Your goal?

Well, when I had to take intro photography a couple semesters ago for my Fine Arts BA degree, we had to shoot photos in the style of a photographer. I chose Wolfgang Tillmans.

It was actually difficult, because his photos look like very plain, mediocre snapshots of things...like a jacket lying on the floor, a gallon of spoiled milk in the fridge, or a cityscape (in fact, a lot people complain about this in his exhibitions, and had lots of negative feedback at one art biennial). I actually saw his work at one of the Chelsea galleries (and I reacted the same way), didn't know who he was, but I was able to identify who he later was by seeing his photographic "layouts" in some books/magazines.

But in his case it's not much about any one sole photograph but more in his presentation of them, which is kind of like an "installation piece" in a gallery...in his case like the walls are pages in a magazine. You begin to make out some sort of analogy between the disparity of his images, as if the photographs act as just a means to an end. This all came out of the basic question which was the basis of his Thesis project: "Why would you take yet another photograph, in an already photo-saturated world?".

It was after this project that my professor recommended I try looking more into photography (I wasn't really interested in it before), and I've been hooked ever since!
 
Sometimes the better photographs convey very little mood and very little technical prowess...
 
Hertz van Rental said:
What is the difference between taking a picture for your own pleasure and taking a picture to please someone else - remembering that giving pleasure to others is a way of getting pleasure for yourself.

The motive.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top