The New Objectivity
The New Objectivity was a German art movement that arose in the 1920s challenging expressionism. Before World War I, art and photography followed the idealised and false image of the world, it was based on expressionism. People followed abstract and creative ways of presenting art and photography and ignored the realism of the world. After World War I, people started to see the world for what it really is due to the fact that the soldiers that returned home from war had terrible injuries and people realised that although war was a courageous and heroic thing, it came with serious consequences. The horrifying limb abnormalities and injuries that the soldiers had, made people see that the world isn't perfect and not everything is as ideal as it seems. This started the New Objectivity Movement after World War I. Art and photography transformed from idealistic and expressionistic outlooks on the world to truthful outlooks. People took photographs of things how they were. They didn't do them up to make them look a certain way and make people believe this was the way the world was, art and photography now presented the world exactly the way it was. It portrayed an honest outlook and everything was as simple, as boring, as ugly and as beautiful as it seemed, there was no worry of it being untruthful.
|
Albert Renger Patzsch
Albert Renger-Patzsch, born on June 22, 1897 and died on September 27, 1966, was a German photographer associated with the New Objectivity. He took photographs in a way that portrayed the world for what it is. He rejected the previous generations way of portraying the world; through creating a false and idealised image. His book, 'Die welt its schön' (the world is beautiful) is a collection of 100 photos and presents this way of seeing the world. He believed that the value of photography was in its ability to portray reality and represent the essence of an object. He believed the secret to a good photograph was its ability to show realism.
Similarities:
- Both photographs are black and white, giving the only detail to the context of the photographs.
- All context is cropped out of the photographs meaning any people or names as to what time or where the photo was taken. This could be because Albert Renger Patzsch wanted to demonstrate his way of looking at the world; everything should be photographed for what it is. Context gives more detail about a photograph than some photographers may want so cropping it out, means that you take the photograph or subject of the photograph for what it is.
- Both photographs include consecutive lines, despite the right hand photograph having straight and the left hand one having curly and round lines.
Differences:
- The left photograph consists of a subject that is natural; a flower.
- The right photograph however, consists of a subject that is manmade; a building.
- The left photograph is a close up shot which suggests that the photographer wanted the flower to be the main subject.
- The right photograph consists of straight and constructive lines present the idea that the photograph is geometric rather than organic. When thinking of it as geometric, you think of something structured and symmetrical which is what this is.
- The left photograph is also a lot more abstract due to the fact that none of the lines are parallel or straight and it is naturally the way it is without any manipulation.
The World is Beautiful
This is my interpretation of Albert Renger Patzsch's 'The World is Beautiful'. When taking these photos, I decided to try and crop/block out all of which would give context to the photos, this was influenced by Patzsch's idea. I also decided to filter all of the photos the same as I wanted to show that they were all linked together. I am happy with the outcome of this project as I think overall, the photographs are a good response and interpretation of Albert Renger Pazsch's work. This is because when taking the photographs, I tried to block out all context as I think that was a big feature of his work. I think I succeeded in doing so however I don't think all of my photographs are a good response. This is because, in terms of the way that he took pictures of objects as they are, I don't think all of my photographs are of specific objects, some of the photos are just of scenery or multiple objects. When taking these photographs, I angled the camera in a way that would show the detail of the specific objects, and the whole picture of scenic landscapes. I done this because I wanted to interpret the way Albert Renger Patzsch took photographs of things the way they were without any sort of image in mind. My photographs consisted of natural objects as well as structural and manmade. I chose to take photographs of these things because I wanted to interpret the sort of photographs that I analysed when looking at his work.
The photographs I liked:
I am happy with this photograph as I think it is a really good interpretation of Albert Renger Pazsch's work. I think this photograph really demonstrates a geometric approach that he has demonstrated himself. I also think that if you were to look at this photograph without knowing it was a part of this project, you would not know where, when, or why it was taken as the context has been completely cropped out. I think overall, this photograph is a good interpretation of the geometric photograph that I analysed on the Albert Renger Patzsch page.
|
I am happy with this photograph as I liked the fact that it really showed the organic side that I wanted to portray, The fact that it is a plant impacts a lot, however I am happy with the way that there are no straight lines and it is very natural and abstract. If I were to retake this photograph however, I would definitely zoom into the main flower to show more detail of it and also show more of the abstractness it obtains with the shapes and non-straight lines. I would have also taken it from a lower angle so you could see the tip of the main flower.
|