Some more reading (after earlier today)

From the book: "Picturing ourselves"-
"autobiography is an extension of control over self image..." but that "the autobiographer stands apart from the self, tried to envision and read it from a vantage distanced from the passage of time."

Talks about how the act of taking a photo of oneself, of making a "representational image" is the construction of "I". There is trouble in this though- representation-creating is never finished, never complete, never totally controlled. As Barthes says: "What I want is that my mobile image, buffeted among thousands of shifting photographs, altering with age and situation, should always coincide with my profound self. But its the contrary which must be said; myself never coincides with my image, for it is the image which is heavy, motionless, solid, and myself which is light."

so... we photograph ourselves to try and control our representation, among the thousands of others, to try and show who we truly are, and yet, as Mark Twain finds, this is impossible, the image never changes, it is a solid, the self beneath is "easily graspable", made into a un-complex object. Death of an author (Foucault) 

 This an image of Mark Twain, who spent lots of time reconstructing and reshooting his self-image to try and "capture his soul".

The answer to this; "hyper-manufacturing of images"- to try and control, to try and show who we are.

Especially important in a world where we are represented unknowingly, unwittingly, from all sides by surveillance- photography has become an identity thing, a way of making solid what it actually fluid and ever changing; if it is said that if you didn't photograph it, it never happened, then is it also true, if we do not photograph ourselves, we do not exist, are unrepresented, are out of control. 

This all links into anxiety about self-image, and also about how disposable photos are now- we must keep creating, keep constructing, to keep control.

"photographs show that someone has been there- photographic honesty and immediacy of photographic representation"
"photographs are not simply the things they represent, but must be made through the culture that creates or consumes them."

More Barthes:
"When I feel myself observed by a lens, everything changes; I constitute myself in the process of posing. I instantaneously make another body for myself. I transform myself in advance into an image." This is an active thing, because the photograph "creates my body, or mortifies it."
"I lend myself to the social game. I pose, i know i am posing, I want you to know i am posing, but this must not..alter my essence of individuality"
"In front of a lens I am the same time the one I think I am, the one the photographer thinks I am, the one others think I am, the ones which is used to exhibit." (also what various audience members think I am?) "I do not stop imitating myself"
This is all very useful, about the act of being photographed. Likens the act of being photographed as a subject like being made into an object- like dieing. Links to death of an author.

This made me think of this hiliar video:

which shows people in clubs posing for photos, when its actually a video which is being taken. It's funny to watch these kids keeping a pose, because each pose says something very precise to the rest of the world. But as its a video- perhaps 6 seconds long- you can see quite how constructed each pose is. pretty funny. 

Some more disposable camera projects
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2012/may/07/trashcam-photography-in-pictures

I saw this disposable camera project, which is all the dustmen in Hamburg who make the wheelie bins into pinhole cameras. I love the creativity of this more than the photos; the idea of making something which people associate with rubbish and digsust into something useful and beautiful and artistsic.


These photos are really cool too- I like their style, which is actually quite good quality and rather beautiful despite the fact that they are made inside a bin.

I also like that they are pin-hole cameras, which make them seem even more like someone is peeking out of the side of a bin; this is really cool and a great effect. 

feedback

We did some more feedback of ideas. I also realised that I have lots and lots of things which link to my work, but it needs to be more specific. Interestingly, the rest of the class responded to the photos by saying that they were abut how people acted in relation to cameras; it was about the behaviour of humans in the presence of the camera, how they pose, how they think through what they are expected and about how analogue is different to digital surveillance. This is not how I was thinking- I was much more interested in the idea of how people are giving me a personal moment and I'm giving it to the public; I guess i was focusing on the method and not the photos.
I could change the project, so it was a focus on these ideas- the behaviour of people in front of a camera- by the idea of posing, of setting up a representation of themselves and acting in a certain way. I could link this into the ideas that we use photography as a way to experience things, to construct a reality; even if they do not know who the audience are.
This is still lots of ideas. I don't want to pick one because there is no much you can read into it. I also liked my ideas about how to display it with private/public.

"A photography project which investigates the way the public behave when asked to photograph themselves. It will particularly looking at how in our hyper-real, photo-mediated society, the way we photograph is informed by this this constant representation, but also how such a society changes our views on what is private, and how now, to photograph is to make reality 'real'." 

