Help with Coursework please

Byker28i

Byker28i

Messages
21,341
Edit My Images
Yes
Quite an interesting discussion going on in the degree thread.

Simon Ess said: "Each individual will have a slightly different interpretation, or perhaps not so slight. It will, as droj suggests, be influenced by culture (a huge subject on its own), by personal experiences, by attitudes, by expectations, reaction to challenge or confirmation of belief systems etc. etc.."

Which brings me to Discontinuities. As part of my course at the moment I'm reading Berger, The Ways of Telling, in which the context within which a photograph is produced, distributed and consumed determines the information it conveys. If a photograph cannot convey the experience of the event depicted, then John Berger called this discontinuity and argued that this makes the photograph ambiguous. Without words to fill the gaps left by the broken continuity, people fill in those gaps based on their experiences, culture, everything mentioned above really. Once words are used, Berger states 'they produce together an effect of certainty, even dogmatic assertion'.

Below are some images which I'd like short captions or explanations for. Without knowing what they are, as mentioned above you'll be applying your own influences so I'd be really interested in any comments you have to make please.

I'll add my comments later.

Many thanks



#1
View attachment 13371



#2

View attachment 13372



#3
View attachment 13373



#4
View attachment 13374
 
Ok I'll have stab at this......

I think you have to older images and two contemporary ones here. The absence of any information forces the brain to fill in the gaps and draw on previous life experiences or knowledge.
and your own contextual bias:-

1) - 'Victorian lady' in mourning. (taken with plate film camera) Used to be a very popular pastime, also photographing their dead loved ones.

2) - Mum and Dad ? early 1950s (taken with a Box Brownie or similar) May have been taken by a child as not much emphasis on the children. 50s clothing?

3) - 'Man relaxing by the sea' (DSLR) modern(ish) image, looking at the handrail and glass held by bolts. Sunglasses also look contemporary.

4) - 'Out with the dog along the seafront' - (DSLR) Another contempoary image, clothing on mail looks a modern fabric. Modern lights, or are they flag poles (?) outside hotel. - hard to tell on my monitor.

Visual communication is a two-way process 'The Sender' (photographer) and 'the Receiver'(viewer) are likely to have two completely different interpretations.

Interesting challenge and not an easy task. No idea how way off beam I am here........

Good luck with your course :)
 
Last edited:
Hi Byker,
My interpretations would be:
#1 matriarchal figure, possibly British royalty, professionally photographed at the funeral of a sibling. Maybe from late 19th century.
#2 Simple family amateur snapshot on a day trip to the countryside. Low viewpoint and blurring suggests maybe taken by a child? Possibly c1950s
#3 Retired man, enjoying a holiday by the sea. Possibly taken by his wife. C.2000
#4 Thoughtfully composed shot, almost certainly taken by an enthusiast maybe simply for pleasure. I'd guess this is quite a recent photograph.
Is this what you're asking for?
:)
Chris
 
Hi,

My thoughts:

1) woman from the late Victorian period, photograph taken in a studio, she's possibly not as well off as the clothing suggests as many photographers provided costumes for the sitter to dress in.
2) family from the late forties early fifties out for a walk. The blurred photograph suggests it was taken by a third child probably a son, the eldest childof the family - the photo isn't posed and there's not much eye contact. From the clothes and the fact that they have a camera I'd guess they were middle class.
3) retired man relaxing - I'm not sure if he's on a boat or a pier, the ground looks to be flags, not something you'd get on a boat. From the clothes and the fact he's kept his socks on, I'd say he's English.
4) some sort of candid shot of a man out for a walk with his dog? Fairly contemporary., as others have said. Nice composition.
 
Cheers all - I'll add titles and context tonight - give others a chance to comment
 
#1 This one makes me want to ask why almost all in black with such a serious expression. If it is a "mourning" photograph why would you want to have your picture taken at a sad time?

#2 Family snapshot, taken by a younger member of the family (because of the low POV and IQ). Probably around 1950 (becuse of the double brestead suit) and a formal ocassion for thyis reasonably well off family.

