# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Gathered Leaves, The Museum of Modern Art, Kamakura & Hayama, Hayama, Japan. June 2022

A Pound of Pictures. MACK, 2022.

'[An] obsessive ode to image-making ... this serendipitous approach has become Soth's signature.' New Yorker

'[A Pound of Pictures] gathers together a number of superlative photographs..He's delivered his most personal body of work in at least a decade, and that risk-taking openness feels encouragingly contagious.' Collector Daily

'Following along with Soth as his photographic journey has unfolded over the years is not unlike keeping in touch with a friend who is excited to let you in on their latest discovery. Whether you are an astute photo enthusiast...or just interested in photography in general, I don't think you'll be disappointed by this work.' The Washington Post

'As viewers invest works with meaning, and as we respond to these pictures with reveries of our own, we make them larger, heavier, though not with mass so much as with metaphor or memory...The joy of A Pound of Pictures is that it allows Soth, and us, to create meaning for these works beyond what is given.' Hyperallergic

'Alec Soth [is] the great road-tripping witness of American life ... A Pound of Pictures free-associates ... Connections and themes emerge. One is a sense of people searching among wasteland wildflowers for something unknown.' The Guardian

'[A Pound of Pictures] captures the ordinariness of American life and elevates it to something poetic.' Artnet

'Soth has been one of the great visual chroniclers of the American condition...But his new project, A Pound of Pictures, takes a turn inward. Here, America as Soth finds it serves less as a subject than as a vehicle to examine the photographic medium itself, and his relationship to it.' The Paris Review

'Soth creates sonnets, elegies and odes to American life that engage both intuition and the imagination in equal measure ... A Pound of Pictures is a window into both our world and Soth's process itself.' AnOther

'[An] expansive lyrical contemplation of the nature of photography itself and of the innate human impulse to document our own lives.' i-D

A Pound of Pictures at Sean Kelly, New York, January 14-February 26, 2022.Recent Press: Collector Daily, Widewalls, Musée, AnOther, Galerie Magazine, Juxtapoz, The Guardian, This is Tomorrow, The Art Newspaper, Breaking Latest News, Star Tribune, The New Yorker.
Photo credit: Cooper Dodds

A Pound of Pictures by Alec Soth will be released by MACK in January 2022 along with exhibitions at Sean Kelly Gallery in New York, Weinstein Hammons in Minneapolis, and Fraenkel Gallery in San Francisco.

The Space Between Us, Three Shadows Photography Art Centre, Xiamen, China, October 6-November 14, 2021.

Paris / Minnesota, Nemeth Art Center, Park Rapids, Minnesota, July 22 - October 2, 2021

The Palms, Alec Soth and Dave King at Mass MoCA, June 25 & 26, 8pm. Purchase Tickets.

Pictures & Words #1

Alec discusses Real Time vs. Stoytime on YouTube

I Know How Furiously Your Heart Is Beating, Arendt House, Luxembourg, December 12, 2020 - April 15, 2021

Rambling through Eggleston's Democratic Forrest on YouTube

Alec discusses John Cage and other things on YouTube

The Palms January 30, 2021, 8pm. Alec Soth and Dave King. Commissioned by The Great Northern. ( purchase tickets) Reviews in the Star Tribune and Mpls.St.Paul Magazine.

The Parameters of Our Cage by C. Fausto Cabrera & Alec Soth is available for preorder at MACK. Recent press about The Parameters of Our Cage in The Guardian, Star Tribune, BuzzFeed, CNN, The New Yorker, The Washington Post.

Alec Soth gives a tour of his library for MACK Live on April 16, 2020.

Alec Soth: Photography Is A Language. Kunst Haus Wien. Vienna, Austria. February 26-August 16, 2020

The Little Brown Mushroom Newsletter is Alec's latest experimental project at LBM. Sign up today!

Desire Lines: Reframing the American Road Trip Narrative in Alec Soth's Photographs by Rebecca Bengal for IMA Magazine, vol 30. This article is now on Magnum Photos

A new online course titled Alec Soth: Photographic Storytelling is now available at learn.magnumphotos.com

Director Brennan Vance recently released a short film through MN Originals about happiness and the farmhouse.

Recent press: New York Times, Guardian, Photograph Magazine, Magnum, Vice, Huck, Star Tribune, AnOther, MINN Post, Monopol, Wall Street International, MPR News, Art News, Document, Daily Art Magazine, Minnesota Monthly, T Magazine, Internazionale, Artsy, Garage, Sleek, ASX, Berlin Art Link, Photobookstore Magazine, Feature Shoot, Domus, Wallpaper, Lens Culture, Art Observed, Brooklyn Rail, Financial Times, W Magazine, Washington Post, New Yorker.

Alec Soth and Vince Aletti in conversation at Sean Kelly Gallery, April 4, 2019.

Desert Island Pics. Alec Soth in conversation at the Barbican for Photoworks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Alec Soth (born 1969) is an American photographer, based in Minneapolis. Soth is known for his large-scale projects and portraits.

# data[].attributes.body
- use these photographs to discuss art elements and principles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Salgado's celebrated photo-essay, Genesis, marked a rekindling of faith in the partnership of humanity and nature. Completed in 2013, the eight-year project is awesome in the truest sense of the word. Genesis is about returning to origins - finding nature in its pure, pristine state. His most recent series, Amazonia, depicts the rivers, rainforest and indigenous peoples of the Brazilian Amazon.

He has published a number of books including Other Americas (1986), Sahel, lʼhomme en détresse (1986), Sahel: el fin del camino (1988), An Uncertain Grace (1990), Workers (1993), Terra (1997), Migrations and Portraits (2000), and Africa (2007). Exhibitions of Salgado's work have been presented in institutions throughout the world, including International Center of Photography, New York, Natural History Museum, London; Somerset House, London; Tokyo Metropolitan Museum of Photography; Barbican Gallery, London; Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin; and George Eastman House, Rochester. His work is held in many museum collections including the Centre Pompidou, Paris; Art Institute of Chicago; Museum of Modern Art, New York; The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles; San Francisco Museum of Modern Art; and the National Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo, among others

A feature-length documentary about the artist, The Salt of the Earth, directed by Wim Wenders and Juliano Ribeiro Salgado, won the Special Jury Prize at Cannes in May 2014. Salgado has been awarded numerous major photographic prizes in recognition of his accomplishments. He has twice been awarded photographer of the year by the International Center of Photography. Salgado is a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador, and an honorary member of the Academy of Arts and Sciences in the United States.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sebastião Salgado Prints For Sale | SOL . LDN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Salgado's celebrated photo-essay, Genesis, marked a rekindling of faith in the partnership of humanity and nature. Completed in 2013, the eight-year project is awesome in the truest sense of the word. Genesis is about returning to origins - finding nature in its pure, pristine state.

# data[].attributes.body
powerpoint

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Since its invention in 1839, photography has served as a medium for documenting, understanding, and interpreting the world. It has radically contributed to the evolution of visual representation, in part by allowing for the documentation of a moment in time, and, because of its inherent reproducibility, by enabling the wide circulation and distribution of images -which has exploded with the advent of the Internet and social media platforms.

Photographs are forms of representation, shaped by a series of decisions made by the photographer. Moreover, the way we interpret a photograph is influenced not only by the photographer's intention, but also by the ways in which a picture is produced, edited, and circulated. Photography has been used throughout history and into the present day as a tool for science and exploration; as a means of documenting people, places and events; of telling stories and recording histories; and as a mode of communication and critique in our increasingly visual culture. The medium is being continually reinvented and rethought, shaped as much by technological advances as it is by the ever-changing dialogues surrounding photography's use.

Related Artists: Eugène Atget, Richard Avedon, Mathew B. Brady (studio of), Julia Margaret Cameron, Thomas Demand, Philip-Lorca diCorcia, Walker Evans, Alexander Gardner, Katy Grannan, David Wark Griffith, Philippe Halsman, Frances Benjamin Johnston, Dorothea Lange, Nadar (Gaspard-Félix Tournachon), Gilles Peress, Walid Raad, Jacob August Riis, August Sander, Cindy Sherman, William J. Shew, Laurie Simmons, Lorna Simpson, Jeff Wall, Carrie Mae Weems

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Since its invention in 1839, photography has served as a medium for documenting, understanding, and interpreting the world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The exposure triangle is holy combination of shutter speed, aperture and sensitivity, the ISO value. Every photographer has to understand their meanings and use them correctly. This tool helps to easily visualize an affection of the settings on a final result.
Use it, learn it, teach it, share it and embed it!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The exposure triangle is holy combination of shutter speed, aperture and sensitivity, the ISO value. Every photographer has to understand their meanings and use them correctly. This tool helps to easily visualize an affection of the settings on a final result. Use it, learn it, teach it, share it and embed it!

