How photography and painting working with each other.

 

 

For several years I have been using photographs as the reference for my painting process. The photograph is an objective process to document the world. I view photographs as means of documenting and storing human memories. Memory is a complex subject and in some ways, memory is personal. Actually, without sharing, memory will only belong to each individual. But photography makes the documentation of memories possible and easy to share. Comparing novels which are written by words, photographs are more visual and people from different countries with different languages can ‘read’ photographs with no questions. Photographs have a lot of functions. For me, photographs are a starting-point which can motivate and inspire and help me to built my images. And I am not the only artist who works with photographs in this way. In fact, the invention of photography, has contributed much to the development of painting. Firstly, Photography bring painters the opportunity to broaden painting’s scope. Numbers of artists around the world like to use photographs as the painting resource. The colors, structures and compositions which provided by photographs bring the inspiration to people and help those photo-based painters to complete and create their paintings. These resources allow them to develop new approaches and languages. Painting then shows the new pattern in the art history. What’s more, artists like Gerhard Richter are more interested in using the language of photographs to complete his painting or, in other words, add the old photographs’ element into his paintings. We can see this in Gerhard’s Baader Meinof paintings.

 

Photography has also allowed artists to see things that they might not have before. And it is possible for them to use this digital picture to replace the original sketchbooks. At the same time, there are still lots of artists who are full of professional techniques are interested in Realism and their works are exactly like the photographs or real person. I have to say, painting and photograph have a long time relationship between each other. Once the technology of camera has been discovered, the topic around the them has never stopped. 

 

There are lots of forms of photography: Fine Art photography and documentary photography the snap-shot or vernacular photograph, photographs that are taken with light effects or long exposure. I think that most of the photographs which taken by people are, of course, snap-shot, or in some way, the vernacular documentary photographs - in another words, photographs that just record things without reference to art. The reason is simple and easy to understand. When the first photographs came along, there was no art-intention - the original function of this new technology was to record and document. The value of aesthetics in photography developed in later years. Photography, for most of people is still just a tool to capture moments often just for fun and without any further consideration. Sometimes we take pictures because a moment or a person means a lot to us. But two of these are a form of recording. In fact, taking photo itself is a behavior of recording. and for the whole process of taking photos is some kind of collection. The collection of outside world. Mostly because of the development of the mobile phone, photography has now become the most usual way for people to capture what they see and record what they have been doing. Unlike analogue photography, when people needed a supply of film and to develop this film to obtain the printed photograph, the ease of digital cameras and smart phones is encouraging people to take pictures of, it seems, almost every moment. At the same time, because of the development of the internet, people can display and distribute their photographs on social media like Facebook and Twitter. People can now access their photographs and the photographs of others anytime and everywhere as the Internet is global. We no longer need to carry a material picture with us and worry about loss or damage.

 

Sometimes photographs are not only the way to express the world to others, photographs is the world itself. As Susan Sontag wrote in On Photography:

 

“To collect photographs is to collect the world.” (Sontag, S. 1977, p.179).

 

With the help of other media and the Internet, photography builds a large storage of documents. Each document belongs to someone’s memory. And thanks to the on-going technological developments, people can save almost every clip of their life. Comparing with the camera in the past which needed skill to operate, photography has now become quicker, easier and more convenient in the modern age and allows everybody, even with rudimentary knowledge of cameras and photography, to document their lives. But in the past, painting also had a similar function to photography for a long time. 

 

Before the camera had been invented, painting was the way to capture images as well which quite similar with photography. Although writers tried to describe the world through words, painting was still a visible way to reflect the world. Comparing with writings, paintings are more direct which do not need people to image the pattern.  So at the start point, both painting and photography were more like the tool of recording things than the behavior of art making. In ancient times, when people did not have the ability to read and write they drew things on walls to record what they saw. People, in that period, did not have the intention of making art works. They painted for simple a reason. During the Renaissance, the importance of humanity itself became important. People started to think more about human emotion and the beauty of humanity rather than the absoluteness of the God. These changes which happened in the human’s point of views bring them the opportunity to pay more attention to ‘Being’. During the middle ages, portraits became very popular in the upper classes. The aristocracy realized that portraits were a very good way to ‘keep them alive’ and to leave evidence of their lives for later generations. For these reasons, painters made portraits for living. So for several years, painting played the role of recording people, landscapes and objects. Because painting, during that time, had the duty to record things, almost every painting tended to be realistic. Painters spent a long time capturing every detail of their subjects and trying to reproduce the original texture of skin or of clothes for example or the relationship between light and shadow. This required great skill and implied that not everyone could be a ‘recorder’ of the world. This situation actually made a commercial circle and aesthetics at that period. But the invention of camera and, later, the appearance of printed photographs changed the balance between the art and the non-art world. I have to say every generation comes with some sort of threat to the previous generation. That is why the debate that “Painting is dead” began after the invention of the camera 

