Visited Tate Modern yesterday, 24th June 2013. Wanted to see the permanent collection of the work of William Eggleston on display. The collection forms part of the Cruel + Tender collection. There are 36 original works by Eggleston and appear to include works from throughout his career although this is always difficult to tell because he rarely entitles his work and even more rarely provides a date as to when they were shot.
What immediately struck me was the difference in impact between the original prints and the ones that we see in the various publications dedicated to his work. Obviously they are bigger and the colours are the product of the dye transfer process rather than modern printing processes. Colours appear more vibrant and the blocks of colour in some of the images have greater impact. All the photographs invited closer inspection and the results of this closer inspection was to appreciate the subtlety of the images and the many elements that go to make up the picture. I have to confess that seeing this collection significantly altered my view of Eggleston's work and I came to appreciate some of the adulation he receives and why he is often seen as the person who made colour photography acceptable.
Whilst researching material for use in my third Assignment I came across a paper by Eric Kim in which he comments that on first seeing Eggleston's work he was "quite disappointed". However he did not give up on it but studied the images closely allowing himself time to 'see' what was in each work. I propose doing the same. The modern high speed world dissuades us from taking our time over anything but stepping outside of this maelstrom allows the opportunity to appreciate the underlying concept in a piece of work.
So visiting the exhibition not only increased my appreciation of Eggleston but also gave me insight into the value of his work. A worthwhile visit!
Tuesday, 25 June 2013
"Free Range" Graduate Art, Design + Fashion Show
To quote from the catalogue:
"Free Range 2013 will take over The Old Truman Brewery for its annual seven week show of emerging British-based art and design talent, bringing a vast network of graduates to London's Brick Lane."
My interest lay in the Photo Week (in reality 4 days Friday - Monday only) and I visited on Monday 24th June 2013 which was the last day of the the second week. The venue, or at least the area where the photographs were on display was austere in the extreme with white washed walls and concrete floors. For large parts of the exhibition the lighting was such as to make viewing the images difficult and I found there was a tendency to move on quickly that was poor reward for the work and effort put into the display. Fortunately (or at times whether the sun was out or covered with cloud) other areas were adequately lit so appreciation and enjoyment was greater. I am surprised that so important a showing, from the individual's point of view, depended so much on chance. I certainly would think twice about exhibiting my work in such a space.
There were 13 colleges represented ranging from Foundation Courses to those awarding BA(Hons) and the quality varied accordingly. As one would expect the range was very wide and covered virtually all of the genres of photography although it was surprising to me how much was devoted to portrait and the more traditional genres. There was of course the more adventurous student and some bordered on the bizarre. Overall I thought the standard was high but the work produced by the students of Edinburgh College seemed the best overall.
Subject matter varied as one would expect and one of the most striking was the work of one student who had taken photographs of people resident in a hospice. I wonder at the ethics of such a subject matter but as far as one could tell those who were photographed were pleased with the results but I could not help feeling that the intrusion into their lives, which were coming to an end in a known period, was a step too far.
Was the visit worthwhile from a personal point of view? I think the jury is out on this one but my initial reaction was that there were so many images to see and each student had a very limited number of images on show that it was impossible to get a sense of the quality and imagination of any one individual. There was no opportunity for the student to demonstrate a developing individual style and, perhaps unfairly, I got the sense of the controlling influence of the tutorial staff. This view was strengthened when talking to a couple of students who made clear their feelings of resentment at the attitude of their tutor who according to them wanted them to follow a different path to the one they would have personally chosen.
"Free Range 2013 will take over The Old Truman Brewery for its annual seven week show of emerging British-based art and design talent, bringing a vast network of graduates to London's Brick Lane."
My interest lay in the Photo Week (in reality 4 days Friday - Monday only) and I visited on Monday 24th June 2013 which was the last day of the the second week. The venue, or at least the area where the photographs were on display was austere in the extreme with white washed walls and concrete floors. For large parts of the exhibition the lighting was such as to make viewing the images difficult and I found there was a tendency to move on quickly that was poor reward for the work and effort put into the display. Fortunately (or at times whether the sun was out or covered with cloud) other areas were adequately lit so appreciation and enjoyment was greater. I am surprised that so important a showing, from the individual's point of view, depended so much on chance. I certainly would think twice about exhibiting my work in such a space.
