This is Barthes last book and was written shortly after his mother’s death. The Book is about what makes a photograph memorable, but it also Barthes processing the grief for his mother through trying to understand which picture can truly represent her.

Barthes starts by discussing why photographic portraits never seem right to the subject. He sees this as being a result of the four different narratives that take place when someone takes a photograph of someone else:

• They are the person the subject thinks he is,
• the person the photographer thinks the subject is,
• the person the subject wants other people to think he is, and
• the person the photographer uses to make his art.

(Barthes, 1982, 13)

The combination of these four and the subject’s mismatched idea of how his own true character should be represented (as opposed to how others see him) leads to a disconnect that the subject (universally?) finds it difficult to bridge.

Barthes then moves onto what is the core the book what makes an image memorable. Barthes states what makes an appealing image, one we like, is based on the Studium – a combination of attractive composition and subject, alongside the meanings and history surrounding it that we take for granted. There are many images that have the Studium – we like them but they don’t stay in our memories afterwards. The hook for a future recall is the Punctum – that detail which separates the everyday image from the memorable one. He suggests that a Punctum is a personal reaction to an image; what makes a specific image resonate for one individual might have no meaning at all to another. The second may see something else as the Punctum, or indeed not register one at all. Not all images have a Punctum.

The book then goes on his search for a likeness of his mother that he recognises as showing who she really was, and how, eventually he finds it in an old photo of her as a five year old child. He defines the photo as displaying her true personality, rather than the stilted poses which most photo portraits are.

The book also goes into detail about why Barthes feels that a photo is a dead moment – gone forever – but always there as a record that is we know that the people in the image were gathered at that location on that day [in the past]. Although, this particular notion may not be a relivant these days with image manipulation technology we have at our fingertips.

Continuing, rather morbidly Barthes expresses that photos can represent Death – both those of the people in the photos, but also himself (and therefore us a reader). They are a doorway to the past, and at the same time, an indication of what will happen in the future, i.e. everybody dies. This is not something I really agree with or understand just because we freeze a moment it doesn’t really foretell death. Perhaps they was written as a way of processing grief it has coloured his thoughts?

Finally, he talks about the difference between Looking and Seeing, with the latter being unconcentrated and subliminal, whereas the former is active and meaningful a concept that John Berger covered in the Way of Seeing.

For me the essence I will take from this book is Studium and Puctum as these are elements that our photography must have in the correct portion and his opinions on why we don’t like our own photo’s finallt , help me understand why I don’t like images of myself – always thought it was because I thought I looked like my Grandma.

I choose to move on from the death aspect – it is not a concept that I can understand or envisage. Because for me a photograph represents life, my mum passed away 18 months ago and whilst she will never leave my memory and “photo on the mantlepiece” go along way to keep my memories fresh. It doesn’t remind me that she has gone nor did I think when too it she will die one day.

Example of how to read an image

The course notes point us to OCA tutors Sharon Boothroyds 500 word interpretation of Jeff Wall’s Insomnia.

This is an inciteful read, as gives a practical demonstration of what we should be looking for in our upcoming assignment. In a concise 500 words, she covers the formal Denotation and personal connotations of the image – even from her point of view being able to add her personal experience of insomnia. Also tying and explaining Shakespeare use of insomnia as a plot devise to explain other mental issues. The 500 words also adds a context to the artist work in the larger art universe.

This is just as effective as the Arbus essay in the previous post and also points that whole books can be written about similar images.

My take away from she is to structure of description in formal manner things back to recognised and referencable sources, just like did for IFC.

Beneath the Surface

References

Boothroyd, S. (2012). Beneath the surface. [online] #weareoca. Available at: https://weareoca.com/subject/photography/beneath-the-surface/ [Accessed 19 Oct. 2018].

Read and reflect upon the chapter on Diane Arbus in Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs by Sophie Howarth (2005, London: Tate Publishing).

This essay begins with the statement:

 ‘The fictions we make about photographs are as unreliable as they are unavoidable’.

This is a very telling statement and it applies to all art, not just photographs. They are in the hands of those who interpret it.

A Young Brooklyn Family Going for a Sunday Outing, N.Y.C., 1966. © Diane Arbus

Jobey writes an eleven-page essay about this image asking leading questions based upon her preconceptions about the family depicted in the show and from the brief description that the photographer gave to it.

We can never fully know what is happening with the subjects a photograph because we can not see inside the subject’s mind, even as a photographer we can always fully know because you can only go upon what the subject tells us.

What a person writes about or how the viewer interprets a photograph says as much about the writer/viewer as it does about the photograph itself. I could be cynical because that there is ow such thing as wrong in art and write anything, but I’m not that cynical. I was before I undertook the Introduction to Film Culture course there I learnt how to interpret and now I see metaphors in TV programs and film that I didn’t see before.

References

Howarth, S. (2005) Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs. London: Tate Publishing

Rip out an advertising image from a newspaper supplement and circle and write on as many parts of the image as you can. Comment on what it is, what it says about the product and why you think it’s there.

Breitling Watches circa mid-2010’s

When we view the see a composite image in portrait format designed to fit on a signal page of a magazine. This is an advert for Breitling watch which is designed with and co-branded with Bentley cars and it features prominently the watch, and a portrait of a man and a car. The image in 2 half the up half features the photographic elements and the lower half fades to black and features the text and the product shot.

The background of the advert shot of a black Bentley car, on what looks like an airfield, mountains and a dark stormy sky, the horizon of which runs along the upper horizontal third. The overall look for this is dark as if shot in the blue hour on an overcast day.

The portrait is of David Beckman ex England football captain and celebrity, who is dressed in a smart dark suit, and the advertised watch adopting a strong pose, how he holds hand and the in combination with the suit it is very reminiscent of James Bond. It is of larger proportions to the background image and is placed to the left in the upper two-thirds of the image.