#3 Vacation memories, on the coast, for a person (with a conservative background) from a cool climate (he is not tanned). Why dont his shorts have a belt and also no pocket in his shirt for his glasses case? Also his hat is almost totally useless for keeping the sun off his head.

#4 This suggests to me lonelyness. Shot by somebody who appears to think about therr photography. Location appears to be Europe.
Personally I like it very much.
 
#1 Taken as a record of a specific event, from the clothes possibly following the death of her husband.

#2 Another family record shot, possibly on holiday using a cheap camera.

#3 While this could be a snapshot, it could also be documentary photography, such as the sort of shot Martin Parr might have taken.

#4 Taken to evoke a feeling, the person's identity is not important. I don't think it is meant to evoke loneliness, more solitude or aloneness which he is comfortable with.
 
There may be a bias in my captions, I have a particular interest in Victorian portrait photography stuidios..

#1 Late Victorian professional portrait of a woman from the studio of William Avenell. There's an online biography for this photographer (linkthat allows the date to be fairly confidently put between 1889 and 1905. It would appear to be a carte de visite, and there are other clues that hint at a late date. The painted trompe l'oeil backdrop, rustic furniture props and the elaborate embossed backing card suggest a date in the second half of the known date range for the studio. The woman appears middle-aged and is probably middle class, she may be a resident of Brighton but it's more likely that she is visiting the area for a holiday. Her dress is typical for women of her apparent age and the period. The colour of the dress can't be determined, given the response of emulsions of the period it is likely to be a warm colour - it could be a deep read, royal blue, deep bottle green. It doesn't have to be black. Victorian fashions aren't my speciality but I don't think these are mourning clothes - the cape and ribbons appear to be satin rather than crepe and are too shiny and decorative to be mourning clothes, which would be matt. The portrait was probably taken in summer as seaside portait photographers specialised in the holiday trade. They were dependent on the weather for for good natural light for both the taking the portrait and contact printing from the glass plate negatives.

#2 Family snap from the 1940s-50s, probably taken on a Kodak box brownie using medium format film and a square (6x6?) aspect ratio. Using this equipment shutter speeds were limited to very few fixed film speeds (frequently a choice of one) and framing was rudimentery using a supplementary viewing lens. A typical family momento of the period.

#3 Contemporay family portrait from the digital period. I can't be certain, but I'd be surpised if this wasn't the photographer's father. A relaxed portrait, not candid but not formally posed.

#4 Contemporary street/candid observational photograph. Carefully composed by the photographer, the dog adding a slightly more random element that breaks the sterility of the scene.
 
The aim of the exercise is to take personal photos that depict events relevant to me on a personal level and couldn't belong to anyone else, then ask for short captions or explanations, hence proving the ambiguity without title of caption.

So as promised, the details I have are:

#1 is my Great, Great Grandmother, Alice Wells born 1845 with an image taken in Brighton during a holiday to the seaside when she was age 56. I know nothing more as this was anecdotal evidence from my grandmother. We found this photo when she moved into a home. It's the oldest photo I own and it's of a relative.

#2 is the first photo I ever took with an old box camera given to me by my grandmother. It's dated 1967 in Whitewebbs, North London and is an image of my parents and sisters.

#3 is my Father in law, relaxing on the last holiday he went on with my Mother in law before her dementia became too bad. Taken in 2009, they are on the balcony of a hotel at Sandbacks overlooking the sea. The image was taken by my mother in law on a compact camera we'd lent them (and spent 30 mins explaining how to turn it on and press the shutter). This was the only image from about 12 that was framed correctly and didn't cut off my father in laws head.

#4 was taken just over a month ago at Porthcawl. It depicts my wife and dog waiting patiently for me whilst I walk along the sea wall to take photos and rather reflects my coursework, juggling days out with the need to produce photographic work.

This was actually a hard task to select the photos, but thanks everyone for the comments and insights, some surprisingly close and very informative.
 
Last edited:
That was an interesting exercise, probably for all of us... Hope it helps your with your coursework.

As much as I enjoy looking at images in isolation, I like a title and I find a narrative interesting.

Nice to hear about your family too in the context of these images. You've come on along way since you took that first picture!
 
On a side note #4 is a really nice image. Could have that on my wall and look and look and look.
 
Byker28i said:
#1 is my Great, Great Grandmother, Alice Wells born 1856 with an image taken in Brighton during a holiday to the seaside somewhere towards the end of the century. I know nothing more as this was anecdotal evidence from my grandmother. We found this photo when she moved into a home. It's the oldest photo I own and it's of a relative.
Click to expand...


If it helps with your family history, my best guess would be the second half of the 1890s for this portrait. I think that ties in with her date of birth, putting her just into her forties at the time of the sitting. Sometimes there are dating clues on the back of the card - if you're very lucky a date mark from the printer. A full scan of the front and back would he useful. I've not seen a carte de visite with that degree of embossed texture before, I'll have a read through a few sources to see if I can find a date this was introduced.

@RichardTaylor - you comment about the serious expression, it's extremely rare to find a Victorian portrait photograph with a smile. It's unusual to find the sitter looking at the camera. This seems very odd to modern eyes, but the whole context of photography was very different. The more I look at Victorian portrait photographs the more I see - little things, like the fact her hands are concealed in this portrait. With a younger woman the pose is usually contrved to make sure the left hand is visible (presumably so that the presensce/absence of a wedding band can be seen).
 
Quick update - I got the info wrong on the first image, I checked with my aunt who's researched the family history. Alice Wells was born in 1845 and this image was taken when she was 56, so 1901.

Just for Alistair, I have two later images. The first are my Great Grandparents. the parents of my Grandmother, shown below.


View attachment 13467





View attachment 13468
 
1: Austere. Strict. Humourless. Matriarch. I suppose the reason those words came to my mind was that culturally, that's what we've been brought up to believe with older women in the Victorian era due to the whole untouchable persona given of Victoria herself by historical references and media. In all honesty, the strict pose in this image is almost certainly due to the head clamp holding her still during a fairly long exposure. However, this, coupled with the culturally engrained idea of the Victorian Matriarch as a solid, stoic and dominating force in the family all seem to compel us to believe this is s strict, austere, and forbidding woman.

2: Stiff upper lip. Post war. Still austerity because of what we know of post war rationing etc. The man is the patriarch, very much fitting the stereotype - he's "correct" in that role.. upright posture, hands behind the back... he's the head of the familt and takes this role in the image. Whether he is thinking this is irrelevant to me as the reader, again I'm drawing upon what Barthes would describe as a cultural myth to draw that conclusion. The women is more whimsical, feminine, flighty.. not concerned with the camera as much. She IS the man in as much that she would be Mrs Whoever.. the wife, Mother, nurturer. The father is the one confronting the viewer. He's be the one you approached if you wanted to interact with this group. The children are incidental. The photographer wasn't even concerned about them. This, whether intentional or not, is read again by the myth of the post war British family and mindset of the time. Children should be seen and not heard. We're in a pre-teenage era here... children had no personality or means of representation. People either posed them for family snapshots of ignored them. This is why Lartigue's family snapshots were so intriguing when they came to light, as they showed something else other than the culturally engrained expectations.

3: Working class. British. Seaside resort. This is read again from what we know about the British at the seaside culturally. For a further explanation, see Martin Parr :) He's British, he keeps the socks on :)

gotta run... got up late...
 
As an Australian, without a lot of the close cultural background from the "old world" although my family roots (a long time ago) were in the UK, I would have have thought photographs of people with socks and sandals was European, not necessarily "British". I only know of one person who does that and he was born in Croatia. As far as I can remember it was always bare feet wether in sandals or (in latter years) thongs.
The only memories I have (and I was born in 1944) of post wartime was the old gun enplacements round our country town (it was an industrial and mining area) and the shortage of new motor vehicles when dad wanted to buy a new car in 1950. He placed and order for a Ford Perfect or Vauxhall or a Holden (general motors). He took the first one that became available.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
In all honesty, the strict pose in this image is almost certainly due to the head clamp holding her still during a fairly long exposure.
Click to expand...

