11/09/2006


The next few pictures are from the negatives of few weeks back. I find scanning color negative film much easier then slide. It might be for a reason that I think the scanner I use gives it a particular glow which is a technical fault. Its very frustrating getting a good scan in, its much more frustrating printing it. Black and white is a joy to scan and print for that matter.

I missed a lecture last night held in NYC titled 'Can a photograph can still be original'. I had to work late. The topic of the lecture complements much of what I have been reading lately. The art/photography has to be visually pleasing. The originality factor is significant as much as when you speak or write, do you use other people's words? Of course your not and you do. Yes, both. We all do it. Can a photograph be original? Does it matter when a photograph is original but says nothing? I am not really comfortable with those sort of questions. I don't think they are necessary. If you take a photograph out of a series of let say 10, you might loose all originality of what it is/was a part of. So now can a project be original? Absolutely! But then can re-doing let say a project on rough neighborhoods someone else did 40 years ago, isn't the exploration to seek the change original as well? I wish I went to that lecture. I am thinking about this a lot lately in a sense of topics that limit the concentration of the photographer. I do believe a photographer owns to his audience something universal and that is to make his photography as technically flawless to offer a reflection and pleasing photograph to look just few more moments then we're used to. But technical flawlessness does not requite die hard perfection. If an image is motion blurred for an example the viewer might need the tones/colors to make him feel its that moment. That balance of choosing the elements recorded on film is original to me. And as original as it might be the photographer owes his audience the freedom of reflection without making his images understandable only to him only.

No comments: