Photographing From Memory
Photography is unique in the visual arts. It requires physicality to function. It requires a presence, a thing, an object, a place. It requires a noun in order to become what it is. No other art requires anything except the mind of the artist. A photographic image cannot be made from memory. A painting can. A sculpture can. A photograph cannot. What does this mean to me as a photographic artist? Does it even matter?
The link to reality that photography needs in order to fulfill it’s function has been a stumbling block from it’s invention in 1839. At first people only wanted to record facts, places, and things. Fast forward 169 years and it seems that many of us are more interested in photographing from memory. I’m more interested in communicating what is in my head than what my eyes see. It seems to go against the very nature of the medium I have chosen to communicate through. Can it be done? What are the images going to look like? Where will they come from and how will they be made? Does technology get in the way of this desire to photograph from memory? Project our thoughts another 100 years into the future and where does photography find itself?
Tags: Photography
October 18th, 2008 at 9:00 am
I’m so glad to see you back up!!! And with new posts even, very good!
One of the things I love about photography is that reality is necessary because it means that something did exist a form of proof, and you know how I love my proof. I love that if it says nothing else it says that the thing existed and I was there to photograph it. I’m not sure what it would mean to photograph from memory, I know what it would mean to photograph because of memory. Those aren’t the same things though…
100 years from now photography wont exist at all, videos will be made through inter-retinal-devices and if you want a still from that you just take one. But every moment of every day will be recorded through this device implanted in your brain at birth. It’s not only a way to replace memory but also a form of governmental control. It is pretty scary, that’s why I came back to good old 2008.
January 4th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
I want to read more! Ah well, I know you’re busy.
January 6th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
@marc: There is a paradox here. Depending on your angle of approach, photography creates memory. Memory depends on photography, whether it is a mental image or a physical print, whereas photography only depends on your intent. Documenting, as an art like Cartier Bresson, expressing his view without altering reality, maybe merely just cropping out the parts that don’t belong to his original thought process, or Creating, Composing, like the pieces you create using technology and alternative mediums. This is an intriguing question, and I’ll have to come up with an answer for myself. This could be a thesis in itself!
@lexi: 100 years from now, photography will exist, because some of us out there want to preserve the essence of this method of capture. In my opinion a still image is far more powerful than a moving image or any type of scary implants that may come up.
January 6th, 2009 at 11:57 pm
Ah…Kevin, so nice to see you have found my place of venting. Sounds like you have been doing some thinking yourself.
April 11th, 2010 at 9:56 am
Я считаю, что это - ваша ошибка….
No other art requires anything except the mind of the artist. A photographic image cannot be made from memory. A painting can. […….
May 24th, 2010 at 7:13 am
Вполне, все может быть…
No other art requires anything except the mind of the artist. A photographic image cannot be made from memory. A painting can. […….