This is really cool

http://topinfopost.com/2014/03/22/a-man-spent-years-taking-photos-of-one-small-town-when-you-look-closer-youll-see-why

MOMA has an outstanding collection of photography that comes to life in many portrait sizes. The sharp quality and detail varies between each photographer, giving off different moods or abstracts. Studio photography is pretty much under the beholder’s control. It’s both easy and hard at the same time, because creativity is heavily involved. Originality plays its purpose and MOMA’s new gallery perfected it.

MOMA changed my view on studio photography by learning how to create your own world indoors. My experience as a studio photographer has rationally developed while viewing the eye of another photographer. Our job is to allow the viewer to see, how we see things. Light and shadow is the most controllable feature. Adding more or less element, changes the image dramatically as much as color.

Valerie Belin’s, Mannequin Series of 2003 stood out highly towards my interest. The whole image was a detailed head shot of a very beautiful mannequin. It was very wise of her to produce a black and white image which revealed areas of hard and soft light. The direction of light helped the model look more life-like to the viewer’s eye. A large portrait for further admiration tied in well, along with shallow depth of field. Harold Edgerton’s, Indian Club Demonstration of 1939, was also a well produced image on the opposite life of photography. He created a more inverted studio field, where light isn’t involved. He formed movement in a trailed quality with a precise gesture of everyday life. I refer this as a still-motion graphic with a unique use of strobe light. The exposure is different and he found an interesting way to capture motion within a few seconds.

Along with the NYT’s review, I do agree that the exhibit explored the “means of mediums”. It produced many works from different artists, and original experiments. Although many of the pieces do not demand attention, majority stood out on its own. There were a few dull pieces that weren’t fully modern, but overall it complemented basic photography. Here and there were a few repetitive practices that showed the photographers impression. Each exploration was unique; although colored portraits were hardly produced. Color and space is a big emphasis in the modern world. Also, each room carried a mixture of old and recent art. I believed it could have been more organized amongst its group.

I was a little confused about this project, because I thought we only had to take pictures of ourselves. When I found out that we could use objects to represent us. Then I decided mix them both. I chose dream catchers, an elephant that I got from my trip to Colombia, and my music which all symbolize me. This project was very fun, I got to shoot again outside my studio. I used natural light when taking pictures of myself.

In this project, I tried to put most of the things that, most of the time I use in daily basics.

i thought it was fun to put almost everything that I think makes me. and i notice that i use a lot of colors and didn’t notice until I saw the pictures and they looked quite colorful =).

The gallery was a great experience to compare with what we are doing for our self. Normally on the studio in the class we focus our attention on the lights, shadows or effect but I think one of the most important thing that we have to learn is in the whole composition of the picture and I think that exhibition shows us in the different composition and mood.

Another samples was the creation of my studio, the idea was to feel what means to create everything by your self so then you can start shooting any object to get the best result possible. With the home studio and seeing the pictures of the gallery now I have another perspective about how to try to get the best picture because now first I have to set up all the lights, the right position of the camera, the position of the object but the most important is to be able to select a background that fit with the object and the mood that I am try to accomplish. The advantage of shooting outside is that you already have the background but you also have to focus on the light and the position of the camera to get the best shoot.

On the review of the NY Times the author was unhappy with the way the gallery was set up.  In my opinion I do not agree with her because that it is the beauty of an exhibition to go an get a shock with the images and not to think if they have some kind of organization, probably she is used to go to places where is some kind of organization like chronological or historical. The Interesting part of this gallery is the different aspect that you can get from the different arrangement of the images on the same place from room to room and the variety of color an exposure that they arrange. The point to go to a museum is to enjoy the exhibit and do no think about if they are some kind of chronological arranges or if someone was not on the show.

For this photoshoot, I really didn’t have any idea about what I wanted to photograph. In this day and age, when I think self portrait, I think, “selfie.” So I chose to take pictures of things that I like with a small part of my body in frame like my toes or hand. I also integrated some photos of just my face which would be an actual portrait. However halfway through, I ran out of ideas and am still thinking up some new ones.

When I was looking at the photographs, I noticed the different and creative ways photographers were able to make their images similar to a painting or as if it was use with Adobe Photoshop software. This MoMA exhibit, A World of Its Own showed me various effects that people can do in a studio by just using lighting, reflections, colors, and their subjects. I learned how over exposure and using different media can help have a positive affect by keeping the image interesting.

Two specific works that captured my interest and inspires me would be Construct NYC 17 by Barbara Kasten. I really love her work because she made it looked like an illusion. When I was looking at this piece, I was wondering what she had used to make the image so engaging. I discovered that she might have used different objects such as mirrors. I started looking over her other pieces and noticed that she uses several of different obstacles and the lighting and reflection, makes her photographs look so amazing.

Another photographer I really liked was Michele Abeles. I felt like her work of art looks so much like collage work where pieces of pattern and typography are cut out and pasted in an organized way. I really love the colors she used, it made the photograph look more lively and fun. She put the strips of paper in a well-thought out manner that makes the pieces unify.
In my own experience as a studio photographer, I’ve realized the great helps that tracing paper does so that the lighting doesn’t look harsh on my objects. When I used mirrors I was able to mimic lights to get lighting from various angles. Looking at the photographs of MoMA it inspired me to look at photography as a medium for art. I discovered the different ways to experiment in my home studio.

