MOLINA, RAFAEL on mon 11 feb 02
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MOLINA, RAFAEL =20
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 5:55 PM
> To: 'Ceramic Arts Discussion List'
> Subject: 3-D work in a 2-D format
>=20
> In a recent post Lee made the following comment " I've often thought, =
that I'd rather have someone judge a pot competition
> who was blind, rather than one who had no sense of touch. Photos & =
slides of pottery are 3rd or 4th best, at best."
>=20
> In an earlier post Snail made this comment "It's a rare photographer, =
even among professionals, who can look at a 3-D piece, and see it as the =
2-D piece it will become when photographed, while still showing it as a =
dimensional object."
>=20
> I hear this lament frequently and I wonder exactly what they mean. =
I've had extensive experience photographing ceramics and other craft =
media over the last four years. My photographs have appeared in the =
following 'zines:
>=20
> January 2002 Ceramics Monthly page 24, October 2001 Ceramics Monthly =
page 70, May 2000 Ceramics Monthly Cover and pp. 48-51, April 2000 =
Ceramics Monthly page 22, December 1999 page 20, and September 1999 pp. =
40-45.
>=20
> February 2001 Glass On Metal Cover, Metalsmith Exhibition In Print =
2001 page 29, and June/July 2000 American Craft page 57.
>=20
> I also have a photograph of one of my teapots in the soon to be =
published 500 Teapots from Lark and an upcoming article in CM will =
include my photography as well.
>=20
> My point is that with a 35 mm or medium format 645 SLR camera (which =
are the most commonly used) focus and exposure are the only two thing =
you have control over. You would have to use a view camera which has =
focus and PERSPECTIVE in order to try to better "show it as a =
dimensional object." Of course, there is lighting and background which =
can be manipulated to try to show that an object in a transparency or =
print (2-D) is in fact a three-dimensional object.
>=20
> I personally use one light source (Electronic flash diffused through a =
Chimera Strip) directly above an object and reflectors for fill light on =
the front of the piece. This illuminates the object and creates the =
dramatic gradation of light in the fore and mid ground to a black =
background. I also use a seamless background made by Superior because I =
do not want a horizon line. I believe the light and resulting limited =
shadows as well as the seamless background along with a focus which =
gives good depth-of-field works to give a three-dimensional impression =
in a two-dimensional format.
>=20
> The fact of the matter is judging exhibitions, awards, =
artist-in-residences, grants, faculty positions, undergraduate and =
graduate educational admissions, workshop/seminar participation, etc,... =
is done largely with 35 mm slides. It's a function of practicality. =
It's IMPRACTICAL to judge using actual objects. Sure there are =
occasional shows which jury by actual work, but they are the rare =
exception.
>=20
> This past weekend I shot some of my work, student work, and work by =
internationally known enamelist/metalsmith Harlan Butt. It was a great =
shoot and I was quite pleased when I picked up the slides this morning.
>=20
> I do have one final piece of advice on photography. Remember kids =
stay away from that "demon" tungsten light and film.
>=20
> Chao,
>=20
> Rafael Enrique =20
>=20
>=20
> Rafael Molina, MFA
> Assistant Professor of Art
> Department of Music, Art, and Dance
> Tarrant County College-Southeast Campus
> 2100 Southeast Parkway
> Arlington, TX 76018-3144
> (817) 515-3711
> (817) 515-3189 fax
>=20
Wes Rolley on tue 12 feb 02
--=======497E25FE=======
Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-716235D4; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
At 10:57 PM 2/11/02 -0600, you wrote:
> > I hear this lament frequently and I wonder exactly what they
> mean. I've had extensive experience photographing ceramics and other
> craft media over the last four years. My photographs have appeared in
> the following 'zines:
Rafael,
I have not specifically noted any of your photographs, and they all may be
excellent. However, my experience is that there are many published
photographs that are, at best, second rate. Getting a photograph published
is not necessarily a statement about the quality of the work.
I will give you two examples that illustrate two specific non-technical
problems that many technically competent photographers never solve.
Last year, I went to see the Shimaoka exhibit at the Mingei International
Museum in San Diego. The photo on page 27 of the catalogue (credit
Tsuyoshi Unui) is not even taken of the best side of the pot. The
brushwork on the opposite side is much better. The photograph may be
technically competent, but the photographer did not have the requisite
sensitivity for the subject to make it the best photographic
representation of that piece.
Second example: The photograph of Rudy Autio's work on page 112 of Susan
Peterson's book, Contemporary Ceramics. (credit Chris Autio) I would not
have known that this was a 3-D work if it were not for the curve of the
form at the bottom. A great photo of a work of art should give a hint of
its true form and, at the same time, it should "work" as an abstracted
image with a perceivable structure of color, brightness, or line. This
particular photo does neither. I would not judge Rudy Autio's abilities as
an artist on the basis of this photo.
As for myself, I am not a very technically proficient photographer. I
did, with the museum's permission, take an ambient light photo of the
Shimaoka pot mentioned using my Canon GL-1 and I am at least able to see
the other side of the pot. I did not have the ability to control the
background or the lighting. But it does show the work at it's best.
I understand that not every photograph of a pot is going to be the equal of
an Edward Weston pepper. I just want to say that there is more to taking a
really good photograph of a pot than technical proficiency, though that
technical proficiency is necessary to have consistently good results. Just
like making pots. Technical proficiency is a prerequisite for consistency,
but there are too many technically good, uninspiring pots.
Wes
Wesley C. Rolley
17211 Quail Court
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
wesley@rolley.com
(408)778-3024
--=======497E25FE=======--
| |
|
