“Foreign & Domestic” at Columbus State University, March 12th – April 19th

I’ve curated an exhibition of photographs from Mark Alor Powell and Hannah Pierce-Carlson which opens March 12th at Columbus State University, Columbus, GA. Here’s an essay, and photographs from the show can be seen at foreign-domestic.org.

Couldn’t be happier to have been able to put this show together, and I wish all of you could join us in middle-Georgia (on the Alabama line!) tomorrow night.

New Winogrand Restrospective 2013-2015

Fantastic to see this news hit my inbox yesterday, that the first retrospective in nearly 25 years of Garry Winogrand’s work will open at SFMOMA on March 9th, 2013. The exhibition will then travel to DC, NYC, Paris & Madrid. Back when this site was active, there was plenty to say about Winogrand, and it’s great to see that there’s been a recent upsurge of interest in his work, and generally, in street photography.

Apparently, the exhibition is partially inspired by new scholarship of Winogrand’s archives:

“New curatorial research undertaken for this project has enabled the first thorough review of the prints and proof sheets from Winogrand’s complete working life, and will reveal to the public for the first time the full breadth of his art through more than 200 photographs. Roughly half of those have never been seen publicly; close to 100 have never before been printed.” from http://www.bloginity.com/2012/04/garry-winogrands-touring-exhibition/

I’m really looking forward to the catalog (and exhibition, if I make it out there) and especially to a new essay on the subject from Mr. Papageorge. Here’s my swing at the subject, “Reconsidering Winogrand” from the inaugural issue of “PUBLICATION” way back in 2009.

Update: NYT has published unseen work from the 1960 DNC, and is asking for help in id’ing some of the people included in the scenes.

Chuck Patch Discovers Winogrand’s 1964 Worlds’ Fair Women at Boston Museum of Fine Arts

Thanks to LPV for tweeting how Chuck Patch came across these three women from Winogrand’s 1964 World’s Fair photo a few weeks ago at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts!

Chuck’s quote:

My understanding (and I was trying not to disrupt the shoot/interview, which I clearly was) is that one of them spotted the picture a few months ago and for some reason contacted the museum (I’m assuming that they saw some advance notice for the exhibition). None of them had ever seen the picture before and had no idea that it’s so famous. When I said I first saw it in 1972 in the Time-Life “Library of Photography” one of them said, “it’s been around that long?” I think the MFA will release a story to the Boston Globe and also post it on one of the museum blogs.


There’s a new bi-annual magazine dedicated to street photography, called PUBLICATION. Nick Turpin‘s brainchild, PUBLICATION features unbound photos, essays (and no ads!) and I’m looking forward to getting my hands on a copy.

I wrote an essay about Garry Winogrand for the 1st issue. It’s not a typical essay, and in actuality it isn’t even really about Winogrand — but it was fun to get down on paper, and I’m pleased I could contribute. Can’t wait to raise a glass to Nick and the other contributors this week in London.

I’ll see if I can post the essay here after the 1st edition sells out. Click the images on the left to navigate around the PUBLICATION site, and submit your work to see it published.


More on Robert Frank’s “The Americans”, in Abu Dhabi

A new, "American Beauty" - on Robert Frank's "The Americans" edited version of my essay on Robert Frank appears in print in Abu Dhabi today, the 50th anniversary of the publication of “The Americans”.

The paper is called The National and the essay, “American Beauty” is in the Review section. For reference, Abu Dhabi is the capital (of arts and culture, too) of the United Arab Emirates. [wiki]

They’re really into falconry there.

It’s Been Awhile, Rocktober

It’s been awhile since I’ve written anything of substance here, suffice to say that October is busy, and the day job is going well.

There’ve been more pictures and photographers crossing my radar than ever, and I’ve been slow on staying connected with ya’ll here on 2point8. More soon, I hope.

If you live in the Atlanta are, are a photo book collector, and are planning to purchase Paul Graham’s “A Shimmer of Possibility“, please get in touch. I’d love to see it, and it won’t be making it to the Fulton-County Library anytime soon. Shoot, I’ll even bring wine.

If you’d like a behind-the-scenes glimpse at what’s been happening this month, pictures from ACP can be found here on flickr, and a blog’s on the way.

And again, come see one of my upcoming presentations on the confluence of photography, youtube, and citizen journalism, as seen through the Jena 6 story. Please introduce yourself and say hi. Or you can do it on facebook, where I made the mistake of “inviting” everyone in my gmail contact list (which includes anyone who’s ever been cc’d on an email to you). What a newbie.

Got Permit?

Mason Resnick has an editorial on the Adorama News Desk concerning this story in today’s NY Times, “City May Seek Permit and Insurance for Many Kinds of Public Photography”.

“Some tourists, amateur photographers, even would-be filmmakers hoping to make it big on YouTube could soon be forced to obtain a city permit and $1 million in liability insurance before taking pictures or filming on city property, including sidewalks.

New rules being considered by the Mayor’s Office of Film, Theater and Broadcasting would require any group of two or more people who want to use a camera in a single public location for more than a half hour to get a city permit and insurance.”

I guess the idea would be to never go out shooting with your friends. Never photograph where other people are photographing, never use a tripod, and don’t hang out anywhere longer than 29 minutes.

The upside is that permits to do any of the above will be free! Ah, the inevitability of it all…

DiCorcia Lawsuit Appeal Dismissed

Andrew Z. Glickman, a photographer with a law degree, sent 2point8 email with word on last week’s dismissal of Erno Nussenzweig’s appeal in his case against Philip-Lorca DiCorcia and Pace/Macgill.

DiCorcia Lawsuit Appeal Dismissed
Philip-Lorca DiCorcia, “Head No. 13, 2000″

For background on the case that spawned this appeal, see the New York Times.

In Judge Tom’s and Malone’s view “The sale of an individual’s image in a limited edition of 10 photographic prints for an aggregate of some $240,000 is a far cry from the use of a person’s likeness . . . . that Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51 were enacted to redress. . . . The publication of [Mr. Nussenweig’s] portrait in both the popular press and art media confirms that the image is "a matter of legitimate public interest to readers" so as to bring its use within the newsworthiness exception to the privacy statute. . . . Thus, the inclusion of the photograph in a catalog sold in connection with an exhibition of the artist’s work does not render its use commercial, as [Mr. Nussenweig] suggests . . . . If the image is a matter of public interest, it is immaterial whether that interest is satisfied by viewing the original in a museum, art gallery or private dwelling or by perusing a reproduction in an art magazine or other publication.”

Judge Tom also wrote “That profit may be derived from the sale of art does not diminish the constitutional protection afforded. As noted in Bery v City of New York (97 F 3d 689, 696 [2d Cir 1996], cert denied 520 US 1251 [1997]), "paintings, photographs, prints and sculptures . . . always communicate some idea or concept to those who view it, and as such are entitled to full First Amendment protection." The public expression of those ideas and concepts is fully protected by the First Amendment, irrespective of whether an artist or speaker derives income from such expression (see e.g. Riley v National Fedn. of the Blind of N. Carolina, 487 US 781, 801 [1988]; Time, Inc. v Hill, 385 US 374, 397 [1967]; Hoepker 200 F Supp 2d at 350).

Judge Tom’s opinion also disagreed with Mr. Nussenweig’s argument “the courts must strike a balance between [one person’s] right to freedom of expression and [another’s] right to freedom of religion. . . . [and that the trial] Court’s decision to withhold the protection afforded by the privacy statute amounts to state action infringing on his right to practice his religion.”