In the article, “When a Form Is Given Its Room to Play” by Roberta Smith talks about the exhibit concentrating more on images taken in a photo studio rather than outdoors. This allows the artist to have total control. A photo studio is like a “playground” the photographers are able to play with subject, background, lighting, and etc. The exhibition is assigned with separate themes, while they all experiment the unique ways of the medium. One postmodern work of art that Smith discusses is, Valerie Belin’s mannequin photograph. Smith states, “beautiful mannequin that, while fake, looks alive”. I agree with her statement, when I first saw it I thought a photograph of a woman, but when I looked closely you could see how her eyes look painted. I began to think it was photoshop but then realized it was a mannequin. To conclude, I really liked this exhibition it was very fascinating and influential.

Studio photography has always been something that fascinates me in more than one way. Techniques unique to everyone change and the results are unique for all photographers. The gallery at MOMA completely change the way I perceived how studio photography work. While many photographers have a different view of what the subject is we can see many different variations on style making it unique to them.
Some of the work that impact me the most was by Valerie Belin where she took photography to a new level. Making an object look alive with the help of a few brushes and light. The texture in her piece mannequin is the result of make up and uncles able light that outlines the subject. The dark background with pale skin texture makes me wonder what kind of light did she use and if any type of filter was used to create shadows that reflect a more human like figure.
Something that stood out to me was the way a photographer improves on their own work. In Martin Chambi work there was many things that showed his improvement. One of his portraits from his early work seem different from his work more into his life. A picture taken in 1978 of a men who seem to be an older men wearing military clothes was one of the most stocking to me. The sharp image with a shallow depth of field gave the illusion that the person was in fact standing I front of me. With the time line being old I can see that as his work progress he got better at what his idea was to improve the picture.

This galleries made me think of interesting and different ways on making photographs. Creating an unique vision to the same object others can see can make someone stand out from the rest.

During the MoMA exhibit, I felt that the experience has redefined studio photography for me because it has showed me how to take advantage of what I have and how I can use it. As my own experience as a studio photographer, I learned how light and composition can really make a difference in a photograph.

At the beginning of the semester, I knew about using tungsten light and natural light. What I didn’t know about each type of light was that you could do so much with it. You can definitely see the difference in my photos, before and after I was introduced to the concept of the egg and how light can transform the shape of the object and the shadow. It’s great to learn so much about what you can do with light and how it can really change the mood of a photograph. I relate the example of the egg to this concept to the MoMA: A World of It’s Own exhibit because of how many photographs I saw that changed the mood and/or created an amazing effect to picture. Harold Edgerton’s four photographs are a great example of that explanation. The way he uses his strobe light to capture the movement of the human form and everyday objects is completely amazing. Another great photograph, named Laboratory of the Future by photographer Man Ray, is truly amazing because how he photographs the mirrored sphere-shape perfectly so that we actually see his studio in the sphere, because photographing glass is hard. I’m sure when it is a mirrored object, it become so much more complex. But if he can execute it, its possible. I feel that these are a few of the many pieces from the exhibit that has inspired me to go above and beyond while photographing a subject. It also shows how much freedom you have when it comes to photography and what you can do in your own studio.

From Roberta Smith’s review from the New York Times about “A World of its Own” exhibit at MoMA, I agree that exploring the medium filled with “professional portraitists, commercial photographers, darkroom lovers” and more, presents a new way of looking at photography “not for a lack of a good idea”. I do share a sense of agreement and disagreement in the following statement, “ This exhibition uses a great collection to tell what should have been a fascinating statement, but it dwells too much in the past…” I personally love seeing old photographs and making a comparison to what has changed and coincidently, what has not.  I actually like the effect of the then and now sequence, just like Smith mentions that takes us two steps forward and one step back. I think it is suppose to remind us how much photographs are similar with a certain theme, even photographs from years past. I also think it’s interesting that she mentions how the show feels ahistorical. But I question if that is the atmosphere the curators wanted to create or not. I not sure if I would call the show ahistorical either but I do think it brings a certain comforting mood to the exhibit by bringing photos by studio portraitists together in one show. I’m not sure if I completely agree with that statement but I do understand what she is trying to explain. 

Joseph Rodriguez interesting advice on creating your own story inspires me. He starts off discussing his past and how we was heading towards the wrong path several times. He began taking photographs of places in New York were danger was high and were displayed as crime areas in the newspapers. Rodriguez wanted to show more than just crime in the communities, he wanted to show the beauty and that there’s much more to those communities. Rodriguez focused more on family and capturing a hidden look that was meaningful and showed their true lives. The photographer tells us about his fascination of traveling to uncover stories and his near-death experiences. Every part of his photographs have to do with his story towards violence, life experiences, and family relationships. I really loved the part were he talked about the three wise monkeys (hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil) he told us to ignore what people say if they don’t like your work. Just continue to create your own story and do your work the way you would do it and put a little piece of you in your work. Joseph Rodriguez is all about not giving up and whenever you see yourself in the wrong path steer yourself back in the right direction and pursue your dreams.