A brief explication of Roland Barthes’ notions of studium and punctum, which Barthes developed in his book Camera Lucida.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\nFeedback<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
Dear unknown reviewer,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By your words, I can read that you understand my work and appreciate it. I thank you very much. I also thank you for your advice allowing me to perfect my photographic work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As you have noticed, the notion of scale in the visualization of my images plays an important role in my work. In fact, in this way, I try to arouse some disturbance to the viewer. Let me explain. From a distance (or in small format) the images look like portraits. At this distance they were given fully, conventionally, as classical portraits, in an unequivocal and common way. Perhaps I could say, by using a reference that you suggested to me and which I read many years ago, that we are dealing with the notion of studium described by Barthes. However the intrigue caused by the lack of information resulting from the distance of view encourages the viewer to approach the image (or enlarge its format). By thus wanting to know more the viewer loses the coherent view of the whole to see only the matter of which it is constituted. Thus there arises from this matter a disturbance and uncertainty that this is a disturbance in the sense of the punctum described by Barthes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In my work, this material formed of so many points, pixels and algorithmic artefacts evidently comes close to, but without my intention, pictorial impressionism. However, it is only digital photography. Moreover it is precisely on what it constitutes that my present work is mainly based.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Honestly the graphic principle is not new. The Roman mosaics perfectly illustrated the qualities of this principle. Closer to us, impressionist painters such as Monet and Sysley and those pointillists such as Seurat and Signac made perfect use of the process. During the 20th century, other artists also exploited this way of making images. For example, mechanical dot screens have been used by artists who have diverted them from their technical purpose to give them real artistic value. To quote only two, there is Roy Lichtenstein who sublimated the mechanical screentone of offset printing and Jiro Taniguchi, whose use of mechanical screentone is not only pragmatic, to ensure a good impression of course, but also an artistic material by defining a particular style and creating atmospheres to accompany the stories that Taniguchi told.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In photography, the grain is present since the invention of the silver process. Its distribution in the emulsion is not mechanical, but stochastic. Yet it has often been seen as an obstacle to the representation of the real and its artistic value has also often been reduced to the romantic connotation that it conveys. I think, however, that grain is a real artistic matter. For proof, it is enough to observe the images of Jerry Spagnoli where the grain is treated like a poetic matter and where the notion of scale is very present.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In digital photography, the frame is more regular by the arrangement of photosites on the sensor. This brings it closer to a mechanical screen. But the use of image processing algorithms, blurs this regularity. In my current photographic work I use precisely this graphic quality as an artistic matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Your review let me think of another photographic characteristic. I refer to the blur as Hirochi Sugimoto uses it in his photographs of architectural objects. An example is the image he made of the Villa Savoye of Le Corbusier representing frontally the eastern facade of the building. When the image occupies a restricted portion of the visual field, the observer has no doubt about what he sees, immediately recognizes the Villa Savoye (if he knows it beforehand of course), but sees no detail. To better see this facade, the observer tends to fill his visual field with this image. And there, surprise ! Even larger the image on his