 

‘From today, painting is dead.’(Paul Delaroche, 1839)

 

During that period, lots of people had a negative point of view of photography. And the most extreme debate on this area is the notion that photography will replaced representational function of painting. People who had those point of view thought that the invention of camera would became a real threat to painting. Because, as a tool for capturing an image, the generation of the photograph seemed to replace the function of paintings, especially when the color-photos showed up. They worried that the discovery of photography would be the end of painting. The proposition is reasonable. Firstly, photography is quicker than painting. A camera can record things in an instant by simply opening the shutter while painters usually need much more time to finish the whole process of painting. What’s more, painting records things, but photographs can do this as well. ‘Photography is the epitome of realism.’(1981, p.12) The images which are provided by camera are higher quality than paintings. More importantly, I think, people need to have certain skills and techniques to paint a hyper-realistic paninting successfully whilst almost anyone can take a simple photograph to capture the original object. ( In this term, I just define photography as a simple way of recording.) Photography threatened painting because of its simplicity, convenience and, most importantly, the reproducibility between it and painting. Even in the present day, the argument: ‘Is it still necessary for people to paint’ persists. However, from my point of view, painting will not die. This traditional art form will not be replaced by others - even with future technological developments. On this debate, David Hockney gave a similar point of view:

 

"Photography will, in fact, replace only the photographic aspects of painting, which of course photography often can do better." (2007, p.57)

 

This clearly represents one of the relationships between painting and photography. Although painting will not be replaced by new technologies, it has been impacted upon by them. For example, Claude Monet painted the series of paintings, which would found the elements of Impressionism influenced by the photographic series of atmospheric effects, which made by La Havre’s Auguste Autin. What’s more, by the late 19th century, French artist like Pierre Bonnard used camera to document objects. Then he used the photographs which were taken by him to produce his paintings. In fact, new painting forms like abstract painting and Impressionist actually evolved after the ‘the threat of the camera’. So in some way, the invention of camera brought painting a great opportunity to widen its scope and to develop. The threat which the camera brought to painting made artists recognized that painting can go far more than this. This situation which had been brought about by the advent of photography led artists to question themselves and think about the meaning of painting. They started to think about more possibilities for painting. Soon the language of paintings changed. The process and materialrty of painting became more flexible. The form of paining also get more and more possibilities. Painting then carried much more human emotions, passions and the different shapes and expressions on object. When the traditional definition of painting no long satisfied the requirement of the arts world artists started to seek more and turn painting to a new form. So it is fair to say that it is photography that brought painting a chance to improve and reach more possibilities. With this influence, painting built the new forms which allow painters to depict fantastical, emotional idea better and more easily. Dave Hickey said that:

 

‘......painting changed after the advent of photography not because photography usurped its descriptive function, but because photography prioritized it, thus valorizing the referent over what it signified.’( 1993, p. 86. )

 

But the influence which photography had on painting was far more than this. Photography quickly found a place alongside painting. Let us say, photography itself built a bridge from painting to technology. Using photographs to help painters complete their works was not unusual even in the art history. As a painter and teacher, Jean-Léon Gérôme accepted photography as just another means of achieving aesthetic goals and taught this to his students in 1861. Using photographs as a way of gathering visual information means that people no longer need to spend a long time on drawing from life. And the image, which is caught by a camera, is permanent and still. This means that painters no longer need to worry about the changeable light during the day. For example, they can paint a landscape witnessed in the morning in the afternoon. Photography eliminated the limitation of time. And because of photography, it is possible for painter to get in touch with a place and its history in a way that they had never had a chance to learn before. Photography has expanded the painter’s horizon. Delaroche might have declared that “Painting is dead” in the early 19th Century but still, in this modern age, with the influence of digital, film and the internet, painting still holds a place in the art world. People paint a lot of significant work with the help of technology. David Reed said in 2006:

 

"Rather than initiating the death of painting, as was expected, photography and other media of mechanical reproduction have been like a vampire’s kiss that makes painting immortal. Painting is enthralled before the cold eye of mechanical reproduction and can stare back in the same way."