# data[].attributes.body
- contour

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lauren Greenfield - 54 Artworks, Bio & Shows on Artsy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find the latest shows, biography, and artworks for sale by Lauren Greenfield

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Official Works by David Hockney including exhibitions, resources and contact information.

# data[].attributes.body
- maintain detail
- histogram scale
- clipping

# data[].attributes.body
- constructed creations
- merging multiple images
- surrealism
- collage
- multi-media
- photomontage

# data[].attributes.body
- RAW
- DNG
- JPEG
- PNG
- GIF
- TIF

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Buy, bid, and inquire on Andy Warhol: Polaroids on Artsy. "I've never met a person I couldn't call a beauty," Andy Warhol famously said-and the rise of instant Polaroid photography in the 1950s gave him endless ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Legal Guide for Photographers and Photography Businesses - This step-by-step guide outlines everything you need to know from an Australian legal standpoint about taking photographs and starting a photography business. We cover:

Your shooting rights

Protecting your images

Licensing your images, and

Selling your photography services

Whether you're a freelance or professional photographer (or videographer), doing things right will help avoid legal issues and protect you and your business from lawsuits.

Legal issues covered in this guide

Click on any of the questions below to jump to that section of this legal guide.

If after reading this guide you still have a question, get in touch as we'd love to keep adding your questions to this comprehensive guide.

Can I photograph someone without their permission?

Yes, as long as it doesn't violate their privacy. There is no legal requirement that you have to get a person's permission to take their photograph. However, if that person has 'a reasonable expectation of privacy', then you cannot take the photo of them.

For example, you can photograph someone out in public, say in the street or a public park, but you cannot photograph them in their house or garden. And no selfie sticks under their skirt - come on, that's not photography!

Can I photograph children in public?

Yes, there is no law restricting photography of children in public places. However, the images cannot be indecent and the photographer cannot be creating a 'public nuisance'. In addition, the photographs cannot be for commercial use.

In recent years, photographing children in public has been a hot topic in Australia - particularly at the beach or swimming pool. So be mindful that although it is not illegal, many parents will disapprove.

Can I photograph a celebrity or well known person?

Be very careful when selling or using commercially any photographs of celebrities, public figures, politicians or well known persons. They need to control their public image and will not want it associated with anything they haven't approved or consented to, particularly if it is for financial or commercial gain.

Always ask them to sign a Release Form, also known as a Photo Consent Form, if you intend to sell the image or use it commercially.

Can I take a photograph while on private property?

No, you need to get the property owner's permission to photograph - or you'll be trespassing. If you're photographing a statue, painting or other object that belongs to someone and is displayed on private property, in a home or museum, you'll still need permission if you plan to use it commercially.

Yes, but only for private use or what is called 'fair use'. 'Fair use' includes using an image of the trademark or copyrighted work in a review or to advertise the sale of the item. If the trademark is displayed permanently in public, that's OK too.

But if you are trying to profit from your image of the trademark or copyrighted work or if your image will confuse the public or weaken the trademark or copyright in some way, then that is not allowed.

If your photograph isn't for private use or doesn't fall within 'fair use' then you'll need the trademark or copyright owner's permission. And tagging or giving them credit isn't enough - you'll need their written permission.

What can't I photograph?

In general, if there is a security issue you will be prevented from taking photographs. For example, photography is not allowed on military bases, nuclear facilities, some political buildings, etc. Photographs in museums and galleries are also discouraged or often banned. But this is to encourage you to buy postcards, posters and guide books from their shops that carry the licensed images.

Some overseas countries have very restrictive regulations about taking photographs, including airports, embassies, soldiers/policemen, government buildings etc. So check before you travel.

What if I provide drone photography services?

Individual consent is required for aerial drone photography. If you are providing any drone or similar photography services, any operation of any remote device within 15 to 30 m of a person requires the consent of EACH individual. It cannot be group consent on behalf of the individuals, it must be individual consent from each individual.

The Civil Aviation Safety Regulation 1998 Part 101 (CASA Rule) for remote operation devices ('ROD') also recommends that the operator provide a written brief of any additional risks that may be possible to a person if something goes wrong.

Yes, in most cases you own the copyright and the rights to your photographs and any derivative images. However, there are 3 cases when you may not:

You are an employee of a business: In this case it is likely that your employer has included in your employment contract ownership of any photographs, images and videos you take during work hours.

You are hired as a contractor: In a work-for-hire situation, you can agree copyright ownership rights in advance. For example, full ownership rights to the person hiring you; license to reprint your photos and videos; individual sale of photos, etc.

You license or sell your rights to your client: For example, you are commissioned by a client to take photographs at a wedding. You can sell them the full rights to the photographs so they are free to make as many copies as they like; or you can sell them individual photos; or you can sell them a limited license to only make a certain number of copies.

When should I use a Model or Child Release Form?

It is always a good idea to use a Model Release Form. If you do not and your photograph or any image derived from your photograph, becomes popular and generates income, then the person in the photograph may claim a share of the revenue. If your model signs a Release Form at the time of shooting, then they give up all rights to any future income from the images - irrespective of whether you paid them a modelling fee for the photo shoot or not.

If you take photographs of children for commercial use, or if they might end up in the public domain, you definitely should use a Child Model Release Form - also known as a Parental Consent Form. This is a legal form that the child's parent or guardian signs on behalf of the child, that allows current and future use of the photographs and derivative images.

How do I protect images on my website?

Preventing digital images posted on your website from being copied or used without your permission is almost impossible. However, these 6 suggestions can help:

Watermark your images with a copyright notice

Add your contact details and copyright notice to the image metadata

Disable right click saving of images on your website

Use flash to display images

Display images behind a transparent foreground image

Break the image into smaller image tiles and display as a continuous image

Whichever method you choose to use, you should always include a statement on your website specifying what your image sharing and re-use policy is. For example:

Re-use with attribution only

Re-use with attribution and link back to your website

Re-use only with your written permission, or

Any re-use will be considered copyright infringement

Protecting images used on social media channels is even harder, since social media content is designed to be shared. Technical options for preventing sharing do not normally work. At least with your own website you have some control over this. In some cases, ownership of content posted on social media channels actually belongs to the social media channel itself!

If you are uncomfortable having your images shared, we would recommend you don't post on social media at all. The best that you can do is ask for attribution, but don't expect it!

What should I do if my images are stolen or used without my permission?

If you find your images used without your permission you should issue a Copyright Infringement Notice, also called a DMCA Takedown Notice. This is a formal notice to the person who is breaching your copyright that they do not have permission to use your images and they must remove them immediately.

If they are selling your images or a derivative in any manner, you have the legal right to ask them for a share of revenue, depending on how and where the images are used. If they have cropped out your watermark from your images, you can ask for copyright infringement damages in addition to a share of their revenue!

How can I license my photographs or images?

There are a number of ways to sell and license your photographs and images. Here are the most common options or levels of license:

Full ownership rights: This allows your client to do as they please with your photographs. Including reproduce as often as they like; use commercially; use to advertise goods and services; alter and edit; and on-sell the photographs.

Restricted use license: This restricts your client's use of the photographs in some way. For example, no reproductions are allowed; only a restricted number of reprints is allowed; or reprints and enlargements only to be purchased through you.

Specific use license: This specifies the permitted uses of the photographs. For example, for T-shirts, greeting cards, calendars, books or mouse pads; on billboards or business cards; for company advertising or branding; or personal use only is allowed.

Whatever you decide, make sure the terms of your licenses are very clear on your website and at time of sale. Your customers can agree to your terms by ticking a checkbox when they checkout online, or sign a Photo Licensing Agreement if they're buying in-person at a gallery.

Photo Licensing Agreements can also be called Copyright Assignment (or Transfer) Forms when they involve selling full ownership rights.

Should I use a Photography Contract with my clients?

Yes, you should always have a written Photography Contract with your clients. This agreement lays out the terms under which you do business. It should include: description of the photo shoot, location and time, the contract amount and payment terms, in the event of unusual weather or unforeseen events.

