Stories
The sublime within the surreal
I found myself the elected partner as of late tagged to document the goings-on of our studio’s open education events. My purpose was the production of behind the scenes fodder for future promotional purposes and the like. An interesting observation emerged from what I considered busy-work. Somehow subconciously a few flavors of my personal projects crept in.
I’m not referring to what could be considered habit or mere stylistic artiface. Upon reflection what I see is more complex and ingrained in observation and choices of the moment. It’s far more a change or refinement of vision.
As we mature do we change or is it merely a refinement of thoughts and preferrences that tends to clarify? Case in point; although I’ve always been intrigued and amused at what comes across as the surreal my youthful attemps at constructing what I thought that felt like were what I considered abject failures. I put that away two decades ago.
The event itself — obstensibly telling stories with motion and cinema techniques. Here I found myself attempting a story from outside. In itself that skews towards the surreal. As for age and refinement, the difference is not in the goal but in the vision. It wasn’t over the top I was in pursuit of, it was in the subtleties. The surreal on the edge of perception.
Perception and context. Observation of the observer and the infinite.
Am I directing the director? If not, is there infuence in the mere observation? Does it matter? How is your interpretation of the above skewed based on your own observational tendencies, refinements, and paradigm?
Any photographer who says he’s not a voyeur is either stupid or a liar.
The impulse that led you to make an image is a thing that you cannot share with anyone, even if you explain it. What remains is a surface that will live its own life, that will belong to everybody. I accept that surface.
Nexus of intersetction.
At some nexus the story I am telling must intersect with all of the other stories made by all the other cinema photographers that occupied the same location at the same time and pointed thier cameras at the same scene. Wouldn’t they have to?
You’ve heard some variation of the oft repeated “all photographs lie” mantra at some point. To that I must say; it all depends on your point of view.
Point of view and context are the two most powerful mechanisms in the medium of photography. At least that’s the road I ended up on after travelling many blind alleys and dead-ends. All photographs are constructions which is not an implication or indictment related to untruth.
Does ever increasing context contained within any given point of view imply more truth? Here the observer of the observer can be observed. I would contend that particular bit of context is implied no matter what the point of view.
RB
