http://graciekendal.wordpress.com/
Click To Enlarge Photo
Friday, September 30, 2011
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Student Portfolio | Melanie Swinicki
Home Again, 2011
Carbon Pigment Print
Passing Afternoons, 2011
Carbon Pigment Print
Fever Dream, 2011
Carbon Pigment Print
My Body, 2011
Carbon Pigment Print
House By The Sea, 2011
Carbon Pigment Print
Comfort Food, 2011
Carbon Pigment Print
Cold Town, 2011
Carbon Pigment Print
This set of photographs is a representation of one’s time alone. While focusing on what appears to be a single individual, the state of feeling content is portrayed.
In times of turning seasons, our moods tend to shift. We feel differently when the days have a shorter amount of sunlight but seem much more lengthy in time. Each photograph focuses on the body language reflecting the moods of the colder months, as well as an array of elements that surround us in a consistently dismal atmosphere. The characteristics that piece together whatever type of tone being perceived is simple. It is a feeling to which
one can relate.
Simply put, we often fail to stop and find the ability to fully compose ourselves.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Photographers Forum Contest
 | |
| 32nd ANNUAL COLLEGE and HIGH SCHOOL PHOTOGRAPHY CONTEST sponsored by NIKON | |
|
Monday, September 19, 2011
SPEMA Regional Registration, Limited to 200 registrants, reserve your spot now!
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Thursday, September 15, 2011
2012 SPE Student Scholarship Opportunities
2012 SPE Student Scholarship Opportunities
Society for Photographic Education / Deadline: 11/01/11
SPE student members can apply for scholarships to offset the cost of attending SPE's 2012 National Conference. All awards include a 2012 national conference fee waiver and a one-year membership to SPE.
Location
Scholarships are to attend the 2012 SPE National Conference in San Francisco March 22-25, 2012.
Fees
$10
Eligibility
• Applicants must be currently matriculated students enrolled at a post-secondary institution as an undergraduate or graduate student majoring/concentrating in photography not graduating before the end of the academic year 2011-2012.
• Applicants must be student members of SPE or become members before submitting their scholarship application. Visit www.spenational.org for information.
• Applicants are not eligible to receive the same award for two consecutive years, and cannot receive two awards in one year.
• Applicants submitting to more than one award must submit different bodies of work.
Requirements
Submit your materials online beginning September 1, 2011.
Submit online via http://spenational.slideroom.com. There will be a $10 fee for submitting a portfolio.
• A cohesive body of work with no more than FIVE images. Images around 1280 x 1280 px @ 72 ppi are ideal for good image quality and fast upload.
• A succinct artist statement of 200 words or less.
• A statement addressing how attendance at the conference will benefit you, as well as an overview of prior involvement with SPE or other arts organizations.
• A description of the conceptual basis of your work and its technical qualities, including a description of processes used.
• A brief resume, including name, address, phone number, email address and current institutional affiliation, and educational and professional experience.
• Contact information for a current photography professor (include name, title, email, and phone number.)
Applications that do not fulfill all requirements may be eliminated
from the competition.
Awards
SPE Awards
Ten SPE Awards are offered and feature a $500 travel stipend to attend the national conference.
THE SPE AWARD FOR INNOVATIONS IN IMAGING
in honor of Jeannie Pearce
The SPE Award for Innovations in Imaging, in honor of Jeannie Pearce is open to all eligible students working primarily with digital technology and is designated for work only possible because of emerging digital technologies-no alternative processes or gelatin silver prints. A project description describing how the work is possible as a result of emerging digital technologies is required as part of the submission process. Jurors will seek to award work that demonstrates the most innovative, unique, and freshest uses of digital technologies.
