For its latest issue (#71), Source magazine is asking the question, “What is conceptual photography?” To go along with the mag they have produced three short talking-head videos exploring this question with a handful of artists and critics. The importance of the “concept” in contemporary photography has always interested me. In the photo-world, the question regularly pops up about why “straight” photography isn’t taken seriously by the art world. Those in the straight photography corner often appear to see conceptual photography as impure in some way, as if it were not what photography is really about. Without wanting to spark off another one of these debates, it seems to me that concept is indeed considered paramount in Western art photography today (in my experience, this is not at all the case in Japan, where “serious” photography can still very much be about wandering around with a camera and taking pictures). For example, I’m often struck by young photographers struggling to hang an ill-fitting artist statement with some big ideas in it over the shoulders of work that is clearly not conceptual in the slightest… presumably because they have been taught to do so in art school. Wherever you stand on this question (or however delightfully far away you stand from it) these videos provide an interesting look at how photography became so excited about concepts and what the hell “conceptual photography” is even supposed to mean in the first place.
-
Recent Posts
Categories
- African photography
- American photography
- Art Fairs / Festivals
- Asian photography
- Awards
- Book of the Week
- Book reviews
- Collecting
- Contemporary art
- European photography
- Events
- Exhibition reviews
- Existentialist photo-ramblings
- eyecurious News
- Interviews
- Japanese photography
- Latin American photography
- Magazines
- On a lighter note
- One to watch
- Photo-books
- Photo-journalism
- Projects
- Tangents
Archives
- March 2013
- February 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- February 2009
Tumblr
-
RSS





2 Comments
I believe that Concept was introduced in Photography more as a need of the art market to expand its business. The image itself is quite strong to elevate photography to a status of an autonomous art. The problem today is that “C” seems more important and dominant than “P”.
Concept is great, but isn’t the photograph itself more important. If I take one photograph, then take the exact same one standing on my head is there any difference. Maybe I’ll put that in my artist statement
2 Trackbacks
[...] on http://www.eyecurious.com Share this:ShareFacebookTwitterEmailLinkedInPinterestJ'aime ceci:J'aimeSoyez le premier à [...]
[...] comment on ‘conceptual photography’ from Marc Feustel. Those in the straight photography corner often appear to see conceptual photography as impure in [...]