There were 13 colleges represented ranging from Foundation Courses to those awarding BA(Hons) and the quality varied accordingly. As one would expect the range was very wide and covered virtually all of the genres of photography although it was surprising to me how much was devoted to portrait and the more traditional genres. There was of course the more adventurous student and some bordered on the bizarre. Overall I thought the standard was high but the work produced by the students of Edinburgh College seemed the best overall.
Subject matter varied as one would expect and one of the most striking was the work of one student who had taken photographs of people resident in a hospice. I wonder at the ethics of such a subject matter but as far as one could tell those who were photographed were pleased with the results but I could not help feeling that the intrusion into their lives, which were coming to an end in a known period, was a step too far.
Was the visit worthwhile from a personal point of view? I think the jury is out on this one but my initial reaction was that there were so many images to see and each student had a very limited number of images on show that it was impossible to get a sense of the quality and imagination of any one individual. There was no opportunity for the student to demonstrate a developing individual style and, perhaps unfairly, I got the sense of the controlling influence of the tutorial staff. This view was strengthened when talking to a couple of students who made clear their feelings of resentment at the attitude of their tutor who according to them wanted them to follow a different path to the one they would have personally chosen.
Friday, 14 June 2013
Process v Product
As a response to a remark made by my Tutor in response to Assignment 2 I considered how much of the planning process needs to be formalised and whether recording it in a blog really had any value. I can appreciate that it gives more information to the tutor but I am left wondering where the value of this information lies. Early in the degree Course (Level 1) I was required to set out my plan for a project in some detail and I found this a generally useful exercise because it allowed me to test my ideas against those of my then Tutor. His response suggested that he was generally happy with my approach. I have not written down a general plan since. I have found no need although I do on occasion leave myself a 'sticky' if I think that I might want a piece of equipment that I do not normally take with me. Otherwise I go through the same mental exercise each time. In broad terms this is (a) what is it I want to achieve; (b) what location(s) is likely to provide the best chance of meeting my aim and (c) what equipment do I need to provide the best chance of getting the shots that I want. The only time I can be certain of what I will find when I reach the location is any existing building or structure and even then there have been occasions that I have been unable to, say, shoot the interior of a church because of an event that I was unaware of when planning.
I cannot see how recording the process in writing every time I am planning a shoot is going to help anybody and more importantly me. I wondered whether I was alone in these thoughts or whether there were others who had a similar approach. I was reading the June 2013 issue of the British Journal of Photography and came across an article about the work of a Graduate of the UCA (Bobby Mills). His project was the edges of the M25. He states that he went without any pre-determined plan for the photographs he wanted to take and worked intuitively picking out subjects that met the over-arching criteria for his project. I am guessing that there was a lot of pre-planning (he spent four or five days at a time in his van) but once he was at the location he followed his instincts to get the pictures he wanted. There are a couple of photographs of people shown in the article which he could have not planned for but portrays a great deal about the unseen elements of the M25.
In the article there is no mention of the planning that went into the project (this is not to say that he did not have to provide a written element to his work for his Degree) but it is not seen as essential for the purpose of the article which relies on a short narrative and four images to get across the story. The product of his efforts was the key element as one would expect in a Photography degree Course.
The question we have to ask is whether we are to be judged on our ability to provide a written statement of how we planned or is the end product the essential element. If it is the former that is seen as important then I feel somehow we have lost the plot. I personally would not mind as I am quite happy providing written work but would it add one jot to my ability as a photographer. The answer must be 'No'. What I need and want from my tutor is a critique of the images I submit both from a technical point of view and whether or not they meet the aims of the various projects. What I do not need, at this stage of the Course, is a discussion on the plans I formed. If the product meets the criteria then how I achieved that is irrelevant.
Photography is above all else an instinctive process as often we may have only a fraction of a second to get the image we hoped for. Even in the largely unchanging world of the landscape or architecture when we take the photograph rests not on some pre-determined formula but on the quality of the light we face when taking the photograph. Of course we need to plan if we want a sunset or sunrise shot but the planning there is to be at the spot at the right time. When the light is at its best is a matter of choice that lies solely with the photographer and no written plan will help that decision.
Academia seems to have an obsession with the written word as evidenced by the word count imposed on students as they work their way through different levels of a Course. Whether the quality of the dissertation in some way is higher as we move from 2000 words to 3000 words (or even for some degrees 10,000 words) is open to question and I suspect that it does not. I am sure that it does not improve the photography. Don McCullin did not write the articles that accompanied his articles and William Eggleston seems neither to have written or said very much but their photographs are seen to be a cut above the rest.