THE FREESTYLE CRYSTAL APPLE AWARD FOR OUTSTANDING
ACHIEVEMENT IN BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPHY
The Freestyle Crystal Apple Award for Outstanding Achievement in Black and White Photography is generously sponsored by Freestyle Photographic Supplies. Freestyle's goal in offering this award is to provide greater support for students working in traditional black and white silver imaging and alternative processes. One student will be awarded a $5,000 cash prize. The sponsoring faculty member will be presented with an engraved crystal apple. SPE provides a 2012 national conference fee waiver, and a one-year membership to SPE for both faculty and student. Please note: sponsoring faculty must teach at the institution where the student is currently enrolled. All light-sensitive processes, including alternative processes (Van Dyke brown, platinum, albumen, gum bichromate, cyanotype, kallitype, salt, liquid emulsion, lith printing, hand coloring, bromoil, modern day tintype, etc.) are eligible for this award as long as the end product is a gelatin silver or handmade alternative process print. No digital prints accepted.
Evaluation Criteria
This year's jurors are SPE national board members serving on the Awards and Recognition Committee: Christina Z. Anderson (chair), Sama Alshaibi, and Liz Wells.
Contact Information
Meghan Borato
Society for Photographic Education 2530 Superior Ave, #403
Cleveland, OH 44114
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Students Write | Leah Welch
Postmodern Beauty:
Woman as Object and the Returned Gaze – Is it Really All About the Male Erection?
by: Leah Welch
Through each era of art artists have held to a certain canon of beauty: From Venus of Willendorf (24,000-22,000 BCE) to Botticelli’s Birth of Venus (1482). This representation was in the form of the ideal woman – the way the statue or painting was rendered afforded the viewer a look into that period’s idea of classical beauty. The stone statue of the Venus had tiny arms across an abundance of breasts thereby indicating that the culture’s focus on woman was her ability to give birth. The small hands were an indicator that this was not an important part of the female body. In Botticelli’s rendering of the Venus the painting characterizes the long torso of that era’s canon of beauty – her wisps of hair and her contrapposto stance (a stance used in a plethora of Greek and Roman statues of men and women and a stance which the Italian Renaissance adopted-a stance that perhaps a postmodern critic may say to be a weak stance, one that does not afford its server any type of ground to make a move on) along with her nude form and the way in which she covers herself but is still not hinting at any shame, is the canon of this era of art. In fact, this stance and this type of beauty remained with the art world up until modernism. The purpose of this paper is to explore the function of beauty in consideration of modern and postmodern photographers: Edward Weston and Cindy Sherman. The approach to beauty and the way in which the female as an entity and as a form is, is depicted in each photographer’s work will be examined along with consideration of the gaze, women as object, fetishism and the male erection.
Weston’s modernist views juxtaposed with Sherman’s more elaborate postmodern themes with her objects/mannequins/models reveal a difference in gazes. It is with Jacque Lacan’s study of the gaze, that psychoanalytic process in which the object knows they are the object. It is through this main psychology that we shall approach Weston and Sherman while keeping in mind Eck’s work on gender:
Men, as previous researchers have demonstrated, view the female body with a sense of ownership (Berger1977). They interpret female nudes as objects of pleasure or derision and by so doing reproduce and sustain heterosexual masculinity on a daily basis. Men's status as "men" is reaffirmed every time they encounter and pass Judgment on the female form…men's responses to the Hartigan nude dismiss her as a potential candidate for desire, quickly labeling the image as "art"-an antiseptic term that removes the body from potential erotic pleasure (Nead1992). When men look at these images, they reveal no sense of embarrassment or self-consciousness in rendering an opinion on these models. They assume a culturally conferred right to evaluate the female nude (Eck 696-697).
In Weston’s work the gaze of the object/woman goes unreturned. The women or object as Weston saw them, parade in his photographs without heads, with covered and shielded eyes or blanketed by another body part. The Spectator is then removed from the fear that they will be caught looking at a nude woman and it is in this voyeurism that fetishism grows. This loss of autonomy by the object pervades through Weston’s works as is witnessed in the photographer having taken over 60,000 photographs, the majority of which are of nudes, and of those nudes the Spectator would be hard pressed to find a returned gaze from any of the objects (McGrath 334).
