This is my contact sheet for all the photos I took in this photoshoot. I definitely didn’t take enough so if I get a chance I would like to take some more. Also, I don’t really like how the headphones images came out as they just weren’t arranged properly, but my favourite photos are of the dolls because I think their arrangement and the lighting just work really well in all of them.

New objectivity is an artistic movement which arose in Weimar Germany, which focused largely on unsentimental reality and the objective world, as a reaction against the more abstract, romantic, or idealistic tendencies of Expressionism.

The photographic areas of this movement take the form of many artists, beginning with Albert Renger-Patzsch and his book The World is Beautiful, published in 1928. His work placed a focus on the ordinary beauty of the world and its everyday sights.

The compositions include imagery from both man-made and naturally occurring sources.

These images challenged traditional styles as they documented the rapid industrialisation in Europe and America and, following the First World War’s chaos, the artists of the time found that a rejection of the emotional and spiritual concerns of Expressionism and an interest in the rational and political was what they needed at this time. His work is a widely known staple of the movement, and its fame and nuance inspired other artists to begin to take more objective and sober images.

Another artist from this movement is Walker Evans, famous for his images of everyday objects/tools in his series ‘Beauties of the common tool‘.

In framing the items in this way, Evans redefines them as something beautiful and intricate – as opposed to their menial and soulless function and form. They are presented as central upon a plain white background to ensure all attention is focused on the shape and detail of each tool. This fits into the style of New Objectivity because of its rawness, honesty and ability to reassign meaning to everyday objects.

Another relevant artist is Darren Harvey-Regan, who’s work is far more recent than those previously discussed.

Harvey-Regan heavily draws inspiration from the aforementioned Walker Evans in his series ‘Beauties of the Common Tool, Rephrased‘ from 2013, wherein he ‘sourced matching tools, cut them in half and re-joined various halves together, with the resulting physical objects being photographed to create his final work. The montaged tools become both beautiful and bizarre objects, in which a ratchet wrench is combined with a pair of pliers and a Mason’s trowel joined with a pair of scissors.’

My response to New Objectivity

Here are some images I took in my home that illustrate the interesting perspective that the movement indicates – that everything is beautiful and worthy of being photographed.

Here are some edits from Lightroom, where I increased clarity, grain and texture and I added a b&w filter to some.

Overall, I don’t think these responded entirely correctly to what I was trying to achieve – so I may wish to reattempt a shoot soon. However, some do really have the aspect of formalism and order I was aiming for.

Formalism is the identification of a formal set of rules and order that photographers agree are imperative in the making of a photo. These consist of visual/artistic elements, such as lines/shape/form/repetition, and also the elements which are specific to photography as a medium, such as focus/frame/shutter speed. Knowing these key terms and how to use them allows us to equip them to analyse images taken by other artists and use a universal language to discuss them. When a photographer typically identifies a ‘mistake’ in their image it will refer to a misalignment in their ‘following of the rules’ –  e.g. out of focus, subject cropped, blur etc.

Looking at Threshold Concept #8 from Photo Pedagogy, we can see that the idea of this set of rules is becoming rather outdated as photography expands its capabilities as a medium.

The above image shows where we have annotated an image based on the ‘photo literacy’ – outlining the shape, texture, depth, tone etc. This gives us as viewers more of a way into understanding the image at a greater depth and grants us the ability to explain it to others through the universal language we have established.

Still Life

The term still life comes from the Dutch word ‘Stilleven’ in the 17th century, when the genre flourished in the fine art medium. Artists arranged significant objects and painted them and the genre was consolidated as one of the most popular.

Vanitas & Memento Mori

The above image is an example of Vanitas. A Vanitas is a piece of art full of symbols that represent the transience of life, the futility of pleasure, and the certainty of death, often contrasting symbols of wealth and death. The term derives from religious origins – in the first lines of the Book of Ecclesiastes; ‘Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities, all is vanity.’ These works include imagery of material goods such as wine or musical instruments, to demonstrate the triviality and vanity of worldly belongings.

The above image is an example of Memento Mori, a Latin phrase meaning ‘remember you must die‘. It is a style of still life of which the purpose is to remind the viewer of the fragility of life and inevitability of death. These can include imagery of skulls or extinguished candles.

