William Eggleston didn’t invent color photography, but his landmark 1976 exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art gave it dignity, and began the four-decade process of acceptance by curators and collectors as an art form to rival oil painting.
Shot in 1970, “Untitled (Memphis)” – shown above – was one of the 75 photos in the show, and also featured on the cover of the catalogue. Now it’s included in a retrospective of Eggleston’s early work at the Metropolitan.
Los Angeles-based musician Paz Dylan recently pulled a pretty funny prank on the Grammy Museum in LA. He made a series of informational wall display pieces featuring strange descriptions and photographs of himself eating tacos, and then hung them up on the walls of the museum next to the real pieces. That’s pretty clever, but get this: no one noticed, and the pieces stayed up for a month.
The photograph above is a piece he made for the “Wall of Fame.”
Artist Daniel Arsham has an exhibition at Philadelphia’s Fabric Workshop Museum called Reach Ruin, which includes hundreds of cameras sculptures created out of plaster, glass, stone, and sand.
Imagine a photography exhibition in which all the photographs on the walls are being captured by their respective photographers in real-time around the world. That’s the kind of show Sony put on this past Thursday in London: the world’s first real-time digital photography exhibition.
The National Gallery in London, the world’s 4th most visited art museum, is currently holding its first major exhibition of photography, titled, “Seduced by Art: Photography Past and Present.” Andrew Graham-Dixon of The Telegraph has published a review of the show, and has some strong opinions on photography’s place in the art world:
The truth is that very few photographers have ever produced images with the weight of thought and feeling found in the greatest paintings. The camera is certainly an artistic tool, and photos can certainly be works of art. But can they be works of art of the same order as paintings? Modern critical orthodoxy would say yes. But the real answer is no. Photography lacks the depth and heft, the thinking sense of touch, that painting possesses.
That is why the greatest images of the last 150 years– the images people argue about, contest, return to again and again – are not photographs but paintings
Brian Sewell over at The London Evening Standard has written up a lengthier, but equally critical, review.
Seduced by Art: Seven magazine review [The Telegraph via POTB]
Image credits: Photograph by Maisie Broadhead and painting by Thomas Gainsborough
“BYOB” is an initialism that’s readily understood by college students who party. To artist Rafaël Rozendaal, however, it means something entirely different. In 2010, Rozendaal launched Bring Your Own Beamer, a series of novel “open source” art exhibitions in which participants were asked to bring their own beamers (AKA projectors). The recipe for the concept is extremely simple: find a venue with plenty of wall space (and outlets), invite a bunch of artists and art-lovers, and have images projected all over the walls for everyone to enjoy.
Although Adobe Photoshop’s introduction in 1990 spawned the term “Photoshopping”, the manipulation of photos has been around pretty much as long as photography itself. To show this fact, the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City will be holding an exhibition titled, “Faking It: Manipulated Photography Before Photoshop.” The show will feature 200 ‘shopped photographs created between the 1840s and the 1990s, providing a glimpse into how photographers of old use their work to humor and deceive.
You know the expression, “there is no such thing as bad publicity”? It’s certainly true in the case of Joe Klamar’s “bad” Olympic portraits. After getting the Internet talking about (and criticizing) the images earlier this month, Joe Klamar has been given an exhibition in NYC at the Powerhouse Arena. Here’s the description of the show:
Many of the photographs were first met with harsh criticism from a bevy of news sites and photo blogs quick to highlight the images’ alleged defects—citing the off-hand poses, the stressed lighting, the scarred backdrops—and labeled the work an affront to the elite status of the American Olympic athletic team.
Such criticisms miss the work’s powerful and nuanced compositions and display of personality. Here we see real individuals at the peak of their athletic career in ordinary and impromptu poses, sometimes playful, some quite intense, in an unplanned setting. You will not see world-class athletes like this anywhere.
The exhibition is set to kick off on July 27th to coincide with the London Olympics.
Image credits: Photographs by Joe Klamar/AFP/Getty Images
At some point or another, as a creative professional, you will have the option to exhibit work to the public. Exhibitions are a great tool to market yourself, and your work to potential clients and art buyers.
Are you so bad at photography that all your photographs are completely overexposed to the point of pure white? Good news: there may yet be artistic hope for you. The Hayward Gallery in London is planning to mount an “Emperor’s New Clothes”-style exhibition titled “Invisible”, which will only feature artwork that can’t be seen. Pieces include Tom Friedman‘s “1000 Hours of Staring” (shown above) — a blank sheet of paper that the artist stared at for hours upon hours over the course of five years — and Andy Warhol‘s empty pedestal titled “Invisible Sculpture”.
Perhaps it’s only a matter of time before someone launches a photo exhibition consisting solely of blank white photographs.
Invisible at the Hayward Gallery (via The Telegraph via Boing Boing)