If you specialise in a particular type of photography, you should consider having a Photography Contract that is tailored to cover your specific needs. For example:

Wedding photography contract

Event photography contract

Portrait photography contract

Family photography contract

Newborn or baby photography contract

Pet photography contract

Sports teams or school photography contract

Product photography contract

Real estate or architectural photography contract

Corporate photography contract

Food photography contract

Boudoir photography contract, etc.

You should also post a standard version of your Photography Contract on your website, under your Terms & Conditions. Using a Photography Contract is professional, saves time and can reduce potential misunderstandings.

What business structure should I use to sell my photography services?

In Australia, there are generally 4 options for structuring your business:

The best business structure for you will depend on your personal circumstances - and getting this decision right is very important. So talk to your accountant about the pros and cons of each option. Here's a quick summary of each option.

Being a Sole Trader is the simplest and least expensive option. Designed for business owners who are the sole proprietors of their companies, this structure doesn't give you much protection if things go wrong. Your personal assets are unprotected from any claims arising from your business.

Incorporation (i.e. forming a Proprietary Limited Company) effectively makes your business a separate legal entity from you. This structure involves quite a bit of paperwork and can be more expensive to maintain but it offers your personal assets protection from liability. Only your company assets are at risk in the event of any legal actions and company debts.

Creating a Partnership allows you to go into business with multiple people and share income. Partnerships are easier and less expensive than Companies to set up. However, all partners together are personally responsible for business debts and actions against the Partnership. And each partner is individually liable for debts incurred by the other partners. This means you have unlimited liability, unlike a Company structure.

A Trust isn't an organisation at all, but instead a legal structure to hold assets. For example, you might set up a Trust to hold your business assets, then appoint a Trustee to manage them. Commonly, the Trustee is a Company and the Trust provides asset protection and limits liability from operating the business. Trusts are very flexible for tax purposes. However, a Trust is a complex legal structure and establishing a Trust costs significantly more than a Sole Trader or Partnership.

For more detailed information on each of these business structures, see our feature article: How to Choose the Right Business Structure in Australia.

Do I need a photography business license?

If you are conducting a normal photography business, you do not need any business licenses or permits. But you will need specific authorisation if you are taking photographs of children, models, celebrities, trademarks, on private property, etc.

Should I trademark my photography business name?

Just because you set up a Pty Ltd company or registered your business name with ASIC, this does not protect your brand name. Any business can use your brand name. The only way to protect your brand name and restrict its use, is to register it as a trademark with IP Australia.

This concept is one of the most misunderstood aspects of starting or running a business. And business owners frequently contact us because someone has started using their brand name - which they thought they owned!

Should I register my photography business for GST?

If your photography business has annual revenues of over $75,000 then you must register for GST. If you have annual revenues of less than $75,000 then talk to your accountant about your options.

Do I need professional photographers insurance?

As a professional photographer you might consider 3 different types of business insurance:

Photography equipment and studio insurance

Errors and omissions insurance

Public liability insurance

Photography equipment is expensive and it is only sensible to insure it for damage, theft, loss, travelling, fire, etc. Errors and omissions insurance covers you in case you miss or lose an important shot. For example, if you're a wedding photographer and your images are accidentally erased, you're likely to be sued by the married couple. You may also wish to consider public liability insurance if you take photographs where there is potential for accidents - for example, with stunt work, unusual/dangerous locations or working with drones.

As with all insurance policies, read the terms and conditions carefully - make sure the insurance you're buying will cover your particular circumstances. Often you may not be buying policy cover for what you think you are - ask specific questions of your insurance broker.

What legal forms should I use in my photography business?

Use this Infographic on your website

You are welcome to share this Infographic as long as you only use it for personal (not commercial i.e. money making) purposes and you give attribution to Legal123. Download a PDF version of this Infographic here or copy and paste the code below into the html of your website:

Here are the legal forms that we recommend you use in your photography business:

Adult Model Release Form: This ensures you own the images outright and do not owe royalties to the subject of the photographs when you sell or use them. Also called a Photo Consent Form.

Child Model Release Form: This ensures you have the permission of the child's parents/guardians to use the images commercially. Also called a Parental Consent Form.

Photo Licensing Agreement: This provides your client with an understanding of how they may use your photographs. You can give them private licensing rights to use only for their own use; commercial licensing rights with/without royalties paid to you to reproduce the photo on commercial goods; or other licensing restrictions can be provided for in this agreement.

Photography Contract: This clarifies the details of a photography shoot, including date, time, location, payment terms, cancellation policy, etc. Different types of photography need slightly different terms (e.g. portrait, wedding, event, baby, pet, real estate, school portrait, sports teams).

Copyright Infringement Notice: This is an official notice advising someone to remove your copyright owned photograph or derivative images. Also called a Copyright Infringement Cease & Desist Letter or DMCA Takedown Notice.

In addition, your website needs Privacy Policy, Disclaimer and Terms & Conditions notices. Your Disclaimer should include a Copyright notice, that protects your images from being copied or stolen. Your Terms & Conditions should mirror your Photography Contract terms.

None of the legal forms are complicated - and using them will show you're a professional operator. Plus, as we said at the beginning of this guide, doing things right will help avoid legal issues and protect you and your business from lawsuits.
We hope you found this legal guide for photographers and photography businesses helpful.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Photography Contracts, Copyright & Release Forms | Legal123.com.au

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Legal Guide for Photographers and Photography Businesses - This step-by-step guide outlines everything you need to know from an Australian legal standpoint about taking photographs and starting a photography business.

# data[].attributes.body
- model release form
- minor release form
- privacy agreements
- copyright law
- property rights
- selling rights
- licensing rights
- permission
- restrictive regulations
- hired as a contractor

# data[].attributes.body
- on + off camera

# data[].attributes.body
- exhibition
- portfolio

# data[].attributes.body
- visual journaling
- documentation process
- refine thinking
- inspiration
- idea generation
- annotation

# data[].attributes.body
- planning
- execution
- monitoring
- reflective evaluation

# data[].attributes.body
- basic adjustments
- importing
- storing
- exporting
- understanding metadata
- processing RAW files
- colour management
- composite images
- digital darkroom
- blending modes + filters
- monitor calibration
- portrait retouching
- masking techniques
- shadow/highlight preservation

# data[].attributes.body
- focal length
- standard
- wide
- fisheye (ultra-wide)
- zoom
- macro
- telephoto

# data[].attributes.body
- aperture (f stop)
- shallow
- deep

# data[].attributes.body
- tonal range/value
- highlights
- midtones
- shadows
- textures
- clarity

# data[].attributes.body
- image design
- framing
- cropping
- positive/negative space
- rule of thirds
- leading lines
- balance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Advice for the preservation and storage of photographic prints and film.

# data[].attributes.body
- artistic expression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When the world saw the very first photographs, the idea of being able to capture the world as we see it took off rapidly. In a relatively short period of time, film photography evolved from black and white to color photography. From there, it made motion pictures possible, allowing us to see the world from our couches at home. When the first digital camera was invented, little did the inventors know that it would later revolutionize the world of photography and media in general. Today, billions of images are captured and shared between people and the number of image recording devices is growing at a rapid, unstoppable rate. There are cameras literally everywhere - in our mobile phones, homes, computers, cars, and even in wearables like eyeglasses and watches. We trust these devices to give us a glimpse of reality, documented moments of time that we can go back to and review. And yet with the fast growth, ease of access, and use of image and video manipulation tools, we have been seeing more footage that can twist reality: whether we are looking at popular magazine covers, Internet sites or news media, the imagery we see is getting harder and harder to trust, since it is being altered, faked or staged. Media turned out to be a powerful tool to influence and manipulate people, which brings up the question and the importance of ethics in photography. Should photography only be allowed to display reality, or is it acceptable to alter images for presentation purposes? And if manipulation is acceptable, what are its limits, if any? These are very hard questions to answer, but with some common sense, we can create a set of ethical rules and guidelines that should help photographers in determining what's acceptable and what's not.

In this article, I do not want to get into the depth of the discussion of ethics in media, since it is a huge topic on its own and does not belong to a photography site. Instead, I will focus on specific types of photography and the practices we should follow. Please keep in mind that most of the thoughts in this article are based on my opinion and experience. If you disagree with any of them, please state your thoughts in the comments section below in a kind matter, so that we can have a friendly discussion that benefits everyone.