I cannot see how recording the process in writing every time I am planning a shoot is going to help anybody and more importantly me. I wondered whether I was alone in these thoughts or whether there were others who had a similar approach. I was reading the June 2013 issue of the British Journal of Photography and came across an article about the work of a Graduate of the UCA (Bobby Mills). His project was the edges of the M25. He states that he went without any pre-determined plan for the photographs he wanted to take and worked intuitively picking out subjects that met the over-arching criteria for his project. I am guessing that there was a lot of pre-planning (he spent four or five days at a time in his van) but once he was at the location he followed his instincts to get the pictures he wanted. There are a couple of photographs of people shown in the article which he could have not planned for but portrays a great deal about the unseen elements of the M25.
In the article there is no mention of the planning that went into the project (this is not to say that he did not have to provide a written element to his work for his Degree) but it is not seen as essential for the purpose of the article which relies on a short narrative and four images to get across the story. The product of his efforts was the key element as one would expect in a Photography degree Course.
The question we have to ask is whether we are to be judged on our ability to provide a written statement of how we planned or is the end product the essential element. If it is the former that is seen as important then I feel somehow we have lost the plot. I personally would not mind as I am quite happy providing written work but would it add one jot to my ability as a photographer. The answer must be 'No'. What I need and want from my tutor is a critique of the images I submit both from a technical point of view and whether or not they meet the aims of the various projects. What I do not need, at this stage of the Course, is a discussion on the plans I formed. If the product meets the criteria then how I achieved that is irrelevant.
Photography is above all else an instinctive process as often we may have only a fraction of a second to get the image we hoped for. Even in the largely unchanging world of the landscape or architecture when we take the photograph rests not on some pre-determined formula but on the quality of the light we face when taking the photograph. Of course we need to plan if we want a sunset or sunrise shot but the planning there is to be at the spot at the right time. When the light is at its best is a matter of choice that lies solely with the photographer and no written plan will help that decision.
Academia seems to have an obsession with the written word as evidenced by the word count imposed on students as they work their way through different levels of a Course. Whether the quality of the dissertation in some way is higher as we move from 2000 words to 3000 words (or even for some degrees 10,000 words) is open to question and I suspect that it does not. I am sure that it does not improve the photography. Don McCullin did not write the articles that accompanied his articles and William Eggleston seems neither to have written or said very much but their photographs are seen to be a cut above the rest.
Thursday, 13 June 2013
Lessons from Assignment 2
Received my tutor's comments on Assignment 2. On project 5 she raises the issue of an 'impartiality of view' and asks why I chose to use images taken within Winchester Cathedral. The short and probably unhelpful answer is that I was there for another reason but saw the opportunity to take shots that could possibly be considered for the project. On a more reasoned note it was an attempt to demonstrate that the impartiality of a view lies not with the photographer but with the viewer. The images chosen could, in theory, have been taken anywhere - the cropping was such that there was insufficient information within the image for someone without prior knowledge of the places where it was most likely to find these objects to make a guess as to where they were located. It is of interest that my tutor describes it as "a place of C of E worship" (which it is) but that relies upon her interpretation of the clues. There is nothing that is specific enough to restrict it to a C of E cathedral.
I am asked to consider the 'mind of a child as yet free from from influence from those around them'. If there is such a child we are asked to consider how the child would react to what they see -"Vast spaces, high ceilings and echo might suggest noise and movement to a child. A great place to run riot and make yourself heard." We now have a child who is not yet under the influence of those around them but 'knows' in some mysterious way that such a 'space' would be great to run riot. Furthermore we are asked to consider that this is an impartial view - it is certainly an 'incorrect' interpretation but is it an impartial view? I would suggest not from the child's point of view. The important point to make is that the images do not give a sense of scale ( there are no human figures or other clues) so if our mythical child could tell us what it sees it would not be able to tell us about a place to run riot unless it had prior knowledge.
Image 4 is an example of where the viewer adds a layer of knowledge to what they see and seeks greater clarification. The sculpture is almost devoid of detail from which I drew the conclusion that the sculptor used his/her skills to present a figure that could be seen as representative of all human like figures. We each interpret the figure in our own way and then seek clues to see if we are right in our interpretation.
