Surrealism and other art expressions

For me was hardly to figure the difference between the abstract in

photography and other categories that could fit the same photo?

What I want to ask here does the surrealism, impressionism,

expressionism, metaphysical photos exist to categorised photos??

And if yes what will be the difference between them?

I'm pretty sure I understand your question but I'm not familiar enough with these movements to be able to answer whether photography falls into these same categories. I do know, as RML said, that such movements as surrealism did influence photographers but whether you can classify current popular photography in this same way is another story altogether.

 

Whatever answers you get, I just hope the moderator leaves this question up for a little while. There's been some brutal hatchet work done in the last couple of days and the only live thread is gone well past it's expiration date. Give us a break Mr. Moderator.

The answer to your question in order, of the quoted generally understood movements..is <p> yes<p>no<p>yes<p>yes. George

?I am sorry, Samer: your syntax in this question is so poor it is hard to understand what you are asking, try rephrasing it for us please. The above question really makes no sense in english.?

 

Well DO you speak English Sandra???

Anyway for the one who doesn?t understand my English neither the question and to make it simple to answer, I need to know how the surrealism and the expressionism and the impressionism affect the art of photography?

And did they affect photography in a way to make categorized photos in these categories???

Being rude towards someone who expressed a polite request for clarification is not the way to get an answer. And for the record, I don't understand your question, either.

Ok let's start from the beginning?

The surrealism, impressionism, expressionism, metaphysical, all are an act of art in certain period of time.

Was photography affected by these acts of art???

And if yes give me examples please, and how can we categorized photos as a surrealistic or a metaphysical or an expressionist photo.

I?m not asking here the differences between these acts of arts, but I can?t imagine how these acts affected on photography.

 

And for those who didn?t understand my first and second question please forgive my poor English.

In surrealism the artist wants and needs to express the inner dream state of the mind or that what only really exists in his or hers imagination.The(beginning) of use of surrealism in photography is therefore in some ways contradictory with photography's most known strenght : to record the real or the reality of life as it is and not as it would/could be in someones mind.

 

To overcome this paradox, photographers had to invent a new photographic eye that looked beyond the simple objective reality as it's seen true the lens.You could define this new way of looking in three different strategies that sometimes blend in into each other :

 

1. Visionary objectivity : the photography made is simple and direct and the object exists in the very real but is seen by the photographer with an eye of originality and intensity in such a radical way that it makes the viewer wonder of into a whole diffent world. Examples of this mystic vision can be seen and feeled in the works of Minor White (who also leans towards abstractionism) where the objects are 'transformed'.

 

2. The manipulated reality : the photographer lets the viewer look into his/hers mind with the use of technical skills acomplished in the darkroom/photoshop.The photographers freedom of expression is here almost leveled with that of a painter.Example of such a photographer with an obsession for the inner world of the mind is Jerry Uelsmann.This genre is very tricky in that it's so unlimited in expression(once your a master of your tools) that focus can be easily lost.

 

3. The reconstruction of the dream : The photographers main goal is to reconstruct the images from his/hers mind into reality : scene's are staged and than photographed in a very objective or direct way. Photography's strong objective character of capturing the very real is used here cleverly to capture a kinda of off-beat reality that is staged or set in scene and was born from the innermind but now also exists in the very real. Photographers like Duane Michals and J.P. Witkin are good examples who use this strategy.

 

So what surrealism has done for photography is to look at the photographic process from many different angles instead of just the one angle that photography is made of : to record reality. Abstractionism, impressionism,..., they all interact with surrealism as they are used to obtain what surrealism is really all about : to overcome reality. In that way every single photograph is surreal since every photograph, intentional or not, is in need to say something more,something unspeakeble about reality that it claims to represent. Surrealism is everywhere in photography and although it may be not so drastic as the examples above it can even be seen used by photojournalists; their use of symbols and a complex vs. subtle narrative.

Sounds like a term paper assignment by a lazy teacher, sorry, this is a paper I will definitely NOT turn in.....

Maybe I am a lazy teacher, so that would make my answer totally valid.

Also I thought it was a good answer to a rather good question but nevermind, let's see what you got to say on it,or are you just beïng totally lazy?

ok guys,let's have something a bit practical.

can someone categorise this photo????<div></div>

Digital "art".

I'm glad to see people aren't defensive anymore. The Same same picture/title looks like a visual SAT question for someone who can't read, surrealistically.

Phylo, I truly enjoyed your answer. This is what this category (Philosophy of Photography) is all about. Kam