Yoko Okutsu, 2008
One of the most worn clichés in the realm of photography is the notion that a photographic portrait can somehow “capture the essence” of its subject. This has always struck me as pretty problematic; the idea that there is a moment that can be captured on film that encapsulates some fundamental truth about us, about who we really are seems to be a little reductive… I have always liked to think there was more to me than that. I can understand a photographer’s search for an image in which the subject is as natural as possible, forgets the camera and maybe even themselves. However, this may not be any more revealing about the person being photographed than an image in which the subject is playing to the camera, showing another side of themselves in the process.
Review: 10 years of in-public
Trent Parke. Baker, Narrandera, 2006. From the series Coming soon.
Street photography is a strangely controversial photographic genre. When I started blogging, I was a little surprised at how divisive it seemed to be within the photo community and its ability to get people worked up, whether they were in the ‘for’ or ‘against’ camp. As with many other photographic genres ’street photography’ is a pretty broad appellation. There is no dictionary definition of it but a fair assumption would be that it refers to photographs taken in the street (I won’t wade in to the debate on whether those photographs have to be ’straight’ i.e. not to have undergone any manipulation, as that is a blogpost in and of itself), which seems to allow for a fair bit of artistic license. And yet, street photography seems to find itself in a bit of an artistic ghetto, often being, or feeling, completely ignored by the art world. I have already added to the recent debate surrounding Paul Graham’s essay The Unreasonable Apple on this subject, which, although it doesn’t deal with street photography specifically, is a good place to start to get an idea of what the fuss is about.
Read More »