Project 8 - the decisive moment. The 'decisive moment' is in some sense non-existent because only the subject can know whether a fraction of time was the point at which a decision became concrete. Then it is doubtful if the subject is actually aware that in some way a point in time was 'decisive'. He (in this case) could possibly rationalise his thought process and pick that moment in time but in reality it is something that is imposed by the photographer and then after the event. If you take a series of shots, say at 5 frames a second, around an action how do we as an outsider 'know' that within this sequence or prior or subsequent sequences whether there was a decisive moment or not. My choice was based on my interpretation of the body language of the dancer particularly his facial expression but I could be totally wrong.
I am asked to include more of the planning process in my blogs. The planning process is, at the highest level, the same for every shoot. Having read through the Course material I decide what it is I am expected to do (not always obvious); where I am most likely to find the material I need and how to be there at the best time. I rarely go out with just one project in mind and try to plan so as to get as many relevant shots for parts of the Course and my Major Project as I can. If travelling to Cornwall for example as I have done I use any knowledge I have or can acquire to plan a route so as to maximise my chances. Included in my preparation is checking my equipment to make sure I have a range of lenses, all batteries are charged and I have sufficient memory cards to take the number of images I think I will need plus spare capacity.
When I arrive at the pre-planned shooting point I rely in part on the pre-planning but far more on opportunities that present themselves. Experience may tell me that the best time to shoot a particular image may be at sunset or just after. What I cannot control is the weather. I therefore remain open to other opportunities that arise. Normally I write the blog after the event so what I write is a rational description of something that is probably beyond explanation. Choices made at the time of pressing the button and the subsequent selection of shots can be described but I often wonder how real are the explanations. Why I chose one viewpoint over another is probably not capable of explanation and certainly not without showing the alternatives. To explain everything is to reduce the photography to something that could be programmed into a computer ( as much now is in modern cameras) and reduces what essentially is a product of individual psychology and physiology to a mechanical process. It is like trying to set down the emotions felt at seeing something so beautiful that even coherent thought is difficult. Photography at its best is about living the moment not cold-blooded rationalisation.
I am asked to consider the 'mind of a child as yet free from from influence from those around them'. If there is such a child we are asked to consider how the child would react to what they see -"Vast spaces, high ceilings and echo might suggest noise and movement to a child. A great place to run riot and make yourself heard." We now have a child who is not yet under the influence of those around them but 'knows' in some mysterious way that such a 'space' would be great to run riot. Furthermore we are asked to consider that this is an impartial view - it is certainly an 'incorrect' interpretation but is it an impartial view? I would suggest not from the child's point of view. The important point to make is that the images do not give a sense of scale ( there are no human figures or other clues) so if our mythical child could tell us what it sees it would not be able to tell us about a place to run riot unless it had prior knowledge.
Image 4 is an example of where the viewer adds a layer of knowledge to what they see and seeks greater clarification. The sculpture is almost devoid of detail from which I drew the conclusion that the sculptor used his/her skills to present a figure that could be seen as representative of all human like figures. We each interpret the figure in our own way and then seek clues to see if we are right in our interpretation.
Project 8 - the decisive moment. The 'decisive moment' is in some sense non-existent because only the subject can know whether a fraction of time was the point at which a decision became concrete. Then it is doubtful if the subject is actually aware that in some way a point in time was 'decisive'. He (in this case) could possibly rationalise his thought process and pick that moment in time but in reality it is something that is imposed by the photographer and then after the event. If you take a series of shots, say at 5 frames a second, around an action how do we as an outsider 'know' that within this sequence or prior or subsequent sequences whether there was a decisive moment or not. My choice was based on my interpretation of the body language of the dancer particularly his facial expression but I could be totally wrong.
I am asked to include more of the planning process in my blogs. The planning process is, at the highest level, the same for every shoot. Having read through the Course material I decide what it is I am expected to do (not always obvious); where I am most likely to find the material I need and how to be there at the best time. I rarely go out with just one project in mind and try to plan so as to get as many relevant shots for parts of the Course and my Major Project as I can. If travelling to Cornwall for example as I have done I use any knowledge I have or can acquire to plan a route so as to maximise my chances. Included in my preparation is checking my equipment to make sure I have a range of lenses, all batteries are charged and I have sufficient memory cards to take the number of images I think I will need plus spare capacity.
