Blog Paper

It has been suggested by my Tutor that I keep a paper learning log as well as this blog. I was surprised by this suggestion as on my first Course I kept only a blog and this raised no comment from my then Tutor.

I have thought about this a great deal since but cannot find any real reason to do so. I used the Student forum that carries a thread on blogs to see what others feel and, as you would expect, there was a divergence of views with some suggesting doing both whilst some favoured one or the other. As part of the thread there was a link to a piece by Jose Navarro in the praise of the written blog (not surprising then that he is the one suggesting that I use a written log as well as the one online). In the short video we see someone flicking through what looks like a filofax folder crammed with photographs with hand written comments beneath or to the side of them. Unfortunately there was very little chance of actually seeing what value the log had in itself. It was interesting though that Jose referred to the tactility of the log and this was also mentioned in one of the responses to my forum query.

It raises the interesting question as to whether photography is a tactile art. Personally I don't see it. It reminds me of a discussion, that got quite heated, about whether a photograph exists until it is in print form. The argument centred around the value of handling the print that added, in some way, to the overall emotional experience. When the question was raised whether an art picture hung in an Art Gallery is in some way lessened by the viewer being unable to take it from the wall everybody seemed to agree that this was not the case. Why the difference?

If photography is a tactile art or is made more emotionally rewarding by us being able to handle the photograph are we not drawn to the conclusion that a photograph would be even more emotionally rewarding if the material it was printed on was more tactile than the paper upon which it is normally printed.

I would be the first to agree that a painting is best seen in the original rather than on a computer screen. However I would not take this view with a photograph. Until recently most competitions accepted or had a slide section. The only way to see these was by the use of a projector and a screen. Very few people would argue that they were the less for having to be viewed in that way. In some cases the slide version was seen  as better than the printed version. We now have digitally projected images and these are often shown using a computer or television screen with excellent results. At the risk of heresy a photograph is no more than a piece of paper and the emotional reaction to it belongs to the viewer and the photographer has very little input to this experience apart from the way in which it is presented.

OK. Are there other advantages in the written product? Not for me. My writing is so poor that I would have to type any comments before placing them in the folder. Writing for me is a chore and I find the ease of amending what I have typed, which is usually a stream of consciousness that others may find difficult to follow, a boon and a big time saver. It is easy to scan images and place them into the blog and it is unlikely that as the material is solely for my personal use in an educational setting would there be a breach copyright.

I am quite happy to extend my blog to include more of the additional work and thinking about photography that I have done.

My final thought is - does anyone bother to read these things. If I express doubts or suggest an approach is there anyone out there who will respond and either give me encouragement or discuss my thinking. It ain't happened so far nor have I expected it.