What is "antiseptic" / "prosaic" photography to you? Tell / show us!

[SimonSawSunlight]

What is "antiseptic" / "prosaic" photography to you? Tell / show us!

I've been thinking about this and recently had it coming up in conversations...
What does "antiseptic" - in PJ of course, but also in art-, street- or any other kind of photography - really mean / mean to you?

Is it a way of composing the picture? Do colours / black and white or high / low contrasts matter? Or is it more important that the photographer does not interfere at all with the scene, that he acts "invisibly"? Or is it a question of the subject chosen? etc.

Can a high-contrast black and white photo, taken at f1.4 be "antiseptic"?
Are all colour photos with low saturation and unspectacular composition automatically "antiseptic"?

Also, to what degree does a photojournalist have to be "antiseptic" in his style? ...and how?

In fine art photography, how "antiseptic" can a posed or staged photograph really be?

These are a lot of different questions actually and they lead to different answers, I'm aware of that. So if you want to keep it simple, just post a picture that you think is a good example for either "antiseptic photography" or the contrary.

Thanks a bomb!

 

[Ranchu]

I can't pick out anyone's work in particular but a fine selection here. Also "Communication Arts" magazine's photo annual comes to mind.

http://light-test.com/

It's a look that pays the rent..

 

[Roger Hicks]

This is a fascinating and astonishingly difficult question.

I think there are two components.

One is a deliberate banality of subject. The photographer must choose a subject that most people would not look at twice, and then present it as if his audience had never seen it before.

The other is a deliberate literalness: no 'trick' perspectives, extreme focal lengths, or great departures from widely accepted standards of saturation or contrast, i.e. both unusually high and unusually low are not 'antiseptic'. Quite high sharpness and a degree of formalism are, I suspect, essential. There is a 'take it or leave it' quality to the image.

Of the three attached pictures, I'd say that the bicycle and the underground shot were both 'clinical', but that the handstand wasn't -- though I'd be hard put to explain why.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Sparrow]

This came to mind, composed and technically correct but lacking narrative or emotion, perhaps?

 

[Roger Hicks]

This came to mind, composed and technically correct but lacking narrative or emotion, perhaps?

But does it lack narrative or emotion? An 'antiseptic' shot allows the viewer to invent their own story to go with the image (or requires the photographer to write the story) instead of pushing a single interpretation.

To me, your shot tells of the decay of shopping centres and (through the empty seat) desertification and personal isolation. And my bicycle is the garish vulgarity of modern colours, coupled with a lack of pretentiousness (it is only a bicycle after all).

Cheers,

R.

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

This came to mind, composed and technically correct but lacking narrative or emotion, perhaps?

I think "antiseptic", especially in pj, should not mean 'lacking narrative' at all!

But you are contributing to my observation here, that the "antiseptic" style often seems to imply some kind of centered composition; although yours is an extreme example.
Then again, I'm not sure either if this is really 'antiseptic' to me...

Thanks, guys!

 

[Sparrow]

Roger; yep agreed it is a bit of an urban decay cliché, but then the bicycle is hardly sober

 

[Sparrow]

I think "antiseptic", especially in pj, should not mean 'lacking narrative' at all!

But you are contributing to my observation here, that the "antiseptic" style often seems to imply some kind of centered composition; although yours is an extreme example.
Then again, I'm not sure either if this is really 'antiseptic' to me...

Thanks, guys!

how about

antiseptic; clinical and precise
prosaic; commonplace or simple
sober; humourless and emotionless

possibly?

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

side note:
a friend told me about a photojournalist teaching in hannover who said something like:

If you're style is not sober enough, you shouldn't mess with pj, go study art photography.

Converse argument: Your style is too sober, go make pj, stop the art.

Uh-oh I don't want to fall into the "art vs pj" / "is pj art?" pit! But is it really 'soberness' that separates the two?

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

how about

antiseptic; clinical and precise
prosaic; commonplace or simple
sober; humourless and emotionless

possibly?