Of course, these are all examples of pieces of fine art, not photography. An example of Vanitas/Memento Mori in photography is the work of Paulette Tavormina, shown below, who was inspired by the work of 17th Century Old Masters.

Of course in the modern world of photography, we see that still life constantly has a place as a popular genre and here are some examples below.

Laura Letinsky

The work of Laura Letinsky is some I find particularly interesting. Through her images in this series, she creates a moment, an action, an interchange – all through careful arrangement of her subjects. I personally love this work because it creates a space for where there was clearly life previously.

Additionally, the abandonment of the articles within the images suggests symbols of rejection or perhaps the action of leaving things behind. This in itself directly links to the idea of Memento Mori photography – as the items have perhaps been left behind by someone who is no longer here to claim them.

Overall, I think it is clear that still life is always going to have a place in all different forms of art and creation, and so it should not be overlooked in its power to evoke emotion and thought through the use of symbolism.

In my view, it is almost always the case that a picture comes down not to what is contained in it but how the viewer interprets it. This relies upon; context – what previous knowledge the viewer may have surrounding the background of the image/its subject/s; personal background – as we know that this impacts every element of a person’s experience and choices; and connotational aspects – how the human brain has the ability to connect multiple things to each other at once, triggering specific emotions or memories through imagery or sensory experience. This interpretational nature of photography is, in essence, what secures it as an art form and makes it entirely accessible. 

I am going to analyse the statement, ‘photographs confuse as much as fascinate, conceal as much as reveal, distract as much as compel. They are unpredictable communicators.’, from David Campany’s work On Photographs. This quote is interesting because of its use of oxymoronic language. This gives the subject (photography) far more depth than one may have originally established and this is what creates the talking point. 

When Campany says that photographs ‘confuse as much as fascinate’, he is possibly referring to the inevitability of captivation – oftentimes when one views an image it will fade from memory almost immediately; imagine how many images we see in a day, but there are a few occasions when an image will be entirely consuming in its attraction and mesmerism. Sometimes, when this occurs, we are unable to draw away from the image, consistently returning to its beauty/mayhem/gore/nostalgia – I think nostalgia is the most important here as it is often this which triggers the mind and evokes such emotions as sadness, joy or wistfulness to an overwhelming degree. Photographs can confuse as they may force the viewer to confront their content and also question something they believed in previously – as, after all ‘the camera never lies’ can sometimes be true.

The phrase ‘conceal as much as reveal’ is interesting as it alludes to the ongoing presence of media that shows false imagery – media which is consumed by all of us. There are so many examples of this, and one may find themselves constantly questioning what they thought they knew or had seen evidence of. Whilst alluding to this negative aspect of photography, the statement also shows that photographs have always and will always be used to document and broadcast – they allow us to reach across continents to access common experience and reference as a human race. This is arguably the most important role of photography due to its capacity to allow us to connect and also ask for help from one another.

To ‘distract as much as compel’ is important because this is what allows us to escape through the use of images. To ‘distract’ ourselves through the medium of photography is to see things in a new manner and discover new perspectives. To ‘compel’, an image must galvanise the viewer – make them so acutely aware of their own emotion that they believe they must act upon it – or, if not act then just continue to enjoy the image.

Photographs are named as ‘unpredictable communicators’. This is perhaps due to the adaptability of the human mind – we are programmed to take what we are given and make it comprehensible and relatable to our own thoughts and views. However, as discussed earlier, photographs are quite good at challenging this aspect of our nature and they often force us to confront personal barriers or beliefs. One should always be reminded of the need to believe only what we know is certain, and always to question that which we believe is certain, and always be aware of the fact that a photographer’s job is always to make their subject seem a certain way – every single part of the shoot will be directed towards this intention and therefore it will always be achieved, and we will always view an image that has been calculated very thoroughly. Perhaps a good example of this is the use of propaganda during fascist eras in European countries. The imagery used will always be chosen based on its factor of admiralty and inspiration – the purpose is always to ensure the subject appears strong and capable.

