All three of the artist’s that I have studied are simliar in that they all are fascinated with people and their identites. They all know photography is not simply a form of documentary, they all see how it can be used to express any idea or concept that comes to mind, how an image can have story behind it. They all are interested in people and indenties in their own different ways.
All three, Gillian Wearing, Gavin Hipkins, and Anne Noble, love working in series. These series helps them organise their ideas into sets of images. It also greatly assists the viewer in understanding these sometimes quite complex ideas by placing them within the context of the accompanying images. Wearing’s work can easily be understood without the context of other images, but some of both Noble’s and Hipkin’s work’s meaning is much harder to grasp without accompanying images.
My three artists fascination with people and identity manifests itself in different and interesting ways. Wearing is interested greatly with private lives, and the exposing of private lives in public ways. Noble is interested in the human body, the little details that come together to make us who we are, the senses we use to percieve the world around us and how photography can interact with them. Both Noble and Hipkins are very interested in upbringing, in childhood and the the environments we spend ours in. Hipkins is very interested in our community/environment and how it shapes our identity, while Noble is more interested in the actual child going through childhood. Hipkins has been called “the tourist of photography” in relation to his love of communities, especially those different from his own.
... promote successful aboriginal sports people, with current examples being Cathy Freeman and many AFL footballers ... spending of government grants. However the positive aspects of aboriginal people should also be publicised. The media is often happy to ... to blame for their image. "At the end of the day Aborigines only have themselves to blame." Showing people as being "pathetic ...
The simliarities remain, however, in methods. Both Hipkins and Noble are fans of landscape photography (unknown territory for Wearing.) Noble for example, shot two series on Antarctica, attempting to redefine an environment the public still does not know much about, an environment many see as a heroic place of daring, while Hipkins The Homely investigates the environment we ourselves live in, and how/if it defines us. They both use incredible landscape shots to illustrate these ideas. Hipkins places these images inside series featuring very different images to give an overall impression of his theme, while Noble (in this case) is a little more fond of letting a picture speak for itself, and places objects such as rugby posts inside an artic landscape to perpertrate her concepts.
Portraiture is heavily utilised by Noble and Wearing, although very differently. Hipkins does use some portrait style photography, but not quite to the degree that Noble and Wearing do. Wearing uses very straight, simple portaits. Naturally lit and 3/4 body (usually) her work is striking but nothing to write home about. The focus is not on her technique but the ideas being conveyed. Noble also focuses on ideas, but uses very sophisticated techniques to get her shots. She sometimes uses the studio, and creates complicated lighting schemes to get exactly what she wants from an image. She also veers away from the classic composition of a portrait and uses different orientations of model and sometimes extreme close ups.
Wearing uses a very different technique to Hipkins and Noble to get across her ideas about identity, particularly with her most famous series, “Signs that say what you want them to say not what someone else wants you to say” in which people wrote a sign saying anything they wanted to say, then posed for a photo with it. In some ways, this technique is much less contrived than either of my other artists. Wearing leaves the direction of the image completely up to the subject, which is very different to how my other artists work. She also uses very straight photography, naturally lit basic portraits, unlike the stylised work done by my other artists. However, her work fits very rigidly into this formula, in this series anyway, which makes her work seem slightly more constructed and contrived, less organic, than her contemperaries. The images feel a bit more like a collection than an actual series, which is not desirable. However, one cannot argue with the power of many of her singular images.
... idea, from image to abstraction. It becomes an idea and then an idea which obviously becomes infinitely circle. His famous works: art as idea as idea ... idea, from image to abstraction. It becomes an idea and then an idea which obviously becomes infinitely circle. His famous works: art as idea as idea ... explored of the boundaries of previous art. In his work the ideas instead of the objects; it! |s a ...
All three of my artists use different (but in some ways similiar) techniques to get across different ideas about people and identity. They all love to work in series and use photography and see the full potential of photography, and use it, to convey their complex ideas and concepts.