Jeff Wall's New Show in Washington, DC

[r.e.]

This evening, PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) in the U.S. aired this segment about Canadian photographer Jeff Wall's new show. The show started on October 21 and runs through March.


How photographer Jeff Wall’s pictures duplicate the 'magic' of large-scale paintings


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqG8R6h_Q3E


The show is at the Glenstone Museum (https://www.glenstone.org/) just outside Washington. Apparently privately owned, the video says that the museum opened fully in 2018. It sounds a bit like a cross between New York State's Storm King Art Center (https://stormking.org) and Dia: Beacon (https://www.diaart.org).

I saw Wall's 2007 show at MoMA (https://www.moma.org) in New York, which I thought was remarkable. Glenstone says that this is his largest U.S. show since. Press release:


POTOMAC, MD, September 22, 2021 – On October 21, Glenstone Museum will open a five-decade survey exhibition by Jeff Wall (b. 1946, Vancouver, Canada) in Room 2 of the Pavilions. Comprising nearly thirty pictures made between 1978 and 2018, the exhibition charts the development of an artistic practice that is widely regarded as having changed the perception of photography as a contemporary art form. Works on view will feature every photographic process in the artist’s oeuvre, from backlit transparencies to large-scale inkjet color prints.

This presentation marks the first monographic exhibition of the artist’s work in the Washington, D.C. area since 1997, and is his largest exhibition in the United States since a mid-career survey at the Museum of Modern Art, New York, in 2007. It will be on view at Glenstone until March 2022.

“Jeff Wall’s work has influenced generations of artists and shaped the discourse around photography today. His immersive, intricate recreations of scenes from everyday life manage to be both familiar and enigmatic,” said Emily Wei Rales, director and co-founder of Glenstone. “We are extraordinarily proud to offer visitors this rare opportunity to see a comprehensive survey of the artist’s work, showing the remarkable range and complexity of his art.”

Jeff Wall’s approach has expanded the common understanding and definition of pictorial art by making photographs with the visual power and conceptual weight afforded to painting. Relatively early in his career, Wall parted ways with the convention of street photography and the impulse to capture moments on camera as they occur. Inspired instead by memories and imagined scenarios, he carefully plans and constructs his pictures, scouting locations, casting actors as subjects, and organizing the shoots with the rigor of a movie production.

The exhibition at Glenstone opens with a series of color and black-and-white pictures in which landscape features prominently. Works on view include Steves Farm, Steveston, 1980, which depicts tract housing encroaching on rural farmland, and the more recent I giardini/The Gardens, 2018, a monumental triptych photographed in the lush setting of the Villa Silvia Pellico outside Turin, Italy.

Additional galleries contain the earliest works Wall made in the studio—including The Destroyed Room, 1978 and Picture for Women, 1979—as well as his first pictures featuring urban settings. In an innovative move designed to draw in the viewer, he presents these pictures as transparencies in backlit lightboxes, a format borrowed from the world of advertising.

Also included in the exhibition are several large-scale works including A Sudden Gust of Wind (after Hokusai), 1993, a contemporary adaptation of a print from Katsushika Hokusai’s woodblock series Thirty-Six Views of Mount Fuji (ca. 1830-1832).

Jeff Wall currently lives and works between Vancouver and Los Angeles. He has been the subject of multiple monographic exhibitions worldwide, including at the Tate Modern, London (2005); the Museum of Modern Art, New York (2007); the Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam; (2014); and the Kunsthalle Mannheim, Germany (2018).

On the occasion of the exhibition, Glenstone will publish a fully illustrated catalogue featuring an introduction by Emily Wei Rales, an original text by art critic and historian Barry Schwabsky, and color plates of the works in Glenstone’s collection.

About Glenstone

Glenstone, a museum of modern and contemporary art, is integrated into nearly 300 acres of gently rolling pasture and unspoiled woodland in Montgomery County, Maryland, less than 15 miles from the heart of Washington, DC. Established by the not-for-profit Glenstone Foundation, the museum opened in 2006 and provides a contemplative, intimate setting for experiencing iconic works of art and architecture within a natural environment. The museum includes its original building, the Gallery, as well as additional structures opened in its 2018 expansion: the Arrival Hall (LEED platinum), the Pavilions, and the Café (both LEED gold).

