Assignment Four – planning and preparation

My planning and preparation for the essay required for this assignment divided itself naturally into three areas:

• Research into image analysis and essay structure
• Research into my chosen image
• Research on the planning and writing of an essay at first year undergraduate level.

Research into image analysis and essay structure

In order to keep this post fairly concise, I have written separately on this topic and my thoughts can be found here.  I also found the following books useful with regards to thinking about image analysis:

• ‘Camera Lucida. Reflections on Photography’ by Roland Barthes (1982)  London: Jonathan Cape
• ‘Context and Narrative’ by Maria Short (2011)   Lausanne: AVA Publishing SA
• ‘Reading Photographs: An Introduction to the Theory and Meaning of Images’ by Richard Salkeld (2014) London: Bloomsbury Publishing plc
• ‘Semiotics: the basics’ (2^nd ed.) by Daniel Chandler (2007) Abingdon: Routledge

Research into my chosen image

I began by carrying out an initial analysis of the image based on parts of a checklist provided by OCA in the Level Two photography course ‘Progressing with Digital Photography’ (Freeman, 2011) as a basic structure in order to look objectively at the photograph. This analysis can be read here.

Looking deeper into the image, my research material mainly came from books and the internet and these have been listed either as direct references or in my bibliography.   I was very conscious from the beginning of the importance of using reputable sources and was pleased to find Henri Cartier-Bresson: The Modern Century written by Peter Galassi in the library.  Galassi is the former Chief Curator of Photography at The Museum of Modern Art in New York and organised exhibitions with Cartier-Bresson for MoMA in 1987 and 2010 so I was comfortable with his credentials.  Indeed this book became the central point of my research.

It was serendipitous to be able to view Juvisy first-hand at the A Decisive Collection exhibition of Cartier-Bresson’s work held at Beetles + Huxley gallery in London in March.  Physically seeing the print made me much more aware of its quality, its details and tones and I was able to stand back both physically and metaphorically from it and consider it in conjunction with the earlier research that I had gathered.  I found it also helpful to view it in context alongside Cartier-Bresson’s other work.

I soon discovered that Juvisy had a lot of substance and scope for my critical review and found that my research spiralled off into different areas, from leisure to politics, from paintings to picnics.  Whilst much of this research was not included in my essay due to the word-count limitation, I feel that it has benefited me both with regard to this assignment as well as for my studies beyond so I will record it, albeit in note form, in a separate post on my blog.

Research on the planning and writing of an essay at first year undergraduate level

Whilst I am used to writing reports and papers, albeit in purely factual form, as part of my job, I soon realised that both preparing a critical essay and writing it to the required standard was not going to be as easy as I initially thought it might be.  I very quickly found that I was creating a growing heap of notes detailing my research which if I could see could end up out of control if I was not careful and be difficult to collate.  I therefore decided to stop work on the assignment for a week and get organised.  I borrowed an arts study guide from the library which helped a great deal, both with making/collating notes and managing the writing process as well as with the art of essay writing. Although this did delay my assignment submission, this additional learning has been extremely worthwhile and I consider it to be time well spent both for this assignment and for my future studies.

The course notes suggested that we read Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs (Howarth, 2005) as a guide to the level of critical analysis that is expected by the assessors and I found this to be useful as to the style of writing to adopt, even if the book is rather difficult to get hold of (I ended up with various chapters downloaded from the internet as well as a couple kindly provided by a fellow student).

Another suggested read from the course notes which proved useful was an article on essay writing published online by the University for the Creative Arts (UCA, n.d.) which covers aspects from developing your research area through to presentation and format.

