searching for my identity as an artist

Kristin & Jason

2010-05-20T00:39:00.000-04:00

David Griffin on how photography connects us

2010-04-26T00:42:00.000-04:00

Jonathan Klein: Photos that changed the world

2010-04-25T00:24:00.002-04:00

wrapping up

2010-04-21T02:11:00.003-04:00

So, the semester is ending in the next 1.5 weeks for me. It doesn't feel like it's been too long since I've started this blog, yet some good things have been happening over the semester.

This quest for my identity as an artist is no where near complete; however, my eyes have definitely opened up, and I'm not as apathetic about art as I was prior to starting this project. This semester was quite different. Perhaps I just got lucky to have such supportive professors this time around (compared to the past 3 years of being in the art school). To cut to the chase (and forgive me if this gets sappy), my heart has softened up a bit. I'm not nearly as bitter about art and the means of creating it.

I've learned some valuable things while reading, studying, and writing about art. Maybe I never gave it much of a chance to begin with. Whatever the reasoning, things are looking up. I'm excited about this final project.

artists or con-artists?

2010-03-31T00:15:00.000-04:00

This is quite a peculiar display of art among different people.

In class last week, we were talking about the idea of one's trash being another man's treasure - but more along the lines of using a media others will rarely look at and consider beautiful and creating beautiful art. For example, I converted a Tazo tea box into a pinhole camera that takes absolutely stunning photos. This tea box would probably have ended up in a dump, along with many other potential artistic mediums.

This article had a bit of a cynical tone to it; and while I would have thought the same thing a year ago, I've grown to appreciate this radical approach on art. It's new and innovative.

Take this sculpture/bust for example:

Mark Quinn, "Self"

Upon first glance, I couldn't tell the medium was extremely bizarre. I figured it was painted and burned. Then, you realize it's blood - a lot of it. Self-inflicted. Now, I don't know what drove Mark Quinn to think of this, but this is the epitome of self-portrait, and while grotesque, it is so brilliant. (Honestly, I can't bear to keep looking at his works)

It's the process of making the art that I think is important. Anyone could scrap together a few items and create something; however, if during the process, the artist does not gain anything other than the tangible object, it loses it's meaning completely.

While, this blog is not the normal artistic medium, I've gained a lot of insight. I've been, in a sense, forced to look at art, question it, think about it, come back to it constantly, and write about it.

Recently, I've been drawn back into the graphics world, thanks to this blog. In an effort to get a more cohesive blog, I've been testing out new design elements (and failing). I'm also trying to give this blog a new approach, especially on the photo aspect of it. I started posting up pinhole and large format photos, and received a lot more feedback. Essentially, I'd want to post up these photos for an online critique. Same photos I've turned in (or will turn in) for my photo class; however, getting a wider range of people (outside of my photo class) to critique them. We'll see where this one goes.

revamping the site!

2010-03-30T11:51:00.002-04:00

I am currently in the process of revamping the site to make it all a little bit more cohesive. There are still some issues here and there, so please feel free to let me know if something is off or doesn't work.

My queue list is also messed up, so if you find some entries missing, I'm probably reworking it.

Comments should be working now!

the beauty of photography

2010-03-18T12:24:00.004-04:00

One of the things I enjoy about photography is the ability to use it in a variety of ways. The art of photography is that it's not merely art for art's sake, though it could be. When I look at photos like these, I see art; however, it may not be viewed as art at this school.

High-speed photography is so remarkable.

Wedding/engagement photography is one area that seems to be the most "taboo" here.

Another area, which I love, is fashion photography. I remember last semester, the grad student teaching my class told me fashion photography was my strong point. Following one of my final critiques, I did somewhat of a fashion photography-esque type of project, documenting the shoes I wore everyday paired with a self-portrait. In her near exact words she said, "I never, ever, thought I'd say this, but you really should focus on fashion photography. It seems to be your strong point." Those were the best words I've ever heard since coming into the art school.

Is there even a fine line between commercial photography and art? If there is, should that line even exist?

photoshop and photography: when is it real?

2010-03-16T13:39:00.001-04:00

I was reading this article/blog that talks about the line between a true photography versus a digitally manipulated image.

So, where is that fine line? As a photographer, I'd have to compose a shot extremely well to NOT edit my photos. This goes for working in the darkroom as well. There are times where I have to dodge and burn, create contrast, and plan development time. Maybe I'm stretching it a little, but aren't those still a means of "manually" trying to get an ideal image?