Glenstone is open Thursdays through Sundays, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Visitors are also invited to explore the grounds or participate in self-guided sculpture tours. Admission to Glenstone is free and visits can be scheduled online at: www.glenstone.org. Same-day visits can be scheduled online.

Students 12 and older, active-duty military members, and museum professionals enjoy guaranteed entry for themselves plus one guest upon presenting a valid identification card at the Arrival Hall. Advanced registration is not required for visitors in these categories. Passengers who arrive at Glenstone on the Ride On bus (route 301) also will be offered guaranteed entry.

At Glenstone, masks are currently required except when visitors and associates are outdoors and more than six feet apart from other households. For a list of current visitor guidelines, please review the Plan Your Visit page on www.glenstone.org.

[Drew Wiley]

Big for sake of big. So what. I like these PBS mini-segments and find them interesting - this one too. It aired here tonite. But what does it prove except it isn't painting, and just wants to be; isn't really photography either - more a hybrid of stage production and digital alteration, Hollywood style. I'd prefer to see a hecka lot more detail in those pictures to warrant big. And I'd rather see an actual Photorealist painting any day of the week; a big budget stunt just can't do the same thing. But that's my take. Someone else might have completely different taste. Jeff evidently enjoys doing it; so if he can afford it, guess that's justification itself. These sizing trends go in predictable cycles. Huge prints are everywhere right now. It's just a matter of time till people tire of it. The next trend will probably be Minox contact prints instead, placed on museum walls with insect pins.

[Chester McCheeserton]

I'd prefer to see a hecka lot more detail in those pictures to warrant big.

Which of Wall's pictures have you seen in person Drew?

[bob carnie]

I think Drew you should look into Jeff Wall a bit more before you are so critical. His approach to photography is very unique and refreshing, spoiler alert he takes his time.

[BIATHLONEIL]

That is certainly and interesting application of photography. Pretty damn cool.

[r.e.]

I'd like to know why Wall has never made a film. It's clear that if he wanted to, he could, both financially and technically. Vancouver, where he lives, and Los Angeles, where the PBS video says he also spends time, are major film production centres. As I understand it, he works with a set and lighting crew, and can spend days building a set. Why does he draw the line at one frame instead of 24?

In the late 2000s, I saw two exhibits for photographers that I didn't know a lot about: Jeff Wall's 2007 show at the Museum of Modern Art, and Robert Frank's 2009 show The Americans at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Both were major eye-openers. People who decide to see the Washington show may find it helpful to do some reading in advance about how Wall makes his pictures.

By the way, that's a younger Jeff Wall in the pictures at 00:19 and 00:58 of the video.

[bob carnie]

Jeff not only takes , days but even months to set up a scene and get to the point of making an exposure. He is a major photographic influence for many, many people.

[Drew Wiley]

My issue isn't it being uninteresting - it is interesting. I've been following his work for awhile; that PBS segment wasn't by any means my first encounter. But it's really neither fish nor fowl. I guess if a person is into stage production techniques ala Suburbia Genre they might gravitate toward it. To me it has about as much philosophical appeal as looking at taxidermied lion and rhino specimens through a Smithsonian diorama window. I'm not denying it as an art genre; but I prefer actual "discovered" photography. I could care less about influence. Sure, a herd will follow, if that many independently rich people can be found. But's it's exactly the opposite direction I'd ever want to go. Concoction. Anti-photography; something else. If one wants to be a painter instead, just be a real painter. At least the end result won't fade to non-existence in twenty years, or perhaps far sooner with the backlit transparency examples (fluorescent tubes output UV).

But Chester is correct - Wall's work has never turned up around here; and I sure wouldn't go out of my way to view it, like taking a flight somewhere. But there is simply no way on that size scale it's going to appeal to my own instincts as a printmaker, even if 8x10 film was once involved. Apparently he's now more into MF digital capture anyway. And a number of persons who have viewed his work in person have spoken of the presentation as disappointing (too big to hold detail well, and many manipulation artifacts apparent up close). For me, anything much bigger than 4X is pushing it unless one does really back off.

But the degree of manipulation turns me off in general. It just doesn't ring true. Call that jaded if you wish. That's OK with me. A Broadway play production wouldn't appeal to me either. My two cents worth. And I certainly respect any rebuttal to my viewpoint. We're all different; otherwise, life would be pretty dull. I don't like eggplant or okra either.

