|
by
Jules Masterjohn
O
ver the last few generations, technological innovations have radically altered our perception of the world. In her younger days, if my mother had seen a photograph of a '42 Ford resting atop a red rock butte, she would have trusted that the car had been placed there by little green men. Today we don't think twice when viewing a photographic image that challenges common sense or defies physical principles. The belief in what we observe as "real" has been forever changed. Last week, I gazed at photos of both Kerry and Bush dressed as women ... if the American people, 50 years ago, had laid eyes on pictures of the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates in drag, we'd have strong third, fourth and fifth parties by now!
So where does this leave us, as viewers and consumers of visual culture? With the introduction of so much computer-generated imagery, it can be difficult to know what is "straight" and what is "manipulated." I prefer the hands-on nature of traditional fine art techniques. By this I mean the use of light, film, chemistry and the darkroom. I thought I might pick the brain of alocal photographer, Paul Pennington, to help me sort this out.
JM:
I have heard convincing arguments that photographers are image-makers, and it doesn't matter how those images are produced. What are your thoughts and feelings about digital vs. analog photography?
PP:
Most of my students who are digital babies prefer analog, whereas I'm very interested by the speed, simplicity and economy of digital. I believe that digital has its place, especially in photojournalism, but analog is still being used over digital and lends itself to the arts aspect. In the latest
National Geographic
one of the oldest processes, tintype, is being used with a very distinct and artsy look that couldn't be produced in digital. It was also the
Geographic's
digitally altered cover image of the Giza pyramid that caused an uproar and standardization of the photojournalist industry.
JM:
Can we trust photography to be telling us the truth?
PP:
In its photojournalistic application, photographs should be telling the truth but as an art form, the sky is the limit.
JM:
We are inundated with photographic images and everyone is a "photographer." What challenges are presented by this situation?
PP:
As an artist, it's a lot harder to be original with the abundance of photography out there, but I believe there is still something new to be discovered. There are so many styles that are similar and play off each other, that when you think you've got an original idea, someone has already done it. Consistent compensation is another challenge there is no rhyme or reason to the market. A wedding photographer could charge $300 or $2,000. People also don't understand the difference between a professional and an amateur. Professionals use better cameras, lenses, film and have a better understanding of lighting and composition.
It is easy to become desensitized to a lot of photography out there, and the majority of it deserves to be ignored. Still, photography has done a lot for people: it helped to create the National Parks system, and is invaluable in medicine, education and many other sciences.
JM:
As well as using a camera, you create using pastels, paint and monoprints. How do these processes feed your photography?
PP:
Presently, paintings and monoprints are independent from my photography, but in the past I have combined them while collaborating with other artists on certain projects.
JM:
Tell me about your new project.
PP:
I am working on documenting land conservation easements around La Plata County. This subject interests me because of the protections that are being placed on private lands. With a conservation easement, land can be saved for use by future generations. If you look up and down the valley, a lot of it is turning into subdivisions and townhouses they are not very attractive. I'm not sure what direction this project will take, in terms of presentation and composition, but I'm planning to show at the Open Shutter Gallery next year.
JM:
There are so many places from which to draw inspiration. Who or what is your muse?
PP:
I draw inspiration from books, magazines and other artists like Abelardo Morell, who creates photographs with the camera obscura, which is Latin for dark chamber. Imagine a close-up black-and-white image of a hotel room bed with the Empire State Building inverted onto it. He accomplished this without multiple or digital imagery. Each exposure was eight hours long using a 4-by-5-inch view camera.
Cultural visits to Santa Fe are very nurturing to me as an artist, especially SITE Santa Fe, Plan B, the Fine Arts Museum and numerous galleries there.
My muse comes and goes, and hopefully it's coming over again soon for a visit!
JM:
What are the obstacles to your artistic achievements?
PP:
There are lots of roadblocks to success - I think most of them come from within.
JM:
What are the more important uses of creativity in your daily life?
PP:
My creativity manifests itself in survival skills. As an artist, I have to live simply in order to stay focused and not go into the red. I try not to shop for new things, and I recycle more. If I can get people to see things differently then I have been successful as an artist. Play is very important, friendships are crucial, and money takes a backseat, although it would be nice to have security.
I have a deep respect for the land, stewardship for it, living in harmony, and for community values. The Hawaiians call it "kokua akua" - giving back to the community through teaching, political activity and social involvement.
Creativity is very meaningful to me. It keeps me sane in uncertain times. It defines me and, hopefully, redefines the people it touches.
n
Paul Pennington is an instructor at Fort Lewis College and his photographs are on display in the exhibit, "Visions From the Edge," presented at the Durango Arts Center from Nov. 5-Dec. 4.
|