Everyone wants to see a great photograph. They are drawn to well composed shots and technically sound images. I don't think there is anything wrong with using Photoshop to manipulate the image.

I was taking a digital photography class last semester, and one of our projects called us to use Photoshop to create a collage type of photo. Basically, we took a group of photos and used Photoshop to make it one large cohesive photo.

While I went with more of a David Hockney style of collaging, there were others that created some amazing photos that were seamless; kind of like the seagulls and lighthouse the article mentioned:

Everything in the photograph belongs to the photographer. He uses the camera as his main medium and uses the computer to enhance them. So, should this image be discredited as a true photo?

Painters, graphic designers, sculptors, etc all use their imagination, but base it on some aspects of reality. As time passes, new art movements emerge and move away from merely portraying what the artist sees, or true reality in this case.

Photography was initially to capture what the photographer saw through the lens. Through time, the nature of photography has changed as technology advanced. Why not utilize the medium this culture is beginning to embrace?

Sure, the photograph above is not a one shot wonder, but I wouldn't place it in a different category. It's the digital age. Embrace it.

second home

2010-03-15T22:22:00.000-04:00

The photography lab is my second home. I've was there for the past 12 hours only to find myself disheartened after many failed attempts at making a print.

I was talking to one of my classmates, who is a grad student, and mentioned how I failed miserably for a 12 hour workday. He then interrupted me and said, "Failed what? You got something done! You're on the right track so you didn't fail; you're only closer to your goal."

So I thought it was cheesy talk in the beginning, but he kept saying it over and over to me the more disgruntled I got. It hit home then.

One of the joys of being an artist, I've found, is the lack of "failure." What I mean by that is, we all work hard in the lab/studio and while our work may not be considered "perfect," the process of creating the work is art as well.

My initial thought of failure was driven by how much film/photo paper I would use yet, not have a perfect print. The monetary aspect of it became a bigger deal than the process of making the art using the materials. I won't lie; photography isn't cheap and if I keep on "messing up" my prints, it only creates a bigger hole in my wallet. It's a worry, but it should be the least of my worries.

Rather than looking at what I'm losing, I need to start looking at everything else I am gaining.

brutal honesty

2010-03-04T11:59:00.002-05:00

Slowly, but surely, this blog is doing what I want it to do. Well, at least I'm getting some participation and it is really helping me. Thanks. :)

There's an article about photography and digital re-imaging that I will be writing about soon, so keep posted.

*****

While taking color photography last semester, a friend of mine had, what I thought was, great conceptual work that I actually understood for the first time. Honestly, conceptual art is not my forte, so to see something which actually caught my attention is a big thing. (Side note: this is another one of those entries which expresses my frustrations with professors).

Well, to start off, we were given the "freedom" to photograph whatever we wanted to - a semester long project, you can say. My friend is a musician and figured to incorporate his two passions and put up semi-installations for his project. Since, I don't have photos, I'll try my best to describe the experience.

One project, in particular, he used a tripod and shot a series of photo of a girl dancing to a song in shack or abandoned home. As a part of his presentation, he put up his iPod and headphones along with the photos so we, as the viewers, could take part in that experience. The figure was usually a blur of movement, which I thought looked beautiful. I agree there were some technical/compositional issues, but overall, I didn't think the project deserved a "C".

For the sake of keeping this short, he received a "C" on every single project last semester. I saw him working in the lab constantly, yet, his work was considered "half-assed." He took on every suggestion from the professor, but never saw an improvement on his grade or critique.

Eventually, for his final project, he decided to abandoned his semester long project and take on a satirical approach to what he was taught throughout the semester (which was nothing along the lines of constructive criticism). He took a series of photos with captions underneath, and each caption was a quote from the professor or something along the lines of "after some artist, probably William Eggleston..." (side note: there were certain artists that were constantly ingrained into our heads and that was William Eggleston and Nan Goldin, which was why he referred to them).

I thought compositionally and technically, this was his best project. The idea behind is was so... honest. He was showing his frustration through his art, and it showed. I thought it was brilliant. Apparently, the professor didn't think so and took it very offensively.

Now, I think if we create art that raises such emotions: confusion, anger, laughter, etc, in a sense, we have succeeded as artists. It's better than someone looking at your work and simply turning their head away without a thought in the world. I feel like that's what I was taught in art school. To be challenged by the art that you see; to feel uncomfortable; to feel anything but nothing.