References:

Barthes, R. (1982) Camera Lucida. Reflections on Photography.  London: Jonathan Cape

Chambers, E and Northedge, A. (2008 )  The Arts Good Study Guide (2^nd ed.)  Milton Keynes: The Open University

Chandler, D. (2007) Semiotics: the basics (2nd ed.)  Abingdon: Routledge

Freeman, M. (2011) Photography 2: Progressing with Digital Photography

Galassi, P. (2010) Henri Cartier-Bresson: The Modern Century.  London: Thames & Hudson Ltd

Howarth, S. (ed.) (2005) Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs.  London: Tate Publishing

Salkeld, R. (2014) Reading Photographs: An Introduction to the Theory and Meaning of Images London: Bloomsbury Publishing plc

Short, M. (2011) Context and Narrative.  Lausanne: AVA Publishing SA

University for the Creative Arts (n.d.)  Essay Writing [online].   Available from http://community.ucreative.ac.uk/index.cfm?articleid=12239  [accessed 13 April 2015]

Part Four – reflection

I’ve now completed the fourth part of the Context and Narrative course so, as is my usual practice, I’ve taken some time to review how I think this section went, what worked well and what didn’t and to make a note of areas which I need to work on going forward.

What I’ve done:

• Finished the exercises and course-directed research and chosen my image to be discussed in the assignment essay
• Conquered ‘Ways of Seeing’ by John Berger and done some other additional reading around the course material
• Reintroduced myself to semiotics and semiology and dug deeper into these topics
• Enjoyed deconstructing an advert
• Attended an OCA study visit to the Time. Photography exhibition at the Tate Modern
• Visited four other exhibitions and now need to finish writing them up
• Become more active on the OCA student forums
• Attended an OCA Thames Valley Group study day in March, where I received some useful ideas and leads from Group members with regard to my forthcoming assignment
• Finally ordered some furniture (storage unit and bookshelves) for my photography room (aka the third bedroom) – not really part of the course I know but definitely motivating. It will be nice to move everything off the floor!

How it went:

Part Four is all about the language of photography and how to deconstruct and read an image and I found this extremely interesting even if some of the more in-depth theoretical reading did make my brain hurt a little at times.  I particularly enjoyed looking at advertising and the mind-games that the advertisers play in order to convince us that we want to buy something.  During Part Three of the course I found a better balance between study and the rest of my life and I’ve managed to keep this up.  I’ve also managed to catch up with my self-imposed timetable although that I am aware that this may slip again a little as I do not want to rush the assignment to its detriment.

At the end of my reflection on Part Three I noted down some things that I planned to do next. I’ve achieve the majority of these however I still haven’t revisited the Ipswich Waterfront and there is still a huge pile of books waiting to be read (no inroads made this month I’m afraid.

What I’ve learned:

• How to read and deconstruct a photograph
• Looked at the linguistic semiotic models of Saussure and Peirce and how these can be applied to photographs
• Learned about Barthes’ approach to semiotics
• How to include communication in my image through deliberate and careful composition and also the use of semiotics
• Through additional reading, the basics of how to prepare and write a critical analysis.

What I’ve noticed:

• I seem to have moved from books that I would read from cover to cover to books that I dip in and out of. I think this is because my current reading requirements are more directed to researching specific areas/photographers /essays than previously
• The reading of theoretical texts is becoming a lot easier. I still need to read most of them at least twice before gaining an understanding but it’s definitely a case of the more practice the easier it gets.

What I could do better:

• I do still struggle with theoretical texts (although, as noted above, they are getting easier) so there is definitely room for improvement here
• At the time of submitting my assignment for Part Three I was still five weeks behind my original study timetable.  I’ve made a huge effort to catch up during this section, however this has been at the expense of my own self-selected reading and study (although I have dug deeper into semiotics in order to gain a better understanding of this subject).
• I am increasingly conscious that I need to complete my Level One studies by the beginning of September 2016 and that I have one more module to do after this one.  Therefore planning my study time – and sticking to my timetable – is really important going forward
• My sketchbook has really suffered during this part of the course – it is scanty to say the least.  I also need to ensure that it doesn’t just become a home for leaflets and cuttings and that I include some developmental notes.  I succeeded with this during Part Three of the course, however to date there are only blank pages for Part Four.  I will make an effort to write down my assignment planning notes rather than just keep them in my head
• I’m aware that I don’t find some aspects of critical thinking and analysis particularly easy so in preparation for the assignment and also my future OCA studies I’m reading ‘Critical Thinking Skills: Developing Effective Analysis and Argument’ (Cottrell, 2011) to help me improve these aspects
• I need to keep taking photographs – I’ve not taken a single photograph so far during March.