When I arrive at the pre-planned shooting point I rely in part on the pre-planning but far more on opportunities that present themselves. Experience may tell me that the best time to shoot a particular image may be at sunset or just after. What I cannot control is the weather. I therefore remain open to other opportunities that arise. Normally I write the blog after the event so what I write is a rational description of something that is probably beyond explanation. Choices made at the time of pressing the button and the subsequent selection of shots can be described but I often wonder how real are the explanations. Why I chose one viewpoint over another is probably not capable of explanation and certainly not without showing the alternatives. To explain everything is to reduce the photography to something that could be programmed into a computer ( as much now is in modern cameras) and reduces what essentially is a product of individual psychology and physiology to a mechanical process. It is like trying to set down the emotions felt at seeing something so beautiful that even coherent thought is difficult. Photography at its best is about living the moment not cold-blooded rationalisation.
Wednesday, 12 June 2013
Exhibitions
I had the opportunity to visit three exhibitions today, two of which were in the same building and one located not too far distant.
Creative Group Royal Photographic Society
The exhibition was presented in a large room offering adequate space to view the images and, although could have been better, the lighting was acceptable. There were offerings from roughly 20 photographers so there was a wide variety both in the standards seen and also in subject matter.
The Creative Group of the Royal Photographic Society offers, on the RPS website, the following explanation of its purpose:
It could be argued from this that any image could be classified as 'Creative' providing the photographer states that it is so. Such a wide definition would explain the wide diversity of images from the very ordinary to the slightly bizarre that were on display. Imagination was not apparent in a number of the images and it has to be said that the quality was variable from poor to excellent. It was difficult in some cases to have any other emotion other than surprise that the photographer thought the image was worth placing in an exhibition. Without denigrating the work presented at Camera Clubs I found it difficult to believe that a lot of the work shown would be judged as having any merit in a club competition.
That being said there were some jewels amongst the dross that met, for me, the stated criteria of an image being 'creative'. These did evoke an emotion in this viewer but not always the one that the photographer probably was aiming for.
Overall a disappointing visit.
Monochrome Group Suffolk
In an adjacent room to the above exhibition was one presented by the Suffolk Monochrome Group. The Group, which is limited to a maximum of 12 members, aims to promote the use of monochrome amongst its members and to exhibit the work.
I was fortunate to attend the very first exhibition of the Group and it has to be said that there is a marked difference between the quality of the presentation on that occasion and what is shown this year. The quality of prints this year is very high and the subject matter treated sympathetically in the tonal range used. None were ordinary and although there were some that I did not like this was a matter of personal taste rather than anything technically wrong.
There was much to be admired and learn from this exhibition.
The third exhibition was held in Blickling Hall a National Trust Property in Norfolk. Presented by three photographers there was no apparent theme running through all parts so the viewer was required to pause awhile as he/she moved around the exhibition space. It may have been this need that led to a feeling of images jarring as one moved around.
Part of the exhibition was devoted to images of butterflies and was a massive disappointment. The framing was heavy and dominated the image; the subject matter was presented in such vivid colours as to offer a sense of the unreal and to make the butterflies seem to be heavy and incapable of either beauty or flight. I have to say that I was very fortunate to belong to the Norfolk Photography Group for some time and amongst its members were nature/wildlife photographers of the very highest order whose images were simply breathtaking. It is inevitable that any other images in the same genre are judged in my mind using those that I knew before and these were sadly lacking.
The second photographer presented a mix of images and a variety of techniques. The result was a feeling of confusion. Here was a case of so many was too much. Halving the number shown and better thought given to how the remainder were grouped would hav presented a more coherent feel and allow the viewer to experience the feelings suggested by the photographer.
The third photographer's offerings were good but left me unexcited. I do not blame the photographer for this reaction but is a result of trying to cram too much into a relatively short period of time. I have noticed on previous occasions that there comes a point when the shear volume of images becomes overwhelming. Unfortunately, unlike wine tasters, the viewer cannot 'spit' out the memories and one's senses become sated.
Creative Group Royal Photographic Society
The exhibition was presented in a large room offering adequate space to view the images and, although could have been better, the lighting was acceptable. There were offerings from roughly 20 photographers so there was a wide variety both in the standards seen and also in subject matter.
The Creative Group of the Royal Photographic Society offers, on the RPS website, the following explanation of its purpose:
Our aim is to encourage the development of photography as a means of expression and as a vehicle for the author to make a personal photographic statement.
Many types of photography can be creative. Classifications such as landscape, nature, portrait or derivative can all be areas of personal expression in which the photographer seeks to stimulate the imagination and arouse the emotions of the viewer. The medium can be print or projected image, monochrome or colour, for it is the personal input of the photographer which makes the description as creative appropriate.
