Surreal Photography

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

A couple of years ago I visited an exhibition of his work and it was really surprising! Included a video showing also his darkroom with 6 enlargers!
robert

PS: Jerry's website here.

When I was in college, the photo professor was a man named Steve Perfect. He told us that 20 years or so earlier, Uelsmann had been in Fort Wayne to give a lecture on his work, and Steve had the job of keeping him company while he was here. Uelsmann wanted to go photograph, so Steve took him to a lonely tree in the middle of a field just north of the city. Uelsmann photographed the tree and later used it in several of his photos.

Here's a photo I made of the tree:

The tree looked much the same, but smaller in Uelsmann's photos. Here's one of his using the photo of the tree:

http://cdn2.all-art.org/art_20th_century/surreal2/uelsmann/135.jpg

Steve showed us students a large print Uelsmann sent him of one of the photos he used the tree in. It had several holes punched in it from a hole-puncher, to ensure that the print would never have any value for Steve. I think that f--king sucks. He used that tree that Steve showed him for several of his finished works, but couldn't even give Steve a good print?

 

[Keith]

 

[mfogiel]

The world is surreal enough by itself. No need to use photography as collage, although some are quite successful at that. Molesting the negatives?
- As radio Erevan used to reply: - yes, it can be done, but we know much better subjects for molesting...

20149801 by mfogiel, on Flickr

 

[charlesholland]

Have a look at Graciela Iturbide: she really uses here eyes in a surrealistic manner. One of my favourites.

 

[Dan]

When I was in college, the photo professor was a man named Steve Perfect. He told us that 20 years or so earlier, Uelsmann had been in Fort Wayne to give a lecture on his work, and Steve had the job of keeping him company while he was here. Uelsmann wanted to go photograph, so Steve took him to a lonely tree in the middle of a field just north of the city. Uelsmann photographed the tree and later used it in several of his photos.

Here's a photo I made of the tree:

The tree looked much the same, but smaller in Uelsmann's photos. Here's one of his using the photo of the tree:

http://cdn2.all-art.org/art_20th_century/surreal2/uelsmann/135.jpg

Steve showed us students a large print Uelsmann sent him of one of the photos he used the tree in. It had several holes punched in it from a hole-puncher, to ensure that the print would never have any value for Steve. I think that f--king sucks. He used that tree that Steve showed him for several of his finished works, but couldn't even give Steve a good print?

And Uelsmann probably thought he was being generous with the 'holy' print.

 

[StevenJohn]

Collectors sometimes cherish imperfect items. The "Inverted Jenny" stamp comes to mind.

 

[Out to Lunch]