Nowaday, everyone is a photographer? by Lynn Lin

An introspection written at the time when photography became a method of daily social.

2-1. Instagram, an app developed by apple for iphone and ipad only

2-2. Most popular photo-sharing based social network websites: tumblr. Pinterest, Flickr

NOWADAY, EVERYONE IS A PHOTOGRAPHER? Some Facts

Photography, as a form of art, has become accessible to all people; artists and amateurs. Cameras were first reduced in size and cost, then became digital, creating a world full of amateur photographers.Photo sharing websites are blooming, such as Flickr, tumblr, Picasa etc. Iphone even developed an App, instagram, for sharing photos online specifically for the iphone users. People no longer need to be famous to have audiences.

was a girl from Taiwan who posted a picture of herself lying between two objects, with the central part of her body hanging in the air without having any support, and amazingly, people followed her example. Tragically, when an American attempted this feat between two balconies of his apartment building, he fell and was killed.

At the same time, computer softwares are becoming increasingly easy to operate. In the case of photography, the software Photoshop is widely and globally used. It could be used for complicated digital effect applied to photos, or for making photomontage, or for beautifying portraits by smoothing the skin, reducing fine lines, etc. With the help of Photoshop, it seems to be easier to became an artist or designer as well, but more difficult to become distinguished. There are about ten million groups on Flickr, with topics ranging from self-portrait, street pictures, jumping pictures, to Cut and Paste, collage, photomontage, etc. It seems that all ideas and methods are being used used widely by, literally, everyone —“There is nothing new under the sun”. We certainly benefit from these technical developments and the internet information. And personally, I love putting my photos on Flickr and participating in some of the group projects there, such as “365 days self-portrait”, which means one self-portrait a day, for a year. And I am inspired by some of the photos and designs of other participants. But there is something missing there. All of these come easily, and we take it casually, without much thinking. Almost out of habit, we click “like” or the heart-shape below those photos to favor them. We see so many photos daily, but hardly remember any. The aesthetic level is becoming low and the ideas that are behind the photos and designs are becoming shallow. When one girl in Japan posted a photo of herself jumping, the whole world followed the idea, and everybody jumped or floated in their photos. There

3-1. Floating theme photos found on tumblr

2-1. The Two Ways of Life, Oscar Gustave Rejlander, 1857

3-2. “Good Night” stereograph, Molly Davis, 1860

What we are going to do?

As to photographers and designers, what do these useful and convenient techniques hold for us. How can we distinguish ourselves from the numerous amateurs? How can we still bring new ideas and techniques and surprise the world? When was the last breakthrough in art and the design industry?

ed optics, depiction of facts. The first experiments with manipulating a photographic image transpired during the era of daguerreotype (1839-1848). A portrait artist would apply powdered pigment to the cheek and lip area of the subject’s image, making it appear more lifelike and, therefore more visually pleasing. This reminds me of some apps on smart phones today, which, once a portrait is taken, the app will refine it by simply a click, and the fine lines will be reduced and skin tone will be brightened, sometimes even making the eyes larger.

“I think it’s very difficult to find themes these days. You have to look around and ask yourself: What is my life about?” Said Boris Mikhailov, who is an Ukrainian photographer famous for his photo series, “History of Illness”—exploring the impact of the soviet regime on the current social and psychological state of post-soviet societies.

Another very early manipulative technique , which surprised me, was stereography. Images were made using the stereo camera—a machine that took two simultaneous images of the same scene through two lenses placed side by side. The resulting images were printed side by side and were viewed by people through the lenses of a stereoscope which merged the two images into a three-dimensional scene. This 3-D photography was invented around the 1850s.

Boris Mikhailov was born in 1938, he lived in an age that there was not digital camera or computer manipulate software, and yet he was confused. And his answer was to look around and ask oneself: “What is my life about?” So what did other photographers and designers conquered the challenge of lacking of ideas? If it is an universal challenge. As I did some research on the history of photography, I realized that photographic manipulation could be dated back as far as photography was invented.

