Posted by Richard Rothstein on April 15th, 2007
From today’s New York Times “Digital manipulation is just another tool. It’s less profound than the lens you use, or the angle. But in the end, photography is all about manipulation, and as it’s evolved, it’s become more manipulative in every way. I’ve never seen photography as a truthful medium. It’s about individual perceptions of reality, and that’s what people want to see.”
The Times examines the work of London photographer, Nick Knight. “When I’m producing a piece of work,” Knight says, “I’m looking for something I haven’t seen before, and once I’ve produced it, I’ll want to see something else.”
One of the world’s most successful fashion photographers, Knight lives in the digital world.
I realized that one of the most fascinating and potentially controversial and engaging aspects of digitally enhanced photography is that unlike any other visual art form before it, just about anyone with a computer can have at it. A great artist’s work (assuming you accept Knight as a great artist) becomes an interactive experience that can evolve, devolve and easily change according to the viewer’s own vision. Imagine a visual art form that is a photograph or creation that is the combined effort and vision of both the artist and the viewer(s). Warhol’s multiple images reimagined except the series is the work of the original artist digitally “enhanced” infinitely by his viewers. more… »
Posted by Richard Rothstein on April 8th, 2007
New Yorkers are works of art unto themselves.
more… »
Posted by Richard Rothstein on April 1st, 2007
Why do artists create them? Why are viewers interested in them? Is it exhibitionism on one side and voyeurism on the other? For reasons I can’t clearly explain I’ve never been comfortable with self portraits by any artist. So that’s what you look like or want me to see about you? Fine. Thanks. Now go away. I would love to hear from others how they feel about self portraits, their own and those by other artists, any other artist. At the risk of revealing too much about myself and just how fucked up I am, I’m simply going to express–in a kind of stream of conciousness way–how my own self portraits make me feel. Uncomfortable (obviously). Silly. Naked. Exposed. Self-indulgent. Egotistical. Awkward. Embarrassed. Validated (like a parking ticket). On the record. That’s all I have to say on this subject. Short, sweet and revealing.
more… »
Posted by Richard Rothstein on March 25th, 2007
From the mid 1970s until the late 1990s, the Times Square area hosted three completely illegal, outrageous and brazen gay whore houses: The Gaiety, Show Palace and Eros. Show Palace and Eros survived until the late 90s, The Gaiety hung on–thanks to the patronage of many influential and prominent Manhattanites–through March of 2005. But even with the patronage of icons of the New York performing arts world and several entertainment industry moguls, the Internet ultimately proved to be too fierce of a competitor and Denise the very professional and always courteous Greek lady who owned this establishment shuttered the doors, collected her Drachmas and retired to Lesbos (not actually Lesbos, but you get the idea) after 30 years of peddling boys to men.
The cover story that allowed the authorities to turn a blind eye to these whorehouses was simple. They were not whorehouses; they were burlesque houses where boys would strip, dance and display their merchandise. No liquor was served and the”theaters” fell under the protection of Off-Broadway regulations.
more… »
Posted by Richard Rothstein on March 18th, 2007
The Arts section of today’s The New York Times examines the strange history and odd future of an artist considered to be one of the geniuses of the 20th Century and possibly the greatest of the Abstract Expressionists. Ironically, he remains–by design–virtually unknown to the general public and this despite the fact that he may have been even more prolific than Picasso.
For those of you unfamiliar with Clyfford Still, he is most certainly the ultimate manifestation of an artist’s contempt for commercialism, museums, galleries and collectors. He is famous for denouncing the galleries and museums of the art world as Nazi gas chambers. After a brief period of selling and displaying some of his work, Still retreated to a remote farm in Maryland and spent the remaining decades of his life painting furiously, cursing critics and the commercial art world and hiding his work. In a one page will he specified that his body of work could never be sold, never be separated, never be shown next to another artist’s work and could only be shown to the pubic in a Clyfford Still museum that would be built by an American city and would exclusively house his entire collection.
more… »
Posted by Richard Rothstein on March 11th, 2007
As I was wandering down 10th Avenue a couple of days ago, camera in hand, marveling at the amazing variety of shapes, colors and play of light I thought this is an artist’s guilty pleasure. I felt terribly lazy. I know I have a talented eye, but it is so easy to capture compositions and brilliant visuals in a matter of minutes compared to many 20th and 21st Century painters who struggled amd struggle for hours, days and even months to capture on canvas what an observant photographer can capture in a second.
Is time a factor in great art? And if not, why not? Picasso spit out paintings like a fecund rodent. Van Gogh produced something like 40 paintings in the last five minutes of his life–well–something like that. Other artists labor and struggle for months over one painting. The photographer is almost the Henry Ford Model T production line of work, especially with digital photography. Click. Click. Click. Delete. Click. Delete. Click, I actually find myself feeling guilty. I shouldn’t enjoy it so much and it should take much longer. This morning I was paid $1,000 plus a percentage for agreeing to post an online gallery with narration of 12 of my photographs in the Queer New York at Night series. Easiest and fastest $1,000 I’ve ever made. Guilt. And Jewish guilt which is the most refined vintage and vineyard of guilt, like a Vosne Romanee of guilt.
more… »
Posted by Richard Rothstein on March 4th, 2007
I’ve recently taken to carrying my Canon Elph around during some of my late night prowling. Among other things, I’m fascinated by the interesting results you can achieve with a simple digital camera in the absence of light and minus the flash. Actually, while I may successfully frame a shot in almost complete darkness, it isn’t until I get home and load the photos on my computer that I discover many of the interesting details. In fact, I’m often delighted and surprised by the results, revealing scenes that my naked eye failed to see. Sometimes the effects are ghostly and othertimes quite erotic (at least to a queer eye.)
more… »
