What is Photography? (08/10/11)

What is Photography?

Here, I will be explaining in detail some of the notes that I have gathered during my lecture on photography. 

Today was spent discussing what we believed photography was. Before diving into the question, we discussed what we thought were some of the ethical points behind photography and other areas of art. Here is a short list of some of the points I felt stood out the most during this discussion.

• The health of the model (Anorexia, Bohemia etc)
• Clothing and fashion (Fairtrade)
• Copy writing
• Airbrushing (what is beautiful)
• Animals (use of animal products such as fur, leather etc)
• Design Brands exploiting other countries
• Photography - Paparazzi (no privacy)
• Nude Images

This is just a short list of what was discussed about the ethics behind photography. There was a series of questions raised about the ethics of art in itself. What is allowed and what isn't? Are we crossing the boundaries in some areas? One of the main points that stood out to me was the marketing strategies used to sell certain products. Software such as Photoshop is used these days during post production to make, for example, a certain kind of makeup item seem more effective than it actually is. It also sparked the question whether the art of photography is actually being used for good or bad.

I have read two articles that both discuss the art and ethics behind photography. I believe that both articles have similar as well as different views of Photography which really captured my interest and provoked some ideas I had. 

Sally Mann 

Sally Man is a well known photographer in america (Virginia) and is mainly popular for her pieces centered around nudity and nature. After doing some personal research on Sally Mann, I have come to be a fan of her work. Some people/critics may think of her work as inappropriate or disturbing but from the article I've read about her, I have concluded that she is the sort of artist who is not afraid to shed light on unspoken areas and push certain boundaries.

One of Mann's latest interests have been capturing images of the dead. In the article she explains "...And with that came an almost prudish attitude to death. It used to be sex that was the unspeakable but now nobody wants to get old and nobody wants to die..." From that quote, I understood why she was so interested in taking photos of what people usually find horrifying and upsetting. In our modern society, nobody is interested in ageing or death because it has always reminded us that life doesn't last forever and for someone like Sally Mann to make an art of such a subject makes certain people feel uncomfortable. The article also discusses Mann's interest in her children and how she tries to make them a part of her artwork. This brings us back to the subject of the ethics behind photography and what is considered right and wrong. Sally Mann has never been shy of presenting her children's images as she believes in capturing the innocence of childhood. The fact that her children were naked in most of the images caused controversy as they were considered somewhat pornographic. 

Mann reminds me of another photographer, Nan Golding, who also believed in capturing the innocence of childhood. Most of Golding's photography is centered around sexuality, lust, intimacy and gender so the fact that she included images of her godchildren naked came across as inappropriate. The question remained whether or not taking pictures of the naked children was art or just another part of her belief in capturing gender and sexuality which may have come across as inappropriate. 

Overall, from the article I have read about Sally Mann, I have gathered that she is more interested in bringing to light what we as a society shy away from. She discusses race, gender and death and emphasises on those subjects through photography in order to get her message across. 

Controversies - A legal and Ethical History of Photography

This is another article I read that basically explains and discusses the rights to photography and what is considered right or wrong. It is a press release for a photography exhibition that displays photos that have been considered to cause controversy in the past. From the article I have gathered a significant amount of information. What stood to me the most was the three case studies that deal with what is seen as right or wrong when practicing photography. 

The first case study is about a photographer named Garry Gross. Garry gross was a popular advertising photographer who shot photos mainly for commercial use. In 1978, Gross took pictures of a young soon to be actress, Brooke, when she was just ten years of age. She posed nude in a bath tub with makeup on her face and body covered in oil. 

After reading this article, what interested me the most was the fact that the images he took of the young girl was used in a pornography magazine, Playboy. After a few years, Brooke fought to prevent further use of her pictures as she felt that they were embarrassing. Unfortunately, she lost the case due to the fact that her mother had signed a contract giving Gross full rights to use the images as he chose. This brings us back to the ethics behind photography. Many would say that the images were innocent and no where near pornographic but I personally believe that Brooke's rights to privacy had not been respected or acknowledged. My question is If the images were just art and only for commercial use then for what reason would they need to be a part of any porn publication press? 

I believe that because of Brooke's age at the time, she obviously had very little say in what she was comfortable doing. Because of the law behind binding contracts, no matter what Brooke's argument was, she would still lose because and agreement had been made. I still think that despite the fact that her mother had signed a contract, Brooke should still have been entitled to have her say because she was a child at the time. The rest of the case studies all had similar stories more or less but the Gross case study is what I felt stood out to me the most. It raised questions such as whether or not certain kind of photography can be inappropriate and cross boundaries, is the rights of the model always met, is the law actually helping in terms of the rights of the photographer and the model? These were all questions that I asked myself after reading the article.