Michael Schmidt interview Camera Magazine #3 (March 1979)
"Photography was invented to enable us to portray reality with complete precision to the last detail"
"It's a means of documenting our times in a valid and credible form. Credible...because man is primarily a visual creature to whom thought is a secondary process...[and] because the photographer has no influence on the evolution of the negative, unlike in the media of painting and literature in which the artist alone is responsible for the development and execution of his work of art. It makes no difference what the photographer’s intentions were when he began his work, the creative process is and remains subjective."
Reading through the interview, the smart arse voice sitting in the cheap seats at the back of my head piped up quite a bit. However any initial smart arse thoughts quickly turned into more reasonable musing. The first quote above, made be thing that clearly Schmidt was not a subscriber to the view that the camera can lie/be manipulated. However as I read on past the second quote I took a different meaning.
Having no other exposure to Schmidt's viewpoints or working ethos, I interpreted the second quote to potentially mean that Schmidt deemed that the viewer of a photograph provides the final touches, via the interpretation and subconscious mental lenses they perceive and process the image. Therefore as this makes the viewer an integral part of the image and its consumption, this assigns a predetermined credibility. I am aware that I may have completely misinterpreted this, it is not completely clear in my head. A fuzzy image I need to get into focus. Moving on...
On commenting about the photographer having no influence on the evolution of the negative, I felt that Schmidt had stated something 15 years before the digital age but which now more then ever is applicable.
Schmidt appeared to want to create a neutral an image as possible, "Thus, precluding an individual way of seeing (personal colour tastes) by the viewer". My initial [admittedly smart arse] thought was that whilst colour taste issues may be removed by only photographing in black and white, this will have been replaced with personal tastes in respect of colour vs black and white. A viewers personal tastes can never be totally removed or sanitised. The choice for the photographer is how much they want to challenge these personal tastes.
Schmidt stated his preference for neutral diffused light "produce an image without noticeable shadows". "The viewer must allow the objects portrayed in the photograph to to take their effect upon him without being distracted by shadows or other mood effects."
Schmidt appeared to have been striving to achieve a sterile starting point as possible to protect/not infect/taint the subject or topic of his image.
"Photography was invented to enable us to portray reality with complete precision to the last detail"
"It's a means of documenting our times in a valid and credible form. Credible...because man is primarily a visual creature to whom thought is a secondary process...[and] because the photographer has no influence on the evolution of the negative, unlike in the media of painting and literature in which the artist alone is responsible for the development and execution of his work of art. It makes no difference what the photographer’s intentions were when he began his work, the creative process is and remains subjective."
Reading through the interview, the smart arse voice sitting in the cheap seats at the back of my head piped up quite a bit. However any initial smart arse thoughts quickly turned into more reasonable musing. The first quote above, made be thing that clearly Schmidt was not a subscriber to the view that the camera can lie/be manipulated. However as I read on past the second quote I took a different meaning.
Having no other exposure to Schmidt's viewpoints or working ethos, I interpreted the second quote to potentially mean that Schmidt deemed that the viewer of a photograph provides the final touches, via the interpretation and subconscious mental lenses they perceive and process the image. Therefore as this makes the viewer an integral part of the image and its consumption, this assigns a predetermined credibility. I am aware that I may have completely misinterpreted this, it is not completely clear in my head. A fuzzy image I need to get into focus. Moving on...
On commenting about the photographer having no influence on the evolution of the negative, I felt that Schmidt had stated something 15 years before the digital age but which now more then ever is applicable.
Schmidt appeared to want to create a neutral an image as possible, "Thus, precluding an individual way of seeing (personal colour tastes) by the viewer". My initial [admittedly smart arse] thought was that whilst colour taste issues may be removed by only photographing in black and white, this will have been replaced with personal tastes in respect of colour vs black and white. A viewers personal tastes can never be totally removed or sanitised. The choice for the photographer is how much they want to challenge these personal tastes.
Schmidt stated his preference for neutral diffused light "produce an image without noticeable shadows". "The viewer must allow the objects portrayed in the photograph to to take their effect upon him without being distracted by shadows or other mood effects."
Schmidt appeared to have been striving to achieve a sterile starting point as possible to protect/not infect/taint the subject or topic of his image.