1. Image Theft

With billions of photographs being available so widely all over the Internet, it is not uncommon to see not only individuals but also companies using other people's work for their own benefit. In some cases, theft is loud and clear, with images being used without any permission; and in other cases, images are "borrowed" to be altered and manipulated to create something different. No matter how it is done, theft is still theft and it should not be ever welcomed in any shape or form. How would you feel if someone stole your images that you post in common social media platforms like Instagram, printed them out, and sold them for thousands of dollars without sharing any of the money with you? If you have never heard of Richard Prince, check out his website and his gallery:

Yup, he does exactly that: steals other people's work, prints them, and sells as his own "artwork". One could argue that he "repurposes" some of the images and that may be true in some cases where he significantly transforms an image into something completely different. But even then, he should be requesting permission from the original source first and even after receiving permission, he should clearly state in his artwork that his work was based on someone else's idea or images. The worst part is, that some people (including himself), believe that he is a true artist and he has every right to do what he does. In my books, this guy is nothing more than a thief!

2. Photo Plagiarism

What about situations, where a photographer borrows another photographer's idea and perspective to get a very similar, if not identical shot? Now this one is a topic of endless debates, one capable of sparking huge arguments on both sides of the game. As photographers, we often have our own knowledge, skills, and experiences to create something unique that has never been done before, at least to our knowledge. It could be finding a particular subject, angle, composition, subject placement, or perhaps specific use of colors and tones to create something original. Is it acceptable to re-capture such images, taking inspiration from the original author? And if it is acceptable, should permissions be asked and credit provided? I think the answer depends on a number of factors. If an image is copied exactly one-to-one, using the same angle, perspective, composition, subject, and colors, making it look identical to the source, then it is a clear sign of plagiarism and it should never be welcomed.

However, there are certain exceptions. For example, in landscape photography (covered in detail below), there are situations when one photographer can find and popularize a unique spot where certain angles and shapes work very well. Throughout history, there have been many such images - for example, Ansel Adams made the Snake River overlook very popular at the Grand Teton National Park:

Ansel Adams - The Tetons and the Snake River
Copyright Ansel Adams, Image Source: Wikipedia

And since then, countless images have been taken with a very similar perspective and angle by other photographers. Does it mean that they should be crediting the source every single time? This is a hard question when it comes to ethics because landscapes change all the time and if one photographer does manage to capture an image one way, the chances of capturing another image with exactly the same light, cloud formation, vegetation, and color are fairly slim, even if exactly the same composition is used. In the case of the above photo from Ansel Adams, since he captured the shot at the Grand Tetons, many trees have grown and fallen and even the snake river most likely slightly changed its shape and looks a bit different today. Does it mean that other photographers should not be taking the shot with a similar composition? I don't think so - I believe it is perfectly acceptable for others to capture images of popular spots, provided they are not deliberately trying to make an exact replica of the shot of the original author, with the intent to copy it. Now if someone edited the trees to look exactly like the ones in Ansel Adams' original shot, and turned it into black and white with the same aspect ratio, similar shades, and cloud formations, then it could be considered deliberate plagiarism.

However, landscape photography almost feels like a different beast when it comes to plagiarism. While using the same subject, perspective and composition are often acceptable in landscapes, attempting to do the same thing in other types of photography, such as portraiture and fashion photography, is an inevitable path to plagiarism. For example, if we look at the work of Tyler Shields, we can see many of his images borrowed ideas from other existing works. Take a look at some of the examples:

Left: Tyler Shields, 2015, Right: Irving Penn, 1986
Image Source: Vice.com

In this image, we can clearly see that Tyler Shields attempted to copy the work of Irving Penn, by making a very similar image. The idea is the same, the crop is the same. However, he did change a few patterns, adjusted colors, and made a slightly different image. Does it mean that his work is original? Of course not - it was clearly based on someone else's work. There is nothing original about this piece. And yet Tyler Shields never credited Irving Penn for inspiration in creating this photograph. Let's take a look at a different image of Tyler Shields:

Left: Tyler Shields, 2015, Right: Henry Leutwyler, 2012
Image Source: Vice.com

We can clearly see the pattern of a copycat. Again, the same idea of bruised legs of a ballerina standing straight up and only showing the affected area. One side has a shoe, the other does not. He attempted to make his work appear different and original by swapping the shoe, and having different bandages and bruises, but nevertheless, it is still not an original idea by any means. In this case, if Tyler Shields used Henry Leutwyler's work for inspiration, he should have given him proper credit.

In some cases, images can indeed look very similar by coincidence. And when it does happen, it would be truly a "one-off" case. However, if you look at the many works of Tyler Shields, you will see that the above are not cases of coincidence or sheer luck. He deliberately borrowed other people's ideas and executed them in a similar fashion to make a name for himself.

Sadly, in the world of social media, plagiarism is almost inevitable. Photographers steal ideas from other photographers all the time and some do a very good job at it too, often succeeding more than the original author, as in the case of people like Tyler Shields and Richard Prince. There is nothing ethical about what they do and I would discourage all of our readers from repeating the same mistakes...

3. Photo Manipulation

Let's now expand the topic of ethics in photography to photo manipulation. How much manipulation should be allowed and what are the limits? Photography purists will argue that photographs should never be altered in any way - that they should retain their originality. Some even argue that cropping should be a prohibited practice. On the other side of the extreme, we've got people who take no shame in severely manipulating images, sometimes in order to influence people's minds, and alter their perceptions or their opinions. Is there a sweet middle that satisfies photography ethics? I believe there is, but it is not an easy answer by any means - we need to look at each photography genre in detail, as it is a very complex topic.

3.1. Documentary, News, and Reportage

Today, news outlets rely more than they ever have on images and footage provided by the public. Although the most popular media outlets try to have their own staff provide media, it is not always possible, particularly in areas of conflict and inaccessible war zones. When the public sees such footage, there is an immediate level of trust in what they see. As a result, such content can play a huge role in shaping up public opinion, potentially even influencing their future decisions. Because of the importance and the potential influence of such documentary footage, it is only ethical when such imagery is provided without ANY manipulation whatsoever.

This includes documentary photography, news and reportage of any kind, which in my opinion also includes street photography. When we see images of people, affected or unaffected, we want to believe in what we see. Such images become historical records and we cannot allow them to be manipulated. Take a look at some of the altered images that have appeared in media in the past:

At the time the image was taken, it was probably unacceptable for the Iranian state media to present only three missiles in the air, with one looking like it failed to launch, so the image was altered in Photoshop to make it look like all four rockets took off. In addition, a smaller car seen behind the rocket launching vehicle was also removed from the image to remove the unnecessary distractions.

Here is another image by Brian Walski, which was heavily altered to make a single composite from two different images:

Sadly, Brian Walski thought that it would be a good idea to make a composite image from the two images to "improve composition" and thought it was acceptable for him to make such heavy edits. In some cases, people who practice such manipulations should be persecuted in court, especially if a photograph is used as any form of propaganda to lie about the actual facts.

We can see many examples like the above two all over the world. If you want to see some of the best examples of altered images in history, check out this website by the Bronx Documentary Center - you will find some shocking examples of altered images, some of which were used to manipulate the public.

It is clear that such documentary photography and footage should never be allowed to be manipulated. The good news is that those who get caught often get fired and potentially even jailed for doing it, but I bet there are far more cases where things go by unseen. If photographers destroyed their original images and only left the original footage, they would leave it up to the public to decide whether their work is authentic or not. It is very uncomfortable to think that people would do such things, but sadly, it does happen.

What about cropping images? I believe that cropping should only be allowed, if the cropped out area does not represent area of interest to the viewer and does not change the meaning of the photograph after the fact. This can be tricky to determine, so if there is even a slight doubt that cropping would change the message in any way, then it should be avoided at all costs.

3.2. Portrait and Fashion Photography

Portrait photography, and specifically fashion photography, is without a doubt one of the most Photoshop-influenced genres of photography today. Practically every image you look at today on the cover of every magazine is digitally altered. In some cases, changes are very subtle, but in most cases, people go through complete transformations, making them look drastically different compared to reality. Such retouching changes are so common today, that they are now widely accepted as a "normal" practice to make the model or celebrity look flawless. So where is the fine line between what should be considered ethical and what should not? That's another tough one to answer because there will be people defending both sides heavily.