The photographic collage and image combination appeared as early as the 1860s. Cut images would be composed together and be rephotographed. Or cut negatives would be combined together to produce the final print. Oscar Gustave Rejlander was a pioneering Victorian art photographer and an expert in photographic collage. In 1857 he designed his best-known work, The Two Ways of Life, in about six weeks. This was a seamless photographic collage made of thirty-two images.

In the past—photographic manipulation

Photography is an act of “writing with light”. It has evolved tremendously throughout the one and a half centuries of existence. In 1839, photography was announced by France as a great scientific breakthrough, which was able to create a lasting image on metal. At that time the French government freely offered the process to the world. Over the years, this costly, complex and time-consuming process has evolved from the metal plate system to the streamlined systems of today. Film production and the negative developing process has innovated from black and white to colors. Today, digital cameras do not even require traditional film or negative developing. Almost since the inception of photography, it has not been restricted to split-second time frames, sophisticat-

5-1. Pocket stereoscope from Zeiss

6-1. “The Black Bowl”, by George Seeley, 1907

6-2. abstract photographs 1917 vortographs by alvin langdon coburn

During the 1890s, photography began to divorce from “rayographs” accidently in his darkroom, while he waited reality. Pictorial photography manipulated the photoin vain for a couple of minutes for an image to appear graph in order to “create” rather than simply record an from an unexposed sheet of photo paper. Nothing develimage, by causing the image to lack sharp focus, details, oped until he placed a small glass funnel, the darkroom and even be given visible brush strokes or color changes. graduate, and the thermometer in the tray on the wetted For the pictorialist, photography should be like painting, paper and turned on the light. Then an image began to drawing or engraving, projecting an emotional intent form before his eyes. Moholy-Nagy took the idea back into the viewer’s realm of imagination. The Pictorialists to the Bauhaus and dubbed the process “photogram”, usalso would use photochemistry and choice printing paper ing it as a teaching tool, and he incorporated the process to apply their designed photos. into his personal artistic work. In the beginning of the twentieth century, photography was then pushed to a new dimension—abstract. The Society of the photo–Secession was formed in the United States. One notable photo-secessionists was Alvin Langdon Coburn. His images, taken in urban settings, were strongly geometric. Coburn, in 1917, invented the vortoscope—three mirrors placed in the shape of a triangle and attached to the camera. When photographing with this device, all sense of reality disappeared, instead some angular, graphic images were captured. These were the first abstract photographs in the history of art.

Schadographs, Rayograms and photograms were all photographs made without cameras. They were all revised versions of the “antique” photogenic drawing technique, by placing objects directly onto the surface of a light-sensitive material such as photographic paper and then exposing it to light. By practising this antique process, modern photographers and artists applied their own artist language and statement. Most often they were completely abstract. Meanwhile, Dadaist experimented with photomontage. Montage was a popular method to extend photographic vision. Images were often torn from mass-produced periodicals and recombined in varying ways—to express a political or cultural view-point. John Heartfield’s montages of Hitler and Mussolini, produced during the Second World War, were extremely sarcastic. While these artworks were obviously collaged manipulations, they perfectly revealed the true. Since that time, photography has become a political statement-making media.

When Photography was announced to the world in 1839, it somehow replaced the value of painting, thus causing painters to detach from the reality. But photographers wanted to divorce photography from reality as well,making the way for abstract in photography. Photographers envisioned more than a detailed image that a photograph could produce. They were not satisfied with photography being merely the result of a scientific invention that could catch an image in a split-second, using sophisticated optics that depicted the facts plainly.