retina, he will see no more details than when it occupied only a small portion. By this process, Sugimoto sublimates the iconic character of the building and only offers its essence free of details so quick to distract the eye. It retains only a schema, only its phantom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Obviously I do not compare my work to that of the talented Japanese photographer. Yet I try, in a certain way, to retain only his phantom from reality. Or say, its bone. To make that what is seen no longer refers to the real photographed, but arises directly from the photographic process by revealing precisely this process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
My photographic portraits that you have seen no longer belong to a real that would have been (to borrow a concept so developed by Barthes) but belong to the matter itself of the photographic process. To better explain my work, I would borrow from Michelangelo what he says of the work of the sculptor, which is to liberate the form already contained in the block of marble. Thus, I try to update the image already present in the \u00ab\u00a0emulsion\u00a0\u00bb of the sensor by taking the picture and, for this to happen, the \u00ab\u00a0emulsion\u00a0\u00bb must be a matter present to the sight. In my case, a digital matter. Perhaps there is also an aesthetic \u00ab\u00a0where reality exists only in terms of purely aesthetic and mental rules\u00a0\u00bb, as Alistair Crawford wrote of Giuseppe Cavalli work, for whom \u00ab\u00a0the subject did not matter\u00a0\u00bb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Finally, a few words about transferring images from the screen to \u00ab\u00a0paper\u00a0\u00bb. I have already done some tests, especially with the use of a complementary black and white image (an alpha layer) from the basic image, to give some relief to a digital print on rigid support. But the tests are not yet conclusive and it\u2019s difficult for me to find an adequate process for large format prints that take into account the digital material of images by giving them a material reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I would like to thank you again for your generous and constructive review.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sincerely yours.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
R\u00e9ponse<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
Cher-Ch\u00e8re critique inconnu-e,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Par vos mots, je peux lire que vous comprenez mon travail et l\u2019appr\u00e9ciez. Je vous en remercie vivement. Je vous remercie \u00e9galement pour vos conseils me permettant de perfectionner mon travail photographique.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Comme vous l\u2019avez constat\u00e9, la notion d\u2019\u00e9chelle dans la visualisation de mes images joue un r\u00f4le important dans mon travail. En fait, de cette mani\u00e8re, j\u2019essaie de provoquer un certain trouble chez le spectateur. Je m\u2019explique. De loin (ou en petit format) les images semblent des portraits. \u00c0 cette distance elles se donnent pleinement \u00e0 voir, conventionnellement, comme de classiques portraits, d\u2019une mani\u00e8re sans \u00e9quivoque et commune. Peut-\u00eatre pourrais-je dire, en prenant une r\u00e9f\u00e9rence que vous me sugg\u00e9rez et que j\u2019ai lu il y a bien des ann\u00e9es, que l\u2019on a affaire \u00e0 la notion de studium d\u00e9crit par Barthes. Mais l\u2019intrigue provoqu\u00e9e par le manque d\u2019information r\u00e9sultant de la distance de vue incite le spectateur \u00e0 s\u2019approcher de l\u2019image (ou \u00e0 agrandir son format). En voulant ainsi en savoir plus le spectateur perd la vue coh\u00e9rente de l\u2019ensemble pour ne voir plus que la mati\u00e8re dont elle est constitu\u00e9e. Ainsi surgit de cette mati\u00e8re un trouble et peu-\u00eatre que c\u2019est l\u00e0 un trouble au sens du punctum d\u00e9crit par Barthes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dans mon travail, cette mati\u00e8re form\u00e9e de tant de points, de pixels et d\u2019artefacts algorithmiques se rapproche \u00e9videmment, mais sans que cela soit mon intention, de l\u2019impressionnisme picturale. Ce n\u2019est pourtant que de la photographie num\u00e9rique. C\u2019est justement sur ce qui