The above image is an interesting example of this principle. We can see a man falling from a second-storey window, whilst another person cycles by. This is a piece of performance art produced by the famous performance artist Yves Klein, famous during the 1960s. The image is actually a photomontage made up of two images taken at different times and merged together. This is shown here:

Yves Klein has created an image of himself leaping from the building ‘into the void‘. A void is an absence, a space created by lack of presence. As photographs are only snapshots – frames caught in a split-second – they do not allow us as the viewers to know what happened prior to or after the photo was taken. Therefore the image only draws our attention as viewers because we know that he cannot have photographed this as it is shown without injury. This creates a desire to investigate the story behind the image, which is perhaps the purpose of this intriguing technique. Additionally, drawing on the time the image was created, one could possibly link its illusion of freedom to the current socially turbulent era and all its numerous social and political movements including the civil rights movement, the student movement, the anti-Vietnam War movement, the women’s movement, the gay rights movement, and the environmental movement. This links to my earlier point – that a viewer’s interpretation of an image will rely upon context just as much as content.

Therefore, as a whole, I think that photography is many different things all at once, and is always down to interpretation on behalf of the viewer and their personal experiences. Often, the images we remember the most are the ones with a story behind them.

Continuous lighting vs flash lighting:

Continuous lighting is the opposite of flash – the lights are constantly lit instead of only when the shutter is pressed.

Continuous lighting can be paired with a slower shutter speed, giving the photographer the opportunity to create shadow and even a chiaroscuro effect. With this slower shutter speed however, (anywhere under 1/100 of a second) the photographer would need to remain aware of any movement in the image, and to temper this with use of a tripod, if necessary. Therefore, a differentiation between the two will give different results.

There are different types of continuous lighting however, which I will show examples of here:

A Key light is the primary source of light in your images. The colour, strength and shape of your key light will affect the entire composition.

Backlighting involves having the main light source for a photograph behind the primary subject – this can create some interesting shadows and also eliminate ambiguity if the photographer wishes to.

Reflected lighting is a clever way of using the light in your environment to your own advantage and manipulate it to create different effects. In the above example, it is clear that by adding the reflection, the image will have far more depth and clarity, but will still have the same exterior background.

Flash lighting involves the use of a bulb that flashes when the shutter is pressed. This creates a high key light source and eliminates shadows. It is also mostly paired with a fairly high shutter speed.

https://fstoppers.com/lighting/continuous-lights-versus-flash-portrait-photography-610586

Here are the results from my recent studio shoot exploring the use of aperture to create different effects.

Here is a diagram to remind you of the effects that aperture creates:

In this shoot, we chose to show the results of using different apertures to take the same images:

The following images are in the same order of aperture (f5.6, f16, f36), but in these, the objects were arranged moving away from the camera, in order to show the clarity in aperture levels. This is drawing on the idea of lining up 22 eggs away from the camera, and by increasing aperture from lowest to highest, seeing an increase in the number of eggs that are in focus. Here we of course didn’t use eggs but instead the objects we were already photographing. You can see this effect was achieved as in the first image (with a low aperture) a low number of the objects are in focus, but in the final image (with a high aperture) all the objects are in focus.

The word aperture comes from the Latin for ‘opening’. This relates to the function of aperture – aperture is the degree to which the curtain inside the camera opens to allow light into the image. Aperture is measured with f-stops; ranging from as low as f/0.7 (used by NASA to film the moon – though of course most common cameras will use about f/2 at their lowest) to as high as f/45 (used to provide the maximum depth of field possible for a macro lens. Again, common cameras will use about f/16 or f/32 at their highest).

However, using the words low and high when discussing aperture may lead to confusion, due to the system that aperture uses. The ‘low’ aperture numbers signify the larger opening in the camera’s curtain – letting more light into the image, but the ‘high’ aperture numbers signify a smaller opening in the camera’s curtain – letting less light into the image.

Aperture does not just refer to light however – it also relates to the depth of field one can capture in an image. This is shown in the diagram below.

Here are some examples of images taken with wide apertures.

Here are some examples of images taken with narrow apertures.

As you can see, in the first set of images, only the closest/chosen elements of the composition are in focus, but in the second set, the entire image is in focus.