What I plan to do next:

• Seek out information about how to write a critical review (the course notes give us some useful leads) with regard to the assignment
• Plan, research and draft my essay, complete the assignment and then start Part Five of the course
• Start applying what I’ve learned to my own images.  Over the past two assignments I’ve developed my work into being more metaphorical and I realise that the deliberate use of communication in my images can take this a stage further
• Read, read, read.  I have tried the idea of not buying or borrowing any more books until I’ve read the ones that I’ve got. It didn’t work.
• Continue my foray into visual culture
• Start thinking about what to choose for my next (and final) Level One course.  At the moment I’m inclined towards ‘Understanding Visual Culture’ (‘UVC’) as I think that this will be beneficial for my Level Two and Level Three studies.  Also, to be honest, People and Place just doesn’t appeal.  However I do have concerns as to whether I might struggle with UVC so will have a chat with my tutor and also some other UVC students before I make my final decision
• Check into my Ipswich Waterfront project once the evenings become lighter at the end of this month
• I’m tentatively thinking about starting a new personal project.  I live near Icklingham Plains in Suffolk, an area of open-access heath and woodland and for some reason (I’m not sure why) I feel drawn to photograph it (I shot one of the exercises in Part Two of the course ‘Metaphorical and visceral interpretations’ there).  The weather has thwarted my recent attempts to go back shooting there and I’m itching to get back.  To be honest, I’m not sure where this will lead and I have no specific plan in mind at the moment, just this feeling that I need to go there and take photographs.  Maybe practice for Landscape in Level Two?

References: Cottrell, S. (2011)  Critical Thinking Skills: Developing Effective Analysis and Argument  (2^nd ed).   Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

More on semiotics – looking at photographs

Having looked at the linguistic semiotic models of Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce (see my post here), my next step was to learn how to apply these to a photograph.   The course notes tell us that Roland Barthes was ‘the father of semiotics in the world of photography’ (Boothroyd, 2012, p.101) and from reading ‘Elements of Semiology’ (Barthes, 1964) it is evident that Barthes mainly followed the Saussurean analysis in his own approach to semiology.

Saussure’s linguistic approach was that a sign is constructed of two components;

• the signifier (being the physical form that the sign takes and which carries the meaning, the thing that we read) and
• the signified (the mental concept or idea that is the meaning)

For example :

– the words ‘red rose’ (signifier) suggest a flower (signified) or alternatively love  / passion (signified).

– if ‘cat’ is the sign, the idea of a cat is the signifier, and the feline domestic pet sitting on the mat is the signified.

How are semiotics are applied to a photograph?

The signifier

Bate (2009) tells us that the photograph itself is an indexical signifier as it is caused by its referent.  Dzenko (2009, p.19) elaborates on this concept by commenting that in film-based photography the photographic process requires ‘the presence of the object in front of the camera in order to record its image through projected light’ whilst Barthes (1982, p.76) discusses his opinion of the referent by writing that

‘I call “photographic referent” not the optionally real thing to which an image or sign refers but the necessarily real thing which has been placed before the lens, without which there would be no photograph’.

Photographs are perceived to have a direct causal link to the object that was in front of the camera the moment the image was taken.

The signified

This is the concept of the image, what we ‘read’ from it, the meaning that we perceive, and described by Bate (2009, p.33) as ‘a ‘psychological image’ in our head’ (author’s italics). For example a picture of a horse signifies ‘horse’/’horsiness’ to an English-speaker whilst the same picture would signify ‘pferd‘ to a German.  Bate (2009) comments also on how the signified meaning of an image is also dependent upon viewer’s cultural knowledge and understanding.

