Ed Burtynsky - one thumb up, one down?

[tim atherton]

I just wrote a blog post about Ed Burtynsky

http://photo-muse.blogspot.com/

I'm wondering, am I actually the only one who's not quite so keen on him?

[Bruce Watson]

You don't have to like everyone. You can like some better than others. You don't even have to defend your choices.

[tim atherton]

You don't have to like everyone. You can like some better than others. You don't even have to defend your choices.

yeah - but with most photogs I don't like it doesn't take me too long to figure out why

[Capocheny]

Hi Tim,

Actually, I like a couple of his images but I'm not so sure that I'd run out and drop a pile of money on them though.

A friend has 3 or 4 originals in her house. Her favorite is the one where the workers are dragging a huge anchoring chain from one of the massive ships being torn down in India. She explained that she sees it as being "symbolic of the struggle she's gone through throughout her entire life."

So, I suppose it's like a piece of music... sometimes it'll strike a chord in your soul and, sometimes, it doesn't do anything whatsoever.

But, I agree with Bruce... you certainly don't have to justify your likes and dislikes because art/music is a very personal thing.

Cheers

[David Louis]

Yeah I’m with you on this one Tim. I was a fan of Burtynsky once, a while ago, but I’m not a fan anymore. I’ve seen several of his shows here in NYC over the years. His early work – the railcuts series and to a lesser extent the quarry series - showed some promise. I held out the hope that he would offer a North American vision to parallel to that of Stuth, Gursky, Esser and the rest of the Düsseldorf School. Unfortunately that hasn’t happened. I think his photos are visually appealing when seen close-up, hanging on a big white wall in a open gallery, but they are not interesting in any sort of deep way. Why? Ken Johnson’s review in the Times, which you noted in your blog, summed it up well…. pictorial rhetoric, coupled with stifled composition, and a lack of contextualization leads to big yawns.

[Jack Flesher]

I love his work -- awesome eye and great image quality. But, that is my opinion only and I respect that others will vary -- that is the spice of life.

Cheers,

[Frank Petronio]

Maybe he'll get better with age? Most of those 19th-Century travel togs like Francis Firth and Carleton Watkins made some pretty darn boring, flat pictures. That we treasure now.

Given our fascination with detailed pix of the past, that would mean come 2106 AD the Gigapixel guys would be that much more famous and respected. And their pictures make Burtynsky look like a freaking David LaChapple on LSD. ;)

Tim's point about never quite clicking the "buy" button is a good one. Warms my conservative belly to see the free market judging art.

[Greg Lockrey]

Yeah, but a lot of art is bought for if it "fits the decor" and nothing else. Now if it's stolen....

[Deniz Merdanogullari]

I saw his show here in Vancouver and was impressed by the images. I can;t say he is my favourite but i did enjoy the show very much.
Tischy on the other hand....

[Martin Miller]

Two thumbs up for me, Tim. I saw Burtynsky's work in person for the first time in his Manufactured Landscapes retrospective at the Brooklyn Museum in Nov. 2005. There were some 80 40x50" and larger works in that show and afterward I felt stunned and awed. I liked all of his series but felt that he reached his pinnacle in the ship breaking series. Not only did I find the color moving on an aesthetic level (sorry, I still respond to aesthics despite its postmodern banishment), but the images had something of a biblical-epic quality. This was the best contemporary photography that I have seen, the "Struthskys" included. I never agreed with the "National Geographic writ large" criticism. I think his strong guiding concept relieves him of that charge.

It is true that ths was only my first experience with these images in person, so I have to wait for another to see how well the feeling holds up. Sound like you've seen his work on many occasions. Did you have reservations from the start?

[Donald Brewster]

Tim:

There is a lot of excellent art out there that doesn't resonate with me. Aesthetics is a matter of judgment (and hence there are no absolutes) and it is OK to not like an artists work (either all or some) that other respectable and knowledgeable critics praise. That said, I enjoy some of Burtynsky's work and some of it does nothing for me. He has a vision and technical expertise and he should be respected for that (and I think you do). Whether you find his vision compelling is a personal matter. The only reason to lose sleep over whether you like his work or not is when you are preparing to drop serious coin to buy one. My two cents. Nicely done blog by the way.

