Documentary versus Conceptual Photo art.

There seem to be a general division applied to photographic artists, you are either in the documentary or in the conceptual tradition. Generally speaking, documentary photographers are concerned with accurate and true representations of reality as they find it without modifications and embellishments. Conceptual photographers generally pre-visualize a concept which expressed in a photographic image that could be abstract, staged or heavily modified sometimes to the extent that the image is assembled from elements that does not even exist in reality. Now if I can narrow the discourse a little bit, in terms of art photography of landscapes, photographers like Ansel Adams (his famous image of the Tetons shown below) and other modern landscape artists of the kind that get published in the National Geographic are generally lumped with the documentary camp. It has a tradition that stretch back to the Photo Secession of Alfred Stieglitz.

Artists like Anne Brigham and Jeff Wall (An octopus and some beans shown below) are in the conceptual artist camp. The tradition of conceptual photography really stretch back to the beginning of the medium in the successful struggle to gain recognition as a valid artist medium. It has really come into its own in the Post- Modern era and the fast majority of Art photographers who break into the big leagues today are conceptual artists. This is no accident, the whole art world is currently dominated by conceptual art.

The sad fact is that with the rise of conceptual art there has been growing a parallel disconnect with people who do not become to the artistic elite. The average person who views a piece of conceptual art is left, at best, feeling disconnected and unmoved by it, and often feeling that it is trivial junk that anybody could have done. Within the art community this is viewed as a barbaric perspective which speaks of a lack of culture and education and that if people would just educate themselves more they would see how profound it all is.

To me this is one of the saddest things that has happened in the art world. The self conscious superior artist who disdains the public they are dependant on and the public who has all but given up on art as anything useful to society. I recently had a member of one of the most famous Architectural firms in Vancouver tell me that he is yet to meet anyone in the general public who likes the buildings they design, and this is in spite of the fact that their reception is filled with Governor General medals and other honours. It is simply tragic for both sides.

I am hoping to move away from purely conceptual work and in my art create images of beauty that speaks to people in a direct way while giving the serious art aficionado something to chew on as well. Essentially, although my landscape work looks a lot like documentary work and I find much in the documentary tradition that appeals to me, it is more than an attempt to portray the world as it is. I am far to aware of my own subjective perspective to seriously believe in my own ability to objective portray anything. My work is therefore a conscious attempt to capture the emotional impression and the Genius Loci or spirit of the place that I find myself in. In this sense I have more in common with the conceptual tradition.