Photography, not art

“The American photographers all want to be called artists. I’m a photographer and I stand by it.” 

I consider this quote by Don McCullin, a Vietnam War era photographer, to be very important. Take away the word “American” and it becomes even more useful.

I perceive my contemporary dance photography as a form of journalism and I would like to try to explain why. Photography has many forms. I just by nature prefer the form, in which I’m trying to have minimal to no influence on things and people I take pictures of. That is also a reason why I don’t do portraits or fashion. Or anything staged by me for that matter. I would love to be invisible. Theater does allow that in a certain sense. You can hide outside the auditorium in the darkness, where nobody can talk to you.

The usual view from my office, floor of Ponec Theatre / 14mm; T 1/125; F 2.8; ISO 3200; R3

Contemporary dance is also often very quiet. So much it is hard to swap lenses without making any noise. If you miss your target while focusing, autofocus might reach its end and make a little “clank”. You have to think twice before doing anything while things are happening fast. It requires discipline that partially defined my attitude.

Is reality an art form? / Dancing Museums, Temporary Collective / Tanec Praha / 50mm; T 1/500; F 1.4; ISO 400; EOS 5D Mark III

I know barely any other photographer, who would be bothered by the noise, he produces. Too many of my colleagues are preoccupied with thinking only about the outcome and themselves being considered an artist. I believe there is not enough room for thinking about what is going on around you in that motivation. And that is also a reason, why you need someone like a photographer of war to tell you. A person voluntarily surrounding himself with the worst humanity has to offer in order to say something about our nature. He wouldn’t dare to call himself an artist and no one else should either.

Is nature an art form? / Israeli desert / 200mm; T 1/4000; F 5.6; ISO 200; EOS 5D Mark II

You can have interesting pictures without taking thousands of them or breaking the fourth wall by moving or talking to your subjects. Or by having wishes, or asking to repeat something. Therefore by trying to establish some form of control over the situation becoming a nuisance.

Is nature of light and methods used to capture it an art form? / 400mm; T 1/500; F 5.6; ISO 400; EOS 1Ds Mark III

Whatever you do, you can and should from time to time ask yourself, how much influence you have on the scene in front of you just by observing it. When people know you’re there, things already are different because they will feel different. It is virtually impossible to be somewhere without having any influence on your surroundings. I want to change that, well knowing in advance I will lose. 

Is beauty an art form? / Pavlina Podzimkova for Airgym Art Company / 85mm; T 1/250; F 2.0; ISO 3200; EOS 5D Mark III

You should ask what of the craft of photography is art. Dark grainy out of focus pictures do not constitute art. Motion-blurred abstractions taken with long exposure times do not constitute art. That kind of photography I hate because of its complete dependence on luck. Professionals should not depend on luck. Taking photos of the dance performance does not constitute art. Performance was already made by choreographers, light designers, dramaturgs and mainly performers themselves and You’re just looking at it from a certain angle. Where is the art in the photographer’s part?

Claudia Reigmartin, Carla Parislasaga, Katja Cosergaltes, Jitka Cechova, Tereza Holubova, Natalie Tunova, Lenka Gregarova, Sumin Sung, Emily Jane Steele, Michaela Daskova, Martina Hajdy Lalacova, Natalie Podesvova, Jana Marouskova, Cecile da Costa, Talia Marie Preis, Natalie Vackova, Yana Reutova, Liudmyla Ponomarchuk, Olena Korotkova, Anastasiia Pavlovska, Alessia Obinu, Marizquierdo Lopez, Katia Cosergaltes / City Horses by Anna Kallblad and Helena Bystrom / Tanec Praha / 300mm; T 1/1000; F 2.8; ISO 1600; EOS 1Ds Mark III

My goal always was the simple description of truth. Of what I see in front of me. A simple statement about it. I measure, I think about what is important, and I try to be one step ahead. I have to admit I even feel something from time to time. None of these activities make that kind of work an art form.

The same thing applies if I’m taking pictures for the newspapers. You see the information, you gather it and deliver it to a lot more people than would fit in the room with you. You can manipulate through composition and exponometry or through post process. None of which constitutes an art form. All of those things are craft. Or you can try to do your best to be truthful about what you see. Which does not constitute art either. There is a not-so-small group of people, who might be offended by the claim about photography not being art. Let’s skip that since being offended is not an argument.

Is press photography a form of art? / 35mm; T 1/1000; F 4.0; ISO 400; EOS 1Ds Mark III

In a strictly controlled environment, with every condition of composition, timing, amount of light, and most importantly the ability to repeat the shot and with modern abilities of digital post process all in our hands, photography silently slips into the realm of painting. It stops representing the truth and becomes something you strictly want from it. And when somewhere in there, it might become a form of art. Yet it does not use the most important ability of photography anymore. That very ability to carry unchanged information. And therefore, I would say, is no longer photography.

When was the last time you thought or heard someone say you can trust photography? I bet you wouldn’t even remember or this idea makes you laugh. I would like to change that too. And again I know in advance I will fail.

Dance is an art form. But how do I become an artist just by looking at it? / Valeriia Tsvirkunova in “Beauty” by Yana Reutova / Tanec Praha for Benedikt Rejt Gallery / 14mm; T 1/1000; F 4.0; ISO 1600; R3

Most of Henri Cartier-Bresson’s work is rumored to be staged. That does not mean there is no value of course. It might be unusual to say Henri Cartier-Bresson is not a photographer. In my eyes, he is more of the painter though. To add some wood to the fire, he was very interested in painting. He was studying it long before becoming a photographer. The reality in his pictures is shattered. It is not there. It never existed.

In rare cases also a good portrait might be an art form. Portraits are genuinely difficult because their perfection does not stand on the craft alone. You have to make your model feel right, look natural and tell something about him or her. You have to communicate and find things out. Things you then incorporate into your work. Exponometry and composing, the craft alone, does not suffice. 

This is not art / Johana / 85mm; CPL; T 1/125; F 4.0; ISO 400; R3

As Charles Baudelaire would say, we photographers are no more than a bunch of failed painters. And I would add to it, we do have uncanny ability to describe reality and we should stick with that. Is reality, completely and utterly independent on our presence and observation, an art form? Of course not. You may recognize one of the most interesting questions of existentialism hiding in here. If the three in the middle of the woods falls and there is nobody to hear it, does it make the sound?

There are so many people calling themselves photographers. That alone I don’t mind. What tears me from the inside though is the sheer and obvious emptiness of that claim, if you take away their mirrorless cameras and give them an exposure meter instead. I’m writing this because people tend to think I’m something I’m not. Because most of society is used to thinking this way about photography and I would like to correct that. And because I think this is one of the ways to distinguish between photography, painting, art and craft. I believe it is as much important, as something we dare to call “truth” is. Vital to maintain our relationship with reality.

I have very intensive feeling this article is horribly incomplete.

Only 2% of the population is good at logical reasoning. There is a 98% probability I’m not one of them. Therefore there is a very high possibility I committed some logical fallacy in my train of thought. If you find some, please let me know.