I just wrote a piece on architectural photography and the representation of space within architectural discourse. I wanted to share it with the archinect community, get some feedback and hopefully start a discussion.
but I believe it is important to let the architects tell their stories on their own terms, leaving reality out of the frame
maybe, for them to pay your fees, thats just what you have to do. but, a photographer's eye and imagination can stray beyond that. you speak of good architects and bad architects. well there are also good photographers and bad photographers and a good photographer can educate a good architect on how best to see their buildings. you should not be a servant to the architect's vision...at all. but for money, you as well as us...will serve.
as for photography being more a signifier of reality, well, with the advent of 3d modelling and rendering software, this is quite a tricky declaration. also, photography can be used as to deliberate obfuscate and subvert the clarity of the whole or the ordering gestalt to bring out the complexity of vision itself. because photography is not only a negotiation of the conventions of the photographed object but also that of the ocular conventions, one can't simply assume that all photographs serve the same basis or are based on a shared view...well, of vision. its a sweet pun for the photographer than his or her "view"/insight is through his or her view/sight.
architectural photography
Hi All,
I just wrote a piece on architectural photography and the representation of space within architectural discourse. I wanted to share it with the archinect community, get some feedback and hopefully start a discussion.
perspective.razummedia.com
Best,
Alex
maybe, for them to pay your fees, thats just what you have to do. but, a photographer's eye and imagination can stray beyond that. you speak of good architects and bad architects. well there are also good photographers and bad photographers and a good photographer can educate a good architect on how best to see their buildings. you should not be a servant to the architect's vision...at all. but for money, you as well as us...will serve.
as for photography being more a signifier of reality, well, with the advent of 3d modelling and rendering software, this is quite a tricky declaration. also, photography can be used as to deliberate obfuscate and subvert the clarity of the whole or the ordering gestalt to bring out the complexity of vision itself. because photography is not only a negotiation of the conventions of the photographed object but also that of the ocular conventions, one can't simply assume that all photographs serve the same basis or are based on a shared view...well, of vision. its a sweet pun for the photographer than his or her "view"/insight is through his or her view/sight.
i also meant to link
have camera, will take photos
you guys like timothy hursley's work?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.