Don

[walter23]

I just wrote a blog post about Ed Burtynsky

I'm wondering, am I actually the only one who's not quite so keen on him?

I'd give him three thumbs up if I had a third one.

As pointed out, it's subjective, and it resonates with me in multiple ways. I'm no expert art critic, but it reminds me of the work of Anselm Kiefer for those familiar with him, in terms of its resonance with things I find aesthetic and things I think about a lot.

I've never actually seen his prints (nor any real Kiefers for that matter), I've only seen the documentary (manufactured landscapes). I'd love to see an exhibition and I'm keeping half an eye out for one nearby.

[kjsphotography]

Most people that do not like someones work and have no idea why, is because they themselves as an artist have not grown enough to understand or appreciate it. Art is subjective yes, but the more you study the more you can come to appreciate what others are doing and why they are doing it. Rather than sit and write blogs get out there and explore the world around you because after all isn't that why you choose photography as your; passion, form of expression, career, etc... Fill in the blank... Or are you one of those who write just to be heard and feel that for some unknown reason you are the authority on the subject? I have never understood this mentality especially with some critics as some couldn't tell a good piece from a bad one if it was staring them right in the face.

I just looked at this work for the first time and I can appreciate what he is doing. DO I like it? Does it really matter what I like? As long as the photographer is happy with what they created it doesn't really matter what anyone think or likes. Now if that photographer ask for advice or an opinion that is one things but last time I check the art seen I haven't heard word about the photographer in question asking if anyone likes his work have you?

Of course we can get into composition, execution, etc.. But on a visual level to my taste, I think it is will seen and well captured, but again my opinion means nothing.

Are their flaws? To who, to me or you? Who knows? Just because we see one way does not mean we can force our views on others to make them conform to our way of seeing.

I myself prefer to be out there working on a body of work rather than writing post about artist A and artist B and if I like his work or his work. It doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks. All that matters is that the artist is satisfied with his or hers accomplishments.

Sorry but these types of post just irritate me as everyone wants others to conform to their way of seeing and it is just annoying...

[tim atherton]

I myself prefer to be out there working on a body of work rather than writing post about artist A and artist B and if I like his work or his work. It doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks. All that matters is that the artist is satisfied with his or hers accomplishments...


Oh - I'm out there working on a body of work (well, several) - what do you think grants are for... I spent most of the day doing it

but for someone who feels:

Rather than sit and write blogs get out there and explore the world around you because after all isn't that why you choose photography as your; passion, form of expression, career, etc... Fill in the blank...

...Sorry but these types of post just irritate me as everyone wants others to conform to their way of seeing and it is just annoying...

it seems a rather wordy post doing just that

(though heaven forbid we should actually think and talk about photography)

[kjsphotography]

Hit a nerve did I. ;)

I don't have 2700 post...

[tim atherton]

Hit a nerve did I. ;)

I don't have 2700 post...

ah - so it was a cheap troll

[kjsphotography]

No not at all, I just spend my time studying art and pursuing perfection. And trust me I got a long way to go.

No trolling here just heart felt sentiments. For someone with a grant you really have a lot of time on your hands. I know if I had a grant I wold be printing negs and contact proofs at night and planning my next daily outing or printing sessions especially if I had others peoples money in my pocket so I could produce a unique body of work.

Good luck with your endeavors...

I will bet I get another response, just a hunch, but I have been wrong before.

[Ed Richards]

I did notice that my interest in reading blogs and indulging in art criticism vanished this morning when the rain stopped and the sun came out for the first time in 2 weeks. Even let my afternoon class out a little early so we could all get out in the sun. Dragged the camera out and took a picture of a FEMA camp down the street, for lack of anything else interesting I could get to before the sunset.

I wonder if all of the activity on the various blogs corresponds to bad weather?

