Delays, Neglect, Worries, and a Gallery back on track!

OK, so, apologies for the weeks of neglect to the blog and gallery, but rest assured that it was never far out of mind and it has always been my intention to carry on with the opening of my house as a gallery space. The pressure was mounting for a June opening until I dreadfully realized that the optimism I had was not shared by the realistic nature of setting up a gallery. So I put it off. Here now is the actual-probably never going to be changed-dates for The Photo House 144...


Friday, September 7, 2007 - Grand Opening Reception
"Young Photographers I Know"

Friday, February 1, 2008 - "A Salon of Photographic Artists"

Friday, May 2, 2008 - "Small & Delicate: Photographs as Objects"


Unfortunately these three shows will probably round out The Photo House 144's existence. I will most likely be moving next June and will have to close up shop on 144, but not to fear dear friends, as plans are underway for a lifetime of staring at photographs with the hopefully not-far-off opening of The Photo House : Gallery & Cafe. With the location TBA, it has already been decided that this indeed must be the course I follow (much more info on The Gallery & Cafe in the future). So these three photo exhibitions at 144 will be the major focus for the next 11 months, and I would be eternally grateful for any and all submissions and assistance in setting them up.

The Photo House 144 specifics:

- All shows run for one night only on the dates announced from 6-9pm
- Light refreshments will be served (I will not be serving alcohol, feel free to byo)
- A 10% commission on all artwork sold (A low fee because I too am an artist and although commissions are not fun, it is being run as a real gallery and must be seen as such)
- There will be limited copies of The Photo House 144 Gallery Book available for sale on the night of the opening (If demand is there, I might be persuaded to have a second run of books made immediately following the exhibition)
- There will be a "Casual Corner" wall space for any fun or unique photographs brought by visitors ( 144's version of a guest book)



The Photo House 144

To be seen as representing those artists utilizing photography who's images showcase strong individual sentiments. Whether in process, craft, or storytelling, the artists represented by 144 put forth their own photographic vision.

"For the improvements of ages have had little influence on the essential laws of man's existence; as our skeletons, probably, are not to be distinguished from those of our ancestors."

-H.D. Thoreau excerpt From Walden

Soon

Good news from the Photo House 144 front...the selected artists for display at the inaugural show will be announced soon!

*We are still in a real need for artists to represent and showcase in future exhibitions, so please continue to send work samples to:

144@dwillm.com

D. William McGregor
The Photo House 144
144 Sigel Street
Philadelphia, PA 19148

Also still looking for writings and opinion articles on the photographic arts for the Gallery Book to be published in conjunction with the Photo House opening night. Musings on contemporary photography(positive or negative) strongly encouraged.

Stay tuned for the exhibiting artists list and the opening show title and theme...

Gallery Opening Moving Along

Today I have published the Call For Entries in the Philadelphia Craigslist's Artist Community in hopes of drawing more responses. Please don't hesitate to help get the word out, or submit work yourself at...

144@dwillm.com

D.William McGregor
The Photo House 144
144 Sigel Street
Philadelphia, Pa 19148

Get in at the beginning. The Photo House 144 does not want or pretend to be the next great fad of gallery openings, instead it wants to remain secured in the wide world of the photographic arts. Insisting on highly talented and visually astute artists who believe in utilizing the camera to profess their own sense of individuality, 144 wants not just great photographs, but great minds behind the photographs. The Gallery is designed to help construct a community of individuals intrigued not in the commercial world of art, but in how the arts fit into our society, and the important philosophical implications of what we make and how we make it. 144 is not about selling art and over-promoting the, "Next Big Thing," it is about the creators of art, the relationship they have to their own work, and how everything attempts to fit into this world and make it (at least visually) more appealing.

Call For Entries

The Photo House 144 is now officially looking for interested artists with interesting work. With the opening show for 144 being held in early June (hopefully), we are looking for entries to review ASAP. You may submit any photographic work done in any format with any theme or focus. As the gallery develops more specific requirements will probably be addressed, but for now, entries can be sent as digital files (of reasonable size for viewing on screen) or through the mail as slides or even small work prints. The only necessary accompaniment to the images is specific details about the final prints (dimensions, technique, etc.) and some sort of art statement regarding the project and your process for creating the images. The more writing the better.