I might have to cut this down more too (at least for this presentation next week) But this seems like a good basis. I have a few more books to read on this subject, so i'll read after taking notes on them. I was wondering whether the way I want to display the photos link to this. My ideas of display where very much linked to the private/public- so the photo book and the tent. I was also struct today (after i took all my photos into class) that everyone loved looking through the little booklets of photos, and being able to look at the photos themselves. In this case, I was wondering whether I could just have a gallery space with a big frame, and then just have each booklet pinned there; people can through the photos themselves.  This doesn't really link to the main point of the project; I could say that by putting these photos (which are street photos, disposable, given to me freely, disposable identities) in a place which is the one place photos are considered art, and to be stared at- that I am giving these street-disposable-shit images a place to be looked at, and studied....
COULD I HIDE PHOTOS IN THE BUILDING

I need to think about this more. BUT on other news, for my film to be handed in January, I have written a shot list:
1) Making cameras- close ups, not really sure what they mean. Close up of writing, etc.
2) Fast paced cycle to town, and hang up photos.
3) cameras flapping in the wind, etc.
4) People looking and not interacting.
5) Cameras in the wind.
6) People interacting.
7) Some of the photos. Me explaining the stories of them.
8) More interaction/hanging cameras, VO of me explaining about the project (maybe?)
9) taking cameras at end of day, full.
10) getting photos at boots, looking at them.
11) More photos
END.

New photos!

Lots of new photos today. I got quite a few printed up. My concern is that several of the cameras I got broke and I lost about half of the photos die to this.. which is rather a large amount of money! SO i have to try and get them from a different company next time. Anyway, here are some photos.

This first one is from campus, as are several. I had quite a funny day, because i hung the camera in the hipster area and went away. Of course, I came back 4 hours alter and it had gone (hipsters and their retro malarkey) So I stood there and waited angrily and after a few minutes, a guy came out of the meeting house, red faced, and returned the camera. On looking at the photos, most are "arty" shots instagram would have loved, but sadly actual retro disposable cameras are not good at capturing stuff, and there was a few blurry crappy ones, which I haven't included here, but reflect on camera useage.

 This next one is of a couple whom saw me putting up the camera. It came out really dark, but i like this grainyness of the image and idea that even in the dark people are going to think cameras work. (why didn't they use a flash?! who knows)

These are a few photos from campus near hipster area. I like the cross section of sussex students they show! They all vaguely similar poses, as with everything. Pre-culture determined? awareness of construction... but you can tell what sort of cameras they are used to. Because they shoot in low level/ fast/ not framed etc etc, you can tell that they are used to cheap but high quality phone cameras.

Several beautiful shots of Brighton here!

This is my all -time favorite photo- it's beautiful; the person who took it knew exactly what they were doing :) I like this shot because it is well composed. Might be my cover photo for the project? I like this because it's had thought, people have considered that this project is for something and someone, and have taken a photo accordingly. It sets up all sorts of constructions about love and stuff too.

This photo is the foot of a tramp who stole my camera. I had to run after him with a tripod to get it back, though he claims he was going to put it back after taking photos. (not sure i beleive him) Here is his foot:

And an under the chin shot:

Loved this one below in contrast to all the boring smiley adult ones. These kids know how to use a camera and obviously know how to selfie. For them, they dont have to show the world how happy and pretty they are- only that they are having fun and are silly and cool. I liked this because I felt like I know them, and also because they contrast.

I showed this dog picture to my mum and now it is her background; obviously good for the dog lovers of this project.

This is a generic coupel shot; I have lots of these. Was wondering how they look the same- culture tells couples they have to pose like this? Or is this a natural thing to do as a couple? I feel that the word "natural" is stupid to use, because everything is pre-determined. This photo below is how as a culture we think couples should take photos of themselves. This is ideal happy couple photo. When i read it, I see this too- they look close, happy, content, no-one else there,

I want to take a film of people as they interact with the camera, and i decided I would do this filming today. So i set up the two disposable cameras, and also my own DSLR, which I filmed the people interacting with the project with, but in a sly way.

Quite interestingly, when people saw I was filming, or even looking, they refused to interact with the camera. Even if they were reading the sign and taking the camera out, if they saw I was looking, they would run away. This is annoying for my idea to make a film out of their interactions, and also quite a strange reflection on human nature. Is it a feeling of being watched that they don't like? Or acting silly? When I went away, the cameras filled up fast- suggesting my presence did affect the photographing. I'm not sure how to reflect this in my work; I suppose what its saying is that for us photographing oneself is something still personal, and by watching, we are violating a very intimate thing- the construction of self. because when you take a photo, you are thinking about social codes, constructing an image. To do this in front of someone shows that it IS a construct, not a norm, which I guess is why everyone ran away when I was looking; very interesting! This not only backs up my project but asks other questions. People are often happy to selfie with others watching and to take photos of them- but because they are showing to want to take part in a reality which isn't there's, this is embarrassing. This is a new anxiety to write about!

