photo battle" ]

In the spirit of Amy Stein’s “photo battle” series…  Shawn Records caught the bug too… ( comparisons / contrasts – I find sometimes make the most thought provoking combinations – sometimes…)  I decided to begin my own series of comparisons.  Many times I’ve come across photographs or paintings which for some reason or another – remind me of another photo / painting.   It’s not so much that I like one or the other images – or that I think one is better than the other – it’s more about seeing the two together and figuring out something about it from there on…

So here it goes with   ”Painting / Photo battle #1: – the orifices - a face off of sorts.

Mund / Mouth (Brigitte Bardot’s Lips) – 1963  -  Gerhard Richter
Oil on canvas

Liz No. 3, 2006 – Jason Horowitz

From Jason Horowitz statement:

The work is an on-going exploration of people and the human form. The images reveal a hyper-realistic amount of detail about the subject and explore the relationship between photographic representation and painterly abstraction, the formal elements in tension with the emotional content of the subject matter. The flesh depicted is simultaneously seductive and repulsive. Shot with the same ‘glamour’ lighting set-up used for fashion images, these photographs subvert that process to look at what is real rather than ideal. Larger than life, these images become a vehicle for looking deeply at one’s self and others.

Blue Sky Gallery is currently exhibiting a selection of prints from a series of  photographs by Jason Horowitz called  ”Corpus”. I attended the gallery talk this past Saturday which has become a favorite of mine – to hear a bit more about the work offered up by the artist.  There were a couple of interesting comments – one was on technique and one was actually about the photographs – both of which resonated with me.

First – the inevitable question “what camera / film did you use…”  of which I was completely happy to hear Horowitz rephrased the question to a more poignant point – which is that technique (process) matters in so far as the final product (the image) presents what the artist was after – in this case – it’s about presenting “hyper real detail” (and more) of the physical surface of the subject - oh and if it matters to you, it was all digital – a Canon 5d – printed on an ink-jet by Horowitz himself… So the “how” only matter’s in that he manages to get what he’s after.  So much for the film snobbery angle…

Second – the other question / statement from the crowd was about how the images  (more here) seemed to be rather ugly (to one particular person anyway). Most of the images elicited a response: “like a car wreck where you can’t look away” - sometimes just short of disgust.  I’d guess this was probably one of the best responses you could imagine getting from the crowd about your work on the wall.  If what you see in the images is disgusting – are you able to ask yourself – why?  Is the “real” human body beautiful anymore – or only that imaginary idealized image? What parts of your own body would you feel comfortable submitting to this sort of scrutiny?  How strong is your own self image.  I think for me, mostly I felt very self conscious in front of these images – who wouldn’t?  For me anyway – Horowitz’s work seemed to achieve a measure of success – There’s something at both ends of the spectrum working here – the general (fragment of a body – anybody) yet very, very specific – this person – that skin – this hair – that mole on this skin fold…   I think that’s why the response was widely shared – we could all connect at some level with the images in front of us.

It’s worth a look on your own time in person to see what you think if you get the chance – the full effect of the images is not able to be had by seeing them reproduced on the web.

Bruce No. 2, 2006 – Jason Horowitz

So to close the loop (on this navel gazing exercise anyway) -the initial impulse to consider the painting (itself  beautiful / ugly) a completely different sort of constructed image -( More on the assumed subject of Richter’s painting – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitte_Bardot) -is to consider that powerful thing which is truly a unique quality to photography. Simply this: The camera is capable in the right hands to allow you to see much more than you might think and you need not try to escape the facts in front of the lens – in this case the all the better to embrace those facts.

The Altered Landscape

Shirtwood Phenomenon; Maine 1963

Marianne McCarthy

I’m very excited about the opportunity to participate in the upcoming show “The Altered Landscape” opening up tomorrow night at The New Space Center for Photography. The Altered Landscape is an exhibition culled from over 200 local, national and international entries. Photographers were asked to submit depictions of an “altered landscape”.  I’m happy to offer up my own attempt – I’m even more interested to see what others have pictured and explored.

Hill [Pre-Illinoian Glacial influence, East Central Iowa]

Matt Niebuhr – 2006

Altered Landscapes: Natural Forces is part of a series of photographs in combinations among other things…

This old hill, an apparent remnant of glacial action, is located in Eastern Iowa between the boundaries of the Illinoian glacial limit and the Late Wisconsin glacial limit - likely formed during pre-Illinoian time.

The time interval between 310,000 and 128,000 years ago is referred to informally as Illinoian time.   The time prior to Illinoian time (more than 310,000 years in age) is referred to informally as pre-Illinoian time. Several pre-Illinoian glaciations occurred during pre-Illinoian time.  I grew up in Iowa - much if not quite most of Iowa was at one time or another forever altered by the ebb and flow of glaciers  – way before any human touch – but now just how different it has become from that which I experienced some brief 37 years of my life.  And so the subtle shapes of the land of my childhood – deeply embedded in my most brief existence and memory – have been and will always be altered landscapes.

Come to the show – see what you see – First Friday opening reception is tomorrow night already – Feb 8th – 7 – 10 pm.

The show runs February 8th through 26th.

Newspace Center for Photography
1632 SE 10th Ave. Portland, OR

Monday-Friday 10am-8pm
Saturday 11am-6pm
Sunday 12-8pm

Jan 2008 = 111.12 lbs of CO2 offset

Jan 2008 = 111.12 lbs of CO2 offset, originally uploaded by Matt Niebuhr.

Commuting from Home to Work – for the month of Jan. 2008
124.99 miles

Est. of carbon offset = 111.12 lbs CO2

Assuming an average of 22 mpg fuel efficiency if I had driven my car instead and assuming 19.56 lbs of CO2/gallon of gas

Not much… but it’s a start…what if 10 other people did the same thing? The powers of ten….