So what was the verdict on his final project?

"C."

freedom of expression vs. guidelines

2010-02-24T12:03:00.000-05:00

A few weeks ago, I opened up my semester project idea and our class came into a pretty good discussion about the freedom of expression versus guidelines.

Someone said, "Guidelines often help push us as artists and gets us to think outside of our comfort zone."

While I agree with that statement, I feel it is somewhat contradictory. We are forced to think outside of our comfort zones and create this "new" art that defines us and expresses our interpretation of the project. So it's this mixture of freedom of expression and guidelines.

I don't have a problem with guidelines. I have a problem with professors giving an entirely subjective critique based on whether they like the work or not.

I have found professors will gravitate towards a student's work that is most like theirs. Perhaps it's the natural thing to do. You will immediately be drawn to works you find interesting and inspiring; however, why is there such a bias? Is this how all professors base who is their favorite and who gets the better grade?

Several years ago, I was taking a figure drawing course (and mind you, I absolutely suck at anything that is hand drawing) and I was having a tough time getting started in the class. Everyone else knew how to do gesture drawings while I was in my corner making stick figures. Throughout the semester, I grew tremendously. I learned how to quickly draw gestures, shade, build form and mass of the body. The professor saw this improvement, yet at the end of the semester, I never got the grade I had hoped nor a constructive critique. Everyone else got the attention and I was left in the dark, or at least that's how I felt.

I followed guidelines and I grew, but I never got the appreciation from the professors. I decided to do things my way, and I grew even more and began to receive responses - though not much constructive criticism.

What am I doing wrong?

placing a value on art

2010-02-16T13:15:00.004-05:00

I came across this funny/interesting article from TIME.

While quite amusing to read such unfortunate accidents, I was wondering how a value is placed on a particular piece of art.

I understand these works of arts are hundreds of years old, and perhaps a catalyst to a particular art movement; but, is it the artist that places such a value on these pieces? Is it the current owner of the painting or those people who want to bid on the work of art?

There are some artist's whose works I never got around to understand.

Mark Rothko
Jackson Pollock
Ad Reinhardt (specifically "Black Painting")

This is just to name a few.

I recall sitting in my art history lectures studying paintings by such artists. Now, perhaps it's my ambivalence towards this genre of art, but I never understood why these were such fascinating artworks. Sure, there is a ton of meaning attached to each painting, but is that all it takes? A simple painting with an elaborate meaning attached to it?

Take all I say after this with a grain of salt, please.

I remember when I was in kindergarten, I played with paint in my art class. I splashed different colors onto the canvas using the flick of my wrist and unknowingly, I was following in the footsteps of Jackson Pollock. I do think I painted several boxes on a canvas as well. There goes Mark Rothko. Could this have marked a legendary career in art for me?

Honestly, I don't understand it. Does everyone in the art school find this as fascinating as the professors.. profess? What am I missing here? Can I dig up my old paintings from elementary school and receive the same praise as these famous artists?

Please, someone enlighten me.

refreshed

2010-02-11T11:22:00.005-05:00

I've been taking large format photography this semester, and so far, it's been probably the most refreshing classes I've taken in a while. My professor, Ben Reynolds, has been very open about the assignments. He knows it's a learning experience and has been quite understanding of my many mishaps.

I've always had long, drawn out critiques. It's really not my style to spend 15 minutes per person for critique and arguing (debating) about how the photo doesn't give the right "feeling". I've had previous professors talk about how certain works did not convey what the assignment called for. I don't understand how they can come to that conclusion. Granted, maybe there's a sense of integrity behind it where the student should take carefully planned out photos; they shouldn't just shoot some random subject the last minute and try to think of some great artist statement that will fit along the lines of the given assignment. But, when it comes to me, I usually carefully plan and take photos; yet, the professor never seemed to get a "feel" for them and during critique, I rarely heard suggestions on how to better what I wanted to convey. It's always "great photo" or "I don't feel it."

In large format, my professor goes through each group of photos and gives us the option of saying something about it. He then critiques on technical aspects and how we can use lighting, camera positions, etc to make the photo stand out more. If we failed to meet the assignment guidelines, he won't say the picture sucks; rather, he'll point out areas where we succeeded, and areas where we need to better for the next time around. It's very constructive criticism. I think I'm getting better each time and it's because he helps us to be better. He doesn't just throw us out hoping we'll figure it out for ourselves.

