Ed Burtynsky at the AGO ...

[Ron Bose]

I just got home from one of the most stunning photo-exhibits I have ever seen.

Ed Burtynsky, a Toronto LF photographer is exhibiting his works at the Art Gallery of Ontario, but closes on April 4th.

His prints from 8x10 and 4x5 are 40"x50" in colour and are absolutely amazing.

If you can get to Toronto in the next week you have to go to this exhibit ...

An absolute 'must see' ....

[tim atherton]

"His prints from 8x10 and 4x5 are 40"x50" in colour and are absolutely amazing. "

Helps when you own your own photo lab... :-)

It's pretty cool work isn't it - wonderful photogorphy - Ed is a neat guy.

[Ron Bose]

In the video presentation he lamented handing in his student card once he'd graduated from Ryerson, because it meant that he no longer had access to their colour print facilities. He had had quite a few problems trying to create stable colour prints in his home colour darkroom. He then thought that other photographers were probably having the same problems and this lead to him starting up Toronto Image Works. Then colour photographers would have access to high-quality printing facilities.

I think the exhibition will be on in Ottawa until May 4th according to the website.

Tim, you gotta get on a plane and see it for yourself ....

[tim atherton]

"Tim, you gotta get on a plane and see it for yourself ...."

I know... I saw a number of them "back stage" at the National Gallery after his exhibit of the work there last year, but not actually on display

"I think the exhibition will be on in Ottawa until May 4th according to the website"

Was that the National Gallery? that was 2003 I think

[Ed Burlew]

The composition is unremarkable. His photos are really nothing more than snapshots made very large. I have seen his work on several occassions including during its preparation in his lab. I have seen dust and hair shadows in the prints. His pictures are mostly of deconstruction site, places where items are cut apart or torn up. These ar eplaces few people would ever visit. The prints are clear and the colours accurate. His ability with depth of field is very good.

[Ron Bose]

Tim: you're right, it was 2003, sorry. Glad you saw some of the prints though ...

Ed: Your observations have merit. I was very impressed by his control of D.O.F. especially with (my estimated) shutter speed (from the shimmer of moving objects). His huge detailed prints are a site to behold. But, I stood in front of each image and tried to figure out why it impressed me. The the richness of the detail, the rendition of colour, the control of DOF, and yes, its sheer size.

But when I did an 'analysis' of the composition, it didn't follow too many traditional themes (the S-curve, rule of thirds, leading lines). But it did seem to draw me into the image, hence that enveloping feel when you stand in front of the print.

I wonder, if Ed used some of the more traditional compositional methods, would they have been too strong on a 40"x50" print ?? Would the overall print have been balanced ? If these were 8"x10" prints then I think they would have been 'weaker' due to the 'lite' composition.

However, that all said, it's refreshing to see huge detailed prints. I'm sick of seeing single contact prints of 35mm or 6x6 negs on exhibition walls. Ed is a master of his technique and has produced a body of work in three themes which work very well IMHO. He should be applauded for that.

And, if his work motivates LF photography (it's got me pumped), then that's better for all of us ....

[Capocheny]

I'm in the same camp as Ed is on this subject. A friend of mine bought one of his "smaller" prints for an arm and leg... $50,000 strikes a cord. For the same dollar... hmmm, I don't know that I would have purchased it. However, my friend is a geologist and the image was something that my friend wanted in his boardroom. So, in my friends case, the subject matter and the final image struck an emotional cord in him. This is what photography is all about.

For me? There wasn't an emotional connection to the subject matter although I recognize that Burtynsky obviouly is a master at using the large format camera.

I'd take an Ansel Adams any day of the week, or a Weston, or a Strand... but I know there are some folks out there who would disagree with my taste in photographs too.

Gotta like what you like...

Cheers

[tim atherton]

"The composition is unremarkable. His photos are really nothing more than snapshots made very large."

I'm not sure I'd entirely agree based on the prints I did see + the book (mind you if the latter comment was about my own work I'd actually take it as a compliment...)

Ed, I'm interested in what sort of composition would you consider "remarkable" - whose photographs.

"But when I did an 'analysis' of the composition, it didn't follow too many traditional themes (the S-curve, rule of thirds, leading lines). But it did seem to draw me into the image, hence that enveloping feel when you stand in front of the print."

In part I think that's my experience. One of the problems I find with a lot of photography is the use of those kinds of compositional themes as you put it Ron. For me they are often a sort of straightjacket that comes from the dominance of perpectivism in photography - a sort of continued application of Renaissance theories of perspective to photography.

[Ed Burlew]

I am not talking about formulae. That is a long gomne idea. I am takling about a special way of seeing, seeing a moment, seeing an emotion, having a special perspective and conveying an idea. To just take a photo and then enlarge it is interesting in itself but it is not art, Struth, Wall, Adams, Sherman, Meyerwits (sp), have a moment they captured adn iit is shared with us all, Elliot Porter has those mmnets too. I guess that I am just underwelmed by industrial outflow, houses being wrecked, recycling dumps, empty quarries and backyards. Clyse Butcher knows composition. Meunch knows composition. Struth's perspective observational of people in places and there is a context for that. Wall creates drama. I guess that's what I don't get about Ed B.. The reviews call his work "high focus", Tell me, what is that? Is the detail the message? (Marshal McLuhan rewritten)

[Ron Bose]

I certainly don't practice the rules of composition, I'm too stubborn and the rules are too restrictive.

I just wish that I'd have the opportunity to see some the original works of the greats that you mentioned Ed ....

To me anyways, Burtynsky's shots are powerful. I enjoyed them much more than the Bill Brandt nudes (platinum prints) that I saw in London ....