Personally, I believe that retouching should be acceptable, but with certain restrictions. While adjusting colors & contrast, fixing skin blemishes, removing excessive hair and taking care of wardrobe mishaps should be allowed, altering someone's physique and general appearance should be prohibited. Consider the following photograph of Angelina Jolie:

To me, this is the borderline of what should be allowed. The retoucher removed all skin blemishes from her face and made the skin of the actress look flawlessly smooth, which as we know, is almost never the case. However, facial features do not seem to be drastically altered, as in the below image of Kelly Clarkson:

Here, the retoucher went to the extreme - eyebrows and eyes changed, face shape altered, body shape altered, especially towards the lower body. This is an example of heavy retouching that should not be allowed. This kind of imagery takes us away from reality, making our youth believe that people can look as perfect as they do on magazine covers. These are not the ideals to pursue and this kind of "fake" beauty should not be welcomed by the public.

Having assisted my wife in photographing weddings, I have come across a number of brides, bridesmaids, and other people, who made special requests to make them look thinner in photographs via Photoshop. Although my wife certainly did experiment with such capabilities and knew very well how to use specific tools such as "Liquify", she found it quite frustrating to agree to such requests. Not only because it is a lot of work, but also because it is just not right - people should not assume that such practices should be commonly acceptable. Over time, she learned how to position the subjects better and capture them at particular angles that made them look slimmer, but she completely stopped heavy digital manipulations that made the person look different than they were in reality.

3.3. Nature Photography

Humans are drawn by the sheer beauty of wild and mysterious nature. Having witnessed it in real life, we know that nature can present itself in vibrant and beautiful colors, especially during those peak golden hours, and at the same time can really impact our moods with those gloomy, cloudy days. So when we immerse ourselves in a photograph with a stunning landscape, we always make the assumption that we see the reality: we want to believe that the photographer was there at that right moment of time to capture the natural beauty. While we can make assumptions about the fake nature of photographs of celebrities in magazines, we practically never make such assumptions about images of nature. Why is that? I have been pondering about this question for a while and I think the answer to the question is quite simple - we want to believe in nature being as beautiful as it is presented to us. We look at nature as something raw, innocent, something that has not been corrupted by humanity.

The moment we are introduced to a nature photograph that clearly looks unrealistic, or worse yet when we discover that a photograph that we perceived as real was in fact not, it leaves us with a feeling of distrust towards the photographer. We feel cheated and faked.

Take a look at the two images below, one straight out of my camera, and one after I slaughtered the hell out of it in Photoshop:

Five years ago I thought that my edit looked "cool and dramatic", although I knew upfront that it looked very fake. Without moisture or cloud formations in the air, the sky could have never been that colorful! And yet at the time, I thought it was a cool effect to use on an image, giving it more of an "artistic" feel. I often make fun of myself with this particular photograph in my workshops, because I want others to see that we all go through the stages of experimentation and it is perfectly OK to try out things. I would never make this image part of my portfolio and would never present it in a gallery because it skews reality and presents nature in its most unrealistic form.

Here is another image that really upset some of our readers when I posted it:

Total Lunar Eclipse Composite

Although it is pretty clear that the image is a composite, people got really upset that I copy-pasted the different phases of the moon to a completely different scene. For this composite, I photographed the moon on its own, then moved to another location after the eclipse was over in order to capture a more attractive foreground, which I later used as a backdrop panorama for the arcing moon. I wrote about what I did to the image in detail in my " how was this picture made " article, where I explained the process in detail, for the purpose of education. The above image is not something I would ever claim as real - in fact, I purposefully made it look fake (the moon never arcs as shown in the image) so that it was clear from the image itself. This is another image that I would never display at a nature gallery because nothing about it represents reality. Sure, the moon phases are real, and the landscape is real, but the two never took place together as shown in the image.

So what kind of editing is ethically acceptable in nature photography? That's the million-dollar question and the can of worms to open! In landscape photography, I consider it acceptable to adjust exposure, colors, shadows, tones, and contrast, to perform selective boosting / dodging and burning, to crop images for better composition, and to perform other adjustments, as long as they don't make the image appear too unrealistic and fake. I am not against HDR photography either - in fact, it can be a great technique to use in order to recover data that cannot be otherwise captured by modern camera sensors, as long as it looks natural at the end (no Grunge HDR please!). I am not against blending techniques to bring out details from different parts of the scene either, as long as they are not overdone. Lastly, I also find it acceptable to remove distracting objects from the scene. Basically, I don't mind most types of editing!

Here is an example of the type of editing that I find acceptable:

In the above case, I cropped the image to get closer to the rock, adjusted the white balance of both the foreground and the sky, added some more color to the clouds, and added a bit more structure to the clouds to make them stand out a bit more. After I was done with the basic edits, I realized that some of the footsteps on the playa left by other photographers looked rather distracting. I used Photoshop's clone stamp tool to remove some of the obvious spots, to keep the scene looking cleaner and not as distracting.

Here is another set of images from Wadi Rum that I captured last year to illustrate the point of what I consider to be acceptable in terms of post-processing:

The changes in the "after" image are a bit more aggressive than in the previous case. Aside from the standard editing steps like boosting contrast and colors, I removed both cars and their tracks from the scene, since they looked too distracting. While I did not make too many changes to the foreground, I did remove a couple of distracting elements there - take a look at the white stone in the foreground, to the bottom left side of the frame. When I was shooting at that particular location, I was literally jumping between rocks in order not to leave any footsteps and really struggled to find an area that provided me a clear composition. As I was taking this photo, I already knew that the stone on the lower left had to go, because it was incomplete and it was pushing too far to the bottom frame. I was able to fit the dark rock on the left, but the white one was too big to fit (you only see a portion of it in the shot). As I went through the image, I also removed some white dots and other imperfections in the sand, since they looked a bit distracting.

Now that you have seen the type of editing I personally consider acceptable, let's talk about the editing practices that I would not recommend. Basically, any kind of composite imagery, especially ones where multiple unrelated images are put together to create a dramatic scene that never actually existed or took place, is something I consider unacceptable. Those photographs, or rather "artworks" do not belong in nature photography or fine art galleries - they have a place of their own. Nothing wrong with such creative photography/composites, as long as it is made obvious by the photographer, either through the image itself or as part of its description. Again, the idea is not to mislead people into believing in something that does not exist.

Another big factor in ethics is our involvement, influence, and impact on nature as we document it. We have written quite a bit about this topic in the past, but sadly, it is something that continues to happen. When I was at the Death Valley National Park just a few weeks back, I saw an interesting scene - a young couple took their car way into the Devil's Cornfield for one stupid reason - to take a selfie. Sadly, people do these kinds of idiotic things all the time, thinking that they are doing something cool, when in fact, they are destroying the landscape for others to see and enjoy in the future. I have personally witnessed people camping at the Race Track playa at Death Valley, and I have seen rocks removed from the playa, with the selfish intent of having unique images that nobody else could have. We have seen Michael Fatali burn up Delicate Arch and a few other spots in Arches and Canyonlands National Parks to capture unique photos at night and not only for himself but also for the workshop groups that he was teaching at the time. And there are many cases like this that we see over and over again, with photographers doing all kinds of damage to landscapes, all with the goal of doing something unique that was not done before. Such acts of vandalism and selfishness are huge problems of our time since we are failing to learn how to share the beauty around us with the current and future generations.

For more information about ethics in nature photography, I would recommend visiting NANPA's website. You will find a wealth of information in regard to ethical practices when shooting in the field.

3.4. Travel Photography

There are many ethical concerns when it comes to travel photography. Unfortunately, there are no set rules or guidelines that apply to all countries, cultures, tribes, groups, and individuals within them. I believe that we as photographers should do prior research about the cultures, religions, and other social norms before making decisions on who or what to photograph. Not abiding by very specific rules provided by government authorities in countries like North Korea could easily land you in jail there, and if you were to photograph people in particular areas of Mexico where they perceive photographs as something that steals their souls, you could easily get in trouble. Local laws, rules, and norms should always be respected and we as photographers hold responsibility for properly representing all other photographers. If some of us sneak in and break the rules, it will surely affect the rest of us.

