A hundred years ago Pictorialism was beginning its decline, as the “straight-print cranks” (as one Pictorialist called them) began their ascendancy and promoted the new dogma that photographs should be sharp and clear records of what was in front of the lens at the time.
The merest glance at a current photography magazine or site will show that Pictorialism has come roaring back, now armed with digital technology that would have made the artists of a century ago drool.
We take no position in the debate for or against Pictorialism, because the debate seems silly. If you can produce a good picture straight from the camera, go ahead. If you can produce a good picture with three days’ manipulation in your darkroom or image editor, go ahead. The only question is whether you can produce a good picture.
It is, however, interesting to see how many of the clichés of current pictorial photography are catalogued as faults in the literature of a hundred years ago. Perhaps the most obvious among them is the use of extreme wide-angle lenses to produce what the first generation of Pictorialists would have decried as “violent perspective.” Incorrect perspective is another fault that the old masters would not have expected from anyone beyond the Brownie stage: streetscapes with buildings that seem to be falling in on each other because the camera is not held level, or because the perspective is not adjusted with a rising front (or by angling the enlarger, or by using the perspective tool in your image editor).
But these faults are all symptoms of the dominant fault of our culture today, which is a lack of patience. We have no time for subtlety. We do not believe in subtlety. A work of art that does not make its point right now will be skipped over and ignored. Therefore our photographs must be striking, meaning that they immediately stop a viewer. The reaction we look for is “Wow!” Of course, “wow” lasts for only a few seconds, and then the viewer moves on to the next thing. But if we get the “wow,” then verily we have our reward.
This is in most ways the opposite of the ideal of the original Pictorialists. It is quite true that some of them—generally the lesser ones—went for the striking effect. But you have only to read the writings of the best artists to see how much they were concerned with subtlety—how much effort they put into reducing the contrast in their landscapes, for example, so that the viewer would be invited to pick out the details slowly and contemplatively.
Here, then, is an opportunity to explore another world, an alternate universe of pictorial photography where subtlety is the most desired quality, and a work reveals its treasures over time. Our greatly expanded Photography page gathers the writings and the photographs of some of the best artists (and one or two of the worst). For photographers who still use film or plates, it will prove a treasury of antique processes and techniques. For digital photographers, it is a fascinating study to see how the same effects can be had with digital technology. For all photographers, these old masters bring a challenge: can we make pictures that reward a long engagement, not just a fleeting “wow”?