It must be said that as a modern formalist photographer, Weston was not interested in the female form per se, but rather in the shape of the body. He and his muse, second wife, Charis Wilson, believed the world contained only a strict few perfect forms; “The body of the woman was, for them both, one of only three perfect shapes in the world. (The other two were the hull of a boat and a violin…)” (McGrath 329). Thus the content of the photographer was inconsequential on a conscious level to the formalist. However, this repetition in a large amalgamation of prints suggests that on another level there was intent in choosing such a form for this work. This can be supported through Weston’s own journal in which he substitutes “nude” for “negative”; “In his diary Weston makes the following slip: ‘I made a negative I started to say nude…’” (McGrath 331). The inclusion of this deliberation in his diary may suggest that despite the formalist persuasion of his work the use of female form may have been approached because of the shape but it was Weston who deemed them objects through his vicissitude in terming them objects and his evisceration of their gazes.
This evisceration (which is sidestepped in Sherman’s photographs) is very sexual in its exchange. First, the Spectator sees the object but the object (interchanged with woman) is denied a return gaze. It is this lack of autonomy that further involves the Spectator turning from mere passive person to interactive person. The interaction here is beget with physical penetration: The gaze of the viewer peers ever more ardently since there is no fear of being looked back at, and therefore judged, or even seen. The penetration here is in reference to the penetration of the space between object and Spectator (McGrath 330). The only way that this interchange is made possible is through Weston’s particular style as Operator: “Unlike the woman herself the photograph is portable, can be referred to at will, and is always a compliant source of pleasure. Without this scenario the camera is another device of denial and retention” (McGrath 331). In fact, it is the camera that plays as an interlude between photographer and object that is the true arousal apparatus. It is the camera that transcends the Spectator from passive to aggressive in this gaze/nongaze exchange: It is a fetish device. As such, Weston’s photographs can be seen as pure pleasure and as blatantly sexualized as Sherman’s work tends to be; Weston’s work is far more pornographic because of this allure of the unreturned gaze and the lack of repentance from the voyeur.
Woman’s deconstruction of self, her lack of autonomy, is what marks Weston’s work; that is, her physiognomy robs the viewer of enjoyment of the object (woman); for as McGrath states, “If the face appears, the picture is inevitably a portrait and the expression of the face will dictate the viewer’s response to the body. This would interrupt…the aesthetic appreciation of naked beauty” (328). This masking, prevalent in all of Weston’s nude work is exemplified in Nude 1923 in which a woman lays supine on what appears to be concrete. The startling aspect of this photograph is that unlike many other Weston photographs, the face is intact. The Operator has not cut off her face from her body so that the Spectator receives a more formalist view of the object; nor is her physiognomy hidden by a limb, nor is she face down. This startling aspect of the photograph marks this one as slightly different from the others, but in the essential qualities of Weston’s work, and the qualities that mark the work as fetish, this photograph stands in line next to the others. The same formations of gaze, masking and avoidance of power are the motif that runs strong in this image. The object’s eyes are closed, and her legs are cut off at the knee. In fact, an interesting thing to note about Weston’s work is that the model while not returning the gaze, is often times cut: Either the head or the legs are absent from the full frame of the photograph, or else, if the model is in full view, the camera has panned back so that the viewer receives a larger portion of the landscape than of the model (an exception to this is Nude 1936). In this way, Weston disavowals woman as entity – a thing, an object, an Other. His cutting of them is a symbol of his denial of knowledge to them. They are not permitted to return a gaze, although they are full aware of their own nude presence; they are only permitted to cover up their eyes or their face. This way, the voyeur can look on in their penetrating fashion without being judged. This is the fetishism of his work – his allowance of fantasy. The fact that the women know they are being gawked at but pretend not to know, leads one beyond the proscenium of the stage Weston constructs. What is alluring to this fact and what supports this theory of fetishism, is the sole lack of males in Weston’s body of work – not only of males but of self-portraits. His denial of woman’s gazes is extant with fetishism because of the lack of a male presence in all of his nude work (McGrath 335). In short, Weston’s body of nude work may also be a large body of different and subtle examples of sadism.
After this dialogue on Weston’s approach, it can be stated that although he finds the female form one of three perfect shapes, it is not the female in that equation that is his attraction – rather it is her shape, and in this twist of formalism, in this modernist’s work, beauty finds no canon. Since it is the object of the photograph and not the gender or femininity that excites and lures the photographer into his station, how then can the Spectator expect to find pulchritude in a piece? If the photograph is absent of beauty then the only thing left in the photograph is the sex that Weston gives us – and not the gender, and not the act, but the pervasive penetration of space that remains.
