2001: Age of innocence

Smoking kills

2011

James Bond pelastuu. Hän on paratiisisaarella nussimassa ja juomassa kaljaa.

 

Olin kävelemässä kotiin. Kadunvarren mainoksesta minua katsoi James Bond. Heitin häntä lumipallolla. Osuin olkapäähän. 2011/ I was walking home. James Bond was watching me from the roadside ad. I threw a snowball at him and hit his shoulder, 2011

 

Art of selfie is in repetition.

Something about damaged photos, choosing of topics.

There is something to be rejected in ‘perfect photos’ as they may look too good to be real. Staged, rehearsed and paraded photos where there is something enjoyable and nice is to cheer us up. Photography is much used in this purpose. It is a mood creator taking the viewer somewhere and good as such, with a purpose. We have stuck ideas of what is perfection and what is beautiful, how it looks, as it is a look and desired. Of course we must define what is perfection, what is the aesthetics of perfection. A perfect photo is a window to a lovely world and to personality. Perfection is to know what one wants, it is a goal to which there is a road. We will notice it very often is a matter of taste and tradition and what we are used to seeing, what we like, what moves us. How much do we dare to push buttons of viewers? What does rejection tell?

We must show others that we know what is good. What do we want to tell via preferences and the medium is what is interesting. What are you telling me and why. Perfection is in part a fantasy. Is it yours, do you own it or are you reaching out for it? It is personal, somehow naive, shallow and a thing to be had, thing of vanity and making a gap between. Perfect photos uplift the photographer to a illustrator of dreams and achievements, that something is exact, right and in order and the maker of photos must know something of order and organising. The photographer is the hero owning the medium. There is heroism in photography which is itself disturbing. Sizes, prices, glows and sounds of cameras are a thing and sight and matter of awe themselves. I am interested in what is the edge there too much to take and accept. What is unacceptable in terms of photography? Is it ugliness, greyness, fuzziness, lack of light, obscenity, unprofessional look, gender, lack of money or what?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-06/why-photography-can-t-get-woke?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social “But there was one glaring omission: All 32 of the people they chose were men.”

What is the point and issue we are not touching, do not want to see and accept, are not showing but removing, are afraid of or despise in photography. We think we know perfection, so there is a ground to be followed? Rules such as don’t burn pictures with too much light. Perfection in photography is more complex than what is there in sight at first glance. It is eye candy for some, nostalgia, arranging a set and prettiness immortalised. Is there something more that needs a deeper look, what is the story or clue behind there. What is interesting in a photograph for me is fragility via a powerful medium, tool (too powerful for me to touch? Am I too small to be holding a camera?) and how this medium and media can be challenged, as it obviously must be. What gets captured, where do we point our cameras at and what does it tell?

Damage on a photo there can be is dust, scratches, negatives ageing, sudden wetness makes paper get glued on negative. Anything that creates something on the surface other than a picture should be removed. To please the eye is an interesting demand. Something gone wrong in the process of preserving a photograph, or a disturbance during any phase of making, disruptive something is a remainder of importance of imperfection, to understand this makes one take more dimensional photos than just surfaces that instantly please. Damage and doing wrong in photography is somewhat a punishable act as it is highly seen a technical art where one has to master the equipment, light, have eye for situations and capture in seconds. How good one is, is very much a technical issue for many. It is an issue of being accepted as a photographer. In other words how much equipment one can afford, which has led me to question authority and decision-making processes within the industry. Quality and how much wealth it needs to be achieved and how much wealth dictates quality and creativity in general.

In unreal photos of reality there is awe, how it was made, how much it is about the equipment and how much it is the master behind the lens. It is not unheard of to witness men saying women can’t photograph or you can never afford this camera. My destiny is of course set by people who know better. When money is the number one authority there, getting it gives you authority or is it skill.

carpetcarpetcarpetcarpet

photos of public carpets

Artist poses in front of her art.

To observe, analyse and then what? What changes between people? Power relations, who wins and who loses?

Photographing our lives

What is in the picture? What is left out? Who is able to use a camera and what kind of camera? Photographers are idealized in capturing the moment, capturing a feeling and time.

Have you noticed how especially in American TV-shows that like to emphasize speed and hurry shutter noise of a camera is used to bring atmosphere of the moment. Right now something important is going to happen or is going on. Quick shots in a row are shown to us as a mark of importance. Shows that focus on crime and politics, in which things happen rapidly, change fast, quick thinking and problem solving are the key issues. There are people who are on top of things, being solvers and key persons who have master minds. They are photographing situations and bloodstains or they are being photographed. Finding evidence, proof and truth, respectability and present moment right now on a face of that actor. Respectability and raising interest with quickness of a shutter of a camera, noise and movement.

In TV time is money and in acting strange kind of speeding, constant making and something happening, especially in American shows, all the time without moments of rest is a value that is repeated. Something new is there behind the corner all the time. Pauses are found boring and uninteresting, though they have been the core things of acting a long time. Without this newness of all the time we might lose and be forgotten. We are afraid of those two, losing and being forgotten.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/garden/when-blogging-becomes-a-slog.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C%7B%222%22%3A%22RI%3A17%22%7D&_r=2

Interesting is how the pictures taken reflect the person who takes them and to what extent are they images purely of that person, about her.

It is a bothering thing. I object the thought of constant self-portraying what comes to images produced as an artist. Pictures and texts are products with framing, analytical or not, telling something of the world around. My pictures and texts can of course be seen in certain frame of personal view to my life, disturbingly strongly. Photography is a case if timing and instant observation for me. It is not planned activity, in my case. So how much can my images be portraits of the taker is a question I wonder. It is also a very often faced a sort of accusation what comes to making art and presenting it that it is therapy and reflections of a troubled mind. So there is always some kind of mental state and problem going on, in a process.

I do reflect myself, how else, and very sensitive issues, but not my pathology or illness of any kind. Troubled world is what I see and that is where I live. I want to solve it and it is a puzzle indeed. Do not make simple judgments not with my pictures, with me or with anything. Simplicity hardly ever gives the right answer as we are so very complex.

If you are bothered by something do not hesitate to ask. I will gladly answer your questions.