The Value of Virtue

I believe that all things we do should be available to be shared without restriction, creative work and ideas especially as this triggers feeling we do not (yet) understand and which seem to be really important – perhaps other periods of human existence were closer to the value (not monetary) of art – perhaps some peoples living today are more in touch with the significance of art – perhaps.

This brings me back to the focus of my thoughts and the relevance to what I spend my time on (or as much as possible of it) which is to create images which share a feeling.

I have been saying these images have no monetary value – should not be sold or traded – I am also saying that if the creator of art (image, tactile, sound or whatever) is removed from the direct creation, this expression is dead – it has some relevance – as does a cut flower or a stuffed animal, but compared to the field of poppies or the running herd of deer – it is dead dead dead.

Take the analogy a little further – put a picture of a dead animal on a screen or print it in a book – it still conveys some feeling, but nothing to the emotion you may have seeing the dead child blasted by a bomb in Palestine on the floor in front of you.

Art and invention should be free for all who wish to share.

In a couple of previous posts I try to understand a little what virtue means. For me it is a word more attuned to what I feel is the essence of something created to be shared and which contains something more than just the depiction, or rendition of the painting, poem, tune or image offered to me, it contains some of the identity of the artist. At some point the creator of the work has directly touched or been intrinsically involved with the piece presented.

Somehow this essence of the artist is shown, or transmitted to be shared by others- perhaps this is why a live performance is more involving, more satisfying than a recording, print or digitised image, even though the copy may be technically, acoustically or perceptively more tangible.

The virtue of reality is intangible and how strange that virtual reality means something completely different, almost the opposite.

The Value of an image

Stating the ‘value’ of anything is simply a way of placing its desirability in relation to other, similar, items or to establish its usefulness in relation to a situation (a lifebelt to a drowning person for example is very valuable).

If photography is used to show images which cause a reaction which helps in any way – the image of a naked, burnt child in Vietnam, a Mother bathing her child in Japan who was crippled by mercury pollution, a Spanish soldier falling dead – these images are photographs which were made to be seen in a magazine and can be seen on a screen or on a wall or in a magazine and have a high value, they do something.

But to put a price on an image which is a digital presentation on a screen, or a printed version of this is, for me, ridiculous.

I have just put some prints into an exhibition locally – a little gallery asked me to let them show a few of my new photographs, so I printed some (on paper and glass) on a theme – there are five other photographers showing. Most used digital equipment, edited this with software and get them printed. They then ask hundreds of euro for these ‘prints’ – how can this ‘value’ be determined – by pressing a button hundreds, thousands of similar prints can be created, to me this is obscene.

I could not give any value to my prints, made in my darkroom. I was happy to show my ideas and what I am doing, but it is over 35 years since I had my last exhibition (where I sold stuff) and I am returning from a twilight zone into the light again after all these years.

A digital recorder (phone, table, camera etc) can record an important event and can be used to manipulate light to show a pleasing or a disturbing image, in this case the ‘camera’ operator should be rewarded by society for their perception – but as a digital image is only a lump of binary code, intrinsically it is almost worthless.

A crafted piece of paper, or glass, tin – whatever – with an image which shares a feeling or message is unique – the artist has touched it and put life into it and is sharing this – it can have true value – I hasten to add “in my opinion

I have stopped looking at any digital images if possible (it isn’t of course) and refuse to digitalise anything I make, so I doubt you will ever see my recent work unless you go to a gallery which is showing it, or, better still, come and stay with us and sit with us looking at prints and plates.

There is so much dross, overwhealming all media and so many people are using awful apps to make more rubbish (hipstamatic, ghost image camera etc) – it is sad – after many years I now refuse to use or own a telephone and limit my keyboard time (or try to) to an hour a day – slowly I am getting free

The Song of a Shadow

A book which has influenced my thoughts recently is, “In Praise of Shadows” by Junichiro Tanizaki – there are many free downloads,here is one – is a very short, but I found it deep and enchanting.

Without shadows, we are blind, we could not see anything. I often wonder what the weight of a shadow is – or is it a negative weight as it is where fewer photons fall – but as a photon seems to have no mass than why should a shadow exist?

Whatever a shadow is, with them there can be no photography, so I am a borrower of shadows, a chaser of their beauty.

Collodion, wet-plate photography, suits me well as the shadows I borrow briefly in my cameras and put onto glass plates are more elusive than usual. I use a lot of light which I cannot see as it is ultra-violet. For nearly 50 years I have used the Zone System in all photography I have done, often cheating a lot when using roll film, but I try to use the principles set out by Ansel Adams in his Basic Photo Series of books. Applying this to collodion is a challenge as the lighting is more difficult to “see”, but the shadows are there as my friends and help me to gather the silver sunbeams in the right order.

Here is todays effort to get a plate of my son Jack, it may be one of the last of this particular camera/lens combination (a 360mm Rodenstock ‘Portrat’ Petzval on a 12″x10″ Watson?) I will be trying a 360mm Flor tomorrow. I found out he actually took a picture of me taking a picture of him with his ‘new’ Olympus OM1 – 16 seconds at f3.5 (me, not his).

Jack Tidswell taken by his father and taking his father

A Gentleness of Shadows

We are offering our accommodation and all the photographic facilities at Villa Roquette for workshops and photographic services – the next collodion wet-plate workshop is the end of January 2015, run by Jon Brewer, book before the new year for a special price.