Pictorialism, an art movement that dominated photography during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, was dedicated to promoting the medium as a fine art. It was an ever evolving movement that drew from popular painting techniques and was split into two major camps. The first consisted of artists who used photo manipulation while the second camp held true to the photographic process with little to no manipulation. The first group were taking inspiration from symbolism, poetry, and history while emphasizing texture. The second was using the ideas of composition, tone, and line in much the same way as the Cubists, Fauvists, and Futurists were at the time. (1)
Henry Peach Robinson, Fading Away (1858), (image source) |
In the image above, artist Henry Peach Robinson is using photo manipulation to create a pictorial image. Robinson has not only combined five different negatives in order to create this intimate scene, but he is also playing on symbolism to enrich the story. The use of chiaroscuro, or treatment of dark and light, leads the viewer to a somber conclusion. The male figure is turned away in his dark suit set against the brightly lit sky in a pose of grief. The older lady in dark attire stares sadly at the girl while letting a book fall from her grasp. There is tension in the sky and the way the other female is leaning on the back of the sick bed suggests that death lingers. Robinison is using symbolism common to Vicorian painters to imply that the girl will ascend to heaven. It was a controversial subject to address as a photo, but it was an important topic to help state the case that photography could be art. (2)
Alfred Stieglitz, The Steerage (1907) ( image source) |
The next image is a photo taken by Alfred Stieglitz in 1907 entitled The Steerage. This photograph is quite different from the one by Henry Peach Robinson. It is a prime example of the second school of pictorialism where no manipulations have been added, and the artist is relying on the sensibilities of the abstract art movement for inspiration. Steiglitz was very proud of this photo because he was able to capture a perfect abstract-like composition of strong diagonals and lines contrasted by round and triangular shapes. There’s a nice balance of contrasting lights and darks for appeal as well. Steiglitz was not trying to produce an emotional connection to the people in this photo, even though a case could be made for that. He was simply mimicking techniques the painters were using in the art movements of the time. (3)
Pictorialism was an important and ever changing movement that sought to legitimize photography as a fine art. Whether it was being done with photo manipulation and symbolism, or by comparing a straight image with an abstract painting it didn’t matter. The end goal was always the same, that photography could be more than mere documentation. It could be as beautiful and expressive as a painting.
Sources
1. Bunnell, Peter C, “Towards New Photography, Renewals of Pictorialism,” in A New History of Photography , Köln: Könemann, 1998 17th Ed, 311-326.
2. Mogensen, Jannie Uhre, “Fading into Innocence: Death, Sexuality and Moral Restoration in Henry Peach Robinson’s Fading Away,” Victorian Review 32, no. 1 (2006): 1-17, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27793587.
3. Belden-Adams, Dr. Kris, “Steiglitz, The Steerage,” in Khan Academy, accessed September 14, 2020, https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-art-history/later-europe-and-americas/modernity-ap/a/stieglitz-the-steerage
Love the sources! The question I have is, How can you layer more than one photo negative? Wouldn't it muddy the image over time? I see you are doing a comparison between 2 different photographs. What similarities do the 2 photographs have in common? how does it tie into what we learned in class?
ReplyDeleteYour first photo is a perfect example of how much manipulation of photography at the time. It would have taken skill to get this negatives firstly well balanced as individuals, but to be able to make it appear as though there is no break in time or misplaced shadows show a real artistry. Admittedly I was a bit disappointed when the real story behind the second photo was discussed in class. If you didn't have that context how would you view the second photograph? Is it still as impactful as the first with it's symbolism?
ReplyDelete