The reason I used these three words was that I can't seem to find one single word to describe the phenomenon. It's all of them. But not necessarily humour- or emotionless.
There is this young french photographer who's got "it" in a lot of her shots:
http://gonzale.net/blog/
(Often fitting the low-saturation yadda yadda 'cliché' - if you can call it that - as well 😀 ). I like what she does. It's still very personal though... God this is diffcult!
Is it something semantic or purely visual/graphic?

 

[mfunnell]

OK, so I tried to pick examples from my own photographs...

The first is all clean lines, and probably follows the "rules" of composition a little too faithfully, and too much is in focus and not enough isn't...or something:

A bit antiseptic:


This has, more or less none of the above in terms of clarity or rule-following andfor want of better phrasing I think it is...less antiseptic:


Whether you like or dislike both or neither or either of 'em, I think and hope they might be a little illustrative.

...Mike

 

[Sparrow]

The reason I used these three words was that I can't seem to find one single word to describe the phenomenon. It's all of them. But not necessarily humour- or emotionless.
There is this young french photographer who's got "it" in a lot of her shots:
http://gonzale.net/blog/
(Often fitting the low-saturation yadda yadda 'cliché' - if you can call it that - as well 😀 ). I like what she does. It's still very personal though... God this is diffcult!
Is it something semantic or purely visual/graphic?

We have pictures because we can’t put everything into words maybe?

I wouldn’t have used those words to describe that photographer

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

We have pictures because we can’t put everything into words maybe?

I wouldn’t have used those words to describe that photographer

well, yes. from the semantics' point of view I think you are right, most of her stuff isn't 'antiseptic', it's too intimate for that, she's too big a part of it. but it's the graphics, the look of a lot of her work, that is. at least to me, while this is very subjective, for sure.

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

good example! thank you.
the first one is very "informational". the second one has a very "sensual" touch to it (not just because of the couple).
- in some kind of journalistic reportage, i.e. about subways (obvious I know, sorry 😀 ) do you think that a shot like this second one could have its place?

OK, so I tried to pick examples from my own photographs...

The first is all clean lines, and probably follows the "rules" of composition a little too faithfully, and too much is in focus and not enough isn't...or something:

A bit antiseptic:


This has, more or less none of the above in terms of clarity or rule-following andfor want of better phrasing I think it is...less antiseptic:


Whether you like or dislike both or neither or either of 'em, I think and hope they might be a little illustrative.

...Mike

 

[degruyl]

But does it lack narrative or emotion? An 'antiseptic' shot allows the viewer to invent their own story to go with the image (or requires the photographer to write the story) instead of pushing a single interpretation.

I think that this is an important point. The picture can illustrate the story, but the story takes place outside of the image.

As an example:

http://charlottewhalen.net/projects/guatemalata/2

This is a pile of bundles of papers. What is significant is something you cannot know about it without further information: the files are from the secret police death squads in Guatemala.

 

[surfer dude]

Perhaps a "dispassionate observer" can be said to take "antiseptic" photographs eg in David's link above, the photographer could not have done a better job of making clinical photographs, yet the underlying motif is extraordinarily unsettling.

Perhaps some of Walker Evans' photographs of petrol stations and home interiors could fit into this category, especially under the subheading of prosaic. In fact much large format photography, because it is generally contemplative and, almost of necessity, taken after much consideration and adjustment, and tends to be of generally static things.

This is an interesting thread!

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

Concerning the "pj has to be 100% antiseptic and sober"-thing,
James Nachtwey said that instead of being consumed by all the fear, anger and stress he's going through while shooting, he channels these emotions into his photography.
I think his work really is less "antiseptic" than many other photojournalists' work. Still no one can deny that he is one of the big guys.

 

[Sparrow]

One thing that does strike me is the absence of selective focus in the canon of photojournalism, I can see how as an historic document it would be more valuable if along with Nixon and the Chinese leader one could identify their retinue and see the great-wall rising up in the background.

I imagine explaining to a picture editor the artistic merit of isolating ones subject and the particular merit of that lens’ bokeh would be a thankless task.

perhaps it just means, don’t do anything fancy, just get the shot. The hackneyed “f8 and be there” springs to mind.