"I'm doing reportage, not art"

U

user237428934

User deletion pending
Local time
10:05 PM
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
2,669
Yesterday at photokina I met an interesting photographer: Michael von Graffenried from Switzerland. He will receive the Erich Salomon Photography Award and made a tour though his large exhibition at photokina explaining photos and photography techniques (he uses mainly panoramic cameras like a widelux).

youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSo3eveOZJE
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r3S0nR0tEw (German)

At the end of the 2nd video (it's a little older) you see HCB visiting the Exhibition of Mr. Graffenried and he's signing a book for HCB.

At the end of his tour at photokina I asked him if he sees his photography as reportage or as art. He almost got upset by the word "art". His message was that he is doing reportage photography and art is something what others do with his photos. He was absolutely no friend of the term "art" and he didn't want to be viewed as an artist. Interesting.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
I don't know. If it quacks like an artist, and says it isn't an artist, it protests too much.
Click to expand...

I think his comments are fair, I'm sure most reportage photographers never plan to exhibit in galleries, but if it pays the bills they will.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"His message was that he is doing reportage photography and art is something what others do with his photos"

This is the critical point, in that it does not matter a whit whether he considers his work art or not, it is purely in the reception and consideration given it.
 
The bowl I eat my breakfast out of is essentially art at its core, though it may not have been created for artistic purposes.
 
Well, if it is shown in a gallery setting, it seems it is art to me. Perhaps he meant that he's not concerned with art and that the curator / whatever using his work in a gallery setting makes it art, but that isn't his intention when making the photos.
 
I've always thought that you're fighting a losing battle to try and label your own output, people naturally tend to apply their own labels that stem from their opinions and viewpoint.

However I understand that if you are attempting to report on a situation/event etc then for your images to be labelled as art must be frustrating as the point behind the images may easily be lost amid artistic interpretation.
 
Silly me however I would lean towards the opinion of the fella actually producing the work. As a viewer, who probably hasn't even met or spoken with him, I can call it whatever I please.

"is it art"?

"no, never intended it to be".

"LIAR"!

Funny stuff.
 
JSU said:
OT but still at least tangent: I worked more than a few years in the newspaper industry and it always grated my nerves and at times insulted me to hear an editor ask, "what art do we have to go with this story," in reference to our photographs. I always wanted to scream, "I'm a photographer, not an artist!" At newspapers, some editors consider anything going into the paper other than copy and headlines as art. At most papers, the ads are placed by the ad dept, not the editorial div editors.

Please excuse my rant, this shouldn't even bother me given that it's been nearly two years since leaving the industry. But I can appreciate the perspective of one who claims to shoot reportage rather than art.
Click to expand...

Well, you must know the term "camera ready art" from your graphics Dept. Maybe your editor was just borrowing a term from the "press" side of the paper? This is likely art rather than Art. It's a term that is (was) in common usage in the "graphic arts" world to mean anything that was being reproduced. The art could have been a page of type, custom set, or a cartoon. Any flat art that went into a "camera" used for making printing plates. Any paper with a Web press (not WWW type Web) had one or more cameras that photographed "camera-ready-art".
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure the distinction between art and reportage is important. The photographer's intent does not change the way the image is viewed.

"Art" has been used in newspapers to include everything that isn't text. That usage is not intended to mean something self-consciously produced by a self-described artist.
 
raytoei@gmail.com said:
thanks for sharing....i spotted a widelux in the second video. I wonder what's the first camera ?
Click to expand...

Perhaps the XPAN with the accessory finder

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/xpan_30mm.shtml


During the tour he had the widelux hanging around his neck and he showed us how he operates it. He takes photos while the camera is in front of his chest. This technique was important when he was in Algeria during the war in the 90s. People and Police didn't like to be photographed and he couldn't do this openly. The same in other african countries.
 
perhaps he was trying to say that he takes photographs, captures images, but what is on the walls and is for sale are photoshopped, framed, and matted glossed up stuff that is what others are doing. The latter, of which he wants no part of.
 
easier way

easier way

Next time you want to know if someone is an artist or not, just ask them this:

"Do you use photoshop or crop your images?"

From their reply, you will know.


tom.w.bn said:
Yesterday at photokina I met an interesting photographer: Michael von Graffenried from Switzerland. He will receive the Erich Salomon Photography Award and made a tour though his large exhibition at photokina explaining photos and photography techniques (he uses mainly panoramic cameras like a widelux).

youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSo3eveOZJE
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r3S0nR0tEw (German)

At the end of the 2nd video (it's a little older) you see HCB visiting the Exhibition of Mr. Graffenried and he's signing a book for HCB.

At the end of his tour at photokina I asked him if he sees his photography as reportage or as art. He almost got upset by the word "art". His message was that he is doing reportage photography and art is something what others do with his photos. He was absolutely no friend of the term "art" and he didn't want to be viewed as an artist. Interesting.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom