“Technical reproduction can put the copy of the original into situations which would be out of reach for the original itself.” -Walter Benjamin
Obviously without the ability to technically reproduce this work through a photograph there is no way a semblance of this painting could ever make its way onto tumblr, so in that way this copy of the original is already in a situation that would be impossible for the original.
“Reproduction can bring out those aspects of the original that are unattainable to the naked eye yet accessible to the lens, which is adjustable and chooses its angle at will.” -Walter Benjamin
This is true not only of the initial taking of the photo but of any manipulation that can then be done digitally to that photo. For example, the background of the original painting is not as dark as I’ve been able to make it in this image with photo manipulation. The colors are not as vibrant, either, as I’ve been able to make them here. Another change I’ve made is that I have somewhat altered the composition by cropping this photo to change the borders so that the focal point of the two floating heads is set farther to the right of the picture plane than they were in the original painting.
“One might subsume the eliminated element in the term "aura" and go on to say: that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art.” -Walter Benjamin
I have often been confused about how to refer to photos of two-dimensional artwork like paintings and drawings, especially my own. While assembling my digital portfolio for my college applications I worried that my artwork might be misinterpreted in a thousand different ways by someone seeing only photographs rather than the work itself. This is an edited photograph of a painting I did in my senior year of high school. I find this image to be visually engaging and when I look at it I’m proud of both my painting abilities and my photo editing skills, but I’m not sure which of the two has more impact on this final product. I enjoy looking at my original painting, and I enjoy looking at this photograph of my painting, but I absolutely believe that there is something to the idea that the “aura” of the painting has been lost. There is so much that can’t be known or felt through viewing this photograph on a screen. For example, the paint on this canvas is incredibly textured when viewed in person, and when viewed at different angles there are bumps and divets in the paint that cast interesting shadows that cannot be seen in this thoroughly two-dimensional digital rendering. Also, this painting is actually five feet wide. The impressive size of it conveys something emotional that can’t be conveyed by the image on the screen. These are concrete examples of differences. However, for me, as a painter, there is something deeper as well. Obviously I love the accessibility that comes with the digital reproduction of paintings. Being able to view any painting from my computer no matter where the original is physically located is an amazing thing that is incredibly valuable, but there is something unreproducible by even the most high-resolution photograph. Viewing a painting in person, really looking at it, being able to lean in and smell the medium and see the intricacies of every single brushstroke, is an experience in its own right.
izzy806
andulkaphoto
amandla
titsay
stormborns
blakekathryn
ellievsbear