In opposition to Weston’s portrayal of women, Cindy Sherman offers a postmodernist approach to the gaze and to the masking/unmasking of the woman as object. In fact, Sherman uses objects in her photographs. It is this distinction that gives her a philosophical edge to her work. Here the Spectator is presented with the real and unreal. Up until this point the female body was seen as beautiful according to a set rule of what beauty is, as defined by the canon. Even in Weston’s work, despite the invasiveness of the camera and the deconstruction of women through the lens, his photos by many are perhaps illustrative of that canon, for his work does still depict the female form; nude, and in repose. In this regard it echoes many art movement’s view of what beauty is or should be. In Sherman’s work (not her film stills but the work she accomplished in the 1980’s with use of mannequins) the Spectator is presented with what many may not consider beauty by classical standards but forms that mark women as powerful since the objects (mannequins in most but Sherman does make appearances in some of her 1980’s photographs) return the gaze and it is in that act that women gain ground (women are no longer stuck in that powerless contrapposto stance). The canon of beauty here is being redefined so that the focus is less on a taught viewpoint on what beauty is and more about women as powerful and thereby beautiful through their power (in regards to taking back the gaze).
Through the use of mannequins Sherman is already castrating her audience from any penetration into her frame or space. This lack of real flesh allows for Sherman to more effectively control how the Spectator views her work. As she adds distance between the Spectator and the object through a returned gaze and use of fake flesh (Avgikos 339). Thus, the Spectator is unable to immerse into the fantasy of the scenes that are going on inside the frame. This is best exemplified through her Untitled #250 in which a mannequin is lying on top of wigs, with an old woman’s head, what’s present of her legs in spread eagle, a full bush and a dildo/sex toy placed into her vagina: “…Medusa/whore/Venus/Olympia, who menacingly displays her startling red-foam vagina, the invitation promising pleasure for herself alone” (340). The head of the mannequin is unabashedly looking out of the frame of the photograph straight on into any and all Spectators. This brazen look is filled with a backlash of …well, of power. For ages, the woman in art has been the other, the object, the thing without knowledge. And yes, thing is the operative word. In Sherman’s work however, despite the presence of fetish items their place in the photograph only serves to strengthen this idea; the mannequin is looking at us saying, you wanted to see, so go ahead, take a good, long look.
This positioning of the mannequin denies the viewer power over the object – over the woman that this mannequin stands in place for. The object is in full awareness (as well as the Operator) that someone is looking at them and instead of hiding their face and pretending to not know they are being looked at as in Weston’s photos, Sherman’s mannequins stare back: In this stare it is Sherman’s gaze that the Spectator is seeing, “This argument fails to take into account Sherman’s control as director and producer of her own visual dramas” (Avgikos 341). In this fashion, Sherman is not allowing the Spectator to gain an erection nor is she suggesting castration with her missing limbs (a commentary that perhaps has more to do with how the gaze has not only left women without autonomy but has left them with parts of themselves missing) instead this indelible gaze gives back women their face, their self, their identity. It is through her fetishism that she castrates her viewer for gazing with sexual intent into her work and it is ultimately them she mutilates – a penitence for having sinned as they have (not speaking here about sex but about stealing a person’s soul/identity); As Avgikos states, “Sherman’s representation of female sexuality, in contrast, indulges the desire to see, to make sure of the private and the forbidden, but withholds both narcissistic identification with the female body and that body’s objectification as the basis for erotic pleasure” (340).
This desire to see stands as stark contrast to women as Other – of women being denied the gaze back into the Spectator. By denying the classical beauty that Weston held to be true (of the female form being one of three objects that were perfect in this world) – Sherman allows for female identity and in order to do that she must break the previous well-established, patriarchal canon of beauty - she must mutilate this female artifice in order to give her power: She must destroy the idea of male beauty in order to reinvent female beauty.
