LAUNCH REPORT
Thanks to the brave souls who made it to the launch of After the Fact. They braved torrential downpours and two tornados to get there. And when they arrived they were met with a completely dark gallery because of the power outages that were happening all over the city.
Weirdly prophetic, seeing as weather, climate change, is partly what After the Fact is about.
Eventually the lights did come back on, snacks were consumed, beverages were taken to the face, photos were looked at and conversations took place.
Amongst the folks that came was Ava. Here we are, Ava and I, standing by the photo of her legs that appears in the book. (Yes, she is alive, the book is a work of fiction.)
The show continues until September 28th.
Here’s a review (or, maybe a reaction) to After the Fact, by Taymaz Valley, which appeared in apt. 613.
Buy After the Fact here.
PAY TO PLAY
Colin Pantall wrote a very interesting blog post about how photographers having (spare) money (or not) affects the photoworld.
Here’s an excerpt . . .
I was talking to somebody (who appears extremely successful and makes genuinely great work. But is actually broke) a couple of months ago and she wondered if there shouldn’t be a consideration of the wealth of the photographer in evaluating work. If you are stinking rich and can afford that army of assistants and those high production values, should there be a little cross against you was what she was saying. Should there be a red mark of wealth against you.
It’s a valid question and one lots of people ask – but not too loudly.
A few years ago I posed this question on Facebook:
Should photographers who have a good disposable income apply for grants?
Well, a shitstorm ensued in the comment section.
First of all, many folks misinterpreted the question, they wondered how granting agencies might apply a means test to applicants.
But my question had nothing to do with granting agencies applying a means test. I was suggesting (in a passive/aggressive way, truth be told) that those who practice art and who have a trust fund, money socked away, a swell pension, a rich partner, etc., might consider stepping away from the grant money table, that they leave money there for those who actually need it.
It also was brought up that receiving a grant, being accepted by a jury of your peers, was always good for your career, good for your resumé and good for the good-old ego. And, sure, it’s difficult to argue with that.
I suppose, too, that that’s why so many photographers enter those pay-to-play contests . . . career advancement, acceptance, a line in your CV and having your photograph appear in some online gallery or (if you’re doubly lucky) as part of a group show somewhere.
Aside from a few that actually have some industry weight and a modicum of morals, most of those contests are just money grabs that prey on the hopes and dreams of photographers. You “win” but the only real outcome is an ego boost and another line on your resumé, another bit of news for your social media feed.
But, as Colin points out, having money is pretty much a prerequisite for moving your career along, and many (most) of the systems in place to “help” photographers do nothing to address that issue.
It’s good to see that, more and more, people in the photoworld are beginning to question certain foundations that world is built upon.