The techniques which the photographer employs to add creativity can vary but will normally include
- choice of location
- choice of view
- choice of season
- choice of composition
- choice of lighting at the scene
- choice of timing to take the exposure
- choice of post-capture treatment
You certainly do not have to employ derivative or manipulative techniques to be creative.
That being said there were some jewels amongst the dross that met, for me, the stated criteria of an image being 'creative'. These did evoke an emotion in this viewer but not always the one that the photographer probably was aiming for.
Overall a disappointing visit.
Monochrome Group Suffolk
In an adjacent room to the above exhibition was one presented by the Suffolk Monochrome Group. The Group, which is limited to a maximum of 12 members, aims to promote the use of monochrome amongst its members and to exhibit the work.
I was fortunate to attend the very first exhibition of the Group and it has to be said that there is a marked difference between the quality of the presentation on that occasion and what is shown this year. The quality of prints this year is very high and the subject matter treated sympathetically in the tonal range used. None were ordinary and although there were some that I did not like this was a matter of personal taste rather than anything technically wrong.
There was much to be admired and learn from this exhibition.
The third exhibition was held in Blickling Hall a National Trust Property in Norfolk. Presented by three photographers there was no apparent theme running through all parts so the viewer was required to pause awhile as he/she moved around the exhibition space. It may have been this need that led to a feeling of images jarring as one moved around.
Part of the exhibition was devoted to images of butterflies and was a massive disappointment. The framing was heavy and dominated the image; the subject matter was presented in such vivid colours as to offer a sense of the unreal and to make the butterflies seem to be heavy and incapable of either beauty or flight. I have to say that I was very fortunate to belong to the Norfolk Photography Group for some time and amongst its members were nature/wildlife photographers of the very highest order whose images were simply breathtaking. It is inevitable that any other images in the same genre are judged in my mind using those that I knew before and these were sadly lacking.
The second photographer presented a mix of images and a variety of techniques. The result was a feeling of confusion. Here was a case of so many was too much. Halving the number shown and better thought given to how the remainder were grouped would hav presented a more coherent feel and allow the viewer to experience the feelings suggested by the photographer.
The third photographer's offerings were good but left me unexcited. I do not blame the photographer for this reaction but is a result of trying to cram too much into a relatively short period of time. I have noticed on previous occasions that there comes a point when the shear volume of images becomes overwhelming. Unfortunately, unlike wine tasters, the viewer cannot 'spit' out the memories and one's senses become sated.
he group was founded in 2009 to foster the appreciation of monochrome photography and to encourage the development of this branch of photographic art within the 'Group' membership. Members approach to monochrome includes traditional darkroom, digital capture and infra-red in both film and digital. Membership is by invitation with numbers limited to 12. The Group exhibits regularly in Essex, Suffolk and Norfolk.he group was founded in 2009 to foster the appreciation of monochrome photography and to encourage the development of this branch of photographic art within the 'Group' membership. Members approach to monochrome includes traditional darkroom, digital capture and infra-red in both film and digital. Membership is by invitation with numbers limited to 12. The Group exhibits regular
Tuesday, 11 June 2013
Loughborough
Spent last Saturday at the Great Western Railway in Loughborough where a '40's weekend was being held. It was a planned visit as part of my Major Project where I am photographing activities held by societies such as re-enactors to bring to life events from the past. In this particular case I had a broad idea of what to expect, not only from the publicity material issued by the GWR but previous knowledge from a similar event held at Sheringham in Norfolk. In my planning I had to make a number of assumptions not least on what I was likely to see as each re-enactment varies considerably even when the subject title suggest a similarity. In this particular case I planned to take as many different shots as I could but also to use it as a learning experience for a similar event in Norfolk in the month of September.
The restored railway line has four stations and each had been turned into a different element of the early part of the Second World War. One station was primarily focused on Great Britain; the second on the German Army; the third on the Americans and the fourth was a 'French Town' occupied by the Germans. As always the relevant groups had made every effort to be authentic (apart, fortunately, language) and they were supported by a significant element of the spectators who had also dressed for the part. I arrived early in the hope that there would be less crowds so that I could take shots that were not 'spoiled' by the presence of too many jarring modern elements . The early arrival worked well because as the day wore on the crowds became greater. However there was a slight drawback as many of the re-enactors knew each other and initially there was a great deal of fraternisation between the different armies. This problem was mitigated by the willingness of the actors to move away from each other as a photographer approached. I found the easiest way to get the shots that I wanted was to be near another photographer who would shepherd the character he wanted away from the group. I would then take my shots of the remainder who being less aware of my presence did not feel they had to pose unnaturally.
