Visual Culture: UVC - Photography: the new reality

Brik makes a series of statements that point up what he sees as the main differences between painting and photography. Having opened his article by stating that photography pushes painting aside and that painting resists this pushing he declares that this is how the battle must be interpreted. Clearly he sees painting as a dying art telling the reader that life cannot be represented in a painting having assigned to the painter the duty to change reality and that failure to make this change makes the painter a bad copyist. Having made it clear where he thinks the future lies the rest of the article lauds the photographer. He does however have a warning for the photographer who pursues his dream of creating a 'painterly' effect in his photographs so that they look like reproductions of paintings. Such activity Brik sees as destroying the craft of the photographer taking away the basis of his 'social importance'.

In declaring the demise of painting Brik echoes the view of Paul Delaroche (1797 - 1856) who, on seeing his first daguerreotype (an early type of photograph), declared "from today painting is dead" (there is no evidence that he ever made this remark). As of the present time both were wrong. Photography has not replaced painting and it could be argued the sheer volume of photographic images that bombard our senses every day has, by contrast, given paintings an air of uniqueness and being of another more leisurely and more desirable world. We can sit in the Art Gallery and lose ourselves in a painting whereas the reality of the photograph guides us towards similar experiences in our own lives that may or may not be pleasant.

The attempt by artists to imitate the 'reality' of the photograph is matched by the photographer who strives to create something of the uniqueness of the painter. In the world of the painter this striving to imitate photography probably reaches its peak in the world of photorealism in which the artist paints a copy of a photograph using his skill to faithfully capture every line, nuance of light and colour to re-create the original image. Whilst some would claim that there is no agreement about what constitutes a great photograph the discussion normally revolves around  'laws' that have been borrowed from painting such as the 'rule of the thirds' and the 'golden mean'. Photographers attempt to use the same underlying ideas as those that guided the great painters. In a limited sense there is no difference between painting and photography and indeed both are bound by centuries of aesthetic judgements of what is seen to be good.

Perhaps the most telling element of the striving of photographers to be seen as artists can be seen in the present day output of many photographers and what can be seen in international and national exhibitions. It would seem that the more 'artistic' the style of the photograph the more likely it is to be exhibited and be awarded an accolade. The power of photographic enhancement software such as the ubiquitous 'Photoshop', with almost every imaginable effect on offer, is providing the photographer with previously unavailable chances to imitate painting. The arguments that were put by Brik continue even now and perhaps with even greater force.

It has been suggested that one of the early users of photography in the production of his paintings was Edgar Degas (1834 -1917). In the latter part of the 1880's Degas became a passionate photographer taking photographs of many of his friends. It is claimed that his paintings were often influenced by the new medium of photography with art historians believing that that the large amount of non-essential space, cropping and the placement of the figures on the canvas are evidence of the influence of photography on his work. There is no direct evidence that this is the case and like modern day arguments on the 'reality' of photographs and the amount of manipulation by the photographer opinions vary widely.

One painting that has been seen to be influenced by Degas' knowledge of photography is 'Four Dancers' painted c.1899. To the left of the image are the four dancers with the one to the extreme left of the picture cropped so that only her head and arm are seen. Of the other three dancers two of the faces are seen in profile and the third is a side view of her head. Each of their positions is different (it has been suggested that we are only seeing one dancer moving as in a sequence of images (The Collection -National Gallery of Art website). There is a large element of essentially empty space to the right and Degas has painted it so it appears slightly unfocused that would be the effect of a camera shot.

Whilst there must remain an element of doubt about the strength of the influence of photography on the later work of Degas such doubt does not exist for the work of the Photorealists. One example are the works of Rob Hefferan (1968 - ) (see his web site). An untitled image is of a painting of a female with her back to the viewer and her face half profile. Her dress is open to reveal her naked back. Beyond her is a window giving a glimpse of a garden. The level of detail in her hair is incredible as is the fabric of her dress which makes you feel as though you could stroke it. The original photograph is not good with loss of detail in a white cushion, the window frame and parts of what can be seen through the window. Hefferan has resisted the temptation to fill in the detail that has been lost and has left the blown highlights of the image white.

The Degas image demonstrates the impact of early photography where the painter has become more aware of the elements of the scene that are captured in that brief moment of time that the camera shutter has been open. There is also an awareness of the impact cropping can have on a picture and the use of 'focus' that blurs the unimportant parts of the scene concentrating the viewers attention on the key elements. Hefferan's picture has taken the photograph as its starting point and created a painting mimicking the 'realism' of the photograph thus attempting to combine the two disciplines.