The sign

The image itself, together with the idea we take from the image, together make the sign.

Denotation and connotation

Denotation is the straight-forward, objective approach to looking at the image and its visual elements.  Descriptive in nature, we look at what is depicted in the image; its visual content.  Bate (2009, p.38) refers to denotation as ‘the visual signifiers’.

Connotation relates to the viewer’s interpretation of the image and is therefore subjective.  What do the various elements mean? What is implied?  Connotation is arbitrary  as the meanings that the viewer takes from the image will largely depend upon their own cultural knowledge.  Bate (2009, p.38) describes connotation as ‘the cultural signified’.

Barthes discusses the denotation and connotation of images in more depth in his essays The Photographic Message (Barthes, 1977) and The Rhetoric of the Image (ibid.).  In the latter, he deconstructs an advertising image through the use of semiotics (see my earlier post here).

Studium and punctum

In his book Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography (1982) Barthes introduces the reader to his concept of two elements that he considers are present in an image – studium and punctum.

The studium is the overall interest of the image, whether it be cultural, political, historical etc., with Barthes describing it as ‘a kind of general enthusiastic commitment … but without special acuity’ (Barthes, 1982, p. 26).

Punctum on the other hand is that point of the image that attracts us, the one we gravitate to without really knowing why, the one which gives a personal connection to the viewer. It pierces the studium, breaking into the narrative of the image and being described by Barthes as ‘that accident which pricks me (but also bruises me, is poignant to me)’ (Barthes, 1982, p.27)

From the reading that I have done on semiotics I now feel comfortable with the basics but I am aware that there is still a lot of ground that I have not yet covered on what I’ve found to be a vast and complex topic. Chandler (2007) has provided me with a good starting point and I will continue with my reading step by step.

References:

Barthes, R. (1968) Elements of Semiology.  New York: Hill and Wang

Barthes, R. (1977) Image-Music-Text.  London: Fontana Press

Barthes, R. (1982) Camera Lucida. Reflections on Photography.  London: Jonathan Cape

Bate, D. (2009)  Photography: the key concepts.  New York: Berg

Boothroyd, S. (2014) Photography 1: Context and Narrative.  Barnsley: Open College of the Arts

Chandler, D. (2007) Semiotics: the basics (2nd ed.)  Abingdon: Routledge

Dzenko, C. (2009) Analog to Digital: The Indexical Function of Photographic Images.  Afterimage: The Journal of Media Arts and Cultural Criticism.  37 (2) pp. 19-23)

Looking at semiotics – starting with Saussure and Peirce

Notes from Semiotics: The Basics by Daniel Chandler (2nd ed., 2007)  – Introduction and Chapter One.

As semiotics forms an important part of Part Four of the course I decided it would be beneficial to do some reading around the subject.  In his book Semiotics: The Basics  (2nd ed., 2007) Chandler covers the subject over a number of chapters in what appears at first sight to be considerable depth but at this point in my studies I’m concentrating on the basics.   I am starting by looking at the theories of Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce, linguist and philosopher respectively, who are widely acknowledged as co-founders of semiotics and who established the two primary theoretical traditions in semiotics/semiology.

The Saussurean model

Saussure’s linguistic model comprises three related concepts:

1.  A ‘sign’ results from the association of the ‘signifier’ (the sound pattern, the non-material form of the spoken word) with the ‘signified’ (the abstract idea or concept).  A ‘sign’ must have both a signifier and a signified

A linguistic sign is not a link between a thing and a name, but between a concept [signified] and a sound pattern [signifier] …. a sound pattern is the hearer’s psychological impression of a sound, as given to him by evidence of his senses’ (Saussure, 1983, p.66).

Chandler notes that nowadays the ‘signifier’ is interpreted as the actual material/physical form that the sign takes rather than Saussure’s concept of a non-material sound pattern.