Objects were photographed and manipulated at different angles with new sensibilities. This avant-garde aesthetic extended to America with many Dadaist and Bauhaus people,who emigrated there during the second world. They influenced the next generation of Americans. Andy Warhol employed some of their spatial qualities in his own imagery. However, he used photographic image to examine certain aspects of the American culture. He developed a new “Pop” iconography in American art. Instead of mirroring the style of the Bauhaus, the Rus-

Further exploration into new photographic manipulation techniques took place in the 1920s. One of the Zurich-based Dada members, Christian Schad updated the photogenic drawing technique, invented by Henry Fox Talbot, by placing objects on photosensitive paper. He called this new technique “schadographs”. Schadographs were similar to Man Ray’s “rayographs” and Laszlo Moholy-Nagy’s “photograms” later. Man Ray discovered

8-1. post-visualization photo, Jerry Uelsmann

sian constructivists and the dadaists, a unique style was forming in America.

of the image. It is the soul of an image; the subjects and the processing methods are the skin and clothes. And today, most photos are made without any thought of concepts. We sometimes focus on the techniques and computer skills more than on the images.

Besides photomontage, multiple exposure was also experimented with and applied by photographers. Edward Steichen enjoyed creating controlled confusion through this type of manipulation. His multiple exposures of urban architecture in the early 1900s stand as landmark images of the genre.

High techs—the big boss

In the days before computers, digital cameras and photo editing software, the darkroom was the place where photographers manipulated photos. The darkroom functioned as a visual research laboratory. Much time was required to develop the correct exposure and best blending. In the case of Uelsmann, he said usually he ran through 50 sheets of paper during a darkroom day and hopefully got one or two images that he cared about. Over the years, he discovered that he would produce about 150 photos from a year’s work. And about 15 of them have a lasting value. Such situations have become rare nowaday.

Jerry Uelsmann has been exploring the boundaries of the photographic medium for over 40 years. He experiments with complex multiple prints, negative imagery and other techniques to convey his personal vision. Uelsmann declaimed himself as a huge believer in post-visualization, which he said was all about the willingness of the photographer to revitalize the final image at any point in the photographic process. Incorporating the photo with symbols, such as nudes, floating trees, clouds, reflections in bodies of water, windows and hands, Uelsmann fabricated spiritual and surreal images that gravitated toward the intense emotion he, himself, was feeling

In the 1980s, the invention of digital cameras and Photoshop, cooperating with computers, changed the feature of photography. With a digital camera, we get to see the I’ve seen countless photos with or without post-visualizaresult of the photo immediately after the shuttering. If tion on Flickr, Pinterest and other photo sharing websites. we like it, we keep it; if not, we delete it and take more. I remember that many of them were perfectly done. But We do not need to wait for the film to be developed I could not remember what they were anymore, even or to worry about how many films are left—we do not though they were interesting. But when i saw a collecthink through or plan ahead before we push the shutter tion of Uelsmann in the school library, I picture them ofbutton. Since digital cameras have become increasingly ten. These darkroom manipulated images are compelling, “intelligent”, deciding most of the settings—shutter speed, not only because of the seamless darkroom fabricated aperture and focus--we are giving away authority skill, but also because of the concepts behind the images.

And this is what I meant by “something missing” in today’s photos—a concept behind an image. Concept is an abstract and intangible idea, and yet a general notion. So, when I look at pictures produced by famous photographers, I realize that it was the concept that had made their work successful, not only what kind of skills or processes they had applied. Compelling photos with clear concepts would reflect an attitude and notions of art and aesthetics, and would even evoke the mood of society. Concept is also a statement, the reason for the existence

9-1. typical digital camera setting 11

10-1. first-person view of the Google glass

to the machine. I said this because I feel this way when I am using my Canon 5D, which I just bought four weeks ago. Before that, I had been using manual film cameras, in which case I could make all of the decisions. But with the digital one, I felt like most of time I was fighting with it, or it was fighting with me. If I use the “M” mode, which means manual, I need to adjust a lot of fancy settings before I can take a picture. Or, I could just settle with the “A” —auto mode and let it decide everything.

