Art Review - Faking It at the Metropolitan Museum
I was really looking forward to this exhibit. Whenever I see
photography, I always have a tendency to closely inspect the image for signs of
retouching. I usually can spot a line not matching up or pixel distortion from
the use of too much patch tool. Or some other strange pixel artification. But
sometimes, everything is perfectly seamless and I am so impressed. Not because
I want to catch errors, but because retouching and tweaking photos is an
absolute necessity and it is required in everyone’s work whether it’s analogue,
digital or video. So, to see a compelling image that is perfectly retouched and
flawless, that, to me, is the height of enjoyability.
As much as I enjoy the functionality of
retouching/manipulation/doctoring, whatever you want to call it, I equally am
intrigued by the creativity that spawns from modern technologies and photo
software. Sometimes my intrigue stops short when I don’t particularly like the
result of that creativity. For instance, it’s taken me years to get used to HDR
effects. I’m just not a huge fan. And I’m seeing HDR in every movie poster,
every liquor advertisement, even food photography. Gasp! But sometimes, with
other effects and tools, I wonder simply, hey, why didn’t I think of that,
that’s pretty damn cool.
Anyway. I was looking forward to this exhibit so much that I
went back the next day because I wanted to see it all over again. That’s how
nerdy I can be about retouching and photography. I think the Met Museum knew I
was moving to New York City this fall and planned this exhibit as my
homecoming. Thank you Met! How thoughtful of you. To show my appreciation, I
nudged the sleepy, amateur writer in me and jotted down some observations about
a few pieces that stood out to me. Oh, and I’ll be back in over the next few months
to see it all again and again. To my photo friends, when you visit NYC over the
holidays, plan a day to see this exhibit.
The current photography exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum
of Art, Faking It: Manipulated Photography Before Photoshop, unravels and exposes the history and mystery of the
manipulated photograph. From daguerreotypes to digital prints, viewers see how
photographers alter their art. Modern photography easily has a reputation for
being doctored, but as the exhibit analyzes, primitive photography involved
manipulation in many different forms. Post photography manipulation has always
been and always will be a sub context of the camera obscura.
Other works in the exhibit show intentional bias by the
photographer by using multiple prints of individual objects or people. Or in
the case of Union Army Officer, 1861-1865,
painting in new details. The final image with all the objects and people are
placed together, creating a new scene or narrative. The original photograph Union
Army Officer, 1861-1865, by an unknown
photographer, consists of a
uniformed soldier standing on a decorative rug with his hand and hat resting on
a table covered in a lace tablecloth in a non-descript studio. The final image
is the same soldier in the same pose, but is hand-painted with bright hues and
realistic skin tones. But the photographer didn’t stop there. The officer is
revealed in a new setting – a pristine countryside, complete with an encampment
of tents and soldiers in the distance. His new surroundings are romanticized
and idyllic and cast an entirely new response to his stature. This work stands
out because the original print is adhered to the altered print, allowing the
viewer to see both before and after. Rather than belonging to a family member
as a personal memento, the dual structure of the piece seems fitting as an
example for retail purposes, perhaps to advertise painting and hand tinting
skills at the studio.
Similar photographs were used as socioeconomic tools and
political propaganda to express crafted ideologies to sway the masses. Henrich
Hoffman, Hitler’s personal photographer, photographed Hitler with filmmaker
Lani Riefenstall at her home with a group of people; including Hitler’s
propaganda minister, who is standing next to Riefenstall in the original
capture. In the final photograph released to the media, Riefenstall is standing
next to shrubbery; the propaganda minister is entirely removed from the image,
making his presence invisible to the viewer. While the reason is unknown, the
transformation was successful by doctoring the published photograph.
Other images on display are magazine covers and iconic
advertising. Ralph Bartholomew Jr.’s Advertisement for Texaco Inc., 1957, shows a classic car at a filling station and an
attendant zipping around the car completing multiple jobs. The attendant is
duplicated eight times and has a ghosting effect, while the car is perfectly in
focus, shining in tip-top shape. The manipulation is intentionally apparent and
recognizable to the viewer. While some images try to disguise the doctoring, in
Advertisement for Texaco Inc., 1957,
Bartholomew exploits the opportunity to alter the medium to please his paying
client.
The exhibit is devoted to early photography and pre-digital
imagery, to the mid 1990s, filling an expansive seven rooms, divided in the
large, dimly lit gallery. A walk across the hall will take you to a secondary
exhibit running concurrently, called After Photoshop: Manipulated
Photography in the Digital Age. The viewer
will feel the distinct leap that photography as a medium has experienced in the
last 30 years. Featuring 25 works from the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s
collection, the digital era artwork explores artists using modern technology to
manipulate photography.
Interestingly, my sister-in-law's portraits are in this exhibit. I could write another blog post about that fun fact, but the short of it is, my sister-in-law, Kiba, is the subject of photographer Kelli Connell's photo project Double Life, and two of her prints are displayed: The Valley and Carnival.
Interestingly, my sister-in-law's portraits are in this exhibit. I could write another blog post about that fun fact, but the short of it is, my sister-in-law, Kiba, is the subject of photographer Kelli Connell's photo project Double Life, and two of her prints are displayed: The Valley and Carnival.
Anderson Low’s Untitled (Kit the Swordsman) 2009, embodies a graphic, comic book feel, perhaps by
using different filters in photo manipulation software. It appears to have been
influenced by video game effects, with solid, bold colors and chunky outlines
around objects. There is nothing subtle about it. It demands attention as you
enter into the gallery.
Tom Friedman’s Untitled, 1998, at first glance appears to be nothing more than a line drawing. Upon
closer inspection, the artist created a portrait and stretched the pixels from
one edge of the print to the other, forming a series of colored, horizontal
lines.
In Matthew Jenson’s The 49 States, 2008-9, Jenson used Google Earth to find the glaring sun in
49 states in America and group them all together. The aesthetic cohesion is the
bright sun as well as the size and shape of the prints. The internet is used a
sub context to the medium. Jenson incorporated photography by utilizing the
accessibility of Google Earth. Without even touching a camera, Jenson created a
group of images that is hanging in a photography exhibit in the Met.
http://www.metmuseum.org/about-the-museum/press-room/exhibitions/2012/faking-it