2.  Signs gain their meaning from their relationships and contrasts with other signs – ‘[they] only make sense as part of a formal, generalised and abstract system’ (p. 18)

3.  Signs are arbitrary.  ‘There is no necessary, intrinsic, direct or inevitable relationship between the signifier and the signified’ (p.22).

Different cultures and languages use differing words to describe the same objects or concepts.

Example of a sign:

An example given by Chandler (p.15) is the word ‘open’ on a door sign:

Sign = the word ‘open’ when it is invested with meaning by someone who encounters it on a shop doorway

Signifier = the word ‘open’

Signified concept  = that the shop is open for business

Signification – the relationship between signifier and signified – what is signified

The Peircean model

The representamen – form that the sign takes (not necessarily material, although usually interpreted as such)  (similar to Saussures signifier – p.31)

An interpretant – not an interpreter but rather the sense made of the sign (roughly analogous to signified, but is also the sign in the mind of the interpreter  – p.31)

An object – something beyond the sign to which it refers (a referent)

=> p31 example given by Chandler – opaque box which contains a (non-visible) object and has a label on it

representamen (the thing we first notice) = box and label => prompts the realisation that there is something inside the box (the object)

interpretant – the realisation that there is something inside the box, as well as the knowledge of what the box contains.

‘ … the object of a sign is always hidden …  if the object could be known directly there would be no need of a sign to represent it’ (p.31)

‘We only know about the object from noticing the label and the box and then ‘reading the label’ and forming a mental picture of the object in our mind.  Therefore the hidden object of a sign is only brought to realisation through the interaction of the representamen, the object and the interpretant’ (Munday, 2005)

=> p36 – 37 Types of signs – Peirce

=> Symbol/symbolic – signifier does not represent the signified, but is arbitrary or conventional – language, morse code, traffic signs

=> Icon/iconic  – where signifier is perceived as resembling or imitating the signified (recognisably looking, sounding, feeling, tasting or smelling like it) e.g. portrait, cartoon, a scale-model, realistic sounds in ‘programme music’, sound effects in radio drama, a dubbed film soundtrack, imitative gestures.

=> Index/indexical  – where the signifier is not arbitrary but is directly connected in some way (physically or causally) to the signified, regardless of intention – this link can be observed or inferred –

– ‘natural’ signs  – smoke (signifier) => fire (signified), medical symptoms – rash (signifier) => measles (signified).  ‘An index indicates something’ (p. 42)

Iconicity – based on (at least perceived) resemblance

Indexicality – based on (at least perceived) ‘direct connection’

Popular but non-semiotic meanings for icon/iconic:

to be iconic – to be famous and recognisable

an icon – computer icon signifying a functionality

religious icons – woks of visual art representing sacred figures which may be venerated as holy images by devout believers.

The models of Saussure and Peirce are concerned with linguistics so how do we apply these to a photograph?  Roland Barthes studied the semiotics of images and so it is to Barthes that I will turn to next in my research.

References:

Chandler, D. (2007) Semiotics: The Basics, 2nd ed.  Abingdon: Routledge

Saussure, F. (1983) Course in General Linguistics (translated by Roy Harris).  Cited in Chandler (2007) Semiotics: The Basics, 2nd ed.  Abingdon: Routledge

Book: Notes on ‘Context and Narrative’ by Maria Short

I first read this book in May this year as part of my research into the ‘Narrative and Illustration’ section of ‘The Art of Photography Course’ (see my review here) and have just re-read it in conjunction with my current studies as I felt that a revisit would be useful.  This time I have not written a review, just made some notes for my own benefit on the points that I’ve found helpful to think about at this moment in time; a kind of aide-memoire if you like.Chapter One – The Photograph

=> p.20  ‘The photographic brief defines the context of the final output’ – in other words, who are you taking the picture for?