This semester in general has been refreshing. I'm able to really take time during my classes to discover myself as an art project. For far too long, I've been catering to what everyone else thought was art that I ended up not building myself up as an artist.

If anyone has any articles they'd find helpful to me during my quest of "searching for my identiy as an artist", please pass them along.

hiatus

2010-02-08T14:46:00.002-05:00

I've been away from this blog, but I have not forgotten about it.

My thoughts are in a chaotic mess.

My grandmother passed away this weekend, so I'm taking some time away to spend with the family. I will continue to write after family matters have settled down.

urgency

2010-02-01T23:07:00.001-05:00

I made an emergency trip back home tonight. My grandmother suffered a stroke early December and has been fighting for her life ever since. Last night, nurses started giving her doses of morphine for the sake of easing her pain. She's resting calmly now. But, we all know the morphine will eventually take its toll. It's all a matter of time now.

For the past two months, I found myself dedicating my art to my grandmother and the rest of my family. I'll admit none of them really understand my choice in going into the art field; however, neither do I. This is the reason I have a sense of urgency to really study myself as a person/artist. Why do I think the way I do? Why do I act the way I do? Why am I investing so much time into art that has so many gray areas?

I love art, but only when I'm allowed to express myself the way I want to.

pet peeve

2010-01-31T00:52:00.005-05:00

Art takes a lot of time and effort (blood, sweat, and tears.. literally). Juggling a photography profession as well as school is hard work. The time spent in the lab trying to process photos is exhausting. I had a taste of working with large format and I can already tell it's going to be a very long process.

Digital photography, while serving as a convenience so I won't have to spend hours in a darkroom, is still equally exhausting. Using digital, you're bound to take hundreds of photos in a few hours. Post-processing takes hours. First you have to go through a delete the bad photos. Out of about 1000 photos, there are usually about 300 good ones. Then, you go through and edit each one which can take a long while. Afterwards, I watermark each one.

Juggling school, work, and other things, getting digital photos done can take anywhere from 2 weeks to 2 months. It's so satisfying to finally see a finished batch of photos.

Now, what ticks me off is when people decide to use these photos and cut off my watermark. To them, it's just a small text in the corner of the photo. To me, that's time and effort I spent carefully trying to make everything look good, and to them, it's just a silly text that they could care less about.

All I hear from these people is, "Hey, did you finish those photos? I want to put them up to promote my band." How about promoting my photography and not just your band? Do I ever get a thanks? No.

Well, you know what? I'm a poor starving artist. I take these photos free of charge to get some kind of accreditation and you rob me of even that?

This is why I fail to ever take such people as clients. They continue to ask me for their event photos, and since my credit hasn't been given for the previous two events, I don't see why I have to continue working on their photos. They are deep within my hard drive and will stay there, untouched, until I get my proper thanks and credit.

Please, support your artists, especially if you use their art.

embracing technology

2010-01-30T10:07:00.006-05:00

Earlier in the semester (about two weeks ago), my art & tech class had a discussion about the Kindle and other latest technologies. We started the discussion after reading this blog post: marieyall

Let me start off by saying I don't disagree with the post. I would much rather buy books than read it on a device that could easily be broken and cost a few hundreds of dollars to replace. I enjoy the feeling of flipping the pages and seeing the progress while reading.

With that said, I never saw a Kindle up close and personal until about a month ago. It's actually not as I expected. Electronic paper/ink is wild! I thought it would strain your eyes like when reading off a computer, but it doesn't! The idea of being able to buy and download a book at the click of a button is great, especially if you are unable to get to your nearest Barnes & Noble.

I'm all about embracing the latest technologies. It doesn't mean I'll necessarily use them, but I feel as though artists should learn to utilize them and enhance their own art. It's really embracing culture.

I don't know how people will feel about my using technology all throughout my semester long project. Instead of writing in a journal, I decided to blog. Instead of printing actual pictures, I wanted to use a photoblog using shots from my digital camera and iPhone. Instead of raw, untouched footage, I wanted to create video blogs that are edited with daily events and my own thoughts recorded from my Macbook Pro and iPhone.

Why am I doing this?

I don't want to limit my art to a classroom - you know, doing all these things for the sake of my grade. I don't want to start a project and have it end in March when final exams are over. This is my search for identity as an artist, and my search will continue after this class is over. It will continue even after I graduate. I'm just using this class as a means of finally doing art that I actually want to do. So what if the photos I take are cliche? So what if this seems more for personal interest than art?

