Close to Home exhibition

Teferi

As part of Culture Night last night I popped into the Gallery of Photography in Temple Bar to the Close to Home exhibition by Stephen Ahern. I have to say that they didn't do anything for me at all. They were quite boring scenes and it felt a little hodgepodge and thrown together. The blurb written about the expo is lovely but this and art like this just makes me feel scammed to be honest.

Link

Has anyone else seen it?

On the other hand, I visited the Dublin Camera Club exhibition and really enjoyed their photos. Especially the set of the bridge, the urban scenes and the musician/listener scenes.

humberklog

Yerp, I did. Only yesterday so still forming an opinion on it.

Hodgepodge? Parts were, maybe that's what a hodgepodge is (sometimes). The Cork pics did lessen the overall effect. Made it navelgazey. So tiresome having so many introspective exhibitions. "Today I'm just going to point the camera at the suff around me. This is me, there is nothing".

I did leave with a taste of emo in my mouth. But then recalled the other pics. The ones done in 3's (or 4's) of places he seemed to reside in around the world. Interesting if only for content. Pictures of doors of homes of residences. Family looking homes. Pictures taken of windows from the inside looking out.

Doors of someone's past family home from the outside and kitchens and windows from the inside. I haven't figured out what that means to me. I don't care what it means to the photographer.

I found myself not caring what it means to the artist because I didn't like his Cork pics. I don't like galleries that too often display bellybutton fluff pulled out from an emo artist that really should get up off his hole and do something better than lolling about being homesick (and sick of home when he's there). I really don't like artists that think it's relevent or important or significant to display the abject boringness of their lives in the vain hope they'll get a ride off the curator.

I've no problem with empty displays. Just don't tell me that there's something important to me in them.

But pictures of doors close up from the outside, not so much in vision but certainly in spirit. Pictures of kitchens and windows from the inside. Yeah grand...I'll enjoy reflecting back on that.

But please oh please GOP get an artist in that hasn't got one thumb up his arse and the other thumb flicking belly fluff at the TV screen in his mother's house of a bleak Tuesday lunchtime.

I'd like to stick the hoover under that lad's legs.

robertcochran

Teferi wrote: »

As part of Culture Night last night I popped into the Gallery of Photography in Temple Bar to the Close to Home exhibition by Stephen Ahern. I have to say that they didn't do anything for me at all. They were quite boring scenes and it felt a little hodgepodge and thrown together. The blurb written about the expo is lovely but this and art like this just makes me feel scammed to be honest.

Link

Has anyone else seen it?

On the other hand, I visited the Dublin Camera Club exhibition and really enjoyed their photos. Especially the set of the bridge, the urban scenes and the musician/listener scenes.

Yes, I agree with your comments on the exhibition in the GOP. I wondered how the photographer was chosen as an award winning artist. They didn't seem great to me at all.

I am a member of the Dublin Camera Club, so glad you liked the exhibition there. I didn't have any entries in that, but when down at the GOP I remember thinking that the quality of the images there would not have been selected for display in the Club or would not have got anywhere in a competition there.

humberklog

robertcochran wrote: »

Yes, I agree with your comments on the exhibition in the GOP. I wondered how the photographer was chosen as an award winning artist. They didn't seem great to me at all.

I am a member of the Dublin Camera Club, so glad you liked the exhibition there. I didn't have any entries in that, but when down at the GOP I remember thinking that the quality of the images there would not have been selected for display in the Club or would not have got anywhere in a competition there.

That's not really a negative though. It's poor measuring. What camera clubs and competitions get up to does and should belong in another world (parallel universe of sorts) to that of individual exhibitions of artists.

artyeva

humberklog wrote: »

I really don't like artists that think it's relevent or important or significant to display the abject boringness of their lives in the vain hope they'll get a ride off the curator.

singularly the bestest sentence i've read on boards in yonks

can i please have that printed up on a t-shirt?

melekalikimaka

pfft one may hate it, one may love it, you havent really justified this opinion so until then, I think I might go...just to spite your views

robertcochran

humberklog wrote: »

That's not really a negative though. It's poor measuring. What camera clubs and competitions get up to does and should belong in another world (parallel universe of sorts) to that of individual exhibitions of artists.

