civilized ku # 87 ~ more than meets the eye
Thursday, June 19, 2008 at 09:32AM 
Information • click to embiggenUnlike yesterday's street picture, this one seems to thrive on color without which it just sort of dies. The color of this scene is very much a part of the 'experience' - both the real one and the trace one. And, I'll say it again, one the medium's characteristics which distinguishs photography from the other visual arts is the fact that photography is, intrinsically, an inimitable cohort with the real.
That relationship with the real, however, does not damn the medium to the role of mechanistic documentation. I like what John Szarkowski had to say about what makes a good picture;
.... what a good picture does is demand your attention .... You try to bring as much of yourself to it as you can. In the course of a lifetime you might make up a hundred different stories about the same picture, all of which are indefensible but each of which is a kind of compliment .... Pictures .... attract to themselves wonderful rich bodies of speculation and superstition and fairy tale that, for better or worse, are part of what we're going to do to things that interest us.
Which is another way of saying what Susan Sontag had to say;
The ultimate wisdom of the photographic image is to say, 'There is the surface. Now think - or rather feel, intuit - what is beyond it, what the reality must be like if it looks that way. 'Photographs, which cannot themselves explain anything, are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation, and fantasy... The very muteness of what is, hypothetically, comprehensible in photographs is what constitutes their attraction and provocativeness.
Both of which seem to say that the medium of photography is more, much more, than "just" a visual art. Of course, this idea flies in the face of those who think that a good picture is one that is independent of words (and, I guess by extension, 'thoughts'). A picture is either "a feast for the eyes" or it is nothing.
But, then again, I like what Ansel Adams had to say about that;
A photograph is usually looked at – seldom looked into.
gravitas et nugalis
color v bw • click to embiggenThere was a request to see a side-by-side view of the picture, so here it is.
Reader Comments (9)
"this one seems to thrive on color without which it just sort of dies." ... So can we see it die? side by side like yesterdays photo?
and also, it looks like hugo is getting harassed by that security guard for touching that glass?!
and I like the "spycam" that appears directly above him like he is about to be zapped or something?
While i was looking at your picture i realized that there was something getting directly into my mind. I suppose it could be assimilated with your concept of mystery.
Meanwhile i realized that our brain, which is a very smart device, must certainly process images without the need to translate them or part of them into words.
btw i find amusing your casting choices in the last two posts. A bit on the "Harry Callahan" side (a photographer that i really love).
What draws me to this is that I see the center where the man sits and his head glancing to his right where Hugo's red hair stands out and his movement shows the interaction and tells the story.
The fellow at the information booth told Hugo that King Kong had just left the building. Hugo was very impressed by this guy!
It's about human behaviour, is it not.
Black and white draws one attention to what the subjects are doing, without distraction of colour. This is why I prefer street photography in monochrome - it is rarely about colour and more about behaviour.
Here I am drawn to the motion in the corner in the black and white. In the colour version it is more about the golden wall above the desk.
I was not too sure about the how's or why's of street photography and the whole b&w vs. color thing, but Martin's point seems to be ring pretty true for me. I didn't even see Hugo in the first glances at the color version this morning. Nor did I really notice the security guard. Now it is quite the opposite with the b&w version.
Its hard to see Hugo because he is blurry. Perhaps Gravitas should post this on a legit photo site, so he can receive some advice on keeping the camera still, exposure, etc. For instance, IWO not cut off the top of building in the frieze behind the security guard.
"not cut off the top of building in the frieze behind the security guard."
perhaps it wasn't cut off in his full frame viewfinder? My suggestion for him would to be to put 4 little tiny hash marks on his viewfinder with an exacto blade that marks a square area for him.