Take the recent case of a German teenager, who climbed the Great Pyramid of Giza, completely ignoring the Egyptian law that specifically prohibits it. Climbing ancient structures in Egypt is prohibited for a number of reasons. First, it is very unsafe. Over the course of many years, the stone blocks have been eroding and collapsing, and many tourists have died or injured themselves while attempting to climb in the past. Second, those sandstone blocks are not as strong as they seem to be from a distance - imagine what will happen to those pyramids if everyone continues to climb them. There will be nothing left for future generations to see and enjoy.

Andrej Ciesielski illegally climbed the Great Pyramid of Giza, despite local laws that prohibit climbing on ancient structures. The practice of photographing dangling feet with the scenery is commonly practiced among roof toppers, giving scale and making it seem like the photographer is in danger.

People have been vandalizing ancient structures like this for many years and we can clearly see the evidence today. Even on top of Giza, you will find carvings in different languages from people who wanted to leave their own traces of history. What a selfish bunch! I personally have little respect for daredevils like this, who break the law to promote themselves. The same goes for roof toppers, who only do what they do for the act of self-promotion, status, and social media "likes". Most of them have zero respect for laws, regulations, private property, or privacy - they are known to break locks and walk into closed areas.

Aside from the above cases, there are many other ethical factors we have to consider when doing travel photography. Is it permissible to photograph people for money? You have probably seen pictures of fishermen with cormorants in boats, with lamps in their hands, and beautiful distant mountains in the background. Practically every single one of those photos is staged. In fact, there is now a whole army of these fishermen, ready to model in exchange for money. That area of China where the photographs are taken practically has no fish left due to over-fishing and pollution, so the traditional culture of cormorant fishing only exists today for photographic reasons. So is it ethical for us to employ such practices? I cannot answer this question, but one must think about both pros and cons of such actions and how they affect people. It has become common in many parts of the world to pay people in exchange for taking their pictures. In some popular tourist hotspots, people can be offended and even get aggressive, if you snap their photos and forget or refuse to pay them.

What about asking for permission before taking pictures? This applies to all kinds of portrait photography, especially street photography. Is it acceptable to take pictures of people without asking their permission, especially if the goal is to profit from the sale of such images?

If one explores the inner world of travel photography, there are a lot of dark stories to tell and hear. I once heard a horror story of photographers paying children to pose naked in front of a camera (picture young monks showing their private parts), again, for the sole purpose of capturing something unique nobody has previously photographed. I felt disgusted and saddened to hear of such stories.

3.5. Drone Photography

In the past few years, drone photography has been really taking off. Photographers and videographers are using drones to capture unique footage from angles and distances that are impossible to capture otherwise. While the idea of drone photography (see our detailed tutorial) sounds appealing to many, it does bring up a few, rather serious concerns.

Drone photography is something very new and largely unregulated. Although after a number of cases of drones posing threat to passenger and government aircraft, falling into protected areas (remember the guy who crashed a drone into the Grand Prismatic Spring in Yellowstone?) or crashing into buildings, the Federal Aviation Administration of the USA made it mandatory to register drones. Aside from basic guidelines, there are still no specific laws or rules in regard to how drones should be operated. This has been creating a huge problem for everyone because people are making all kinds of assumptions about what they can and cannot do. Nothing is said about flying over private property, privacy concerns, and recording footage of people or their property. Things are getting even more complex overseas, where governments and people never had concerns about aircraft flying over their heads and now they find themselves in dire need of protecting their landmarks and secure zones from tourists operating drones.

Nikon Coolpix A @ 18.5mm, ISO 360, 1/1000, f/2.8
Seyðisfjörður, East Iceland. Photo Copyright Spencer Cox

Sadly, many owners operate their drones without much practice, crashing them into government and private properties. Since drones cost a lot of money, they often end up breaking into closed areas and trespassing in order to retrieve them, causing all kinds of aggravation from the public.

There are many ethical concerns with drone photography and I believe that this subject should be explored in detail, as it will become more important with the growing popularity of drone photography.

4. The Ethics of Photography Competitions

Photo competitions historically have had a rather odd set of rules, often disallowing any kind of post-processing on images. Some do not allow any retouching, while others allow very slight changes involving color and contrast adjustments and perhaps some cropping. While I disagree with "no editing" rules of competitions and believe that some editing to images should be allowed, I would certainly disagree with rules allowing any kind of editing and photo manipulations. Once you go into the "free for all" zone, photo competitions can quickly lose their appeal. There are some real Photoshop wizards out there, who will make stunning-looking images from images that others would consider below average. A little bit of imagination and Photoshop drawing skills can really bring something that never existed or took place into life. That's not to say that such composites and artwork should not be allowed at all, but those should be judged separately on their own, away from photography competitions.

Consider the recent case of Chai Yu Wei, a photographer from Singapore, who not only borrowed another photographer's idea to capture a ladder leading up to the sky but also had the guts to insert an airplane into the center of the image before submitting it to a competition hosted by Nikon. Sadly, when asked, he even claimed that he was lucky to capture the plane like that. It did not take much time for other photographers to discover that the photo was a fake:

Nikon ended up removing the photo from its Facebook page and apologizing for selecting the photo as the winner, and the photographer issued an apology as well. However, this particular case will serve as another reminder of why photo manipulations like this should not be allowed. Chai Yu Wei wanted others to believe that he was at the right moment and at the right place to capture a photo of a plane passing by right through the center of the leading composition, something that obviously never took place.

The same ethical guidelines apply to wildlife photography competitions as well. We have seen a case where the photographer José Luis Rodriguez captured a photo of a wolf jumping over a fence, stating that the image portrayed a real wild wolf that was hunting a farmer's livestock:

José Luis Rodriguez staged a tame wolf to jump over a fence and submitted the image to a wildlife competition. He won a prestigious award, which was later recalled by judges.

It turned out that the wolf was in fact not wild and the photographer basically staged a tame wolf to jump over the fence, while he captured it with flash at night. While this particular image was not a composite and was not edited as the previous image, it has a huge ethical problem - lying about an animal being wild, when it is not. If photographers are allowed to stage tame animals for wildlife competitions, then there is no point in photographing wild animals at all: one could capture stunning images of domesticated and tame animals, with some beautiful backgrounds.

5. The Ethics of Feeding Wildlife

There are cases where some wildlife photographers might get upset with other photographers, who might not necessarily use a tame or a domesticated animal as in the case above, but might feed a wild animal in order to capture unique shots. Many wildlife photographers practice such feeding procedures and take no guilt in doing that - some of them are quite open about it as well. Whether it is setting up bird feeders in the backyard, or putting mice in fields for those awesome shots of predators flying towards the camera, the question of whether those acts are ethical or not come up all the time between wildlife photographers. I will leave this one up for discussion: Do you think it is acceptable for photographers to feed wildlife to capture unique shots? Are there cases when such practices should be allowed?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When the world saw the very first photographs, the idea of being able to capture the world as we see it took off rapidly. In a relatively short period of time, film photography evolved from black and white to color photography. From there, it made motion pictures possible, allowing us to see the world from our couches at home.

# data[].attributes.body
- camera angles
- proportion/distortion
- distance
- size/scale
- OR in terms of  personal attitude/point of view/understanding

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Exposed: Voyeurism, Surveillance and the Camera at Tate Modern 28 May – 3 October 2010

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From the seconds after a bomb is detonated to a former scene of battle years after a war has ended, this moving exhibition focuses on the passing of time, tracing a diverse and poignant journey through over 150 years of conflict around the world, since the invention of photography.

In an innovative move, the works are ordered according to how long after the event they were created from moments, days and weeks to decades later. Photographs taken seven months after the fire bombing of Dresden are shown alongside those taken seven months after the end of the First Gulf War. Images made in Vietnam 25 years after the fall of Saigon are shown alongside those made in Nakasaki 25 years after the atomic bomb. The result is the chance to make never-before-made connections while viewing the legacy of war as artists and photographers have captured it in retrospect.

TateShots: Don McCullin

The immediate trauma of war can be seen in the eyes of Don McCullin's Shell-shocked US Marine 1968, while the destruction of buildings and landscapes are documented by Simon Norfolk's Afghanistan: Chronotopia 2001.

Different conflicts will also reappear from multiple points in time throughout the exhibition. The Second World War for example is addressed in Jerzy Lewczynski's 1960 photographs of the Wolf's Lair / Adolf Hitler's War Headquarters, Shomei Tomatsu's images of objects found in Nagasaki, Kikuji Kawada's epic project The Map made in Hiroshima in the 1960s, Michael Schmidt's Berlin streetscapes from 1980 and Nick Waplington's 1993 close-ups of cell walls from a Prisoner of War camp in Wales.