[Greg Lockrey]

Why do a lot of you guys pick on Tim? It sometimes feels like I'm back at highschool where the jocks picked on the egg heads. Tim has that gift of gab and likes to share his knowledge. You don't have to agree with the guy, but slamming him on a personnal level is a little much. Hell, I never heard of Ed Burtynsky until the thread got started. Now I know something new thanks to Tim. :)

[KenM]

Burtynsky was in Calgary last year as the keynote speaker for the Through the Lens photography series. He did a slide show of this work (pretty much covered all his major bodies of work), and of course talked about his work.

While I didn't particularly like his methods of searching out content (he doesn't do it himself), the end results can be, in some cases, stunning. He's also a very good speaker, and if you have the opportunity to go to one of his presentations, you should attend.

[paulr]

For someone with a grant you really have a lot of time on your hands

Why would you criticize someone for reading/writing about photography in a photography forum?

Personally, I'll waste time reading blogs and blabbing in places like this as long as I'm gainfully employed and have bosses who don't look over my shoulder too much.

Photography cuts into weekend time and sleep time, not online B.S. time.


As far as Burtynsky goes, I've always felt luke-warmish about his work. Which is less compelling than disliking it as much as Tim does. There are individual images that I find striking, but his bodies of work mostly remind me of other people's work ... people who did it before him, and who also seemed to be exploring something with a little more depth. Burtynsky seems to mostly cop the superficial aspects. But I haven't seen enough to dismiss him outright. I'm open to seeing more and maybe getting surprised.

[Martin Miller]

"...his bodies of work mostly remind me of other people's work ... people who did it before him, and who also seemed to be exploring something with a little more depth"

Who do you have in mind, Paul?

[paulr]

I see precedent in both the color 'new topographics' work of guys like Misrach, and of course in the struthsky school of gigantic, color, sometimes cynical work. It's not that any of this stuff is identical to Burtynsky's ... but I just can't find much that's nuanced or of interest that B. brings to the table. My reactions to his work are mostly second hand ideas and second hand emotions.

[tim atherton]

"...his bodies of work mostly remind me of other people's work ... people who did it before him, and who also seemed to be exploring something with a little more depth"

Who do you have in mind, Paul?

I have a copy of The Independent magazine tucked away somewhere from about 1983 that has photographs of the Carrera marble quarries that are very similar to Burtynsky's work - I'm pretty sure it was by Luigi Ghirri who is also instrumental in the New Colour Work movement.

Which isn't to suggest any kind of copycat, because of course like many places, it could just be that everyone who goes there basically takes the same photographs

While I didn't particularly like his methods of searching out content (he doesn't do it himself), the end results can be, in some cases, stunning. He's also a very good speaker, and if you have the opportunity to go to one of his presentations, you should attend.

I made that point I think - I actually found him much more interesting to lisen to for two hours.

[Martin Courtenay-Blake]

This is an interesting debate...thanks Tim for kicking it off. Hope you don't mind the following rant...just gotta get it off my chest.

Like a number of people Ed Burtynsky's work leaves me totally cold. In fact I can see almost nothing of interest in at all. It all appears as simple record shots of ruined landscapes. Now I'm not saying that someone should not be out there with a camera taking these pictures it's just that I really believe they should be kept in a folder in a basement for historians or archeologists of the future looking for dull record shots of the three valleys or whatever for inclusion in a learned thesis or academic publication.

Should these pictures be enlarged to such huge proportions, hung in prestigious galleries to critical acclaim from the gliterati and celebrated as great art. Personally I think most definately not. We are regretfully living in a time when any photograph enlarged to wall filling proportions can be called art and I'm sure we have all seen the incredible amount of rubbish afforded this accolade over the past twenty years or so. This brings us into the "is it art" debate. In the case of Burtynsky's work again I feel no. It is record photography purely and simply. It is not even reportage and it would be a great pity if this was in any way associated with the work of the great reportage photographers. To see a real portrait of blasted landscapes just look at Sebastian Selgado's work on miners in South America for example.

Clearly Ed Burtynsky has been working on this "body of work" for a considerable part of photographic career. This too does not necessarily make it anything special. What is there to say that a person who produces poor work when he first picks up a camera will not still be doing so the day he dies, perhaps three decades later.

