tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057826380522065501.post61521602121354503..comments2023-12-28T23:27:33.142-05:00Comments on DLK COLLECTION: Michael Wolf: The Transparent City @ApertureDLKCOLLECTIONhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14875914464454488384noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057826380522065501.post-38264348213291142392009-12-23T10:52:07.393-05:002009-12-23T10:52:07.393-05:00Based on the comments above, I emailed Michael Wol...Based on the comments above, I emailed Michael Wolf and he sent back a long, thoughtful reply covering the issues that have been raised. Rather than copy and paste it all here, I'll try to provide a simple summary, with a few of my own thoughts mixed in. <br /><br />I think we all know that a long exposure image of a TV will result in a blanked out white screen (think of Sugimoto's theaters). Wolf knew this would happen (given he was shooting at night with long exposures), and was therefore left with the choice of contacting the apartment dwellers and asking them to freeze a frame on their TVs, thereby intervening in their day to day lives (a kind of "director" like manipulation), or to add images back in later via digital manipulation. Which is "better"? Either way, to avoid the blank out, he needed to intervene; in this case, he chose to do post-production editing. <br /><br />According to Wolf, he has always been open about inserting the images, and while some might find it too obvious, the one with Rear Window inserted is the most popular in the series (already sold out in all sizes). <br /><br />Since the images are not coming from a journalistic or documentary vantage point but are clearly labeled as art, in his mind, the rigid truthfulness of the works is not quite as relevant. Unlike the Edgar Martins situation, Wolf seems to have been open and direct about his small manipulations from the beginning, and thus, they have become a non-issue in terms of the whole argument about truth and photography. In my view, whether they ultimately resonate with viewers is a question of art not truth. <br /><br />A few other thoughts, unrelated to this issue: Wolf orginally wanted the pixelated close up images to be printed the same size or larger than the architecural shots, but due to the constraints of the show, this didn't end up happening. If they were larger, viewers would be forced to step back further to see them, and then move forward to see the details of the architectural shots, creating the flow of movement we discussed a bit in the review. <br /><br />Also, in response to my concerns about large print size, Wolf reminded me that Aperture has some 20x24 reasonably priced donation prints available, one a composite of two Transparent City images and one from his earlier Hong Kong series.DLKCOLLECTIONhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14875914464454488384noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057826380522065501.post-60515271406422893032009-12-18T11:16:09.150-05:002009-12-18T11:16:09.150-05:00These, as well as the Barbara Crane images are act...These, as well as the Barbara Crane images are actually for sale. Contact someone at Aperture for pricing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057826380522065501.post-90821662858906769442009-12-18T09:55:01.664-05:002009-12-18T09:55:01.664-05:00I agree with the comment above about the digital m...I agree with the comment above about the digital manipulation involved in these photographs and how it makes for a clichéd body of work. <br /><br />According to the blurbs about the published book, Wolf claims not to manipulate the images. <br /><br />http://www.photoeye.com/magazine/Reviews/2008/09_22_The_Transparent_City.cfm<br /><br />Look closely and one can see that this is just not possible. The colors are completely desaturated, other colors are hand painted in and images have been inserted onto television screens that would have been blurry in the capture due to the long exposures necessary to produce this work. Referencing Rear Window is just too obvious.<br /><br />Let's not even talk about the ugly prints and the digitalness of them, look closely and you'll see what I mean.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3057826380522065501.post-90678161765616763362009-12-17T14:36:55.168-05:002009-12-17T14:36:55.168-05:00I think it would be a good idea to discuss the dig...I think it would be a good idea to discuss the digital manipulation aspect of this work. This is a major omission from your review. <br /><br />There are many scenes occurring in many of the windows in these photographs.<br /><br />For example, there is a tiny window inside a giant photograph that shows Hitchcock's "Rear Window" playing on a flat-screen television in someone's apartment. <br /><br />There are many other examples, but what strikes me most is the unreality of the detail included. <br /><br />I'm perfectly comfortable with manipulation, and with photographs not representing a true reality. <br /><br />I just question the value in manipulating these images to include these details. It feels like a gimmick.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com