Judging Photographs & the Filter Photo Festival

                Judging a photograph is much more than offering an opinion about the piece. An effective critic is one that supplies the reader with their insight about the piece as well as an explanation for their judgments. Though the criteria for evaluating the piece varies from one critic or work to another, alternative viewpoints and insight assist viewers in thinking about the piece from a new perspective.

                Barrett states, “A judgment is a what that demands a why.” Readers will only take the critic seriously if their appraisals are founded upon fact and criteria. This criteria is established from different art theories, including realism, expressionism, formalism, and activism. It is extremely important that the critic understands the difference between these categories. An artist might have the intent of creating a series to inform society about a problem to create change. This is going to be reviewed with consideration of how a social concern is relayed and the consequences it brings about. On the contrary, an expressionist’s work might be reviewed with consideration for the artist’s emotions and how they were portrayed. Critics might have differing criteria even for the same photograph. The photographer’s intentions should be kept in mind, not as a standard of whether the work is good or not but as a reminder of the work’s purpose.

                A critic will only be taken seriously if they remain truthful and justified. Merely stating that an artist’s work is original or moving won’t be effective unless the writer includes more details about their viewing experience. Once they explain the reasons for their judgment, their views will be taken seriously when compared or contrasted to other critics’ judgments.  Furthermore, whether a critic likes or dislikes the matter they are reviewing should not affect the rationality of their argument. A writer should be willing to educate others about their interests, but they must remember that the primary topic is about the art object, not the critic. Though passion is important when reviewing a piece, remaining educated about the work is just as crucial.

The Filter Photo Festival is a prime opportunity for photographers of all levels to learn more about the field and spark their inspiration. The workshop we attended, Funding Your Personal Photo Projects, was informative and educational. The panel of professionals has all had a large amount of experience with applying for grants and was especially helpful in providing the audience with ways to do so. A valuable tip that Rich gave was, “You have to be your number one grant-maker.” Through government, foundation, and individual or corporation grants, receiving funding for projects is quite possible. He advised to find a fiscal agent with the same mission. Similarly, Encarnacion mentioned that photographers can look for grants that aren’t photo specific. The third speaker, Carlos Ortiz, is an example of an artist receiving funding for a common purpose, social change. He posted his project, “Too Young to Die,” on Kickstarter.com, and then successfully received his funding goal through pledges of individuals also hoping to spread awareness about youth violence. Work that has an impact on an individual or historical level can undoubtedly receive funding.

                Photo festivals are a wonderful opportunity for artists from the same location to network and converse with one another. The particular workshop we attended seemed to be geared toward novice photographers, especially those right out of college. Emerging artists must keep in mind that the business side of photography has to be taken seriously. Though I don’t need to start applying for grants now, the workshop reminded me that it is important to stay organized by developing an artist’s statement and creating a resume, bio, and website. This experience was different than our studio or museum visits but was equally important, as the business side of photography can’t be forgotten about.

Hedrich Blessing Studio

            The Hedrich Blessing Studio, the oldest in the world, has been known for its architectural photography since its origination in 1929. The studio specializes in elevating and advertising architecture, showing it in its best light. It has also been a commercial studio, shooting industrial, product, and editorial photography. Hedrich Blessing’s photographic assistants have been mentored by predecessors to become skilled photographers; thus, the work the studio produces is consistent and created with the same careful attention that traditional photographers give to the craft. This is why none of their work is contracted—it isn’t necessary.

During the first moments of our visit, Hedrich Blessing’s President Jon Miller immediately pointed to the old-fashioned black and white camera on display, highlighting the importance of traditional photography. However, he mentioned that photography is constantly changing gears. Both photographers and architects have to become acquainted to new processes and technology. Just four years ago, the studio went digital and now uses a few computers instead of darkrooms to produce efficient results.

Jon stated that photographers have to invoke “architectural personality” and have “sympathetic interpretation” when capturing a room or building’s most notable assets.  I found the following piece of advice most valuable: an architectural photographer must document not only the built environment but its culture. By capturing this, a part of history and progress is saved for future generations to look back on. Jon also noted that a different perspective, a fresh view, is needed in photography. Frank Lloyd Wright’s “Falling Water” has been photographed a good many times, but Ken Hedrich’s snapshot is the truest representation of the title, said to have given the building that name. His work portrays buildings as grandiose and elegant, showing their ‘character.’

