This week, we’ve been introduced with a kind of Uncanny photography, which is not quite unfamiliar in our daily life. As being known about the world is staged, the assembled stuff in front of the camera lens waiting to be shoot for a specific moment is naive realism, some uncanny things has also been taken, or being edited in a photography way, the fiction-like photography.
In the type of photography, uncanny contains many forms and aspects. We viewed some artists works that give me a broaden horizon about photography, which took us on a impossible journey.
The photography reproduces the conditions of optical perception, but only some of them. That the photography appears iconic not only contributes an aura of authenticity, it also seems reassuringly familiar. The articulation of familiar-looking subjects through established aesthetic conventions further fuels realist notions associated with photography. Umberto Eco
But what if some of them are not real, or it is real but we’ve never seen it before? How can we know its real or not? Can we trust the photography, or just use this feature to do more creations?
By reading the book of ‘Post- photography’, I conclude some of my opinions from the theme, and did a research on the photographer Gregory Crewdson as this week’s tasks, to find more inspirations of the course.
For me, the post-photography is based on the range of photography, but more like to be called image. They are more subjective, meddled more by premeditate design. Because some of them are now not taken by a camera, they are just the digital making pictures. And within these pictures, they are not easy to be understand, because they are self-defined by the maker. Mostly, if you don’t read the instruction, different people could guess in variety ways of the meaning and seldom could know the ‘real’ answer. While some of the expressing form are implicated in relation with people’s normal depiction, thus will be easier to understand, or the objects are based on common logic. If some elements above are too much exaggerate, the thoughts in the work will be parochial, beyond the public’s cognition. The only way is to follow the rules of the maker who made, in a new creative path.
I feel that the more it develops, the more abstract it becomes. Different from the beginning, they just want to keep the reality in an more stable form, so the realistic painting was been impacted a lot. Then, “In the digital revolution, the preconception that the camera never lies has flipped into the camera always lies- there is a lot of mistrust in images now, and if anything appears peculiar within the photography, we assume it to be digital manipulated.” ( Jonny Briggs ) Now some of them have more similarity with the abstract painting, which belongs to ‘uncanny’.
“The artist-working-with-photography featured in this book- do not subscribe to be a common philosophy of image-making. …The fact /fiction dividing line is continually blurred in post-photographic work.” Robert Shore
For our group work of Gregory Crewdson, he made his own style which create the film-like picture. What he made is the kind of realistic scene with uncanny stories. He is the director of the story-telling image, that illustrate a scary atmosphere using colour, light, and actors.
He decade-long quest to create a series of haunting, surreal, and stunningly elaborate portraits of small-town American life — perfect renderings a disturbing and imperfect world. His work is powerful than others in this kind, the dramatic crash give out a contradictory impression that attract audience to see but feeling afraid after, the empathy is too strong.
‘Sometimes, they don’t take pictures, they make pictures.’ Rune Guneriussen