Last Saturday was the OCA study day on the Prix Pictet this year. I read up on the Prix Pictet’s website on what is the purpose of this award and the shortlisted portfolio. Basically, I have already had in mind what I like and don’t like before going to the exhibition, so I have two goals in mind: 1) To see if viewing the photograph in gallery setting in large print will affect my opinion, and 2) To see what other people find in the photographs that I have missed. I think latter is more important to me because I think it is almost too subjective to view a photograph along, have your opinion and call it a day. At this level I feel it is more interesting to see what appeal to other people.
With this in mind, these are some of the portfolios I have seen.
The Obvious One
I think Rana Effendi’s work on the Zone of Alienation stands out from all other portfolio. I like her use of lighting and colour to create such a desolate screen, yet full of symbols and hints of human inhabitation. It is the kind of conflict I feel that make me wonder: where are the people? What happen to them?
There are two types of photographs I have seen in modern photographic works. The first type is the image hardly conveyed any message, or even one finds it appalling to find it in an exhibition, until you see the background note on what the photographer is aiming to present. The second type is the one finds a certain emotion, context, of the image, and wish to find out more about the background. This work is definitely the later type.
Seeing the work in gallery in big prints makes some of the images more like a painting than photograph. This one, for example, looks like an oil painting when looking up close in the gallery.
In discussing with other students about the exhibition, I was surprising this portfolio is rarely been talked about. Many students seem to like Effendi’s work, but the work is essentially a close ending which provides no room for further imagination, or speculation. In fact, very few students spend time in front of this piece.
Similar, but not exactly
I spoke to Eileen about the exhibition and she told me that she prefers Philippe Chancel’s work on Fukushima. Chancel’s work is also focus on a disaster. There is a Google map right next to each photograph of the aftermath of a tsunami. In some aspects, this work is quite similar to Effendi’s work, in which it also involve no human, but only the evident of past habitation. However, Chancel’s work doesn’t give me the same emotional impact, because its subject is too grand: a huge ship got washed on-shore, an array of damage car lining up orderly. Joseph Stalin once said, “One death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic.” I find it showing the grand scheme of damage after a tsunami is not the best way to present a human tragedy. Also, the “use” of colour is brighter.
Having said that, the best photograph in this series is a damaged photo album of a family. It keeps me wonder what happen with the people there, where they are, and what happen to them.
What lies beneath
There is quite a lot of discussion around the oil spill work done by Daniel Beltra. Those are landscape with very beautiful colour. It is beautiful, but we are not very sure if we should be enjoying it given the context. I think it is the guilty pleasure that force everyone to question what they are looking at.
I wonder if the religious Catholics or Muslims feel the same when they watch porn image online...
Sky and BBC TV coverage for the Gulf coast oil spill do not show such beautiful colour, so I wonder, what time in the day did Beltra take the images? Or does he go on helicopter a lot?
The Oddballs
There are several oddballs in the exhibition. It will be too time consuming to talk about all of them, but I will pick one. Guy Tillim has one photograph showing the back of the head of the Presidential candidate Jean-Pierre Bemba (http://www.prixpictet.com/portfolios/power-shortlist/guy-tillim/). The composition of this image is very disturbing, because we are so wired to pay attention of human face first, which is the body guard on the left hand side.
This photograph, when view in large print over a big gallery, is obvious the body guard is not in sharp focus, but the back of the head in the middle of the image is. Therefore, when I saw the image in the gallery, it is more obvious the person in the centre (the back) is the subject. The focus is not as different while viewing it on computer. Therefore, the photograph makes no sense to me initially.
Still, I prefer a smaller corp closer to the centre to make the subject occupied a larger area than the body guard.
Tillim also has a blurry image of a salute. This image looks so much better on computer screen than big print. In the big print I find myself completely lost. However, in computer, I can spot the salute right the way. I think the blur is overdone if the image is intended to print in such scale.
One thing I cannot tell if this is just technical deficiency or intentional. Helen seems to like his work a lot. However, I believe if the purpose of these photographs is to communicate ideas, they should be made less confusing as possible. I don’t think this is a novelty to make your image so obscure for average people just to make yourself look more like an “Artist”.
And the winner is...
Who care? I am impressed by neither the work, nor the presentation of the work. I am looking at a huge photograph with glass in front of it, only to see my own reflection. There is little coherence in the portfolio as a whole.
But then, who cares?
Sometime I wonder, how much does my opinion worth anyway. In the same light, how much does my tutor’s opinion worth? It only worth something if it helps me to learn or gives me an insight or enlightenment. If it is doing none of above, then maybe the activity of getting feedback is pointless. Then, let’s come back to the worth of my opinion: I don’t like it. There are better images on the other side. Let’s learn from the good one.
Gareth made a comment of giving the price to the less well known guys who survived on baked beans, instead of a very well known guy. I disagree. Reality never works that way. Forget about competition, if there is photographic job, who is going to get it when a bunch of applicants has roughly similar level of skill? The one living on baked beans? No. It is always the person the organizer seems to remember. We can do theoretical debate on which is a better picture forever. In the real world about getting a job or winning an award, it is about who you know. If you don't know anyone, you won't be nominated here in the first place.
Some other side notes
I had a short conversation with Miriam about how much information a photograph should contain so that there are enough clues for the viewer to guess. Against, it boils down to the question of what is the purpose of a photograph if everything is hidden in secret code? Some people compare photography to cross-word puzzle, which the joy is about solving a puzzle. However, if there is not enough hints and one will not solve it, is there any joy?
I use an analogy of watching opera in German without subtitle, and assuming you don’t speak any German. Do you need to know the story to enjoy? Or do you just enjoy the screen, and the singing alone even though you have no clue?
Final random note
It was nice to see other students and hear what their opinions are (which is why I went there for). I don't have a chance to speak to everybody (who does?), but it was fun to talk about the exhibition with a cup of chocolate...
It is strange, but I seem to forget what Vicki looks like.
Somehow I wonder what happens to Brian (the one with all the fancy gadget), since I ran into him every single photography study visit.
I did get a good photograph on Amano, but only blew it off in the development stage. I think I have to try again.
The new tutor (Robert) has a Nikon FM2.