[drj52]

If you plan to visit Glenstone, be aware that ALL visits are scheduled, in order to avoid crowding. This has been the case since they opened; it’s not COVID-related. They were typically booked weeks in advance, but that may have changed; it’s been a couple years since I was there.

[r.e.]

If you plan to visit Glenstone, be aware that ALL visits are scheduled, in order to avoid crowding. This has been the case since they opened; it’s not COVID-related. They were typically booked weeks in advance, but that may have changed; it’s been a couple years since I was there.

What did you think of the grounds and exhibition areas? Worth seeing in themselves?

[Mark Sampson]

Glenstone is a museum founded by the billionaire financier Mitchell Rales to house his vast collection of ultra-contemporary art. It was private for a long time, now open to the public. It sits in a vast estate; IIRC the museum's buildings are by the modernist architect Charles Gwathmey. I had business there, seven or eight years ago; it's expanded quite a bit since then.
It's probably worth seeing- but Washington DC is full of museums and sights, so a short-term visitor to the city might find their dance card filled rather quickly. Glenstone does feature today's art superstars... who you probably won't find at the National Gallery of Art, the Hirschhorn, or the Phillips Collection (to name only a few).
I wouldn't mind seeing Jeff Wall's work, but it's four years since I moved away from that part of the world, so I won't get to see the show.

[Chester McCheeserton]

My issue isn't it being uninteresting - it is interesting. I've been following his work for awhile; that PBS segment wasn't by any means my first encounter. But it's really neither fish nor fowl. .... But there is simply no way on that size scale it's going to appeal to my own instincts as a printmaker, even if 8x10 film was once involved....But the degree of manipulation turns me off in general. It just doesn't ring true...

Drew, before I saw the work in person I felt the same as you, that it had to be too big to hold up and that hiring actors and staging everything was somehow wrong, and "faking it" or something, that it was more artful to find things, real true things that existed already in the world. But after seeing a show at a gallery in in nyc almost 20 years ago, I had to step back and re-evaluate. The lightboxes had an impact in person that was undeniable, for me at least, and it was unlike anything I had experienced before. Not Photography? certainly, but photography, specifically the large format photography we all love, was there. It was in color, and it was glowing with a presence usually only felt in a movie theater. The art theory and painting references are there too, but i think the best of his work is impactful even for those who have no knowledge of such things. (I didn't then, and only slightly do now) I think there already is a backlash against huge prints now, he's become like a sort of Stephen Spielberg or Jeff Koons type figure that people love to hate on. But I think of the people who brought big photo prints into the art museums he is one of, if not the, most important figures. His knowledge of the cinema, of painting, and of critical writers like Walter Benjamin and Theodor Adorno can be seen in the pictures – he created something new and he did it using the gear we all geek out on. But yeah I like taking pictures of trees that I didn't pay and tell what to do too.

[profvandegraf]

Looks like Cindy Sherman meets Gregory Crewdson. I would like to see these in person.

[Alan Klein]

Walls pictures in the museum are not prints but rather chromes displayed through very large back-lit lightboxes which bring out the colors and 3D look. I've noticed from other photos I've seen elsewhere by most other photographers, that large always seems to make the photos look better even if they're ho-hum. His work is planned like Crewdson, not my style. I prefer street shots that are extemporaneous.

[Alan Klein]

Lik uses backlighting too. It's very dramatic. Yeah. I know. It's inane. But it works. And sells.

[nolindan]

Although big has a quality all its own, for big glowing color pictures I usually haul out my slide projector. And then there is just the plain-ole-boring 60"+ TV set everyone has in their home.

As to Wall's work, I haven't seen it and can't comment.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, everyone already knows what I think about Lik, so I won't go there; and Jeff Wall is certainly not in that category, esthetically. But as far as backlit transparencies in general, besides being at risk of premature fading, I just find the whole manner of presentation tacky. It reminds me of oversized backlit Hamm's beer ad boxes in dive windows. Now someone might accuse me of hypocrisy, because for appropriate subjects, I have made a considerable number of full gloss polyester prints of various sizes, including relatively large, on either Cibachrome or more lately Fujiflex Supergloss. But at the point of display, I try to frame them and illumine them in a very tasteful manner. And that provides both a 3D effect without going silly, and, at the same time, a certain reserve which is quite compatible with other adjacent prints of other degrees of reflection, including outright flat, whether color or black and white, or even paintings. I've done a number of gallery or special venue exhibits based on that very premise.