I'm sure Mr Burtynsky has a whole raft of great reasons as to why he takes the photographers he does. I'm sure, as do all photographers whom aspire to be regarded as artists, he could spend many an hour explaining these reasons and go into great depth the meaning behind each and every image. Photography is a purely visual medium...if an image cannot tell you everything it is supposed to itself, to excite, shock, awe or even wonder when viewed by an observer on it's own then it has failed.

Strangely, whilst I may appear very critical of Ed Burtynsky's work there is something in it that I want to like. The images are very cold, perhaps deliberately so but the personal response I mostly feel about many of the images is "So What" when it could so easilly be "Wow". Perhaps if these photographers concentrated in producing great photographs rather than pretending to make great art things would be different.

Martin

Tim - keep on blogging, Your site has introduced me to much work I would otherwise not have seen...Cheers.

[tim atherton]

This brings us into the "is it art" debate. In the case of Burtynsky's work again I feel no. It is record photography purely and simply. It is not even reportage and it would be a great pity if this was in any way associated with the work of the great reportage photographers. To see a real portrait of blasted landscapes just look at Sebastian Selgado's work on miners in South America for example.
.

though you could also say the same about Atget...

[Donald Brewster]

Tim, you might have been thinking of Joel Leivick. He ultimately published a book, Carrara: The Marble Quarries of Tuscany, with the Stanford University Press in May 1999.

[tim atherton]

Tim, you might have been thinking of Joel Leivick. He ultimately published a book, Carrara: The Marble Quarries of Tuscany, with the Stanford University Press in May 1999.

thanks donald, I hadn't seen those. The ones I'm thinking off were colour though and quite similar to the Burtynsky ones (now I'm going to have to go to the garage and see if the box with the old mags is still there or got thrown out....)

[bob carnie]

I am a fan of Ed Burtynsky and his work. I have been fortunate enough to see his work over a long period of time, and as well walk up close to his images on many occasions.
His steadfastness to his approach and as well the look of his prints have been consistant for over twenty years. He has been producing shows every year and I respect this commitment to his art.
The last two shows that I saw were here in Toronto . One was a retrospective show with up to 100 images that was very well recieved. Unlike others that commented on other threads about this show , I did not like the images taken at theship breaking yards in Bangledesh , and I think it was because that paticular site has been photographed to death, and somehow did not fit in with my idea of Eds work.
The last show I did see was the contact festival show of his work from China. *Wow* is the word in my opinion and I say keep on bringing on this type of work Ed.
Burtynsky has consistantly year in year out produced work of a very high level and expertise that I think many here would love to achieve.
He definately is one great photographer in my opinion , and I think time will prove this to be true.

[Brian K]

I like Burtynsky's work, but I get a sense of emotional detachment in it. He's seeing something in the scene but I don't get his POV of it. I don't know if he approves of what he's seeing or trying to show the world the horror of our defacement of this planet or fascinated with the ant farm like manner in which humans can act ( granted his work is usually devoid of any people). There's a coldness to his work. They're still lifes without the life.

[tim atherton]

I am a fan of Ed Burtynsky and his work. I have been fortunate enough to see his work over a long period of time, and as well walk up close to his images on many occasions.
His steadfastness to his approach and as well the look of his prints have been consistant for over twenty years. He has been producing shows every year and I respect this commitment to his art.
The last two shows that I saw were here in Toronto . One was a retrospective show with up to 100 images that was very well recieved. Unlike others that commented on other threads about this show , I did not like the images taken at theship breaking yards in Bangledesh , and I think it was because that paticular site has been photographed to death, and somehow did not fit in with my idea of Eds work.
The last show I did see was the contact festival show of his work from China. *Wow* is the word in my opinion and I say keep on bringing on this type of work Ed.
Burtynsky has consistantly year in year out produced work of a very high level and expertise that I think many here would love to achieve.
He definately is one great photographer in my opinion , and I think time will prove this to be true.

thanks Bob - my question was a genuine one, and I was looking for serious responses. I appreciate your eye and experience

[Maris Rusis]

I guess I just don't get it. Some posters in this thread like Burtynsky's work and others do not but I can't even figure out what Burtynsky work is. What does he actually do?