The exhibition is staged to coincide with the 2014 centenary and concludes with new and recent projects by British, German, Polish and Syrian photographers which reflect on the First World War a century after it began.

The most powerful, most relevant, most moving exhibition to deal with conflict this year
The Times

★★★★ You will feel educated and heart-broken in equal measure by these awe-inspiring photographs
Time Out

★★★★ A subtle and haunting evocation of the past
The Telegraph

★★★★ Deeply affecting
Evening Standard

A powerful show
Finanical Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Conflict, Time, Photography - Exhibition at Tate Modern | Tate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From the seconds after a bomb is detonated to a former scene of battle years after a war has ended, this moving exhibition focuses on the passing of time, tracing a diverse and poignant journey through over 150 years of conflict around the world, since the invention of photography.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The most famous performance photograph of all time must be the one known as Saut dans le vide (Leap into the Void), showing the artist Yves Klein apparently jumping into space from a building on a quiet street. It is in fact a photo-montage, made for Klein from photographs taken in the Paris suburb of Fontenay-aux-Roses in 1960 by the photographic partners Harry Shunk and János Kender. Klein made the jump on to a tarpaulin held by a group of his judoka friends, who were later edited out. This was, Klein claimed, his second such jump, the first similarly from a two-storey building several months earlier. Whether you believe his claim or not, the result is still a great image - ecstatic, impossible, truly 'spectacular' - with which to advertise your new ideas about art. More than half a century later, it's become one of the great art clichés, but like all good artworks still retains enough of its potency to introduce the new exhibition at Tate Modern, which explores the relationship between performance and the camera.

Klein published the photograph in Dimanche (Le journal d'un seul jour), his parody of a Sunday newspaper, where he expanded his idea of the 'theatre of the void', an imaginary space where art and life could be merged. Tate's exhibition looks at some of the ways artists have used the camera across its history, as a means of recording, enabling, constructing, reflecting and framing their works - and at the same time underscoring what the artist Mel Bochner describes when writing about photography as 'a distrust of [its] truth function'.

The word 'selfie' might have entered the language only in 2002, but the camera offered a licence to perform as soon as it was invented. It provided not only the means to record a performance, but also - pace Klein - to attempt the double trick of convincing the viewer that the resulting photograph was a record of an immutable truth.

What is probably the first performance photograph was taken in 1840, when Hippolyte Bayard posed, half-naked, for his daguerreotype Self-Portrait as a Drowned Man. It was a statement of protest and defeat. Bayard believed he had invented photography before Louis Daguerre and Henry Fox Talbot had registered their claims in 1839, but had been prevented from registering his. His consolation prize was to have made what is probably the first fictional photograph, since despite the fatalistic caption, 'The corpse which you see here is that of M. Bayard, inventor of the process that has just been shown to you...', he lived until 1887. In 1888 Kodak introduced the Box Brownie, an inexpensive portable camera which would go on to make performers of us all.

Gaspard-Félix Tournachon (Nadar)
Adrien Tournachon Pierrot surpris - Album des figures d'expression du mime Deburau, Pl.6
1854 Musée d'Orsay (Paris, France)

By this time performing for the camera had been co-opted for publicity purposes, not least by the theatre. La Tosca - the play by Victorien Sardou that Puccini later turned into an opera - had been written for Sarah Bernhardt, who first played the role in 1887. As she had done three years before as Lady Macbeth, she posed in costume for the great French portraitist Nadar, to produce what Simon Baker, Tate's head of photography and curator of the show, describes as 'an early production still'.

At the end of the 19th century the American Fred Holland Day took photographic fiction to its extreme, re-creating the life of Christ with himself in the title role. He starved, let his beard grow long and, when it came to the crucifixion scene, made a series of close-ups, The Seven Words 1898, based on Jesus's last utterances on the cross. In one sense it's a giant leap, but in another not so far, to the late 1970s and Cindy Sherman's early Film Stills 1977-80, staged on the streets of downtown Manhattan. As the critic Douglas Crimp wrote in his 1980 essay The Photographic Activity of Postmodernism, Sherman's photographs 'use art not to reveal the artist's true self, but to show the self as an imaginary construct'. Photography had acquired the power, particularly for women, to create an artificial image and market its stereotyping potential. Sherman's photographs were both a construct of and a commentary on the manipulative power of the image.

Photography was adopted by artists particularly in that fertile period of the 1960s and early 1970s when the traditional genres of painting and sculpture were under attack. Art was splintering into new forms that included performance, dance, video, installation, happenings, body art, land art and photography, and artists needed a record. Pop had dispensed with the single image as artists reacted against the claims of uniqueness and value made by easel painting. Consumerism, advertising, celebrity and irony were the subjects to explore; appropriation and multiples the emerging forms. For post-minimal and conceptual artists interested in serial imagery, the document and the record, the camera was the perfect tool. The 'unskilled' photograph, as Lawrence Alloway called it in his introduction to his self-described 'exhibition/ catalogue' Artists and Photographs 1970, only underscored the belief that the idea was more important than the image. At the same time art was becoming political, exploring identity, gender, media manipulation and issues of social and economic class. For artists, the camera came into its own as an instrument that could document and make widely available pictures of events and artworks that were never intended to hang on a museum wall.

This shift had been predicted by Allan Kaprow - often credited as the instigator of the 'happening' (though Klein might take issue with that) - in his essay The Legacy of Jackson Pollock, published in 1958, two years after Pollock 's death. At this point, Kaprow wrote

Artists must become preoccupied with and even dazzled by the space and objects of our everyday life, either our bodies, clothes, rooms or, if need be, the vastness of Forty-second Street... we should utilise the specific substances of sound, movements, people, odours, touch. Objects of every sort are materials for the new art: paint, chairs, food, electric and neon lights, smoke, water, old socks, a dog, movies, a thousand other things that will be discovered by the present generation of artists... Young artists of today need no longer say, "I am a painter" or "a poet" or "a dancer". They are simply artists. All of life will be open to them'

For those working in New York in the late 1960s, one of the crucial factors in their development was geographic. As the industrial areas of Lower Manhattan were listed for demolition, artists rented cheap loft space that doubled as studios to present their work. The derelict streets, river piers and rooftops became the spaces where art was acted out and photographed. This coincided exactly with the period in which Shunk-Kender were at their most active.

The Japanese artist Yayoi Kusama arrived in New York in 1958. She was 29. In a decade she moved from painting to installation work to staging downtown happenings. In 1968 her Anatomic Explosion, with its naked performers, took place on Wall Street and outside the UN building, while other anti-war events were held on Brooklyn Bridge. The same year, her Naked Event - the bodies were painted with large coloured dots - was staged in an unidentified studio. Shunk-Kender were there to record them. In some cases they contributed more than just documentary images. 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.' As Graham worked Shunk-Kender made a parallel series of cityscapes in which Graham's figure is seen from different vantage points, but always in the frame.

All 27 participants in the Pier 18 project were men. It was one of the ignition points for women artists: despite signal works being made by Kusama, Louise Bourgeois, Eleanor Antin and Joan Jonas, they were still in the minority. But over the next decade, gender politics, and women's art in particular, would become an increasingly important factor (though arguably it has been only since the 1990s that the value of their works has been fully recognised). In 1970 Jonas made a long trip to Japan. On her return she added the influence of Noh and Kabuki theatre to her street performances. In 1972 her work Delay, Delay was performed on a derelict 10-block site in Lower Manhattan as spectators watched from the roof of 319 Greenwich Street. In 1973 Babette Mangolte, the cinematographer and filmmaker who had moved to New York from Paris in 1970 to escape the male-dominated French film industry, photographed Trisha Brown's nowfamous Roof Piece, in which 14 dancers performed across the rooftops from 420 West Broadway to just above Wall Street and back again, signalling to one another.