Interesting observation! If I understand you correctly, you are saying that when judging the merits of a photograph, the opinions of highly skilled advanced photographers are not relevant.

Instead, some undefined sense of what is art is presumably used? I would be very interested to understand more about how this latter process works.

humberklog

robertcochran wrote: »

Interesting observation! If I understand you correctly, you are saying that when judging the merits of a photograph, the opinions of highly skilled advanced photographers are not relevant.

Instead, some undefined sense of what is art is presumably used? I would be very interested to understand more about how this latter process works.

But it's not about judging the merits of a photograph. Judging the merits of a photograph is for camera clubs and competitions. That's exactly my point.

The people that'll tune into (or not) an exhibition, even if in the GOP, are the general public. People that don't care if the picture has merit, as awarded by those supposedly in the know.

mehfesto

I did enjoy the US stuff - particularly the pictures with dated brand logos on display, but as already stated the Cork ones were particularly uninspiring.

The exhibit on before it - the pictures of Asia was simply stunning. Really beautiful and interesting.

But not all photography has to be of that ilk. Different strokes for different folks and all that.

Has anyone here ever applied for it?

Teferi

melekalikimaka wrote: »

pfft one may hate it, one may love it, you havent really justified this opinion so until then, I think I might go...just to spite your views

Well art is subjective and all that so I feel it was hard to justify. They look like photos I've taken when testing out a new setting I've discovered on the camera to me anyway

Humberklog's first post was ace

CabanSail

Any exhibition will have some sort of brief that should put it into context. How successfully it fulfils that is up to the individual viewer to decide for themselves.

One of the Panels on display at DCC is mine (Lovell Radio Telescope) and I am aware of the other panels on display there at the moment. Not living in Ireland any more means that I cannot see the exhibition at the GOP, but I can get an idea of what it's like from posts here. There was another epic thread on a similar vein last year called "Not getting an image" which went into depth on this same issue.

The photo's on display at DCC are panels from the members. Each year there is a night where members bring along a panel of six images on a theme of their choice. These are displayed to the members present and the photographer speaks about what they were trying to acheive with their panel. There are no judges involved only the members present who cast a vote for their favourite panel at the end of the evening. There is then a small prize for the Best Panel as well as the best from a new participant. These two panels go on display later that year (now) in the Gallery. Another three panels are then also selected to be diplayed. This happened to be the exhibition on display for the first Culture Night which DCC was officially involved. It was then decided that would continue so that when Culture Night is on we are displaying work from the members. So when you are viewing these photo's you should keep in mind the process of them being there.

The process of selection for the exhibition at the GOP is completely different and this makes direct comparison difficult. There should be some information available to help with this, though I normally like to look first to let the images speak to me before going to that level and then finding out about the context before looking again. Sometimes my first opinion remains the same but others it can vary.

Karlmartini1

As a second year photography degree student I would have thought I'd have 'got it' by now but I simply haven't. With the exception of the 'Asia' show before the current Ahern show the venue is a downward spiral of photographs that celebrate the mundane. I really think it's a case of the emperors new clothes with the Ahern show. Are the curators playing a big joke by putting up someone's bad pharmacy prints and seeing how many critics write gushing reviews for fear of being perceived as 'not geting it'?

Perhaps this work can only be appreciated by the elite few and I fear that no matter how many years I study the medium I will never be in this group and I will always walk out of a new GOP show feeling underwhelmed. This is a public space funded by the Arts Council, should we not insist on work with broader appeal?

IMHO fine art photography does not have to be 'deadpan' to be good. There are plenty of brilliant photographers out there that speak to the everyman.

One final note on the Ahern images...they are very very small and appear to be taken on 35mm. I think it's a terrible shame to waste such a beautiful space as the GOP with postcard size photographs. I'm assuming this was done deliberately to fit with the snapshot aesthetic. Can't we have this kind of work on smaller walls in a smaller gallery that caters to the small group of people who enjoy it?

Teferi

I actually didn't even think of the size of the photos but you made a good point. They could have all fit in one of those tiny alcoves in the building, although I do think that the size fit in with the theme.