Avgikos coins a term in her essay “active looking”. This means that the model is not passive – that is, is looking back into the audience. In Weston’s photos, the object was denied knowledge through covering her gaze - juxtaposed with this is Sherman’s active looking models who in their gaze fulfill a self-satisfied pleasure, “In Sherman’s photographs, however, active looking is through a woman’s eyes, and this ambiguity makes them both seductive and confrontational…Sherman heightens the spectacle of the sexual act by isolating genital parts and coding them with fantasies of desire, possession, and imaginary knowledge” (339). This idea of possession takes us back to Weston’s photos in which the Spectator possessed the space of the object. The knowledge that Sherman infuses into her work is beget through fetish – through dildos, open vaginas and in these items and ‘body’ parts we find a plethora of cerebration: “The instrumentality of these photographs lies in their tantalizing paradox: offering for scrutiny what is usually forbidden to sigh, they appear to produce a knowledge of what sex looks like… but simultaneously are not real” (339).
Another interesting item in both of these photographer’s works is that while Weston exhibits a complete absence from his work, Sherman is very much present in hers. Sometimes taking the role of the model as in her film stills or sometimes taking the role of a mannequin as in her work Untitled 305 in which she poses as one of the mannequins. Even with this presentation of real flesh however, because the model is designed to represent a mannequin the idea of castration through fetishism in Sherman’s work still stands, “Her mechanisms of arousal – rubbery tits, plastic pussies, assorted asses, dicks, and dildos – may deceive momentarily, but finally defeat the proprietary gaze of the spectator, whose desire can only partially be satisfied by the spectacle of the artificial flesh” (340). Through these devices women reclaim their identity through centuries of being objectified through the patriarchal male canon of beauty; “Helene Cizous insists that women should mobilize the force of hysteria to break up continuities and create horror. This is not to hark back to some ‘natural’ state – an effort that masks woman’s censored hysteria as though it were an unwelcome disease – or to fall into some other form of ‘political correctness,’ and the guilt and repressed desire that it triggers…Rather than making a ‘sex-positive,’ Edenic retreat from that which we think we should not think or do, Sherman complicates libidinal desire” (341). This invitation of welcoming hysteria is what dominates Sherman’s frame – all of these mannequins in sexual positions and blatant fetishisms are a pleasure that is not translated for the Spectator but is for the mannequin alone.
The lack of a gaze in the classical canon is misinterpreted as reverence. The female looks away from the viewer, or hides her body in order to detach herself from her humanity, from the thing that makes her human, that makes her a woman. The gazes presented in these two photographer’s works are set on two sides of an era: Modernism and postmodernism. Modernism’s goal is to document what is real, what is around them – on a subtler contextual level this may be interpreted to mean we must discern fact from fiction when viewing Weston’s nudes. The fact is, is that he termed them objects, turned them into negative nudes and denied them faces not solely so the form of their body isn’t compromised by presenting physiognomy in the frame but so that the Spectator can view them in uninterrupted passion and eroticism through fetish and voyeuristic clandestine nature. In postmodernism we are struggling with authorship – in presenting mannequins instead of people Sherman is stating that there is no authorship and because of that we are liberated to view whomever and however we want. There is great sexualized energy in one and great liberation in the other photographer. Both veer toward fetish and both re-evaluate our ideas of the canon but neither one sticks with the classical canon as a way to see the female form. It is interesting to note that Simone de Beauvoir states that a woman is not made, she is born – in effect, the object/model is diverting her gaze because of something that is not innate but is learned and it is strange to think that in Weston’s work this aversion shows lack of knowledge when in looking away from the camera the woman is telling the Spectator that she knows she is a woman. There is no gaze that can deny that fact.
Images:
Venus of Willendorf, 24,000 B.C.E. - 22,000 B.C.E.
Sandro Botticelli, The Birth of Venus, c. 1485-86
Edward Weston, Nude, 1923
Edward Weston, Nude, 1936
Cindy Sherman, Untitled #250, 1992
Cindy Sherman, Untitled #305, 1994
References
Avgikos, J. (2003). Cindy Sherman: Burning Down the House. Ed. Liz Wells. Routledge.
London.
Eck, B.A. (October 2003). Men Are Much Harder: Gendered Viewing of the Nude
Images. Gender and Society, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 691-710.