Sure, there are big pictures out there in galleries associated with the Burtynsky name but what are the pictures; photographs, prints, lithographs, what? Who makes them, Burtynsky or someone else? Where does Burtynsky fit in the chain of production?

For such a heavily lauded individual I hope he is more than a subject matter selector/camera clicker. Photographic heroes are scare and I hope Burtynsky is one I can look up to and emulate (at a smaller scale) in my own darkroom. This, for me, would be a refreshing anodyne to the modern art fog in which successful artists are largely indistinguishable from successful impostors.

[tim atherton]

Sure, there are big pictures out there in galleries associated with the Burtynsky name but what are the pictures; photographs, prints, lithographs, what? Who makes them, Burtynsky or someone else? Where does Burtynsky fit in the chain of production?

For such a heavily lauded individual I hope he is more than a subject matter selector/camera clicker.

well, for one thing he built up ran for 25 years or so and still owns one of Toronto's main pro labs - so I think he knows what a darkroom is.


For such a heavily lauded individual I hope he is more than a subject matter selector/camera clicker .

actually that sounds like a pretty good definition of a photographer - are we talking about photographers or printers?

I've finally figured out what's wrong with photography. It's a one-eyed man looking through a little 'ole. Now, how much reality can there be in that? -David Hockney

[Lazybones]

Your mother called... she said she's in love with Burtynsky.

[bob carnie]

As Tim points out Ed owns Toronto Image Works.
As far as where does he fit in the chain, he is the cook , bottle washer all in one.
Nothing gets past his eye and I know he can handle a horizontal wall enlarger as well as the chromira he owns. He does all the final colour correction and image corrections himself. He does use his own personal printers/assistants to set up the images when printing , but he is totally involved when show prints are being made of his work.
He built TIW so that he would be able to make his mural prints himself. Jeff Wall in Vancouver bought his own large ciba machine to to his own printing as well.
In both cases I would say they are very commited and involved in their work.


I guess I just don't get it. Some posters in this thread like Burtynsky's work and others do not but I can't even figure out what Burtynsky work is. What does he actually do?

Sure, there are big pictures out there in galleries associated with the Burtynsky name but what are the pictures; photographs, prints, lithographs, what? Who makes them, Burtynsky or someone else? Where does Burtynsky fit in the chain of production?

For such a heavily lauded individual I hope he is more than a subject matter selector/camera clicker. Photographic heroes are scare and I hope Burtynsky is one I can look up to and emulate (at a smaller scale) in my own darkroom. This, for me, would be a refreshing anodyne to the modern art fog in which successful artists are largely indistinguishable from successful impostors.

[Lazybones]

Why does that matter?

[tim atherton]

could you be a little more cryptic?

[Lazybones]

Why not address the work as opposed to the labor? Does this not teeter towards a sort of reductio ad absurdum?

[tim atherton]

Why not address the work as opposed to the labor? Does this not teeter towards a sort of reductio ad absurdum?

ahh - absolutley

which was why I highlighted the comment

For such a heavily lauded individual I hope he is more than a subject matter selector/camera clicker .

a subject matter selector/camera clicker is one of the most succinct definitions of being a photographer I've seen - it gets to the heart of the matter. Essentially all a photographer is, is someone who points to something and says "look at this" - the work stands or falls on whether what is pointed at is worth looking at and whether the way the photographer shows it conveys that.

[Bruce Watson]

A subject matter selector/camera clicker is one of the most succinct definitions of being a photographer I've seen - it gets to the heart of the matter. Essentially all a photographer is, is someone who points to something and says "look at this" - the work stands or falls on whether what is pointed at is worth looking at and whether the way the photographer shows it conveys that.

Nicely said. I may quote you on that!

[tim atherton]

thanks bruce :-)

John Szarkowski's essay from the front of the four volume MoMA Atget book set is online somewhere about Atget/photography and pointing

worth a read

[Lazybones]

ahh - absolutley

which was why I highlighted the comment

For such a heavily lauded individual I hope he is more than a subject matter selector/camera clicker .

Yes. I am in agreement with you. Another interesting Szarkowski essay is the bit from William Eggleston's Guide. The one that starts "At this writing I have not yet visited Memphis...".