This is the kind of art I enjoy - that I thrive in. I love engagement/wedding photography. I love fashion photography. I love the idea of video blogs. I love everything that this school thinks is taboo. I'm not trying to go against everyone's suggestions, but I don't want to be forced to do something that does not interest me. I'm willing to try new things, but if I don't feel passionate enough about it, why continue?

The reason I started this blog is to gain some insight from people - artists so to say. I'll admit that my views on art is probably skewed, but am I to blame when no constructive criticism is given? I've heard, "I don't feel your art/photos" many times; and rarely, "I think you could have done this to make this project more successful."

I want people to explain to me. I want to be challenged.

Is anyone willing to step up to the plate?

frustration

2010-01-29T12:28:00.002-05:00

What others think is not what should drive your life.

I find that people are too caught up in what others think of them, and more often than not, these people seem to be some of the most insecure people. This is probably because they are living life too sheltered. Almost like taking the easy way out by appeasing anyone and everyone. Sometimes, you learn more when you venture out on your own. You learn from your mistakes. You grow from your experiences. (That is unless you're too stubborn to admit you were wrong).

This concept seems all too familiar in the art school.

Since when did we have to start making art for everyone else? Isn't art a means of expressing oneself or raising awareness for another cause? Maybe I got it all wrong. I agree that art should be viewed by a wide spectrum of people; however, I don't think you should change your concept or idea because people are uncomfortable with it or don't understand it (of course constructive criticism is welcome).

I recall last semester, a fellow student of mine had an installation set up. She did not put up an artist statement because she did not want the statement to serve as a bias for other people's interpretation of the installation. She wanted the individual experiencing the installation to create their own meaning for the work. Of course, she was willing to share her idea if asked, but she wanted that initial experience to be something of its own to each person.

When it came to critique, our graduate assistant/teacher criticized her for not having an artist statement. When the student explained how her lack of an artist statement was part of the concept, the GA grilled her even harder. It was a very intense moment in the class. Everyone was silent; we were shocked at the response.

I sat there speechless and stayed that way until class let out. Is this really art? Is this how they teach you to be an artist? I didn't know there were such guidelines on creating art. I was angry, disheartened... discouraged, really. Where is that freedom of expression?

I don't know.

I want to say that if this is art, then count me out; however, I am not afraid to defy all things "art" that this school teaches. If anything, that is going to be my semester long project.

irony

2010-01-28T11:24:00.003-05:00

There are somethings that I struggle with as an artist at the University of Georgia. Here is a synopsis of my artist statement that I wrote for class:

I decided to do the semester long project that investigates who I am as a person and how it affects me as an artist. This investigation of identity is a continuation from a previous photography class. I wanted to continue this project mainly because the professors had a great influence in what I could shoot and was advised not to shoot for my project. I found it ironic that my search for identity was really not my own; rather, it became strongly influenced by my professors. I was essentially forced to listen to my professors and take photos that they found appealing for the sake of making the grades. Eventually, the semester ended on a very unsatisfactory note on my part.

Why is it that the art school teaches the importance of finding ourselves as artists; yet they insist on forcing their views of "true art" on us? Why do we get failing grades when time, effort, and participation have all been exerted, which are the main criteria for grading? Why are technique and "idea" placing a heavier weight on our grades when our resources are limited (ie. dark room supplies, studio space) and we were given freedom of expression?

Growing up, kids always seem to go through several, "I want to be ______" when I grow up. Well, the first profession that I inserted in that blank was "artist". I would go out to my front yard and repeatedly draw my house - front, back, sides. Perhaps it was architecture that fascinated me, but regardless, I loved the freedom of expression. My house was white and brown and had a lot of trees and small shrubbery all around it. I remember trying to draw it exactly, but didn't like the clutter it created on paper and pencil, so I decided to leave out a few details. That's the freedom I liked - being able to manipulate artwork to my own liking. If I wanted to color my house something other than brown and white, I could have done so.

Now, actually being referred to as an artist in a top of the line art school, the idea I had of being an artist is absolutely not what i had imagined. That freedom of expression I loved only exists with restrictions, so perhaps it really doesn't exist at all. Honestly, the art school has left a sour taste in my mouth for the past three years.. I'm only hoping my last 1.5 years here will really change my apathy towards it all.