|
.telephone interview
on 16.3.2005 with Primoz Bizjak(b) _ miha(a)
a.For a begining maybe your view, your relationship, your thoughts about
the photography as vojarismus?
b.I just had some thoughts, ideas about this subject yestarday alias day
befor that. Sometimes you can think, that your taking pictures just because
you´re taking pictures. That you don´t care what will/is coming
out, that you´re taking pictures just because of the feeling that
is there when taking pictures. Final result is not important at all. Some
time ago we had a discussion with friends and I was interested what will
they watch, observe if I would have a film in my camera.
a.When you have a camera in your hand and you make picture, you have a
feeling that you´re controling the situation, that you´re
in some kind of authoritative position?
b.Well, they are different situations.
a.Like...
b.Like... At the begining of taking pictures with motives of empty canals
in Venice that where presented in "gUF" I did alias were doing
this because of my own satisfaction, because of my own observing, my own
research. That was the begining. Then the process continius and the relationship
changes. I never thought that I´m going to exhibit them, that they´ll
be in a catalogues, that I´m going to sell them. I was taking them
because of my own need of taking pictures.
a.Were you looking for canal motives or did you find them, are they a
kind of expressions of moments or are they consider in advance?
b.Consider in advance? In this canals you can go in during the day and
it is also forbiden to go in during the night. Theoretically you can´t
alias you´re not allowed to go in, so I couldn´t see them
during the daytime. To think over them? I was living in Venice, so I knew
where they are cleaning them, where they´re building, repairing
them. Light? In the hole series light is the same, considerable. I was
taking pictures allways at the same, specific time. In the morning when
it´s dawing or in the evening when it´s getting darker.
a.What about the series, the other series you do. Would you consider alias
define your photography as documentary or as a fictionary. Do you occupy
yourself with the questions of defining your work, of how you use the
photographic medium?
b.I don´t know if I could define it, because it could be define
in... I don´t know if it´s neccesary to define it. On one
side thea are pure documentaries and on the other they are not only documentaries.
The photographies of the empty canals in Venice have a certain documentary
feeling, because they´re cleaning and empying this canals now and
they won´t do it for the next 50 years.
a.Are you sometimes disappointed with the resultes, with the pictures
that came out alias you see the moment, you capture it, but the picture,
photography that comes out is not what you saw, what you want to take
into picture?
b.As Diane Arbus said you never get what you see/saw in you head. In is
allways worse.
a.And what do you think about this ?
b.I don´t know.I think that when you taking night pictures with
the big-format camera and you´re using long exposure times, you
throught the glass-lens never see the right com position, you don´t
see the lights, actually you don´t see anything alias you have to
have everything in the head and after the years of experiences you get
the result that you had in the head, that you were looking for. Of course
the mistake happens, you make the wrong exposure, the camera trembels.
All you can do is to make the picture again. But the more you make-take
pictures, the less you can surprise yourself. Of course you can, but not
in the way, that you would be disappointed because of the bad result.
But it is interesting, that with such a long exposure times the new moments,
compositions are revealing to all of us, you see and get a world that
you don´t see, you see things that are during the night alias that
are in the bad light not there. And that can surprise you, because on
that kind of picture you things that are not there, you see the details
that are hidden.
a.Do you know in advance what the presentation form is going to be? Do
you know how you´ll present the finished picture? What is you´re
process? Do you have-use the same process all the time?
b.It depends on the project.
a.And the canals of Venice that were presented in gUF?
b.Nothing was determined, fixed in advance. As I allready said, I wasn´t
even thinking of presenting, exhibiting this pictures. I just took them
and enjoy. Then you start thinking if alias how you´ll present,
exhibiting an image, a picture. Sometimes now I know which picture I´m
going to send to an exhibition alias in what form will she be. I think
that this advance thinking comes with your development, with the process,
because at the begining you´re not thinking about the presentation
form.
a.What place does the technology have in your work in your process?
b.Technology leaves it´s seal(stamp). She is important. But more
you use the technology, more you see how unimportant she is alias you
use and you´re pleased with the "little" technology you
got. At the begining you would like to have and use the best technology
that there is, with the best possibilities of adjusting, moving, everything.
Then you see, that you don´t even use all that and now I´m
using one camera, which is a real classic, with only one lens. I have
the quality, but it´s not some kind of technology. She leaves her
aesthetics as all others cameras. She influence that you don´t see
almost anything throught the glass-lens and that the picture has to be
in your head.
a.What about the digital technology? Are you still doing everythnig with
negativ or do you use digital camera with your work?
b.As said my camera has her own aesthetic and with the digital technology
you couldn´t get it.
a.Do you go to the exhibitions of other artists?
b.Of course. The last two I saw was Tillmans and Viola in Madrid. Both
were very good exhibitions.
a.Video or photography?
b.As you know, I finished painting on the Academy of fine arts in Venice
and in fact I don´t use photography in a strick way-sense alias
photography as pure photography. I have a little bit different view and
thoughts about photography. Also on the finished product of photographical
process.
a.What do you think that attract people to photography? What makes the
photography interesting? That the pictures are nice? Shocking? That they
sre representing new-other live styles? What do you think attracts people
and what attracts you?
b.Yes, what? The most of the people are attracted to nice and beautiful
pictures. But the question is, what is beautiful-nice picture? It very
large notion, conception.
a.What attracts you? What are you looking for in the photography, in picture?
b.I´m not satisfied if people say that this is a nice picture. I´m
not satisfied alias I didn´t do enought if I presented only a nice,
beatiful picture and not anything more. I allways want to present and
show more then just nice picture. Then you see, that people who know more
about art and photography see something more in your work, that you´ve
showen and did something more then just, what an ordinary people would
call beautiful picture. But of course on the aesthetic, beautiful way
and not neccesary on the ugly one. Everything has his own beauty, anyway
I think that there is no ugly photography.
a.Do you think that a interest in photography has gone down, that the
people are looking and asking for somekind of "new" mediem?
Or we´re still part in the rising of photography as medium?
b.It still depends how it is. It propably looks like we´re doing
some things that the american photographers and people in USA did couple
of years ago and the photography lives in the same mentality and state
of mind as everything else on the planet.
a.And the theory? What do you think about it? Do you read it? What do
you think about the texts about you? Do you work with them? Do they influence
your work?
b.If I go back to the beginings the theory meant very little alias nothing
to me. Photography is allways around us, we have her in our selfs, it´s
like technology that interests you, you start working with her and you
learn her. Anyway the theory interest me now, I read her and think about
her.
a.And the texts about you? They influence your work, do you start working
out of them? How do you find them?
b.I think that someone has to know you very good to write a good texts
about you and your work. Maybe somebody can understand and write somethings
about you and can describe you work, but if he or she knows you, they
can write better and more precise. I think that one professor from Madrid
wrote a good text about me, but I also reject one text from my professor
from Venice, because I was sure he didn´t go deep enought alias
he didn concentrate enought. He then wrote another one and this new one
was interesting and was also published as an intro in one exhibition .
a.When did you start working with photography, what made you?
b.More seriously I start working with photography at the academy. First
year in Venice I was still painting and then after the exchange with the
academy in Madrid I start using camera as my tool. In Madrid I got to
know photography and I quit painting.
a.And now you use only photography as medium?
b.The things I wanted to say and express that be said only through the
photography alias could be painted. I think that through photography I
could express on the more easiest and more appropriate-adequate way.
a.Primoz thank you.
|
|
|