Conjectures of a recovering dilettante --- Welcome to Pizzaonia! Reflections from a different perspective --- Diverti Mento, John Frank Giovanni, Frank John Franco, Vera V. Veronica and all of the Pizza digogo DiVinci family invite you to join us - We discuss and share ideas that are relevant to our new emerging world. A division of the Pizzaonian Newsertainment Network
http://pizzaonian.com
Donald Trump addressing the NAACP convention PHOTO by DIVERTI MENTO
Today the prestigious Pizzaonian Art Institute awarded the coveted Pizzaulitzer Prize for photojournalism to Pizzaonian managing editor, Diverti Mento
The institute’s curator, Abe Straction, in making the award said, "Nothing better illustrates the Kandinsky* method of visual communication better than the photograph of Donald Trump addressing the NAACP convention. A great example of photojournalism at its best. Well done!"
Contact: Publicio Relationio at the PNN office of Public Relations at: [email protected]
SUBJECT: THE DEATH OF THE LITERAL IMAGE
Image - delegates at the Pizzaonian Art Institute, Abe Straction, curator
All images are from the private collection of the PIZZAONIAN ART INSTITUTE - Contact Abe Straction, curator, for more information" [email protected] copyright - (C) all rights are the exclusive property of the Pizzaonian Art Institute and images cannot be reproduced without written permission.
Today at the opening of the Pizzaonian Art Institute’s seminar on the state of Pizzaonian art, Abe Straction, newly appointed, permanent curator of the Institute, declared the death of the literal image as a viable art form.
It should be clear to all who have followed art for the last 100 years that the literal image has become so ubiquitous, cliched and mechanical in its rendition it is now insignificant as a form of communication in the digital age. This is the major theme of this year’s meetings.
“Perhaps, one could argue there is some usefulness in the literal image as a reminder of a past age, but when examined closely even that fades,” declared Mr. Straction
The focus of discussions here at the seminar is on what happened to the literal image after it was co-opted as a marketing tool to sell and propagandize. The advance of technology and the notion that everyone is “an artist” was simply one more “nail in the coffin.”
Obviously, not everyone agrees, however, this controversy will only grow louder as Mr. Straction gains more credibility in the Pizzaonian art establishment.
Reporting from Pizzaonia, Brother Giovanni for PNN
"Pizzaonian Emerging"
Courtesy of the Pizzaonian Art Institute, Abe Straction, curator
At the conclusion of the recent Pizzaonian
Film and Photography Convention, Focali Planei offered these thoughts
about technology and its effect on the still image.
As the years go by many things come to mind on how you view your supposed area of expertise.
I
have spent 40 years plus in photography and related image making. I
have sixty four years of being involved with the photographic
process. Enough years have gone by for me to have experienced many
technical changes on how a photograph is produced.
At least till today, none of these changes challenged the nature or the definition of what photography is. That is no longer true.
We stand at a technical crossroads, an evolutionary transformation that
forces us to rethink the very nature of what is considered photography.
You can find endless articles about the change technology is bringing to our medium. This is particularly true of how image making will be presented in the future.
Not enough is said, however, about the change in the distinguishing
nature or character of what has for years defined the photograph.
The
power of the photograph has been the notion that it represents a
captured moment in time that allowed you to preserve history. We are
fascinated by photos that are a portal to the past, to an event, a place
- or that simply allow us to relive the shared experience of someone or
someplace special to us. The power of the photograph is the fact that we believed it to be true, an authentic representation of what no longer is.
We could always manipulate the photograph.
But these manipulations were acceptable because of the serious
limitations the camera and the film process imposed upon us. We
recognized photography as a limited medium that occasionally needed
tweaking to better represent the scene being photographed.
For the most part we were still stuck with what was there and whatever enhancements we applied strengthened that position.
We were always aware the photograph was a representation and not a
literal image. But all of this was acceptable within the boundaries that
created an authentic photo. This is no longer the case.
For
the doubters, simply show a magnificent landscape with all of it
natural radiance to a younger person and the question will arise: has that been photoshoped?
The immediate response from the viewer that the image may not be an
authentic representation changes the perception of what a photograph is
or was. The question is does this make any difference? For us I think it does since this change will redefine what a photographer is.
The nature of the changes that the digital process has given us changes the perspective of photography as a limited medium.
The interpretive photograph has a new meaning and the new meaning
requires fresh and better honed creative skills. For years we confused
craft and technique with artistic talent. Since the craft, for the most part is now done for us, that perspective no longer prevails.
The new skills will be the ability to tell a visual story, a keen sense
of visual language that will include a fine sense of editing, use of
symbols, color and design. A sense of the whole that brings universal and holistic meaning to each image will be essential to the new photography. These will be the arenas that the professional will use to separate themselves from the amateur.
From a professional perspective this becomes a matter of survival. If we do not define who we are then the public and/or the technology will. If so it is the end of our profession as we know it. Is this good or bad? I am not going to profess judgments here. What I am professing is the change is upon us and is evolutionary in its significance. Are we going to be ahead of the change and help define it, or will the change wash over us like a giant tsunami?
As for what we will call the new photography? That is still evolving. I
am sure the term photography will be preserved by the film process, but
the new photo imaging that is now with us brings an exciting new
dimension that is different and will be identified as such.
Focali Planei, President Emeritus, Pizzaonian Photography Academy, PPA