Above is Jeff Wall’s “A Sudden Gust of Wind,” which I just saw at the MoMA. (I actually had this image in my collection of references because I found it interesting but didn’t know anything about it!)

Wall’s photos are often gigantic (some figures are life-sized) and they are cibachrome photographs, back-lit in a light box. This show was a perfect case study on the importance of seeing work in person because so much of that–the scale, the light–is lost in reproduction.

The photos are so large, in fact, that they have seams where two photos are put together to skirt around the technical limitations of the size that can be printed. Despite this logical explanation, I held firm to my belief that the seams were significant and I went from photo to photo seeing if the seams bisected the figures or if they separated figures from one another. I could have made a graph for you. Well, I read too much into that because I checked the catalog and the seams are all photoshopped out, meaning that they are just insignificant bystanders of the process. So, that is an introduction to my ignorance. How very embarrassing. And now an introduction to my naive alacrity to begin educating myself.

I see now I’ve been treating photography a little irresponsibly. I haven’t taken much time to learn about the inner workings of the process: a friend helps me set up the camera, then a friend helps me finish it up on the computer, and finally someone else prints them for me. Collaboration is wonderful, but I don’t know any other avenue where I would have been so willing to let anyone have a hand in my affairs. Knowing how something works is rather important, you see. I worked at a big print shop that makes editions for artists. Some of them had never touched a press and didn’t have a clue about the possibilities or limitations of printmaking, so they would simply make prints that imitated their normal work in their comfortable mediums. When you have a clue as to how a thing works then you can subvert that process, use techniques in untraditional ways to stretch the possibilities, and basically get somewhere interesting.

Anyway, that’s all grand since I am now exclusively painting as I’ve just shot my load on the last photo and need some refractory time before I begin again. Sorry, that was gross. That was my revelation though, that I am into photography. The show made me really want to print my “Sneak Peek” huge. I’m not sure if I was just justifying myself when I thought I wanted them small and voyeuristic. You never know with the self-deception and rationalizations that we make to justify our laziness, eh?

Oh, and lastly on Jeff Wall. The magic of his scenes is palpable because of the credibility that photography lends, which seems to be crumbling in the age of photoshop. The only time I contemplated digital manipulation was in the photo below, “The Flooded Grave,” and I could have cared less. It was apparently composed from 75 different sources. Besides the sheer joy of painting, this makes me wonder if I couldn’t make my paintings some other way.

Can you see the water clearly? Check it here if your eyes ain’t too sharp.

Now’s about the time I wish I had access to a wonderful art library so I could begin reading his writings. Well, no time like the present. For me, that is. Thanks! (Oh wait! I will! I’m a going to grad school!)

Images VIA MoMA and The Tate Modern