Source: McGrath, R. (2003). Re-reading Edward Weston. Ed. Liz Wells. Routledge.
London.
Infinite Ideas Scholarship
Infinite Ideas Scholarship
Infinite Editions / Deadline: 10/02/11
Infinite Editions is presenting an opportunity to help a graduating BFA/MFA student better realize their artistic vision and conclude their academic journey with the finest quality production services available. We are awarding annually one $5,000 scholarship towards the production, at the Infinite Editions studio, of one BFA or MFA student's thesis exhibition for Fall 2011 or Spring 2012 semester.
The recipient will receive access to our fine art digital printmaking services and work in close collaboration with our team to produce a body of work specifically for their thesis exhibition.
Location
Anywhere in the US
Fees
$0
Eligibility
Applicants must be enrolled in a college or university in the US and preparing for their upcoming Fall 2011 or Spring 2012 semester thesis exhibition. Only graduate MFA and undergraduate BFA students are eligible.
Applicants must be planning on creating work that utilizes digital printing as a component. The scholarship recipient must be able to submit their final images to our studio no less than 30 days before their thesis opening for Fall 2011 or Spring 2012 semester.
Requirements
Visit www.infinite-editions.com/about-scholarship for more information
Only one entry per applicant.
Applicants must:
1. Fill out application form on the Infinite Editions website : Click to apply
2. Provide a short biography about yourself as an artist and about your plans for after graduation. (300 maximum)
3. Provide a proposal statement about the concepts and formal approaches to your thesis work. Describe the style of photography or art you plan on/or have created for your thesis. Include ideas about how you envision your final presentation to look and how your concept for your thesis relates to your presentation. (800 words maximum)
4. Submit one letter of recommendation from an academic reference. The letter must be submitted electronically and on your reference's letterhead. (.PDF or .DOC format)
5. Submit up to ten properly labeled JPEG images (combine the images either .ZIP or .PDF format ) Longest side at 800 pixels, 72dpi of their potential thesis work. Images do not have to be the final images included in the final presentation of your thesis work. Infinite Editions accepts works in progress, or work that is very similar to the type of photography that will be used in the final thesis presentation.
All files MUST be labeled as: FirstNameLastName_filename.pdf
(Example1: RonLanducci_ImageFileName.pdf)
(Example2: RonLanducci_LetterofRecommendation.pdf)
Mailed submissions will not be accepted.
Awards
One scholarship recipient will receive the Infinite Editions: Infinite Ideas Scholarship - up to $5,000 worth of professional services from Infinite Editions. The scholarship recipient will be contacted via email.
Infinite Editions may also announce up to three honorable mention recipients.
Considerations
Apply now at www.infinite-editions.com/apply-now/
Infinite Editions is excited to work in collaboration with creative minds seeking creating solutions.
Packaging and shipping costs for this scholarship are limited to $500.
Please email scholarships@infinite-editions.com for any questions regarding this scholarship.
Evaluation Criteria
Infinite Editions is particularly interesting in working with emerging artists who push the boundaries of photography and traditional image making. Risk-takers, not those interested in merely putting framed pictures on the wall, are more likely to be considered. Interesting, relevant and conceptually thoughtful work is encouraged. Submissions will be judged on conceptual and technical merit as well as clarity of submitted proposals in relation to the submitted imagery. A jury of professionals in the fine art industry will select the scholarship recipient.
Please view our projects page to view examples of the type of photography and installations we have produced in the past.
http://infinite-editions.com/projects/
Contact Information
Candice Knutson
4965 Independence street
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
2011 FotoWeek DC International Awards Competition
2011 FotoWeek DC International Awards Competition
Challenge the Way We Look at the World
FotoWeek DC's fourth Annual International Awards Competition is looking for extraordinary images! The 2011 competition will honor professional and emerging photographers from our region and from around the world. We're looking for you!
- Entries will be accepted in 11 main categories
- Cash prizes totaling $20,000
- Winners will be selected by a distinguished panel of world-renowned judges
- Winners will be notified on or about October 5, 2011.
