Today there was a Huffpost tweet about “a mind blowing art revelation”. This related to work about a Korean realist painter called Kang Kang Hoon, whose paintings look just like photographs. My immediate reaction was simply ‘why?’ What was the artist adding that a photograph didn’t already have? The discussion underneath the article seemed to be divided between those with similar ideas to me and those who thought the talent of the artist of such detailed work was the important thing.
On my recent holiday, we flew over Bulgaria and Turkey. I took a load of ‘abstract’ photographs of the landscape below. I intend using them as the basis of a series of paintings. I stress ‘the basis’. I have no intention of reproducing the photographs!
There was recently a discussion on the blog of a fellow OCA Drawing student who had used photographs for some drawings. I felt that there was a bit of ‘cheating’ in this in that the photograph had already flattened the 3D subject into a 2D plane and added a definite edge, problems that the artist has to work out with reality.
Finally a couple of other tweets about photographs. Firstly a housing project in Mexico City. This was the opposite of the first item in that it was a said to be a photograph but looked like a painting. I loved one comment on the tweet suggesting it was the work of ‘an architect with ocd’.
There was also a Hyperallergic article about ‘photographic firsts’. I particularly liked this photograph. Photography pioneer Louis Daguerre took the image of the Boulevard du Temple in Paris in 1838, and unintentionally recorded the first person in a photograph. As Retronaut describes, the figure down at the bottom left getting his shoes shined was the only person on the street during the long exposure to pause long enough to appear.