While these new art forms were emerging across America and Europe, some of the most powerful works of performance and photography were being made in Japan, little over a decade after the devastation of the Second World War. In 1959 the photographer Eikoh Hosoe saw the dancer Tatsumi Hijikata perform his adaptation of Mishima's novel Kinjiki (Forbidden Colours) 1951, and asked if he could photograph him. The culmination of their collaboration was Kamaitachi, a dramatic dance-narrative performed in the villages and open landscape of northern Japan from 1965 to 1969, where Hijikata had grown up and Hosoe had been evacuated during the war. According to Japanese legend, Kamaitachi is a demon that takes the form of a weasel, haunting the rice fields and slicing its victims with a sickle or a razor. In his 1989 essay about Hosoe, Mark Holborn quotes another popular definition which brings Kamaitachi much closer to an atomic blast: 'A lacerated wound caused by a state of vacuum which is produced partially in the air, owing to a small whirlwind.' The two artists had created what Holborn describes as 'an autobiography of fear... the first breeze of a nuclear age'.

Many artists used the camera with themselves as a model or vehicle for their work. In 1977 two dissident Soviet artists, Vitaly Komar and Alexander Melamid, were given permission to travel to Israel, going on to New York in 1978. In the USSR they had created their own art movement, Sots Art, which they described as 'a unique version of Soviet pop and conceptual art, which combines the principles of dadaism and socialist realism'. Many of their works were destroyed by the state. In 1976, after friends sent them catalogues from department stores in the West, they assembled A Catalogue of Superobjects: Supercomfort for Superpeople, a selection of household items which, like Duchampian readymades or surrealist impossible objects, they adapted and modelled on themselves and their friends. A metal oven shelf was curved into a visor; a wooden drawer had two large holes drilled into it so it could be slipped on like a sweater - it was classified under 'Furniture to Wear'. If, they observed, the West suffered from an overproduction of consumer goods, in the Soviet Union 'there is an overproduction only of ideology'. Once in New York, their works were exhibited and the catalogue published. They continued to work together for another 25 years, established a company, Komar & Melamid Inc, for the buying and selling of human souls (a successful ad campaign netted several hundred, including Andy Warhol's) and even got their names in lights in Times Square.

Romain Mader
Ekaterina: Mariage à Loèche-les-Bains (Marriage in Leukerbad) 2012
© Romain Mader / ECAL

Photography has extended an open invitation to artists to parody the tropes and clichés of publicity shots and propaganda. In 2010, in his series A Requiem: Theater of Creativity, the young Japanese artist Yasumasa Morimura pays homage to some of the greats of contemporary art. In Self-Portrait as Black Andy he dons the blank expression, leather jacket and silver wig. Self-Portrait as Jackson Pollock re-creates the famous session in which Hans Namuth photographed and filmed Pollock in action. In Self-Portrait as Yves Klein he re-creates, obviously, the Leap. But not all self-portraits require a costume drama. In 2011 the American photographer Lee Friedlander published a compendious book of selfportraits that took him from 1958 to 2011. What might have appeared to be an exercise in solipsism turned out to be very moving as time did its work.

Masahisa Fukase
From Window 1974
© Masahisa Fukase Archives. Courtesy of Michael Hoppen Gallery.

The most poignant series in the Tate show, however, is not self-portraiture, at least not in the obvious sense. It is a sequence of black-and-white pictures taken by the great Japanese photographer Masahisa Fukase of his wife as she leaves for work each morning, looking back up at the window where she knows he'll be waiting with his camera at the ready. What I think about when I see them is not so much the face of the person leaving, but the feelings of the person being left behind.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
hold still: performing for the camera at tate modern

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hold still: Performing for the Camera at Tate Modern - Tate Etc | Tate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The most famous performance photograph of all time must be the one known as Saut dans le vide (Leap into the Void), showing the artist Yves Klein apparently jumping into space from a building on a quiet street.

# data[].attributes.body
- outdoors
- public property
- private property

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Exhibition. Feb 26–Jun 11, 2012. Cindy Sherman (American, b. 1954) is widely recognized as one of the most important and influential artists in contemporary art. Throughout her career, she has presented a sustained, eloquent, and provocative exploration of the construction of contemporary identity a…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rineke Dijkstra is a contemporary Dutch photographer. View Rineke Dijkstra’s 356 artworks on artnet. Find an in-depth biography, exhibitions, original artworks for sale, the latest news, and sold auction prices. See available photographs, prints and multiples, and film, video for sale and learn abou…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Nobuyoshi Araki is a prolific photographer who has produced thousands of photographs over the course of his career. He became famous for " Un Voyage Sentimental" (1971), a series of photos depicting both banal and deeply intimate scenes of his wife during their honeymoon. A number of his works feature young women in sexualized situations: " Kinbaku ", a series from 1979, features 101 photographs of women in rope bondage. He typically works in black-and-white photography, and his hallmark style is deliberately casual. "Rather than shooting something that looks like a professional photograph, I want my work to feel intimate, like someone in the subject's inner circle shot them," he says. More recently, Araki has been working on a series titled "Faces of Japan" (2009-) in which the artist photographs 500 to 1,000 people in each of Japan's prefectures.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nobuyoshi Araki - 620 Artworks, Bio & Shows on Artsy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nobuyoshi Araki is a prolific photographer who has produced thousands of photographs over the course of his career. He became famous for " Un Voyage Sentimental" (1971), a series of photos depicting both banal and deeply intimate scenes of his wife during their honeymoon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Peter Dench. Photographer based in London traveling world-wide to complete assignments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Copyright © 2023 Bruce Gilden. All rights reserved. Powered by Squarespace.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Join Steve McCurry for a virtual conversation with Peter Fetterman on the closing day of The Power of Photography exhibition.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Robert Mapplethorpe | The Guggenheim Museums and Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about Robert Mapplethorpe and their art in the Guggenheim's Collection Online.

# data[].attributes.body
- social/cultural activity of sharing stories
- teach us about ourselves and others
- ways of seeing/perspective
- record moments/memories
- intimate/personal experience
- builds our understanding of the world
- connects us to others
- entertainment
- series: image sequencing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Diane Arbus was an American photographer best known for her intimate black-and-white portraits. View Diane Arbus's 1,785 artworks on artnet. Find an in-depth biography, exhibitions, original artworks for sale, the latest news, and sold auction prices. See available photographs, prints and multiples, and paintings for sale and learn about the artist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A project by Ai Weiwei and Olafur Eliasson
http://www.moonmoonmoonmoon.com
BEIJING, June 22, 2013 - The Ai Weiwei Studio released Ai Weiwei's first music album, "The Divine Comedy", today to commemorate the second anniversary of his release from an 81-day secret detention.

The single "Dumbass", premiered last month along with its music video, is included in the album. "The Divine Comedy" features six tracks with vocals and lyrics by Ai Weiwei, and music by Zuoxiao Zuzhou. Each song is a different take of Ai's newfound channel for expression through music. The album includes commentaries on current events (Just Climb the Wall, Hotel USA), documentations of real dialogues (Chaoyang Park, Laoma Tihua), and personal reflections (Give Tomorrow Back to Me, Dumbass). The full album crosses musical genres with influences from pop, rock, punk and heavy metal, and takes us on a journey through Ai's experience with the conditions of China. Continue reading

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged press on by .

BEIJING, May 22, 2013 - The Ai Weiwei Studio released Ai Weiwei's new heavy metal single, "Dumbass", the first piece of Ai Weiwei's forthcoming music album "The Divine Comedy".

On the choice of music as his latest creative endeavor, Ai explains, "During my detention, the conditions were very restrictive, but the guards would often secretly ask me to sing for them. Being in that environment makes me realize that for these people, the only available release or means to kill time, is music. I felt deeply sorry that I couldn't do it, either I was not in the mood or I didn't think I can sing. The only songs I knew were the revolutionary ones. It is the same for many Chinese people; we had to memorize every red song. Creating music is a way to break through that situation." Continue reading

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged press on by .

#aiflowers is a project by Ai Weiwei inviting everyone to create a flower in memory of the child victims of the devastating Sichuan earthquake on May 12, 2008.

FakeCase.com is the definitive source for information on the Chinese authorities' "tax case" against Ai Weiwei, the Chinese artist who was secretly detained for 81 days from April 3 to June 22, 2011. The charges of tax evasion, online dissemination of pornography, and bigamy that were levied against Ai are widely perceived as political retaliation for his outspoken criticism of the government.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A project by Ai Weiwei and Olafur Eliasson http://www.moonmoonmoonmoon.com BEIJING, June 22, 2013 - The Ai Weiwei Studio released Ai Weiwei's first music album, "The Divine Comedy", today to commemorate the second anniversary of his release from an 81-day secret detention. The single "Dumbass", premiered last month along with its music video, is included in the album.