I hope this isn't a silly question, but is there a Gustav Klimt of photography?

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>I hope this isn't a silly question, but is there (in any sense) a Gustav Klimt of photography? <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustav_Klimt#Paintings"><em><strong>Here are some of his paintings</strong></em></a>, some of which can be said to fall (at least in part) into the genre of photographic realism. Most, of course, do not.</p>

<p>Therein lies the rub: how does one become as creative with a camera as Klimt and others can or could be with a brush?</p>

<p>Is that even possible?</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p><a href="http://www.klimt.com/"><em><strong>Here</strong></em></a> and <a href="http://www.gustav-klimt.com/"><em><strong>here</strong></em></a> are some others.</p>

<p>As for his sayings, he is famous for saying "All art is erotic." (See also <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBTSZt2o-sU"><em><strong>this</strong></em></a>.)</p>

<p>I am not so sure if that is so-sensual, yes, but "erotic"? Perhaps that depends on how one defines "erotic."</p>

<p>Nonetheless, <a href="http://www.gustav-klimt.com/The-Kiss.jsp"><em><strong>here</strong></em></a> is one of my personal favorites of his.</p>

<p>As for elements of "realism" in his work, I am not sure that a single one of his works in its totality is completely "realistic." Yet, yet, certain portions of many of his paintings look almost as realistic as do photographs.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUfcbPgQSME"><em><strong>Here</strong></em></a> is a good clip.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[dhbebb]

<p>In general mood (and contemporary to him) is the work of Alfred Stieglitz and his "Photo Secession" crowd:<br>

http://www.moma.org/collection/artists/5664</p>

[User_6502147]

<p>That's rather poignant question, Lannie. I'm thinking that's feasible especially using double exposure (if I can be so crass)....tho so far I haven't seen it done. He was certainly one of a kind. I got infatuated with his work way back in v. early 80's....and decided that he was, indeed, my favorite painter. Subsequently, in 1982 I had a chance to see his original works (over a dozen) hanging at Belevedere in Vienna. The contrast between modern graphic prints and his actual work is simply many kilometers apart.<br>

Anyway, not much has changed, he's still a maestro...<br>

Thanks for the links.<br>

Les</p>

 

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>Well, thanks, Leszek, but surely there is more to it than that. The range of post-processing options in both film and digital has made it possible to be very creative. We are hardly limited to what we can see through the lens, either in one or two exposures.</p>

<p>Still, the brilliant painters would still seem to have the edge where creativity is concerned.</p>

<p>I hope that somebody proves me wrong.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustav_Klimt#/media/File:Gustav_Klimt_-_Tranquil_Pond_%28Egelsee_near_Golling,_Salzburg%29_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg"><em><strong>Here</strong></em></a> is one of the more realistic shots that I found. In many others, only a very small portion of the painting resembles a photograph in its detail and sense of realism. Of course, the realistic effect fades as one views up close, but from a distance (or viewed small on the screen) the overall effect is quite realistic, albeit romanticized in this case.</p>

<p>In <a href="http://www.gustav-klimt.com/The-Kiss.jsp#prettyPhoto[image1]/0/"><em><strong>this one</strong></em></a>, by comparison, one notices a pretty realistic treatment of the hands and fingers.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Richard Williams]

<blockquote>

<p>Subsequently, in 1982 I had a chance to see his original works (over a dozen) hanging at Belevedere in Vienna.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I envy anyone who saw the intact collection before 2006, when a court case transferred ownership of 5 of the paintings back to the family of the original owners (it was found that they had been illegally appropriated during the Nazi era). Unfortunately for Vienna, the Austrian government did not buy back the paintings when it was offered them on favourable terms, and all were promptly sold off and acquired by various private collectors. The greatest work, the stunning golden portrait Adele Bloch-Bauer, is at least on permanent display in the tiny Neue Galerie in NYC, where it's the main draw for the rather steep $20 admission fee. Its companion piece, a later portrait of the same subject in a very different style, is currently on loan to MoMA - I hope I get back to NYC while it's still there, as I've never seen it. Anyone interested in Klimt should still see the paintings in the Belvedere, though - it remains one of the greatest collections of his work. While in Vienna, the Beethoven Frieze at the Secession and the Klimts in the Leopold Museum are also worth your time.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The contrast between modern graphic prints and his actual work is simply many kilometers apart.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, definitely!</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>Thank you, Richard. It is indeed a shame that so many were bought by private collectors. I am glad that this one is still available for public viewing:</p>