(http://rhizome.org/editorial/2016/may/24/surface-image-reception-painting-in-a-digital-age/)

​

So from my point of view, new technologies - including photography - help artists to extend painting’s range. But how does photography influence painting in this way? Van Deren Coke wrote in The Painter And The Photograph: From Delacroix to Warhol that: 

​

“The photograph thus functions not as a crutch but a means of expanding the painter’s vision, permitting painters to see aspects of a situation preciously overlooked, or beyond he range of the human eye.” (1964, p.89)

(Van, D. (1964). THE PAINTER AND THE PHOTOGRAPH. United States: The University of New Mexico Press.)

 

Photography now is everywhere. It is easy for people to get a mobile phone and hand held device. They carry those devices almost every day, and they take pictures whenever they want to capture what they see. Thanks for the development of internet people upload these pictures online. And people are now are surrounded by several medias: online, film, photography, 24 hour rolling news, the proliferation of hand-held devices etc. Artist Michael Staniak says, “the screen is as normal a part of my day-to-day life as eating.” (http://rhizome.org/editorial/2016/may/24/surface-image-reception-painting-in-a-digital-age/) So firstly, we know, just like I said in the first two paragraphs and I usually do, photography brings painters the start point -- printed or digital pictures. What’s more, the impact which comes from the computer technology and digital element is likely to expand the language of paintings. And because of the increasingly developing technology, it is even possible now for people to paint and draw on the computer. The digital painting now are more and more popular all around the world. Technologies allow people to have the devices to connect their computer in order to paint through a screen. And this means that painters no longer need papers, canvas, pens, brushes to finish their paintings. Painting has its new, digital form. This art form is usually used on various areas of the design such as game painting design. And this new form of painting is more convenient as people do not need to use a larger space as a studio for painting.

 

Then let us back to the original painting form, in art history, the relationship between painting and photography has been defined as “a mistress whom one cherishes but hides” (1852, p.209), but Dominique de Font-Réaulx describes a proactive relationship between painting and photography in her book Painting and Photography: 1839-1914. Painters use photographs for good. Contemporary artists like Eberhard Havekost, Gerhard Richter and Peter Doig use found images from newspapers, movies or snapshots taken by themselves to inform their paintings. Eberhard Havekost believes that photography is a medium that exists between painting and reality (2007, p.172). Gerhard Richter said he did not take it (photography) as a substitute for reality but as a crutch to help him get to reality (2007, p.78). Peter Doig uses photographs as a starting point to image memory. He thinks that photographs create plenty of space for painters for invention. 

 

“I use photography in the way that some painter in the latter part of the nineteenth century used photography. I am almost using photography as a map, a way to map out the image.”(2007, p.126)

 

“The photographic element is usually only a part of the composition - something that involves perspective or dimension for which I need a reference; something that is distorted maybe and would be unbelievable if drawn straight out of my head.” (2007, p.127)

 

Peter Doig uses photographs and film scenes as references. In his interview which I found on the Youtube , he said that when he look at the photograph which he chooses, he is more interested in the very detail of that picture like figure’s cloth or boots. What he takes from the photograph is a small part for his work. Gerhard Richter also built his ‘archive’ called ‘Altas’ which includes lots of pictures taken from newspapers and magazines and used this image resource to complete his series of photo-based paintings since the mid-sixties. And this is a ongoing project which includes almost 4000 pictures such as, portraits, pornographic imagery, and pictures of famous historical figures and events. It is not only a storage of the memorable things, but also the evidence of the history. Within photographs the basic elements like colour and composition have already been expressed. These objective elements help painters structure their paintings, whilst giving the artists a chance to modify the images in a personal way. Photography allows painters to discover their own personality beyond this developed image. Photographs are the link which connects people from the mental world to the real world, the present and history. Though photography, people get in touch with memory, see the world which they can not get. And at the same time, with the help of these photographs, people can access a world that they would not normally see. Photography provides lots of opportunities for artists. Artist Dan Graham had a series of projects. 

 

‘In 1971 the videomaker and curator Willoughby Sharp invited a group of 27 artists to create works on Pier 18, one of the abandoned industrial piers on the Hudson, on the west side of Manhattan. For his piece Dan Graham, dressed in jeans and a singlet, strapped a camera to different areas of his body, giving the lens as much autonomy as possible: ‘Still camera pressed to body – beginning at my feet, each shot progressively spirals to top of my head – Lens faces out – back of camera slide pressed flush to contour of skin.’

