The “Decisive Moment” is dead. There it is, I said it. If what the latest crop of photography magazines and images that have crossed my desk would have me believe is true, Cartier-Bresson must be rolling in his grave. As most readers are probably already aware Cartier-Bresson coined the term Decisive Moment…“this way of working requires an interrelationship of eye, body, and mind that intuitively recognizes the moment when formal and psychological elements within the visual field take on enriched meanings” (P.485, Rosenblum, Abbeville Press, New York, A World History of Photography 3rd ed. 1997) The result of this concept or philosophy was a full realization of an image at the time of the exposure. In the past several months, it has become clear that fewer and fewer images are being made in full realization at the time of the exposure.
Everything being pushed right now, from Loretta Lux to Julie Blackmon all rely on hours of “post-visualization” and little or no darkroom usage but do require a master’s degree in Photoshop. The image is hardly realized at the time of exposure. Even the gimmicky and trendy techniques of HDR and texture overlays, demonstrates further the demise of the decisive moment. HDR takes several exposures and composites them for a “High Dynamic Range” image, which used to take a while to composite in Photoshop but has now been relegated essentially to a filter on most new camera models. The HDR setting automatically takes the multiple exposures and composites them in camera. And is available as an Automation option in Photoshop CS3 and above. So it is hardly a new technique, but has entrenched itself as the current trend. But back to the point, the fact it takes multiple exposures to create one composite image virtually eliminates the possibility of a fast moving subject matter or decisive moment. There of course have been trends before all throughout the history of photography, but never ones quite so prevalent and forced upon us as HDR and also texture overlays.
In addition to the current prevalence of HDR, every other new image coming out if not HDR seems to have a texture overlay. Most often a landscape, in which some one has then shot a frame of brush strokes or rock formations that they superimpose on top, to give the illusion of texture, resulting in a painterly look for the image, (and it also makes the image look like every other one out there done with the same technique). They substitute effect for affect in an effort to look more like an alternative process, but without having to spend the time to learn and master a new printing process.
We are being led to believe photography is no longer reductive. We used to spend hours to sort through dozens of exposures for the one that best illustrated our concepts and artistic desires, but now they tell us it is an additive process. If the image is mediocre, just throw some texture on it and viola¢… Objet d’art.
Let’s go so far as to print it on canvas and use wood stretcher bars while we are at it. Don’t get me wrong some of these images can be quite pretty and would look fine above my commode, but not my first choice for a gallery wall.
Don’t get me wrong; I have no issue with montage and post-visualization, whether done chemically or digitally. I’ve always enjoyed Uelsmann’s work and that of many digital artists including Lux and Blackmon. I applaud expanding boundaries of the medium and the message, regardless of method. As A.D. Coleman said montage is either “a photographic version of the aesthetic eclecticism of our times” or, “more likely though it is the photographers desire to expand the boundaries of the medium as far as possible”. Conceptual strength of a series or image is what makes the difference for me. Where is the artist leading the viewer? Even, if it’s not where the artist intended us to go, there’s strength in the image.
So the question is: Can an image be made in its entirety in a fraction of a second? If there is one thing we’ve learned from the history of photography it is this: Of course a stunning work of art can be made in a fraction of a second. Even in cases where that was not the intent, such as those of Edgerton whose work was meant as a document of scientific discovery. Dozens of great images are being made (and in many cases overlooked) because of the current trends. Some notable exceptions to the trend, photographers who still incorporate concepts of pre-visualization, do sketches, encapsulates their entire image at the time of the exposure, and are masters of prestidigitation are Arno Minkkinen, Brian Olgesbee (two artists whose work together with the right image selection could make a great exhibition on the use of reflections) and Chema Madoz. Each photographer creates a transformation of reality in their photographs that keep the viewers guessing and more importantly looking. And they’ve been doing it for years.
No matter what else I could say here, there will always be purists and experimenters anywhere there are creative impulses. Embrace an approach and make images that mean something to you, but don’t follow trends just because it might get you ten seconds of attention.
Author: Mark Eshbaugh
Editor: Anne Hopkins