entire reality with an Internet connection. I watched Google’s initial Glass demo video; the guy who demonstrated Google Glass was walking on the street and talking to the glass to take pictures here and there, and to sharing the pictures online. Though I really never want my life to be like that, I believe that maybe this is the future reality. Maybe one day everybody will have a microchip set in their head, and they will be able to take a picture of not only what they see, but even of what they think. And the pictures will then transmit to Though I believe that film cameras will not be eliminated, the computers. If that happens, people will not even I have to admit that the future belongs to the digital. I need to learn drawing or painting, they will just need am not against digital cameras or computers. After 14 to learn how to imagine an object well in their mind. weeks studying the history of Graphic design, I know This might sound terrible, now, to specifically skilled better now, that resisting the updated innovation would designers and artists. But what if that would happen (and only lead me to a dead end. I do not choose to be like it might happen sooner than we thought), what should William Morris, who worked really hard for his whole we designers and artists do then? Again, I believe in life, only to be considered, that somehow he was wrong. concept and ideas. It sounds cliche, but photographers Unlike Morris, the Bauhaus admired and embraced the and designers from all time had the same problem, and industrial innovations. And yet they did not surrender to those who kept digging with concept made their way the machine. Machines were useful tools for them, and out. It does not matter, if we are using smartphones now they knew their tools well. They would look for solutions or Google Glass later, be aware of life surrounding us, when the tool failed them. If they wanted to design a always ask ourselves “ What is my life about?” and make chair with curve penal, they invented a material to fulfill statements of it through our images, photos and designs. their design. “be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” — the Therefore, we should embrace new techniques, use Bible them, understand them and master them. And, tak the fun to experiment with them, as those photographers of the earlier twentieth century did. They kept exploring and pushing the boundaries of photography. They were thinking. Though, today, sometimes It seems that these programmed techniques do not leave us much space to explore or experiment,. but we are human without being programmed. We can push the development of techniques, and are free to go back to the darkroom and see what else we could be inspired and applied to the high techs. Now Google has launched their Goolge glass on the high-tech market. Google Glasses are an electronic device that allows us to walk around and overlay our

11-1. Google glass

REFERENCES

“Adobe Photoshop.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 16 Dec. 2013. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Adobe_Photoshop>. “Alvin Langdon Coburn.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 15 Dec. 2013. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Alvin_Langdon_Coburn>. “As a society, we should be very worried about Google Glass.” IntoMobile. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http://www. intomobile.com/2013/02/22/society-we-should-very-worried-google-glass/?utm_source=hexagram.com&utm_ medium=referral&utm_campaign=hexagram.com>. Couturier, Elisabeth. Talk about contemporary photography. English language ed. Paris: Flammarion ;, 2012. Print. Davenport, Alma. The history of photography: an overview. Albuquqerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1999. Print. Marien, Mary Warner. 100 ideas that changed photography. London: Laurence King, 2012. Print. “Photogram.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 Dec. 2013. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Photogram>. “Pictorialism.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 12 Aug. 2013. Web. 15 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Pictorialism>. “Rejlander.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 10 May 2013. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Rejlander>. “Rejlander.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 10 May 2013. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Rejlander>. “Stereoscopy.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 Dec. 2013. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Stereoscopy>. “Stereoscopy.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 Dec. 2013. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Stereoscopy>. “elizabethmaryclay: kelido camera.” elizabethmaryclay: kelido camera. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Dec. 2013. <http:// elizabethmaryclay.blogspot.com/2011/08/kelido-camera.html>.

IMAGE SOURCE

4-1. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oscar-gustave-rejlander_two_ways_of_life.jpg 4-2. http://www.dailygazette.com/photos/2012/feb/02/32711/ 5-1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pocket_stereoscope.jpg 6-1. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/George_Seeley-Black_Bowl.jpg 6-2. http://elizabethmaryclay.blogspot.com/2011/08/kelido-camera.html 11-1. http://www.catwig.com/google-glass-teardown/teardown/glass-clearshade-isometric.jpg