Also calling for entries for The Photo House 144 Gallery Book. This will be the quarterly-published handmade book accompanying each gallery opening. The Gallery Book will have reproductions of the images on display as well as essays and statements about photography and the arts, and will be available for purchase at the gallery. ***There is not a pressing need for writers interested in submitting to the Gallery Book to be photographers. Anyone with a strong interest in the photographic arts is encouraged to submit essays of varying length to be included alongside the images.

Further details about specific requirements and 144's opening night will be announced later. Feel free to contact me with any questions regarding the submission process or with volunteer help for the space and/or book. Additionally, any ideas and thoughts on small scale book production would be greatly appreciated. Thanks...

Derek William McGregor

The Photo House 144
144 Sigel Street
Philadelphia, PA 19148

144@dwillm.com

The Photo House 144

"The Photo House 144 is a small space dedicated to the representation and discussion of photography's place in the art world. Focusing on not only the shown images, but also the process of creation, 144 showcases a wide range of photographic imagery that has the immediate feel of an individual artist. With strong sentiments given towards process, craftsmanship, and a unique and individual vision, 144 looks to represent photographers who are in love with the medium as a creative personal outlet.

In the same way a painter's body of work defines that artist, a photographer's collection of images should not only be visually appealing for the subjects and their meanings, but also should together create and define an artist."

Two Points

O.K., with the last couple of posts, beneath the jargon and free-thinking writing style (which seems to make sense to myself alone) there were two main points that I have been trying to iron out:

1. Photography can and should be looked at for its individual handmade craftsmanship. Meaning, the photograph should be viewed as a physical object created by an artist, in the same way one regards a painter’s canvas.

2. When one looks at a photograph they should be intrigued by the creation process as well as the subject matter.


The point of trying to figure out these two aspects of photography is, I guess, to try and push the medium more into the art world. When I look at these two ideas I can’t help but see them as part of a process to create an artist out of a photographer. If someone utilizes both of these thoughts, his images must be looked at not only for their represented intrigue, but also for the representation of an artist. A sense of an individual, a specific hand, and hopefully, originality, will come through for the photographer, and he can then concern himself with the taking and making of wonderful images. Maybe this will mean the term artist can be applied more comfortably.

To be an artist

I want to be an artist. I am not entirely sure why I say this, but at least now I have. In a sense I have come clean. No more hiding it, or disguising it with other words or desires. Truth be told, I have never been comfortable with the term artist, and have always found the need to qualify it when applying it to what I do (art photographer, photographic artist, etc.). In each of these appended uses, the term “art” has always felt forced. I believe that part of this feeling of uncomfortable-ness stems from the idea that photographers are inherently not considered artists, as they cannot be in relation to the other art mediums. As Susan Sontag points out in Regarding the Pain of Others, having professional training and years of experience with photography does not bring with it the automatic ability to create a better picture than the amateur or spontaneous photographer. This is absolutely true, and so is the idea that chance carries such a weight in the photographic world (the picture only came about because I was at ‘the right place at the right time’). I personally don’t have an issue with this, and in fact, completely agree. So then why do I desire the label of artist, and why do so many other photographers have that same desire? Maybe it is all a simple fact of attending art school and being surrounded by others who easily refer to themselves as artists without hesitation. There is no second thinking when you are surrounded by artists to call yourself the same, it is only once you are separated that you can see things from another viewpoint and not feel comfortable. I am not comfortable, but at least now I think I know why. Here is the difference for photographers, and here may be the reasoning for the awkwardness of the art photographer label (again pointed out by Sontage), “A painting or drawing is judged a fake when it turns out not to be by the artist to whom it had been attributed. A photograph…is judged a fake when it turns out to be deceiving the viewer about the scene it purports to depict.” How true is that? I mean seriously, for over 100 years, ever since P.H. Emerson wrote his Naturalistic Photography for Students of the Art in 1889 we as photographers have struggled to become accepted in the wide world of art. How can we possibly feel accepted when the basic tendency of paintings and drawings being particular to an artist is not afforded to a photographer? Was he not the one to take the image and craft the print, and is it not his art? Sometimes it wasn’t and so sometimes it isn’t. Again, I agree with Sontag, and it only makes me feel even more pushed towards forming some sort of similar connection between photograph and creator. I guess this is just another push towards wanting to be regarding as an artist. The strengths of the photographic medium have pushed us this far, but as the focus remains on only what the picture is of, then a “photo by:” credit does nothing. As long as we remain separated from fellow creators of art by this poignant truth, photography will always be looked at as but a recording device.