The dark tarmac of the airfield the car is on fades fully to black in the lower section of the picture in the lower right third a product show of the advertised watch is placed, unusually it in it side you would expect to upright, but it is mirroring how it position on Beckman’s wrist, although the watch hands are in the classic 10 past 10 position.

To the right of the watch is a paragraph outlining the watch in a clear Arial style font, all the text on the image is in this font except for the Breitling name.

The image makes good use of the rule of thirds and triangles in its composition, the 3 main elements are in a triangle and the viewers constantly circles around that triangle; from portrait, to watch to car.

The overall feel of the image is dark moody and mysterious, as I have mentioned above very James Bond – esque. And is clearly aimed at a male audience. This image exhibits heteronormative stereotypes to signify power and strength; The strong male gentleman, however, the subtle inclusion of the visible tattoo and a little danger to the male figure. The stormy weather also signifies power.

The headline of the advert is “The Essence of Britain” and the image exhibits those British Stereotypes, the gentleman in a suit, the use of a football star car and the even the dark potentially rainy weather that signify Britishness.

There is an overwhelming feeling of manipulation about the image. Bentley (and to some extent Breitling) is a brand that doesn’t require advertisement they are not an impulse purchase as are high-end watches. However, in the modern world watches are increasingly becoming obsolete as a person sole method of having a personal time telling device – we all carry a smartphone for that.

Therefore what Breitling are doing with this advert is to make this watch an impulse purchase by associating it with class. When the advert is broken down the advert is not selling the watch is it is selling class. Something that is unable to be bought. They are selling the illusion that this one item brings you into a different realm.

For the British market Breitling and it adverting executives have put forward a perfect combination with the working class hero (David Beckham) being presented as the ultimate British Hero (James Bond), diving a car that many many footballers dive. And the connecting item to all these is Breitling watch – which is much more affordable to the viewer than the car. They are hoping the viewer will fall for the illusion that a GBP2000 watch is a gateway to class and sophistication.

There are three subjects in the image, the main human subject is placed squarely in the centre with the others flanking her on the vertical third lines, however, the main protagonist in this image is the Chihuahuas in a hat. The image makes clear use of the rule of thirds, the vertical we have mentioned plus the shallow depth of field isolates the subjects from both the foreground and background.

Erwitt has placed the three subject at the base of the picture, creating a horizon which he has built the image. The chihuahua is the only character of whom we can see a face and it is staring at the camera, this reinforces its status of the main protagonist over its human companion.

The other subjects remain anonymous to the viewer. It is as if we are looking at the scene as the chihuahua would see it. Everything and everyone is huge and intimidating, the chihuahua has a forlorn look. In his use of this low viewpoint, Erwitt produces a  punctum, that is it is not immediately obvious that the legs on the left belong to another (very large) dog, not a human. One of the key features of why this image is so striking.

One interpretation of the picture is that expresses power and dominance. The size difference of the subjects does not leave any doubt about the position of each in that game of power. The leash that holds the chihuahua contributes to the political message, as does the apparent lack of leash on the bigger dog, establishing a relation of dependence or slavery between the small dog and the powerful and anonymous legs. The chihuahua has been stripped of its dignity and forced to wear ridiculous clothes as if it did not have a will. Whereas to the little dog has no leash, it is out of sight, he appears free a collaborator. Together the connection to Nazism of the leather boots frames the power and dominance expressed by the images into a metaphor for the persecution of the Jewish people in World War II Europe.

A further interpretation is to personify the subjects in the picture as a family unit; although two of them are animals. The punctum created by the low angle crop makes difficult to perceive the difference between the human legs and the animal legs. We tend to assume that the booted legs belong to a woman, the confusion pushes the viewer to assign the role of the husband to the big dog. Leaving the small dog as the child. This can then be a metaphor for how pets and be stand-in for absences within a person’s life – husband, wife or child.

The objective of any picture is to be seen and photography, like cinema, is a visual language that has its own vocabulary and grammar.

The technical aspects involved in photography: focal length of lens, aperture, shutter speed, implies a series of limitations that have direct influence in the physical look of the picture: depth of field, bokeh, noise, etc. All this is the vocabulary of photography that the photographer has to use, with the same dexterity as an author uses a pen, when we wants to produce a picture.

The rules of composition, colour theories etc are the grammar rules of photography; the photographer has to compose their scene following (or breaking them) these basic principles in order to ensure that the content of their picture works as intended.

The photographer behind the camera takes the picture, capturing the moment, capturing reality. They then present it so as a faithful representation of what the photographer saw or thought about the scene. By processing the images either digitally or in the darkroom, the photographer is adding their subjective interpretation of the reality.

Viewing the picture the viewer will react to it depending on their own perspective and cultural background. No matter what the photographer’s original message or point of view was authorial control is lost by the photographer to the viewer. The view my see what the photographer sees, they may see something wildly different.

All photographic genres, be it photojournalism, fashion, abstract, nudes, this relationship always exists, between the reality, the photographer, and the viewer. Each genre of photography has its own rules and looks to convey their messages just as each genre of cinema has. In photojournalism, the intention of the photographer is to present the facts as they happened i.e. ‘warts and all” whereas in commercial photography (practically product photography) tries to hid the true nature of it subject by using a series of complex method to show things at it absolute best.

There it is practically impossible for any photograph not to used as a means of expression or communication – there are times when what the photographer is trying to convey is not obvious or even downright obscure but just because we cannot see it does mean it not there. I used the analogy of an author earlier. The vocabulary and grammar of photography give the photographer the tools to compose a photograph just actual words and grammar rules gave/give Shakespeare and Dan Brown the tools to write a book.

Both of these authors are considered brilliant – not normally by the same people…