In all it was a fascinating day and I managed to take a number of photographs that on first examination seem to offer the type of material I was hoping for from my efforts.
One of the side benefits, although this is part of my major project, was the willingness of virtually everybody to chat when approached,whether spectator or actor. I had a lengthy conversation with 'Rommel' (who had been 'Montgomery' in the morning!) about his personal commitment to the re-enactment. He was accompanied by his wife who answered a number of questions for him and there was some evidence of either shyness or possibly memory impairment when the conversation drifted away from the part he was playing. When he was being 'Rommel' he became the man and it was obvious that he put on the persona when putting on the uniform. This was not always the case with others who seemed to quickly abandon their role and were more than happy to discuss their actual background rather than that of someone in uniform in the 1940's.
Although I have still to work through the chosen 'negatives' I am happy with the outcome and believe that I have achieved what I set out to do. As I have said before there is also the important element of learning for me that I trust will lead to better images as I work through the project.
The restored railway line has four stations and each had been turned into a different element of the early part of the Second World War. One station was primarily focused on Great Britain; the second on the German Army; the third on the Americans and the fourth was a 'French Town' occupied by the Germans. As always the relevant groups had made every effort to be authentic (apart, fortunately, language) and they were supported by a significant element of the spectators who had also dressed for the part. I arrived early in the hope that there would be less crowds so that I could take shots that were not 'spoiled' by the presence of too many jarring modern elements . The early arrival worked well because as the day wore on the crowds became greater. However there was a slight drawback as many of the re-enactors knew each other and initially there was a great deal of fraternisation between the different armies. This problem was mitigated by the willingness of the actors to move away from each other as a photographer approached. I found the easiest way to get the shots that I wanted was to be near another photographer who would shepherd the character he wanted away from the group. I would then take my shots of the remainder who being less aware of my presence did not feel they had to pose unnaturally.
In all it was a fascinating day and I managed to take a number of photographs that on first examination seem to offer the type of material I was hoping for from my efforts.
One of the side benefits, although this is part of my major project, was the willingness of virtually everybody to chat when approached,whether spectator or actor. I had a lengthy conversation with 'Rommel' (who had been 'Montgomery' in the morning!) about his personal commitment to the re-enactment. He was accompanied by his wife who answered a number of questions for him and there was some evidence of either shyness or possibly memory impairment when the conversation drifted away from the part he was playing. When he was being 'Rommel' he became the man and it was obvious that he put on the persona when putting on the uniform. This was not always the case with others who seemed to quickly abandon their role and were more than happy to discuss their actual background rather than that of someone in uniform in the 1940's.
Although I have still to work through the chosen 'negatives' I am happy with the outcome and believe that I have achieved what I set out to do. As I have said before there is also the important element of learning for me that I trust will lead to better images as I work through the project.
Monday, 3 June 2013
Yet more images
Visited Ryedale Folk Museum and Beamish Living History Museum on Thursday and Friday of last week. The main attraction was the Georgian Fair at Beamish but I stopped off at Ryedale on the North Yorkshire Moors to see what was on offer. Very interesting but there was no direct connection with my project although the visit did give me one or two ideas to pursue.
At Beamish the weather was poor with a fair amount of rain but this did not dampen the re-enactor's spirits. Although there was less activity than I anticipated there was sufficient to make the visit worthwhile. Also had a chance to talk to a couple of the staff about how they got involved in re-enactment and so garnered some additional thoughts on the underlying theme to the major project. There was also the added bonus of most if not all of the volunteers were dressed in appropriate costume for the part of the museum in which they were located. In the end the visit was worthwhile and added to my store of knowledge and understanding.
At Beamish the weather was poor with a fair amount of rain but this did not dampen the re-enactor's spirits. Although there was less activity than I anticipated there was sufficient to make the visit worthwhile. Also had a chance to talk to a couple of the staff about how they got involved in re-enactment and so garnered some additional thoughts on the underlying theme to the major project. There was also the added bonus of most if not all of the volunteers were dressed in appropriate costume for the part of the museum in which they were located. In the end the visit was worthwhile and added to my store of knowledge and understanding.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)