But a giant light box would just be... well, more like something Peter L. does trying to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse, and hoping that Ma Kettle just won the Kansas lottery and has just stepped off a tour ship docked at Lahaina, seeking something glitzy to hang adjacent to her black velvet Elvis rug.

[bob carnie]

One of the reasons Jeff Wall made backlit cCba's was due to the current timeline belief that Cibas were non fading in dark storage, unlike dye coupler prints. I have to believe this to be true as I just put
a few Discovery Series of Norma Jean on my walls, they were printed in 88 (not by me ) but I have kept them in dark storage for over 30 years and I have to say they are as fresh today as what I imagine I
felt about them in 88. I believe and would bet money that Jeff would pull 6 copies of each image he sold and instructed the buyer to only pull out the other copies if indeed the first copy ever faded, so a museum
only showing his work sporadically could indeed have samples of his handy work for over 800 years. At the time I owned a Ciba lab working for others, I was privately told that Jeff Wall a working artist in Vancouver was the single
biggest user of Cibachrome in the world ... I find this quite interesting and if true I give huge credo to him and believe is the reason he used cibatrans over other artists using RA4 paper

[Drew Wiley]

Hi Bob. I'm doing some remodeling, fresh painting, new lights, etc., and just yesterday pulled an old framed Ciba out of the stack that had been under indirect mountain light for nearly 30 years, and climate conditions so abusive that the plexiglass over the top is all crazed with tiny cracks. But the print itself look like it was made yesterday. I'll replace the plastic and give the print another life. Stored ones - well, even better odds. But harsh UV, whether direct sunlight or intense artificial lighting rich in UV does prematurely fade them, often quite prematurely.

You might be entirely right about Jeff making multiples, presumably at his own expense. How museums these day could afford to do it repeatedly defies logic; most of them are desperate for funds. The mere storage of significant quantities of large pieces is becoming an almost impossible challenge. And 800 years from now ... well, that's a flight of imagination. There could be another world war in only another 8 years as far as I know, flattening half the museums in the world. And I am extremely skeptical about Wall being the largest consumer of Ciba at one time - perhaps in the "art world" as defined in a very limited sense. Dunno. Most of those kind of assessments come from people who just don't know what's going on elsewhere.

But as far as display permanence goes (versus dark storage), I have no doubt that the present Fujiflex Supergloss medium is superior to Ciba, and a lot easier to work with too. There is a related Fuji RA4 transparency version, as you no doubt already known, but the very nature of that limits its permanence. But what do either of us really know? We'll be faded into our little underground pine boxes long before some of our prints are due for the same fate.

[Pieter]

Similer to Crewdson, maybe less dramatic and less dramatically lit. But they both still use film, much to my surprise. I don't know if film is used throughout, or only to capture the original scene. I would think digital would be more appropriate for the number of possible manipulations and the lack of needing to make multiple generations before reaching a transparency or print that size. I guess I need to do some more research into both their technique. I know Salgado makes his photos today with a digital camera, but then converts to film for the final large prints.

[Alan Klein]

Similer to Crewdson, maybe less dramatic and less dramatically lit. But they both still use film, much to my surprise. I don't know if film is used throughout, or only to capture the original scene. I would think digital would be more appropriate for the number of possible manipulations and the lack of needing to make multiple generations before reaching a transparency or print that size. I guess I need to do some more research into both their technique. I know Salgado makes his photos today with a digital camera, but then converts to film for the final large prints.

Why does Salgado do that?

[Pieter]

Why does Salgado do that?

I gather he likes the look and grain of silver gelatin prints, and so he can show them alongside older prints originally shot on film.

[Joshua Dunn]

I saw this exhibit and found it very interesting. Particularly the printing of such large pieces. It takes a lot of effort to construct the messaging in his photographs and he was working within the constraints of technology at the time, and showing your work this large really opens it up to show any flaws in your work that might be overlooked if they were printed smaller. Glenstone does not exhibit photography that often so I would definitely recommend taking in the exhibit if you can.

r.e. - In response to your question, the grounds themselves (to me) are worth a trip themselves.

-Joshua

[Torontoamateur]

Why does Salgado do that?

Salgado uses a digital because of the Airport X rays, He has his techs run a photoshop settings to duplicate Tri X as near as possible.