<p><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Gustav_Klimt_046.jpg"><strong>[Link]</strong></a><br>

<strong> </strong><br>

Speaking as a photographer, I continue to be intrigued by how Klimt used highly abstract and symbolic elements and themes combined with fragments that had at least the superficial appearance of being photographs.</p>

<p>It is the way that Klimt wove the realistic, quasi-photographic elements into the larger composition that continues to intrigue me.</p>

<p>--Lannie<strong><br /></strong></p>

[AJHingel]

<p>I don't see neither the quasi-photographic dimension of Klimt's paintings of women friends and clients. One sees less the paintings he made which are less pleasing to the bourgeois eyes which he made his name from (gold, beauty, warm colors). His painting of the <a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Gustav_Klimt_-_Blind_Man_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg">Blind Man</a> has none of these internationally known highly decorative works of the Vienna secession. None of it is photographic realism, as far as I see it. It is more or at least something else. <br /> Go to Klim's <a href="http://www.culturainquieta.com/en/erotic/item/6683-33-erotic-drawings-by-gustav-klimt.html">erotic drawings</a> which he made hundreds of in a period of his life outside Vienna before becoming known and accepted, which by the way ended him up in prison. These drawings are far beyond photographic and still worrying realistic.</p>

<p>Klimt's early decorative works you see now reproduced throughout the work. See below one example from a tea-house in the town of Busan, Korea.</p><div></div>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Lannie,</p>

<p>If you haven't already, you might also want to check out the paintings of Egon Schiele, a contemporary and protégé of Klimt.</p>

<p><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Egon_Schiele_-_Zwei_sich_umarmende_Frauen_-_1911.jpeg">LINK</a></p>

<p><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Egon_Schiele_016.jpg">LINK</a></p>

<p>An excerpt from an introduction to a book about the two:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Where Klimt is ornamentally decorous, Schiele is often indecorously expressive. Klimt's meticulously structured mosaic compositions are opposite in concept and execution from Schiele's sure and daring linear scheme, as are Klimt's subtly balanced tonal effects when seen in juxtaposition with Schiele's fauve and eventually expressionist use of color. Klimt strives through formal means to attain an order that, not unlike Mondrian's, reduces spontaneous and individual components to a collective validity. Schiele, in contrast more like Klee, transcribes highly personal insights which then assume the power of evoking common experiences. Above all, Klimt, despite his current relevance to modern art, must be seen as a late exponent of an historic style, whereas Schiele raises to the most intense pitch the newly acquired awareness of 20th century man.</em></p>

</blockquote>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>Thank you, Fred. I have to say that Schiele is in general the more expressive--were it not for the drawings which Anders linked to. There is wonder to be found in both sets of drawings.</p>

<p>It is curious but perhaps not surprising that the more realistic elements are not always the more compelling or the more expressive. Drawings are not realistic like photographs can be, and yet they can show a deeper reality, that of the emotions. What extraordinary work!</p>

<p>Thank you, Anders, and thank you, Fred. I am not the best one to lead this discussion. I was indeed hoping, Fred, that you might jump in at some point. There is much to be said, but I am frankly not particularly qualified to say it, or even to interpret it. I am intrigued by art criticism and analysis, but I am really pretty dismal at it.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Richard Williams]

<p>The picture on the tea house wall is actually a Schiele.</p>

[AJHingel]

You are right Richard. Same Vienna secession though.

[barnabe_lise]

<p>I know a photographer, in France, called Patrick AALK, that have created a technical support for moving his cameras and, for my understanding, creates a new photo dimension and feelings that are really close to paintings. I do believe that he is more inspired by painters than others. Unfortunately i cannot find his website. He is now living in Asia but still cannot find any website.<br>

How to check? I really dont know! Some of his portraits could have been painted by Klimt.<br>

:} LizBar</p>

 

[inoneeye]

<p>closer to leroy nieman ... but check out Saul Leiter. painted nudes</p>

[inoneeye]

or Steven Meisel 'patterns' fashion work.

[inoneeye]

<p>or more optically literal ...<br>

<a href="http://rohitchawlaphotography.com/klimt.html">Rohit Chawla</a><br>

&<br>

<a href="http://lunaticadesnuda.blogspot.com/2008/09/art-of-gustav-klimt-reproduced-in.html"> Moises González</a></p>