I think Henson's purpose can be better understood if you imagine those
images printed 1.8m wide (6 feet) - as they were- framed, and hung at the
end of somebody's living-room.
The extra space, the gradation from light to dark (L to R), and the sense of
mystery (or tension) all add up to reasons for viewers to comeback to look
again.
I'm interested in the techniques of photographers who are successful at
selling their work. Some sell literal images, others create the kind of
artistic
image that oil painters and watercolour painters use.
http://www.pavementmagazine.com/billhenson.html
also, from
http://www.geocities.com/soho/museum/5283/billhenson.html
comes this quote( I've seen a more elaborate description of his technique
somewhere else).. ...
"Unlike many photos that try to capture a point in time, this series does not
allow us any assurance of its place in time or space. This ambiguity is
partially a product of Henson´s darkroom technique. He used a method of
hand agitation during print development that created an uneven tone
throughout the print. This and processing/toning procedure effectually
remove the extra detail that allows us to pinpoint the image´s origins."
http://www.abc.net.au/programsales/s1122839.htm
We see Henson as a creature of the night. There is not a lot of light in his
life, he photographs by night and spends most of the day in his darkroom
meticulously labouring over his prints, studying them reworking minute
sections for the right balance of colour and light, venturing out occasionally
for a bite to eat.
Aah, here it is
http://blog.photoshelter.com/2008/05/bill-henson-at-the-opera-1.html
The figures seem darkened or rather that they are moving in and out of
imposed darkness. How do you achieve your effect?
"I always shoot on negative film because it has potential for far greater
extremes in lighting situations. And also, negative film is designed to be half
the process, the second half being the making of the print. More often than
not, I make test prints and let them sit around in a kind of semi-finished
state. Gradually, my ideas start to shift as to what this image could be about
and how I should modulate it formally and technically. It is quite a lengthy
process. I go into the darkroom, change the density of some areas, or
maybe change the emphasis between various elements within the picture,
and push it around.
The exhibition prints don't look anything like the original negative that came
out of the camera. My work is all done in the traditional manner in the
darkroom; there's no digital technology in there mainly because I do not find
it useful for my work."
AND
There is a kind of removal in your pictures. It's as if the emptiness in the
photograph, the disappearance of detail, and the figure within in it become
the focus of the photograph rather than the subject itself.
"Well, putting it in other words, the photograph has to suggest, not
prescribe. Any work of art needs to do that. From my point of view, art is
what almost goes missing in the shadows. It is what is not clearly delineated
but, in fact, just suggested. Rather than the clearly described surface detail
of a highlight of skin, or the surface of a tree or something, it's when the
light
slides off into a sort of half shadow and darkness. It is the way in which you
somehow have something, but do not have it, that offers the greatest
potential."
Interesting.
Brian Swale.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|