In the object-image coupling which one is transformed? The object or the image? Together they become an entity in their own right, a hybrid with a distinct and clean nature. But this coupling between the image and the medium as a necessary mediator, is the ground of a confrontation, of a tension between reproducibility (paradigm essential to the definition of photography) and the single object (because not reproducible). The result is a superposition of layers of residue: the residue of a "real" instant (image captured by the act of photography) and the residue of a reality (tangible object occupying a place in space). However, from this hybrid confrontation emanates the real "body" of the photographic object: the one that gives substance both to the support and to our gaze, the one that makes us think and not remember. If the subject of the photograph is neither death nor life but the transition between one and the other which, for its part, is inscribed in time, which can be a better witness of the passing time than the matter in its fragility, in its residual condition?
I understand that photography is more than its referent (the subject it portrays/records). For me, the materiality of a photographic image is part of the photo-object. In this sense, when recording light with different materials and supports, it makes them part of the message, and in some cases they create a new reading layer that the observer can make of this photo-object. I am interested in creating images thinking about the whole set that is part of it: the registered subject, the photosensitive material that registers it and the surface where the image will be deposited. In some cases, I also include other items juxtaposed to the photographic object, creating a small visual installation. Photography for me is not about being a representation of reality, or having a responsibility to truth (what is real anyway?), but about creating a reality or story that you want to tell or share. -
Alternative photography printing represents a very creative process, especially since it gives the opportunity to experience and transform different objects and surfaces. The importance of the printed object turns into an undeniable concreteness with the concept and is enriched with the image. I don't think the object has completely lost its essential meaning here. Yes, it may be losing its function partially, but it is already preferred in line with a concept that intersects with its basic meaning. Here, rather than a narrative that is far from the object or form, or transforming the object completely, I believe that -at least in my works- it pluralizes the meaning and visual memory. Rather than a concealment or camouflage, I think we can talk about an image presentation that contains the whole process and experience, with its unique status and flaws, very close to the realistic world – tangible – but not completely referencing reality.
Mert Çağıl Türkay
My works are photoscultures: I printed my analogue photos on the marble thanks to liquid silver gelatin. In this way the image mixes with the surface and it's hard to tell where one ends and the other starts. Lately photography is seen as a purely digital art, dematerialized and visible only on the web. It doesn't have a feeling, a materiality. I want to take the pictures out in the world and make them weigh!
Let us take as a standard definition of photography as a reflection, a clue, a presence, a mark of something that is no longer there, and that is greeted by a flat, two-dimensional surface. But, what can be the standard definition of photography today? Is it still a document, proof of "what was"? Is it dematerialized, omnipresent and undifferentiated visual information? Or is it a question of stopping reproducing reality in what it has as its objective to produce works using all the potentialities of the medium by responding to an aesthetic of light? Faced with this refusal of photography to let itself be locked into a definition, we can now see the widening of its migratory quality by opposing resistance to its duty to define reality; it can very well detach itself from its support, or invest the space in a language closer to sculpture.
Mert Çağıl Türkay
I think that there is no standard definition of photography anymore due to its enrichment throughout the process. But, like my production method, we can reveal new interpretations in this formal situation with the photograph, which is carried to three-dimensional surfaces. What makes my works different is that I print on everyday objects or on various organic surfaces. It is important for alternative printing techniques that the objects or surfaces I prefer match perfectly with the concepts I study, research and think about. It allows me to present a richer and more concrete form of perception rather than a two-dimensional surface or digital image.
If we analyze the definition of photography from the etymology of the word, 'photography' means to record or write with light. I record light from different photosensitive materials and supports.
Camila Murúa Solís
Following photography’s traditional canon, photographic portraits seek the transcendence of the being portrayed, keeping a lasting record of it either on paper or as a digital file. Both in my chlorophyll printing and cyanotype work, I make use of the inherent characteristics of materials and techniques, such as the impermanence of the image and the natural deterioration of the medium to create a portrait destined to become dust, transient and ephemeral. This is the main point in which my work differs from standard photography.
I'm not sure what the standard definition of Photography is but, I would say that it's 2D and not touchable. And usually, it's a document of reality. My work is meant to be touched. It's meant to be sensible, sensitive, appealing to be touched. My work awakes the kid in us who wants to touch and feel—trying to confirm what our eyes see with our hands. The sense of Touch proves and reaffirms reality.
Also, from an experimental approach, I feel that using the technique of liquid emulsion (as other coating techniques or processes), the chance, the process, the craft interferes in the outcome in many ways. I feel that sometimes is more important the process and the performance than the last print.
That last print cannot express or show how long the process is and how unpredictable it can be.
Coming from the world of sculpture, I use photography as a raw material, infinitely transformable. You can crop it, edit it, distort it, print it on different media, or simply make it appear in the dark during a projection, on flat screens or even in volumes. My « Naïades » series borrows the draping effect from art history as the evocation of a body. I designed glass sculptures to receive photographs. A photosensitive emulsion is poured on the glass surface to reveal pictures. A woman’s body appears through the depth of the glass, deformed by the optical effects. The picture merges with the volume of the sculpture creating a whole new three-dimensional image