Let Us Create More and Print Fewer

The statements put forth by my dear friend Dan concerning the importance of an image has gotten me a bit rattled. On the one hand I completely disagree with him, and have always found the strength of an image based on its originality and physical self. On the other hand, someone with a camera in the right place at the right time surely can take an image of great importance or significance. These types of images are those who's power comes with the propagation of the image through society; the more eyes to see it, the more value it attains. But...

Consider a great painting, and the value one gets from viewing it in person. You can, of course, see a representation of the painting in a book or online, but in such a situation you are most likely enjoying the subject matter or the painting's place in history. What you can enjoy in looking at a representation of a painting is everything except the artist's hand in the creation process. You cannot fully recognize the talent of the artist, his brush strokes or painting technique or color pallet. When you are sitting with a book in your lap you cannot fully see the artist. Standing three feet away from a Rembrandt, you not only see all of the artist's skills, but you can feel the history of the artist just by taking in the physical specimen that is the painting. Yes, you can be entertained by simply looking at the Rembrandt reproduction, but what if your interest lies in being entertained by the painter's hand? This is how I fell when viewing a painting and these same sentiments can and should be attributed to viewing original photographs. I can be visually satisfied by any reproduction of Henri Cartier-Bresson's photographs, but for me to arrive at a much higher level of joy, I desire to see Cartier-Bresson's actual handiwork (in a word, his print). Even viewing an original image by the photographer, printed by another, doesn't completely do it for me (however more perfected the other's print might be considered).

How can an original Henri Cartier-Bresson photograph be of even more value to me? The answer lies in knowing that there is but only a small number of prints ever to have been created by the artist. This is taken for granted with painters, yet seen by many as foolish for photographers. Yes, the negative can be looked at as specifically designed for reproduction, but what are photographers afraid of when the prospect arrives to create but only a handful of photographs from one negative and then destroy the image's source? This should be seen as placing more value on the actual images created (and I am definitely not talking about monetary value, as most of us know the survival on photographic sales, edition limited or not is left to the truly famous and/or the dead). The value increased by the limited number of crafted photographs is a value of knowing that those few pieces of photographic paper are alone in their singularity. Any reproduction in books or magazines can be enjoyed, but with the same limitations as goes to the painting's reproduction, thus placing all the more value on witnessing a crafted photograph first hand. This is the point of galleries and museums and of buying art, to view the artist, not just what the image represents. Of course all of this is always dependant upon the greatness of the picture. No matter how long and hard you work on an image, if the picture doesn’t do it, then it just doesn’t do it.

I am not trying to be a painter, and I am not trying to be dismissive and close off photography. I just believe in the power of an image (which, said for the millionth time, includes the process) and that power being intensified by originality and the sense of an artist. The reason for becoming anti-digital (if you will) is that I believe you lose these strengths too easily, and with the masses in society knowledgeable of digital much more so than hand created photography, I feel that my need is to attempt to create a difference between the styles, and in doing so bring knowledge to the type of photography I find of value.

What I Object To...

"What I object to is leading people to imagine they are in the presence of art, when they are given diluted imitations having nothing to do with the spirit of an original work...I do object to the making and selling of pseudo-facsimiles, devoid of the sense of touch to be found in a true work of art."
- Alfred Stieglitz