(http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/articles/hold-still’. )

 

He put a camera on the different areas of his body like the top of head, knee and toe, and took pictures to capture his surroundings. I find this an interesting idea. Here, the camera and photography become like a second pair of eyes, and these ‘eyes’ have a lot of possibilities. With these eyes people can see the bottom of the ocean or the top the mountains. So, from my point of view, cameras and photographs allow people to see what they cannot with their eyes. At the same time, because of the photograph is a form of documentation people are able to see visual records of historical events and learn how the world looked like in the past. This provides a lot of subject matter for contemporary painters. And for the artists and painters, Photographs allow them to have a direct reference to the past so that they can make works which includes the elements of the past.

 

At the same time, photography supports those painters who are interested in Photo-realism. For example, the paintings of Alyssa Monks look just like the images captured by a camera. She takes photographs herself and paints directly from them. Salman describe those paintings in his essay that “ you could be forgiven for believing that these images look like an intimate set of snapshots caught by the photographer at exactly the right time.” (2010.) In the present day, it has become more and more possible to make hyper realist paintings. That is not only because of their ability of professional skills, but also the support of photography. A photograph, sometimes can clearly provide the relationship between the light and shadow. As in a photography, the relationship of light and shadow is confirmed, but people sometimes can not define the way how light works by their own eyes. Photography in a way support them to recognize the light and correct it. And just like I said, photographs play the role on the draft for painters. And at the same time, there are lots of details which human eyes can not reach within the photographs. Because of the development of technology the accuracy and quality of photographic images keep getting higher and higher. And unlike photographs from the past, photographic image can now be manipulated on a computer screen. This means that artists can choose the parts of an image that they need and enlarge them for observation.

 

Peter Doig said in the book ‘The painting of modern life’ that “what I feel very boring is that some artists just copy photographs.”(2007, p.126) I agree with him. From my point of view, painting is more like a process of creation, which involves thought, memory, selection and not just copying.

 

The ways of using photography are various. Many artists not only use photographs as a reference, they also utilise the language of photography within their paintings. In these paintings we might see the texture of old photographs for example. These painters will make their images appear fuzzy and out of focus. Others are interested in the depth of field and apply this in their paintings. These photographic elements give viewers a new visual experience. Eberhard Havekost is interested in breaking up photographic effect by changing the focused and unfocused areas of the original image. And Johannes Kahrs is interested in the film still and references this through blurred images and the inclusion of video gliches and ‘snow’. We can also find these photographic elements within Gerhard Richter’s black and white paintings particularly in the early part of his career. Now in contemporary art, we can see the ‘language of photography’ in many paintings. And this language, which comes from mechanical equipment and processes enriches the language of painting. In this respect, photography provides a wide range of possibilities for painting. But, on the other hand, painting has a lot of influence on photography as well. Claude Renault who is a photographer from France, said in an interview:

 

“Photography is not as easy as painting to show exactly what I want. Painting is more like total creation and does not depend on that reality that photographs register. I would love all my images to be like paintings.

 

While I was taking a picture in Pondicherry, for instance, I immediately thought, by association, of a painting in which Gauguin uses a tree transversally, almost to divide the scene. And I did the same, even with completely different settings, colors and, of course, characters.”

(http://www.studentfilmer.com/2015/02/25/painting-and-photography-the-love-hate-relationship/)

 

So it can be argued that before a photographer takes a picture, some kind of image of the painting which they may see before will actually come in front of their head they might visualize a painting and this the helps photographer to manage the picture. Photography has learned a lot from painting about composition, color, or the lighting For example, Eric Nehr’s series of photographic works are inspired by Egon Schiele’s drawings. The whole atmosphere of these photographs tries to rebuild the language of Schiele’s painting in a photographic way. Mario Sorrenti made a series of photographs which imitated a number of masterpieces including Mona Lisa, Vénus à son miroir and La Baigneuse de Valpincon in 1999. In this series of work, Sorrenti recreated similar compositions and colours and even the poses of the models of original paintings. However, he does change things with his own ideas like adding new characters or replacing the female figures with male figures. 

 

So in conclusion, I think that painting and photography now are two brothers in the art world. Photography will not spell the end painting, indeed, it is a great partner which can help painters and push painting’s processes and inform new developments. The relationship between painting and photography is now more like a circle. These two disciplines impact upon one another and help each other. They will carry on with this productive relationship for some time to come.