I am happy with the photos which have people in; I find the people interesting, I guess because they have a mystery and air about them, while the landscape shots are pretty generic. (I like shots of tramp feet) so next time I might ask people only to photograph themselves.
I also like the stories I have to tell about photos. I was thinking the video I make to hand in, in January, will be a first few shots of me making the bag with the camera in, then people interacting and the camera hanging, then several photos, and me telling their story. This is going to be a bit hard to do if people run away when filming. I might have to try and hide a bit more next time.

Schedule and budget, reading and gallery

 Schedule:

Before December 10th- 10 rolls of film
December 10th-7th January- Project coursework
January: 10 rolls
February: 10 rolls
March: 10 rolls
April: 10 rolls
May: Hand in
June: Degree program

Budget
50 cameras: 1.50 each- £75
50 rolls of film: 3.99 for photos- £199
Initial price: £274

Some more reading, linked to below:
 SO, book: Photography, a critical intro, Liz Wells.
-> the idea that the world we live in uses images in a different way. This is partly because it is different to how it was before- modernisation. "in the western world, it is as individuals that people experience themselves, independently from family etc. In the 20th century, consumer economy has moved from a focus on work ethic/self discipline, to a libidinous gratification which encourages us to identify our pleasures in order to define them."
This has meant a change in the way we photograph ourselves, ie- the SELFIE.

Just typing selfie online comes up with a huge number of blogs and articles which love or hate selfies. Some people say that selfies are a way of "addressing confidence and image issues" and that they are a "way of allowing particularity young people to participate with the world" (http://healthland.time.com/2013/09/06/why-selfies-matter/) while some see selfies as part of a "shallow, self centered me me me culture", and that it is "all young people aspire to", and that they are "narcissistic junk" (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brian-reade-the-selfie-sums-2813772)
I bring the selfie in here because, primarily the photos people take are selfies. Some are not- people pose, perhaps having asked an onlooker or a one of the friend/family have volunteered. But most are not, most are unashamed selfies. I suppose this reflects on the more modern culture of self and identity, of needing to be photographed somewhere to have "been" there, to need to be IN a photograph  to conform and produce an identity, even if you have no idea where the identity is going. It links into the modern culture (I'm sure if i tried the same thing 50 years ago, I would get completely different results, if any at all) and into how we experience or create reality. The writer goes onto to suggest that photos are now about "challenging and conforming identity", and "portraying the individual as they wish to be seen."

The book writer goes onto to write more about the public/private image, about how photos are now "malleable, more disposable", not "Precious one-offs", while at the same time photos are a medium has increased hugely, as a way to document and record. These two opposing themes link pretty well with my work- about how we give photos away thoughtlessly, and yet tirelessly produce them.
It also talks about users and readers of photography, which is important. Users are the takers, the people who are the "private" viewers of the photo, or in the photo, who understand the relationships between the objects/people, who know context, memoirs and meaning. This is something I was struck by when viewing the photos- I felt intrusive on these often personal moments, I didnt know who these people were, I was an outsider- and yet they were inviting me in. There are also "readers" of photos, which are the ones in the "public" reading the photos, who don't know the context and have to tease the meaning out. This was me when viewing these photos, and I could tell they meant something, I could guess at what they meant, but I had no idea if I was right.

All this is really interesting! I have two rolls of film waiting to be developed, so no more news on photography yet. BUT news on gallery!
I went to a gallery in Brighton, the Brighton University Gallery, which had a very strange exhibition by Svankmajer. The exhibition was a variety of mediums, and lots of themes, most of them surreal- there was a animation/real film of Alice in wonderland, teddy bears with penis's, and my fave bit, a warped natural science bit where he had built fantastical creatures out of bits of other animals.

In terms of the gallery, it was just a pretty cool mix of mediums, so you had glass cases, puppet theaters, films going on, noises, pictures and sculptures. I liked how it was shown- there were different areas to go and sit, which was nice, to soak everything in.  I liked that there was a lot fo humor in the work too, which made it not so boring to look at it- it was exciting. I liked that all the work was subversive and made you look twice- it loos like a normal natural history museum, but it's not, its a fantastical beast gallery- pretty cool! This was my favorite one underneath, it's a stuffed hedgehog chopped in half, like a scientific analysis, but inside is a crystal- subverting what is expected and making it hyper-real, as well as commenting on fantasy/reality, and how everything in the natural world is connected.