la constitue que mon travail actuel s\u2019\u00e9labore principalement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Honn\u00eatement le principe graphique n\u2019est pas nouveau. Les mosa\u00efques romaines illustrent parfaitement les qualit\u00e9s de ce principe. Plus proche de nous, les peintres impressionnistes tels Monet et Sysley et ceux pointillistes tels Seurat et Signac ont fait un usage parfaitement maitris\u00e9 du proc\u00e9d\u00e9. Au cours du XXe si\u00e8cle, d\u2019autres artistes ont \u00e9galement exploit\u00e9 cette mani\u00e8re de faire des images. Par exemple, les trames m\u00e9caniques de points ont \u00e9t\u00e9 utilis\u00e9es par des artistes qui les ont d\u00e9tourn\u00e9es de leur finalit\u00e9 technique pour leur donner une vraie valeur artistique. Pour n\u2019en citer que deux, il y a Roy Lichtenstein qui sublime la trame m\u00e9canique de l\u2019impression offset et Jiro Taniguchi, dont l\u2019utilisation des trames m\u00e9caniques est non seulement pragmatique, afin d\u2019assurer une bonne impression \u00e9videmment, mais aussi une mati\u00e8re artistique par la d\u00e9finition d\u2019un style particulier et la cr\u00e9ation d\u2019ambiances propres \u00e0 accompagner les histoires que Taniguchi raconte.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
En photographie, le grain est pr\u00e9sent depuis l\u2019invention du proc\u00e9d\u00e9 argentique. Sa r\u00e9partition dans l\u2019\u00e9mulsion n\u2019est cette fois pas m\u00e9canique, mais stochastique. Pourtant il a souvent \u00e9t\u00e9 consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme un obstacle \u00e0 la repr\u00e9sentation du r\u00e9el et sa valeur artistique a aussi souvent \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9duite \u00e0 la connotation romantique qu\u2019il v\u00e9hiculerait. Je pense pourtant que le grain est une r\u00e9elle mati\u00e8re artistique. Pour preuve, il suffit d\u2019observer les images de Jerry Spagnoli o\u00f9 le grain est trait\u00e9 comme une mati\u00e8re po\u00e9tique et o\u00f9 la notion d\u2019\u00e9chelle est tr\u00e8s pr\u00e9sente.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
En photographie num\u00e9rique, la trame est plus r\u00e9guli\u00e8re par la disposition des photosites sur le capteur. Ce qui la rapproche d\u2019une trame m\u00e9canique. Mais l\u2019utilisation d\u2019algorithmes de traitement de l\u2019image, brouille cette r\u00e9gularit\u00e9. Dans mon travail photographique actuel j\u2019utilise pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment cette qualit\u00e9 graphique comme une mati\u00e8re artistique.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Votre critique m\u2019inspire une autre caract\u00e9ristique photographique. Je veux parler du flou tel que Hirochi Sugimoto l\u2019utilise dans ses photographies d\u2019objets architecturaux. Un exemple est l\u2019image qu\u2019il a faite de la villa Savoye de Le Corbusier repr\u00e9sentant frontalement la fa\u00e7ade est du b\u00e2timent. Quand l\u2019image occupe une portion restreinte du champ visuel, l\u2019observateur n\u2019a pas de doute sur ce qu\u2019il voit, il reconnait imm\u00e9diatement la villa Savoye (s\u2019il la connait pr\u00e9alablement bien s\u00fbr), mais n\u2019en voit aucun d\u00e9tail. Pour mieux voir cette fa\u00e7ade, l\u2019observateur tend \u00e0 remplir son champ visuel avec cette image. Et l\u00e0, surprise! Aussi grande l\u2019image soit-elle sur sa r\u00e9tine, il ne verra pas plus de d\u00e9tails que quand elle n\u2019en occupait qu\u2019une petite portion. Par ce proc\u00e9d\u00e9, Sugimoto sublime le caract\u00e8re iconique du b\u00e2timent et n\u2019en offre que son essence d\u00e9barrass\u00e9e des d\u00e9tails si prompts \u00e0 distraire le regard. Il ne retient du r\u00e9el qu\u2019un sch\u00e9ma, que son fant\u00f4me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Bien \u00e9videmment je ne compare pas mon travail \u00e0 celui du talentueux photographe japonais. Pourtant, j\u2019essaie, d\u2019une certaine mani\u00e8re, de ne retenir du r\u00e9el que son fant\u00f4me. Ou, plut\u00f4t, son ossature. Faire que ce qui est vu ne face plus r\u00e9f\u00e9rence au r\u00e9el photographi\u00e9, mais surgisse directement du proc\u00e9d\u00e9 photographique en r\u00e9v\u00e9lant justement ce proc\u00e9d\u00e9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mes