Duane Michals in an American photographer who often uses his photographic sequences incorporating text to examine emotion and philosophy. He usually makes sequences of images as if they are action shots or documentary photographs. He developed this style in the 1960s when photojournalism first became really popular and he adopted this method and used it to create his own narrative. In the 60s his work was not well received as critics rejected his work. When in the 1970s Cindy Sherman adopted this style and it started to become increasingly popular with more and more photographers taking on this style of creating narrative and not actually photographing documentary or photojournalist methods. He staged images and got people to act and pretend, his images touch upon life after death and what happens to those that die. He makes stories/narrative and creates a new concept.

“I never went to a photography school, which was my saving grace. I didn’t know that you weren’t supposed to write on a photograph, and I didn’t have to unlearn all the rules that schools teach you.” – Duane Michals

A Duane Michals gallery: http://www.dcmooregallery.com/artists/duane-michals#1

I find Duane Michals methods of photography really interesting. I like the idea of it looking like stills from a film and that the characters are interacting with one another. The titles are on the pages with the images and some have writing underneath them bringing in more depth and context to what Michal’s was thinking or possibly what the characters where doing. I do really like this style and think it is a great way to tell a story just through images, the sequences of images are simple yet they are really intriguing. I feel that they interest me more because of the time they were made and how different the world looked and how different people looked in the 60s. Some of his sequences are really simple but are interesting to look at while others have more layers and depth to them. I like that some of his images are quite light and easy to follow while others are random and some others have deeper meaning making the spectator actively think about what they are looking at.

I chose to analyse this sequence of images as it stood out to me. I find that Michals way of sequencing interesting as usually in a set of film stills there are 12 frames per second but Michals has only used 8. I feel that this backs up the quote from above that he had no prior knowledge of photography or anything and so just made images that he wanted to make without having any influence from the photographic world being put onto him. I found the sequence to be unusual but my interpretation of it is that the main subject was an angel and by the clue in the title had fallen from heaven to see his lover one last time. He then kissed her and lay on top of her and seemed to loose his wings and had to run away. I feel that maybe he could have lost his wings because he wasn’t supposed to go back down to earth and disrupt the living but he still went against that and did it anyway. This image is really interesting and the spectator could take away a number of interpretations from it. I like that the images are in black and white, even though that would have been the  only option in the 60s, it looks a lot better and allows the spectator to focus in on the angel instead of being distracted by anything else. The intensity of the light coming in from the window just adds more to the effect that the subject is an angel but also eliminates any other distractions from the outside buildings. The images would have been made on a film camera and a long exposure would have been put on to give the slightly blurred effect making the subject more angel-like and is they are a ghost.

I had to choose this photograph as it is so odd. I do think that this is a great image as it does, in a way, reflect how many people think about God. For example, both men are sat naked while talking and many people belonging to Christian and Catholic religion say that they will stand naked before God at their time of death to see whether they will make it into heaven. Obviously they don’t quite mean literally but in this instance it works, making the image stronger and more hard-hitting for the spectator to look at. I feel that the piece of paper over the man on the rights face symbolises how possibly anyone can be a God or that your beliefs can be in anyone and you can confide in whoever you want without actually having to physically see any God. I like the style that this photo has been made with the caption as it makes it more personal and is more intriguing to me. I also find the way the man on the right is positioned is interesting as he looks as though he is teaching the other man a lesson or telling him about something and the man on the left is taking it all in and following the other mans lead. The image looks good in black and white again so there are no distractions from the main message of the image making it stand out even more.

This image really stood out to me when looking through Michals photographs as at first glance it looks very odd. I feel that this image is similar to the style that Francesca Woodman follows with using a slow shutter speed and getting the subject to move so that some of the image is blurred or distorted. I like this image as it makes it seem as though this man, Joseph Cornell, is a ghost and is looking in the mirror to see if he can see himself clearly. The subject is centered right in the middle of the photograph and the back lighting is over exposed and draws the spectators attention right over to it. The bright white light coming from the window attracts my attention immediately followed by the distorted figure of the man. I do really like this image as it is strange but also intriguing to look at at the same time. I also think that this image is more effective in black and white as the spectator is more attracted to the bright light rather than being distracted by any colours in the room. I find that this image represents a ghost or that the story/narrative of this person is that they have died. When researching about Michals I found that he makes his images largely based around life after death and his interpretation of what that would be like. He steers away from the mainstream photography of the 1960s which was largely documentary photography and creates staged images that are unique and a narrative has been created instead of simply bare witnessing.