Very doubtful at this late date. Small children might be supported in a chair with a ribbon, but exposures were short enough that adults could pose unaided.
 
I enjoyed that!
I was a bit far off the mark with the Victorian royalty comment (or is there something you haven't told us Byker?!) but I guess that is part of the purpose of the exercise.
:)
 
Rubidium86 said:
I enjoyed that!
I was a bit far off the mark with the Victorian royalty comment (or is there something you haven't told us Byker?!) but I guess that is part of the purpose of the exercise.
:)
Click to expand...

Chris - all matriarchs of a certain age look a bit like royalty in Victorian portraits..

We're conditioned as modern day viewers by images of Queen Victoria and her family, and the photograhers and clients of the day were certainly aware of the poses in royal photographs and there's a deliberate effort to emulate them. The carte de visite was the budget noble portrait of the new middle class - for a few shillings they could have in miniature a likeness formerly only available at great expense as a painted portrait and restricted to the upper classes. Photographic portraiture was a novelty of the age suddenly available to the masses.
 
Anyone else loving Alistairs explanations :) This has generated far more info and feedback that I could possibly have hoped for. Great forum this.
Thanks All
 
No 3, its not Martin Parr,Parr has shot most of his seaside work in color,and he doesn't tend to shoot with people looking into the camera :)
 
I can keep going.. but I think I'm skating close to a thread hijack :)

My g-g-grandfather was a Victorian photographer with a studio in Skipton, his cousin was a prominent photographer in Scarborough at the same time and who had off-season studios in Sheffield and Rotherham at various times. There are at least four professional photographers within the extended family (cousins and their spouses) at this time. Various offspring are noted in census returns as assisting. It was researching these family photographers, their studios and collecting their carte de visite from Ebay that got me interested in Victorian photography.

Researching turns up so many odd little stories - like the assistant left to his own devices in one of the satellite studios who because the weather was so poor was unable to open the studio, and so went out and got royally drunk he was unable to unlock the door and let himself in when he got home and so found himself sleeping it off in the cells and up before the magistrate in the morning. Stories like that emphasise how critical good natural light was to the business - whilst popular modern media would have you thinking it was all magnesium flash powder and "Flash! Bang Whallop! What a picture!"
 
Alastair said:
Very doubtful at this late date. Small children might be supported in a chair with a ribbon, but exposures were short enough that adults could pose unaided.
Click to expand...


He mentioned 1845.. didn't see that was when she was born, apologies. Hard to tell how old she is in that shot, but let;'s assume it was taken in the early 1900s in a daylight studio (which was the norm), it would have been around 1/5th to 1/2 second I reckon. I bet she was told to stay still.
 
Pookeyhead said:
He mentioned 1845.. didn't see that was when she was born, apologies. Hard to tell how old she is in that shot, but let;'s assume it was taken in the early 1900s in a daylight studio (which was the norm), it would have been around 1/5th to 1/2 second I reckon. I bet she was told to stay still.
Click to expand...

Pooks you've normally got a few photographs you can pull out of the bag,any chance of a few more images to comment on in a similar vein? This has been a good exercise.
 
Tell you what, it was an interesting challenge to pick 4 images personal to me but were interesting enough for comments. Why not give it a go...
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Pooks you've normally got a few photographs you can pull out of the bag,any chance of a few more images to comment on in a similar vein? This has been a good exercise.
Click to expand...

I have no old family (or even non family) images on my server I'm afraid. They'll all be archived away I'm afraid, both prints and scans. I'll see what I can dig out this weekend.. especially if it's raining again! :)
 
Next time I'm up at my Mum's I'll have a look through my Dad's old collection. He was a decent photographer in his day. I might even get some ideas! The problem might be getting images which clearly aren't all my own family/friends. I suppose you could just use some randoms from the internet as long as there's info available on them (and they're not famous images or bound by some kind of copyright)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top