[Fred L]

I believe the growing hassle of travelling with likely hundreds, if not thousands of rolls of film became too much to deal with, hence Salgado's switch to digital afaik. Don't blame him, even in the 80's, travelling with hundreds of rolls was a roll of dice, depending on how bad a day the airport screeners were having.

[r.e.]

I ordered the catalogue from the exhibition and received it today. Printed in the U.S., it includes, as does the show, photographs from 1978 through 2018. It offers an overview of Wall's work and development over 40 years. Price for the book, with shipping to New York, was US$64.10. I ordered directly from the Glenstone Museum the second week of December, but apparently they had supply problems. If I understand the correspondence, orders made now should be filled much more quickly.

[fuegocito]

I ordered the catalogue from the exhibition and received it today. Printed in the U.S., it includes, as does the show, photographs from 1978 through 2018. It offers an overview of Wall's work and development over 40 years. Price for the book, with shipping to New York, was US$64.10. I ordered directly from the Glenstone Museum the second week of December, but apparently they had supply problems. If I understand the correspondence, orders made now should be filled much more quickly.

If it's not much trouble, can you post a link, I can't seem to find their online shop, many thanks.

[r.e.]

If it's not much trouble, can you post a link, I can't seem to find their online shop, many thanks.

Hi. Yes, Glenstone's site isn't the easiest to navigate. Publications are in the "About" section: https://www.glenstone.org/about/publications/

The site still says that the Wall catalogue is pre-order, but they have it now. It doesn't work like a normal online bookstore either. There's a link to a "Purchase Form", which you fill out and then they get back to you for billing and shipping.

[fuegocito]

Hi. Yes, Glenstone's site isn't the easiest to navigate. Publications are in the "About" section: https://www.glenstone.org/about/publications/

The site still says that the Wall catalogue is pre-order, but they have it now. It doesn't work like a normal online bookstore either. There's a link to a "Purchase Form", which you fill out and then they get back to you for billing and shipping.

Yeah, the site is almost too slick to have that kind of oversight, or for some reason it's intentional.

[r.e.]

Yeah, the site is almost too slick to have that kind of oversight, or for some reason it's intentional.

Glenstone was a private museum and didn't open to the pubic until late 2018. My sense is that its bookstore is not really run like a business. Amazon, it ain't, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

[sharktooth]

https://www.tvo.org/video/tvo-arts-a-sudden-gust-of-wind-after-hokusai

A short video about Jeff Wall's "A sudden gust of wind (after hokusai)". It should be available for a limited time.

[Pieter]

There is currently a Jeff Wall show at Gagosian in Beverly Hills if you can put up with the neighborhood.

[profvandegraf]

Checked out the Glenstone Museum today and of course the Jeff Wall Exhibit. Some interesting images some problematic points. Some images worked very well and drew me in and made me ponder a bit and think.(Picture for Women, Staircase and Two Rooms) Other images had some glaring (to me) technical problems that distracted me.(Stumbling Block, A Sudden Gust of Wind..) At times I felt somewhat emotionally manipulated. I have a background in photography of course but also photo digital imaging and retouching. I also make my living making and installing large format images, so maybe I am a bit more critical of seams between panels, obvious photoshop manipulation and other oddities that took me out of the viewer mode and into technical critic mode. They also reminded me of Greg Crewdson, Cindy Sherman, Anna Gaskell, and a few other contemporary photo artists. Not that the company he keeps in my mind is a bad thing. Glad I went. Also go the the Glenstone Museum, it is very nice.

[Torontoamateur]

After I watched the TVO short I feel e is not Large Format, He is DIGITAL , Fully manipulated. A fantastic artist but Not Large Format. The use of 100 sheets of film and the extensive digital manipulation for over one year puts him in a different league that is Digital

[Tin Can]

Disagree

https://www.theartstory.org/artist/wall-jeff/life-and-legacy/


After I watched the TVO short I feel e is not Large Format, He is DIGITAL , Fully manipulated. A fantastic artist but Not Large Format. The use of 100 sheets of film and the extensive digital manipulation for over one year puts him in a different league that is Digital

[John Layton]

I see Jeff Wall as a consummate artist - passionately and thoughtfully driven to keep striving and moving forward…with whatever tools he finds necessary to support his evolving vision. So no matter that the intent, content, and process of Jeff Wall’s work feels completely different from my own - it is without hesitation that I say…Bravo!