portraits photographiques que vous avez vus n\u2019appartiennent ainsi plus \u00e0 un r\u00e9el qui aurait \u00e9t\u00e9 (pour reprendre un concept aussi d\u00e9velopp\u00e9 par Barthes) mais appartiennent \u00e0 la mati\u00e8re-m\u00eame du proc\u00e9d\u00e9 photographique. Pour mieux expliquer mon travail, j\u2019emprunterais \u00e0 Michel-Ange ce qu\u2019il dit du travail du sculpteur qui est de lib\u00e9rer la forme d\u00e9j\u00e0 contenue dans le bloc de marbre. Ainsi, je tente de mettre \u00e0 jour, par la prise de vue, l\u2019image d\u00e9j\u00e0 pr\u00e9sente dans l\u2019 \u00ab \u00e9mulsion \u00bb du capteur et pour cela il faut que l\u2019 \u00ab \u00e9mulsion \u00bb soit une mati\u00e8re pr\u00e9sente \u00e0 la vue. Dans mon cas, une mati\u00e8re num\u00e9rique. Peut-\u00eatre qu\u2019il y a l\u00e0 aussi une esth\u00e9tique \u00ab o\u00f9 la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 n\u2019est l\u00e0 qu\u2019en fonction de r\u00e8gles purement esth\u00e9tiques et mentales \u00bb comme l\u2019\u00e9crivait Alistair Crawford \u00e0 propos du travail de Giuseppe Cavalli pour qui \u00ab le sujet n\u2019avait pas d\u2019importance \u00bb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Pour finir, quelques mots sur le transfert des images de l\u2019\u00e9cran au \u00ab papier \u00bb. J\u2019ai d\u00e9j\u00e0 fait quelques essais, notamment avec l\u2019usage d\u2019une image noir et blanc compl\u00e9mentaire (un calque alpha) issu de l\u2019image de base, afin de donner un certain relief \u00e0 une impression num\u00e9rique sur support rigide. Mais les essais ne sont pour l\u2019instant pas concluants et je peine \u00e0 trouver un proc\u00e9d\u00e9 ad\u00e9quat pour des tirages grands formats qui prennent en compte la mati\u00e8re num\u00e9rique des images en leur donnant une r\u00e9alit\u00e9 mat\u00e9rielle sensible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
En vous remerciant encore pour votre critique g\u00e9n\u00e9reuse et constructive, recevez, cher-ch\u00e8re critique inconnue, l\u2019assurance de toute ma consid\u00e9ration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Critique et r\u00e9ponse aux portraits tir\u00e9s de Mati\u00e8re Num\u00e9rique pour le Magnum Photography Awards 2017.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1391,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,3],"tags":[92,89,93,27,12,62,95,91,20,63],"class_list":["post-1403","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-image","category-texte","tag-critique","tag-digital-matter","tag-feedback","tag-matiere-numerique","tag-photographie","tag-photography","tag-portrait","tag-review","tag-theorie","tag-theory"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1403","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1403"}],"version-history":[{"count":28,"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1403\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2214,"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1403\/revisions\/2214"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1391"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1403"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1403"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1403"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_11_st_02_02_17-Marcol_2017-449x600\/3736078719.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_26_01_17-Marcol_2017-476x600\/2625127017.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_24_04_17-Marcol_2017-436x600\/423444748.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_24_04_17-Marcol_2017-451x600\/1793243952.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_22_12_16-Marcol_2016_437x600\/4228548814.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_24_01_17-Marcol_2017-453x600\/3175249950.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_13_01_17-Marcol_2017-517x600\/211757797.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_02_12_16-Marcol_2016_410x600\/1463170530.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_05_10_16-Marcol_2016-480x600\/3925972511.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>![](\"https:\/\/www.zhongart.com\/marcol\/wp-content\/uploads\/cache\/2017\/05\/MN_10_st_02_03_17-Marcol_2017-479x600\/2772488746.jpeg\" "\\"MN")
<\/span><\/span><\/a>