The visit was relaxed, as Jon was welcoming and willing to tell us about his personal accounts with Bill Hedrich. Many were quite comical; he gave a true sense of Hedrich’s laid-back, spontaneous personality. Nonetheless, he was able to produce outstanding results, as he had a knack for timing. The Hedrich Blessing photographers still produce these results, despite the processes having become more technological. Though it is a challenging field of photography to become successful in, true dedication pays off. As Jon stated, “Architectural photography is a field you have to live.”

 

Visual Acoustics & The International Museum of Surgical Science

“I was ordained to become a photographer. I was destined.” These are true words of the great Julius Shulman, renowned architectural photographer, whose talent is unmatched. Eric Bricker’s “Visual Acoustics: The Modernism of Julius Shulman” documents Shulman’s progression and career, as well as his vigor for life. Born in Brooklyn and raised on a Connecticut farm, Shulman resided in California and captured the true beauty of modernism there and eventually all over the world. From a young age, Shulman was a talented photographer, and he knew he would rather take an unconventional career path. This path led him to capture the evolution of modern architecture in a magical light.

                Shulman’s portfolio is a collection of striking images showing a generation of modern architecture, which he brought to the mainstream. By the 1960’s, Julius Shulman was one of the most sought out architectural photographers, as he documented the works of notorious architects Frank Lloyd Wright, Richard Neutra, John Lautner, and every major modern architect since the 1930’s. Shulman also had an unfailing eye for seeking out talented new architects, bringing them to the attention of east coast editors. When he documented their work, the result was that of a fine artist. The architects wanted viewers to see their buildings as progressive and reflective of the changing times. Their message truly got across and was even enhanced in Shulman’s photography.  In each snapshot, it’s clear that Shulman was involved in the set-up; much of his personality shows without him even being in the image. His use of light, landscape, and natural surroundings enhances the architecture he depicts. Shulman has an effective use of one-point perspective, pulling the viewer into the image through receding rooftops and floor lines. To no surprise, his work was eventually displayed in galleries. Viewers want to be a part of the rooms Shulman depicted, as he portrays them as personal utopias by making it seem as if one lived in the space. He consistently captured the true essence of the architecture’s surrounding elements, no matter if the building was located in the city or the desert. All of these aspects are what he called his ‘visual acoustics.’

The republication of Julius Shulman’s work was an important element in the revival of modernism in the nineties. Even today, Shulman is still known as the most influential modern architectural photographer around the world. Bricker’s documentary portrays Shulman as a lively gentleman, still extremely involved and interested in taking pictures of modern architecture. Otherwise, he was traveling to the locations he photographed back in the day to revisit or even assist in their restoration. This documentary is effective in depicting the wonderment Shulman left with people, including the architects themselves, after looking at his work. He stated, “Enjoy what’s around you.” Shulman certainly did throughout his ninety eight years of life.

                Unlike any of our previous excursions, the visit to the International Museum of Surgical Science was quite an informative and striking experience. The purpose of the exhibits in this museum is to educate visitors about the history of the medical field. Upon entering the building, I was awed by the elegant Italian interior and preservation of the rooms, as well as the items they contain. Many of the exhibits display the transformation of technology used by surgeons and doctors, along with developments for the common people. Compared to the Art Institute, there was a wider variety of antique objects on display. Though the portrayal of these was more care-free and less archival, I preferred this set-up for its intimacy with viewers. These worn objects clearly aren’t reproductions. For this reason, the vintage displays and elaborate environment are sure to leave visitors with a sense of wonder. The inclusion of dangerous, foreign and old objects in large numbers shows our technological progression in medical science.

                “Milestones in Medical Imaging: From X-Ray to Nuclear Medicine” is an intriguing display of the progress of scientists and other pioneers in medical imaging. Real x-ray images of various body parts were portrayed in a compositional manner, as they all included angles, intentional extras (components that didn’t belong), and branding. The space surrounding wasn’t designed for the pieces, showing that they’re intended to be demonstrational; this applied to much of the exhibit. The large amount of text and photos encompassing display objects serve to be extremely informative, intended to educate visitors about the people, processes, machines, and outcomes related to the objects. The viewer is supposed to get an up-close and investigative look at the array of artifacts known as technological in previous decades. This irony was highlighted in this exhibit’s text. Back in the day, it was surprisingly normal to use hazardous rays for everyday purposes, like acquiring ‘bone-portraits.’ Furthermore, the display of x-ray ‘kits’ available to the general public for therapy and grooming might make for a viewer’s shocked response. The displays provoke resonance, as the idea of the x-ray has completely changed from an unquestioned widespread use to strict medical treatment. The exhibit relays that the time span between the cause and effect of these rays was a phenomenon because the problems they caused weren’t immediately apparent.