I liked I guess this shows that multimedia, or when there is LOTS to look at, that's when it is exciting. This leads me onto thinking about my own work. I have several ideas which I might do of my own work:

1) I was thinking about maybe putting ALL the photos up on the wall, and having them in a sort of explosion shape- on the ceiling, the wall, the floor (hoping to have a corner for this) Like a waterfall of images, maybe coming out of a camera itself. This might represent the explosion of images we deal with daily, and how putting them all together, we have a "family portrait" of Brighton.

2) Photo diary- so having the photos in a book, like a photo gallery. This might also access the idea of a "family portrait" of Brighton, but all the people in it have no connection except that they picked up the camera- sort of creates connections but doesn't; these weak tie networks link to the internet also. Also comments on public/private- people from the public took private photos in the public, gave them to me (a public viewer) which I might display in a private fashion for the public?

3) A photo tent; I wanted the photos to surround people also- was thinking a photo tent/room where the walls, ceiling and floor are all covered in photos. I didn't really have any reason for this, but I could say that it could be the  how we are completely surrounded by photos, and we use them to say "we're here" to everyone else; but everyone does the same. As you have to go in a room, it would also be commenting on private/public photos-  "private" are the ones we hang inside; yet I am hanging public photos in a "private" place and inviting people in- suggests a converge of public/private, user and reader.

That's it for now. Might have more ideas as reading continues.

Reading- mostly Susaun Sontang

Fluidity of self/How society thinks about taking photos

Been reading a bit of Susan Sontang to try and back up some of my ideas in the Disposable Brighton project. I was interested in the idea that photography is all a construct; we take photos conditioned by our culture and upbringing and context, we take photos to try and show something depending on our culture/upbringing/context, and how the act of taking a photo now creates a new reality, a more "real" reality, SS says that photography is a "social rite/ a way to construct a portrait chronicle of oneself" (and you need only to think of facebook and the way that photos are now taken "for facebook", so everyone else knows what you are doing, and so that you can construct a personalised timeline of all the things you have been doing, and create a reality that belongs to you)- "people in industrialised cultures seek to have their photo taken, they feel that they are images, and are made real by photographs." This suggests a new change in photography, as a way to document and create reality rather than the older idea of recording it. It gives more control to the person photographing, but also suggests a dependency on the photograph to access reality, to prove that reality when not photographed is still as important, as interesting, as the parts of reality that are not. It also suggests a cross over between public and private spaces, which I will discuss later.
 Linking to this, SS says that "in pre-democratic culture, someone who gets photographed is a celebrity. Today, everyone is a celebrity, no person is more interesting than another." This links into the "individualisation" of society, which treasures the individual within the mass; identity is more important than utility. In line with this, the new technology of the internet has meant that people have more ability to construct an identity online, to choose how they are presented to other people, to have more ability to find and talk to others who are the same- and create communities- "instant history, instant participation."
This brings me on to the idea of public/private space. Before, public photos, as had been mentioned in a previous reading were "torn from their context", and have loose ideology. Private photos, existing in the home for us all, are much more rooted in meaning. With the rise of the internet, and the ability to photograph oneself and construct an image, the private images collide into the public sphere- many people post photos of family, couples, etc etc online, and others are see, comment, share etc. To Susan Sontang, this a bad thing; each photo is an example of someones "vulnerability, mortality", "to photograph is to violate, by seeing them as they have never seen themselves, to have knowledge of them that they can never know, turns people into objects that can be symbolically possessed." And it is true, we never know where are photos go, where they are stored online, who see's them, if someone takes one and it becomes something else all together on a far corner of the internet. (memes?) In this sense, the private has divulged into the public. This, however, is seen as less of a problem than it might appear. People seem fine to "be photographed", and do not mind where their photo ends up, as long as it has "made real experiences". It is a "chronic vouyeristic relation to the world, which levels all events", and people care more about being shown than caring about where it ends up. It seems that once the photo has been taken, and we have an image of it, reproductions of the image, what happens to it means nothing to us.
With disposable cameras, this links into it- people didn't know where these photos were going, and yet they still interacted with the cameras; their image and self being "symbolically possessed" is not something they worry about, their fear of the public/private is not worrying. As our "affluent, restless, wasteful society", we feel that we belong in the public sphere, deserve to be there- "anything can be made interesting with the camera."
There is also the idea, which SS talks about, that "our junk has become art, and our junk has become history", photos have become artifacts, but their appeal is that they have become found objects, slices of the world"- this links into my idea. That junk cameras are now found and seen as important and good. These cameras are "found", and people choose to represent themselves in terms of how society thinks is good.
In all of this, my project will be an example of how people feel free to give their image, and how they choose to represent themselves in a certain way- They could have posed in a different way, could have taken a photo of anything, could have shown themselves- but because of the huge amount of images around, we think about what we're expected to take photos of. a sort of realism?

