P | P1 | Research point

Read the reviews by Campany and Colberg and, if you haven’t already done so, use them to begin the Research section of your learning log. Try to pick out the key points made by each writer. Write about 300 words.

If you wish, you could add a screengrab of an image from Ruff’s jpeg series, and one or twoof your own compressed jpegs (taken on auto mode of course). You can achieve the effect quite easily by re-sizing a photograph to say, 180 x 270 pixels, and saving at ‘zero quality’ compression. If you use Photoshop’s ‘save for web’ you can see the effect immediately without having to save, close and reopen the file.

http://davidcampany.com/thomas-ruff-the-aesthetics-of-the-pixel/ http://jmcolberg.com/weblog/2009/04/review_jpegs_by_thomas_ruff/

---

Reading the two contradictory reviews on Ruff's book Jpegs, it is interesting to see how art is for the viewer.

I can see how Campany is inviting me to want to see more from Ruff's work while Colberg makes me think how Ruff might not be a photographer at all, or at least that the book is beautiful but only superficial.

I actually disagree with the way Colberg is saying "The tremendous beauty of some of the images notwithstanding, the concept itself seems to rely a bit too much on the technique itself. What else is there? Make no mistake, there is nothing wrong with producing beautiful images or images that are “just” beautiful. And everything would be fine if there hadn’t been so many attempts to convince me that in reality “jpegs” is more. "

I just think that an artist is showing his work firstly, shouldn't be criticised - we are indeviduals and the way work will touch each of us will be different, some would like some will dislike or have different kinds of emotions coming up.

Therefore I think having a theme to a book which relay on technic is totally fine.

It has a theme, an idea. In the same matter of another artist chooses to have a whole book of his film photography - the film is the technique and it can be beautiful and pleasing/ will arouse different emotions for different people, and people will enjoy it.

With Campay's review, I like how he brings the film grain as an example, and say how the grain has a more 'authentic feel to it' while maybe one day the pixel will have the same effect on us.

I feel like film photography feels authentic as it is old and marks for many of us the pre modernist era when people didn't have a phone in hand 24/7 and ready to click as many clicks as they want.

It was slower.

More genuine.

This is why I myself choose to focus on film photography because it is not something I take for granted, it is special, expensive, hard to get - and the grain is this warm representation of this whole essence.

I feel a bit repulsed when I see the pixels on the images of Ruff's and both reviewrs mention this work needs to be seen out of the screen so maybe it is why I am not feeling attracted to it.

But it made me feel something, therefore i disagree with Colberg. It made me reflect.

About our modern society, about our fastness, about the internet, about so many things (also the fact he choses images of destruction to nature by men).

Therefore I praise Ruff, for doing something different, out of the box, almost asking for people to give him bad reviews, or praise him.