- Winning images will be exhibited and/or projected during FotoWeek DC, November 5-12 as well as on-line
A 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization, FotoWeek DC is committed to celebrating the transformative power of photography in all its forms.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Point Park Photo Facility Training Sessions
Photography Training Sessions:
Digital Editing Suite (501 AH):
Demonstration with the Imacon and Plustek negative scanners. Demos will be given on how to scan 35mm and large format film with the Imacon and 35mm negatives and mounted slides on the Plustek scanner.
Friday, Sept. 9th: 3:30-4pm
Monday, Sept. 12th: 5-5:30pm
Thursday, Sept. 22nd: 4-4:30pm
Chemical Mixing and Darkroom Procedures (503 AH):
Instruction on mixing black and white and color chemistry for film processing and printing in the darkroom. Additional instruction will be given on maintenance and upkeep of the darkroom facilities.
Tuesday, Sept. 13th: 9:30-10:15am
Thursday, Sept. 22nd: 1-1:45pm
Friday, Sept 16th: 10:15-10:45am
Inkjet Printing and Inkjet Printing Lab Procedures (507 AH):
Printing demonstration on the Epson 7880 and 9890. Instruction will be given on how to perform a nozzle check and head cleaning on all of the inkjet printers. Using ICC color profiles in your workflow will also be covered. A general overview of the laboratory rules and guidelines will be included.
Monday, Sept. 12th: 6-6:45pm
Thursday, Sept. 22nd: 2:15-3
Friday, Sept 16th: 11-11:45am
Photography Studio (401 AH):
Basics of the photography studio will be covered in this session. Basic guide to equipment, use of gear, standard lighting techniques, and studio clean up will be covered.
Tuesday, Sept 13th: 12-12:45pm
Wednesday, Sept 14th: 8:30-9am
Thursday, Sept. 15th: 9-10am
HomeFrontLine: Reflections on Ten Years of War Since 9/11
|
 |
SEPTEMBER 13 - DECEMBER 10, 2011
OPENING RECEPTION: SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2011, 3 - 6 P.M.
FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
The Silver Eye Center for Photography announces the opening of HomeFrontLine: Reflections on Ten Years of War Since 9/11, running from September 13 through December 10, 2011. This exhibition explores the far-reaching impact of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – both on and away from the combat zones – through the words and images of eleven leading documentary photographers and photojournalists. The co-curators of the exhibition are Ellen Fleurov, Executive Director, Silver Eye Center for Photography and Leo Hsu, Independent Curator, Pittsburgh, PA.
HomeFrontLine is our effort to create a space in which to pause and to think about this decade of war in the aftermath of 9/11 and the enormous human, social, economic and political costs incurred. It pays tribute to the selflessness and courage of soldiers and their families, and honors those in and out of uniform who have sacrificed so much – both on the front lines and on the home fronts. The exhibition also considers how photography and visual imagery shape our understanding and perception of the often contradictory experiences of war, where the lines are continuosly blurred between safety and danger, between soldier and civilian, and between truth and rhetoric.
The exhibition features images and multimedia projects by eleven international documentary photographers and photojournalists – Claire Beckett, Nina Berman, Kevin Bubriski, Gabriela Bulisova, Ashley Gilbertson, Baptiste Giroudon, Michael Kamber, Benjamin Lowy, Alfonso Moral, Eugene Richards, and Peter van Agtmael.
Image:
Benjamin Lowy,Untitled, from the series Iraq/Perspectives I, 2003-2008. Courtesy of the artist.
Monday, September 5, 2011
Photo NOLA 2011
PhotoNOLA
PhotoNOLA is an annual celebration of photography in New Orleans, coordinated by the New Orleans Photo Alliance in partnership with galleries, museums and photographers citywide.
The 2011 festival will take place from December 8-11 with broad ranging photography exhibitions on display throughout the month. Events include portfolio reviews, workshops, lectures, alternative process demonstrations and a kick-off gala. Many events are free and open to the public.
Portfolio Review registration will open on September 1 at 10am CST.
Please join us to celebrate the art of photography, New Orleans style!
Friday, September 2, 2011
SPE Scholarships | National Conference, 2012
| ||||
| ||||
|
2530 Superior Avenue, #403
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)