=> p.28  ‘Context will inform how the viewer places their interpretation of the photograph’.  Look at function, placing, how the image relates to others in the same series, use of text, audience.

=> p.39  Summary

– ‘The function of the photograph will inform the photographic approach’

– ‘The context in which a photograph is viewed will heavily influence its interpretation’

Chapter Two – Subject

To be a photographer, you need to be passionate about communicating ‘something’ as this will inform every choice you make in relation to your work.  To be a photographer, you also need to be interested in the world around you; you need to be interested in things beyond photography.  The substance of the work is in your commitment to your subject, as this will show in your photographs, this commitment will make your photographs breathe; this is how to ‘personalise’ your work.

Short (2011, p.42)

I found this paragraph particularly insightful and one that I can currently really identify with – it is a timely reminder as I am feeling a little lost with my photography at the moment and need to find ‘me’ again.  I also realised when working on the first part of the course that my best work is personally-driven.

=> p.42  Do you need to photograph the subject itself or can you communicate it by intention?

=> p.44  Why are you photographing something and what do you want to say?  Concept (why = reason/intention) links to context.   Also relevant here is some helpful advice that my tutor gave me in her feedback to my first assignment:

In terms of context [italics in original text], who is your imagined or intended audience i.e. where would the pictures be placed (magazine, gallery, book?).  Giving considering [sic] to this question will help you to focus more on what you want your images to say. ( The question, ‘who are you talking to?’ can help you to with the question, ‘what do you want to say?’ – and from there your expressive voice will start to find itself).

Jayne Taylor (2014), OCA tutor

=> p.46  ‘… personal viewpoints, personality and even subjectivity can lead to insightful photography’.  Eve Arnold is given as a good example here.

=> p.55  ‘Missing information – consider the three-dimensional experience when photographing your subject’.  What is not visible but could be included in a visual way – noise, smells etc.  I found this an interesting point – one that I had not thought about before but which I shall bear in mind.

Chapter Three – Audience

=> p.70  ‘Reflecting upon intention’
– decide what you want to convey in an image
– clarify in words
– check whether each element of the image is contributing to this

=> p.73  Reminder of ‘the importance of an underlying passion and commitment to both subject and intention’.

=> p.95   Frames of reference are provided to an audience through use of composition and technical execution.  As an aside, this reminds me of Errol Morris’ metaphorical elephant looming outside the frame (Morris, 2014) – selection and elimination.

Chapter Four – Narrative

=> p.102  ‘Thinking about how the audience will see the images and how context should inform the choices the photographer makes’ – with regard to production and presentation.

=> p. 106  Visual punctuation – pace within a series.  See also chapter five for how the use of signs and symbols can help drive the pace and flow of a narrative.

=> p.109  Aim of narrative technique = need for coherence and the anchoring of meaning.

Chapter Five – Signs and symbols

=> pp. 122-124  Review of basic semiotic terminology

=> p.127  Symbolic meaning – Robert Frank’s The Americans

Chapter Six – Text

=> p.143  ‘Text is directly related to the context in which an image is seen’ – states the obvious but a good reason for me to consider using text in Assignment two if I feel direction for the viewer is needed.

=> p.157  Use of handwritten text versus printed – conveyance of personality in the former.

=> p.167  Need to consider which method of using text is best suited to the image – look at the underlying intention, concept and function.

It has been useful to have a re-read of this book.  A lot of the points I’ve pulled out are fairly obvious ones but the refresher has definitely been worth it, particularly in view of my forthcoming assignment.  I’m doing so much research and reading these days that I’m finding that a lot of the information that I’ve gathered slips to the back of my mind until it is consciously pulled to the surface again.

References:

Taylor, J. (2014) Tutor report – Carol Street Assignment 1. Open College of the Arts.

Morris, E. (2014) Believing is Seeing (Observations on the Mysteries of Photography).  New York: Penguin Books

Short, M. (2011) Context and Narrative.  Lausanne: AVA Publishing SA