---> "realism is a social practise of representation, a normality which allows a strictly deliminated range of variations. It works by the controlled and limited recall of a resovior of similar texts by constant self -referencing anf cross echoing" "mutability which summons up the power of the real; a reality of inter-text beyond which there is nonsense" "subtle web of discourse through which discourse is enmeshed, a fabric of notions, representation, images, attitudes, gestures, modes of action which function as everyday no-how"

What I imagine goes through the head of someone when they find a camera:

What is that?

Why this there a camera hanging up?

Who is this for?

What do they want me to take a photo of?

What SHALL i take a photo of?

If i take a photo of myself, how does the photographer expect me to pose?

How do i normally pose in photographs?

What does this situation (in public) mean for how I pose in this photograph?

What have others done?

Is anyone watching? (photographer included)

I am being asked to take a photo, does it matter that I don't know for?

Is this creepy?

I am being asked to take a photo, does this mean I have to be arty?

I want to be in the photo, what is the best way to do this?

Ask someone or selfie?

How do I want myself to be represented?

How does the photographer expect me to be represented?

Do i have everything I want in the frame?

Is the film Ok?

I saw this photo project also:

http://www.sketchbookproject.com/projects/amlpanalog

It's a similar thing, except they give people who ask for the cameras, and then they only show two- so you have to construct and think about photos. This means that the photos are treasured and thought about, and are meaningful. My project will be different; I guess that people will take photos quickly as opposed to trying to say something. This is an interesting difference between projects; i want to show how disposable self image is, while they want to highlight how important each image is, and to get people to stop and think. I quite like this idea. Maybe at some point I should ask people in the street to take a photo of something they think is beautiful. This would be beautiful!
The project wont let me copy any photos, but they are worth seeing!

ideas from an Inspirational photographer, ideas for hand in, ideas for theory, ideas for display, ideas ideas ideas SWEEET AS

Lots of stuff to get through today!!! Firstly and foremostly,

1) new cameras were put out. First one was stolen :( but, others are all fine, woooop!

2) A new photographer: Joachim Schmid.
he is a photographer who has done lots of stuff, but mostly stuff to do with "found photography"- I have an article written here in the "British Journal of Photography" (issue October 2011) which talks about this. Schmid is a photographer (or "visual artist", as he explains) from Germany, who became famous by taking photos which he found discarded in bins, photo booths, at flea markets and such. These photos are sometimes ripped up, and in bad condition. He plays with photos also, but linking different bodies and heads together in a seamless "portrait", where the two people match, and it takes a second to realize that they are different. My favorite is this one:


The ambiguity of the image, that it is ripped in 4, found in a skip- suggest a girlfriend, an argument, a break up. It is the nature of the photography as a found artifact which makes the story, not the photograph itself. This is pretty cool.
The article is pretty good, it explains how Schmit decides that photos are "big lies/ that the family photo is a tiny peice of reality, it has already been edited, cropped, chosen, framed, dressed etc"- the reality of family life wasn't these staged photos. I liked how Schmit collected photos which were under/over exposed/rotting, because he believed that these were "more real", because they showed photographic process. This is pretty cool (and links to my photos!)
i also like the things he is doing now- collecting images online, on flickr. He has a good quote from this: "If we accept that we are living in a reality of images, then we have to look at them not as photos of the world, but as the world. Found photographs are as much part of the world as anything else."

3) Ideas for hand in, in January: I will try to get as much footage as possible, and then will film myself putting the camera up, and then have a film of people interacting with the camera. I will hand in (something) with photos on. This is easy and takes of the pressure to make an online project!

4) For display: every image taken on the wall in a big explosion! It's a project about how people interact with photographs and how fluid representation and image is- need to have lots of ideas. this will come later, i guess. I did want to include rubbish as part of the display (message in a bottle...) but not sure how this will work!

5) Theorists:

-Fluidity of image
-Give image away; so normal to be photographed.
-representation and documentation.
-Analogue vs detail.
READ FRUED? OTHERS