After my recent - safe to say - not so good but slightly helpful feedback, I had yet another one on one with my actual VP tutor. Here I went through my recent feedback and asked him if he could break it down for me because some of the things that were said previously, I was struggling with. In this session we went through each of the images I had showed the previous tutor and I was told how they could be taking in a negative way etc.
The below received the feedback of :
- Beautiful and outstanding, tutor wouldn't consider this image to show the female as vulnerable, due to her facial expression. He also wouldn't class it as a fashion shot, as the stretch marks, in true fashion style, would be manipulated / air bruised out. The only negative that the tutor could think of would be that her shoulders could show vulnerability, the way they are raised up.
^ This is something I would agree with, I had thought that myself. How I can take this foreword though is difficult, because it's been done plenty of times. It would also still receive negative feedback due to the fact that it is seen as natural for men to be topless in everyday life but women aren't, so these types of images, shot within this framing style, would seem a normal shot for men, but not for women.
Another negative comment for this image could be that it is too intense, her stare could represent the misogyny, meaning the hatred of women. Which is something theorists - NEED TO FIND OUT WHO- have said that women have started to do this too. It's also been said that because of this, women feel a sense of empowerment when they are topless, or pose nude. An example of this being a mens magazine competition where women had to show their breasts to judges, the lady with what would be considered to have the best breasts, then won a photoshoot to be put in the mens magazine - again, revealing her breast. When did we see this as a prize? The question we need to ask ourselves is why can't women see that we're just being used by the men, we're allowing ourselves to be treated this way because we've been manipulated into thinking it is some sort of ego boost or it's impressive to be sexy or get our boobs out. I suppose in my culture another example would be, women putting half naked or nude images on instagram or social networks, basically fishing for the approval of men and to receive 'likes' off random males - this will then give the women who do this a sense of pride and self achievement. Why?
I'm hoping this image doesn't represent the above comment. I'm hoping people see this image and assume the female is confident, yet respectful of herself - something which hopefully you can pick up by her facial expression and her stance.
The next image feedback:
This image received the feedback I had expected. It's quite 'expected' was one of the comments. As the previous tutor stated is that it looks quite 'kate moss' which is also what this tutor agreed with - matters don't help when the model does actually look slightly like the famous model.
-He also said that the image is quite eery or dream like.
Other feedback I got on some images which I haven't posted on my blog as of yet, was that some did clearly look as if a 'man took the image' , this is because I have been brought up into a culture of women whom which has learnt to view ourselves as men would view ourselves, so I unconsciously created images that represent this notion. With this said, i have been told to look into 'Ways of seeing' by Berger. In this book, it explains this idea of seeing thoroughly, it has also been said to be criticised by feminists.
Also, I was told that an image of the girl above, that I took outside, doesn't look as if a man has taken it due to the fact it isn't 'arty' enough, meaning men try to pose the women to look like a 'form or shape' a vision of beauty in a more angular way. Where as mine would be considered as a straight portrait shot. Despite the feedback of the image being beautiful, the issue this image raised was the fact she had no pubic hair. To have no pubic hair is to go back to pubescent years - you're basically changing your body back to when you had no hair, so when you were a child or younger. For many this is disturbing, and rightly so. I could take these types of images but i would have to consider this aspect. It's difficult though because like I mentioned previously, we have been brought up to change our bodies to impress the males in our life, or we do it for ourselves because we've been taught that this is the natural thing to do. If this is the case, all my models would be hairless? so do i carry on taking these types of images to place with my previous statement or do I try to find women who keep 100 percent natural ? - something that will prove to be a difficult job to find - again because of the current views of pubic hair in this society. I think the first thing I need to do is take a picture of a male in this way, so I can compare the two. See if the outcomes are different, answer questions like
Is it different because it's of a man?
Does the male express the same vulnerability?
What does this make us think of the original image of the female?
Does this change our opinions when the images are put together as a pair?
ETC.
I hadn't noticed a lot of the negatives my images portrayed, so todays session helped me understand what I needed to consider when taking these types of pictures. I'm now aware of what images of mine are particularly male related and what aren't and also the difference between 'nude and naked' in my work.
Things I've been told to look at :
-Pornified
-Female Misogynist culture
-Living dolls by Natasha Walter
- Edward Monets 'Olympia'
-John Bergers ways of seeing
- Kiera Knightly article on her recent topless image
-Reneki Djisktra (find correct spelling)
No comments:
Post a Comment