Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Edward Burtynsky's Manufactured Landscapes  (Read 10735 times)
AWeil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 166


WWW
« on: February 17, 2003, 01:48:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you for sharing this information. That's what I love about this site!
A.Weil
Logged
RRE
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2003, 12:44:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Here are a couple of additional links.  They are for the Toronto and New York galleries that represent Burtynsky, and contain a number of images of his work.  The images on the second link are larger than the ones on the first:

www.cowlesgallery.com/Burtynsky.html

www.godardgallery.com/burt.htm
Logged
RRE
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2003, 11:11:59 AM »
ReplyReply

I went to the National Gallery of Canada yesterday to see Edward Burtynsky give a guided tour of a major exhibit of his work that runs until May 4. The exhibit, entitled Manufactured Landscapes, consists of photographs of industrial sites in Canada, the US, Italy and Bangladesh. I was greatly impressed both by Mr. Burtynsky and his photographs, and thought I'd pass on some information about aspects of the exhibit that are available on the internet.

The Gallery and the Yale University Press have published a catalogue of the exhibit and the Gallery has made good use of its web site: see http://national.gallery.ca/exhibit....ex.html

The site includes several photographs: nickel tailings at the Inco operation in Sudbury, Ontario; Adam Pirie Quarry, Barre, Vermont; a shipbreaking operation at Chittagong, Bangladesh; a marble quarry at Carrara, Italy; Kennecot Copper Mine, Bingham Valley, Utah; and an abandoned Shaft at Inco's Crean Hill Mine, Sudbury. The photos look ok on the internet, but do not begin to approach the originals.

The site also has an interview with Mr. Burtynsky covering artistic, technical and business issues. The interview is in 13 parts and can be accessed either as video or as text. At the site, click on the link Cybermuse to access this material.

For those who are interested in technical information, Mr. Burtynsky uses a Phillips 8x10 (he commented that it is comparatively light) and a Linhof 4x5. He uses several kinds of film and a wide range of lenses (for the 4x5, 10 lenses ranging from 50mm to 400mm).

He owns Image Works (www.torontoimageworks.com), which he says makes his photography possible, and he is currently doing a photographic series in China.
Logged
pmkierst
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2003, 01:58:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Note to those in the area (includes me!): He has a workshop titled "Fine Art Photographic Printing through Electronic Media" which sounds pretty interesting as well ($300)

http://national.gallery.ca/exhibit....ex.html
Logged

Paul K.
keith smith
Guest
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2003, 07:34:06 AM »
ReplyReply

How Much!!!

I know original work costs, but $11,000 for a 1 of 10 edition print is a bit steep

keith
Logged
drm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 679


WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2006, 12:47:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Fans of Edward Burtynsky might find the video here interesting.

Apart from the photography itself, it shows how a photographer can engage with wider issues.  So, so far away from a fixation on magenta casts...

I find it really inspirational and engaging.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2006, 12:48:37 PM by drm » Logged

--
David Mantripp
http://www.snowhenge.net
landmark
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #6 on: June 25, 2007, 02:54:27 PM »
ReplyReply

MANUFACTURED LANDSCAPES OPENING JULY 6 AT THE NUART

“Mesmerizing! Breathtaking!
Nothing illustrates the monstrosity of globalized commerce more vividly”
-THE VILLAGE VOICE

“Extraordinary, haunting, beautiful, insightful, touching and thought-provoking!”
-Al Gore

WATCH THE TRAILER

MANUFACTURED LANDSCAPES is the striking new documentary on the world and work of renowned artist Edward Burtynsky. Internationally acclaimed for his large-scale photographs of “manufactured landscapes”—quarries, recycling yards, factories, mines and dams—Burtynsky creates stunningly beautiful art from civilization’s materials and debris. The film follows him through China, as he shoots the evidence and effects of that country’s massive industrial revolution. With breathtaking sequences, such as the opening tracking shot through an almost endless factory, the filmmakers also extend the narratives of Burtynsky’s photographs, allowing us to meditate on our impact on the planet and witness both the epicenters of industrial endeavor and the dumping grounds of its waste.

In the spirit of such environmentally enlightening hits as AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH and RIVERS AND TIDES, MANUFACTURED LANDSCAPES powerfully shifts our consciousness about the world and the way we live in it, without simplistic judgments or reductive resolutions.

JULY 6-12

NUART THEATRE
11272 Santa Monica Boulevard
just west of the 405 Freeway
West Los Angeles

Showtimes 7/6-12: Fri-Sun at 12:00, 2:30, 5:00, 7:30, 10:00;
Mon-Thu at 5:00, 7:30, 10:00
Buy Tickets Online


Please support this eye-opening film in its opening weekend!

For more information about the film visit our website
A Zeitgeist Films Release
« Last Edit: June 25, 2007, 02:55:48 PM by landmark » Logged
wmchauncey
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 360


« Reply #7 on: June 25, 2007, 04:06:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
MANUFACTURED LANDSCAPES OPENING JULY 6 AT THE NUART

“Mesmerizing! Breathtaking!
Nothing illustrates the monstrosity of globalized commerce more vividly”
-THE VILLAGE VOICE

“Extraordinary, haunting, beautiful, insightful, touching and thought-provoking!”
-Al Gore

WATCH THE TRAILER

MANUFACTURED LANDSCAPES is the striking new documentary on the world and work of renowned artist Edward Burtynsky. Internationally acclaimed for his large-scale photographs of “manufactured landscapes”—quarries, recycling yards, factories, mines and dams—Burtynsky creates stunningly beautiful art from civilization’s materials and debris. The film follows him through China, as he shoots the evidence and effects of that country’s massive industrial revolution. With breathtaking sequences, such as the opening tracking shot through an almost endless factory, the filmmakers also extend the narratives of Burtynsky’s photographs, allowing us to meditate on our impact on the planet and witness both the epicenters of industrial endeavor and the dumping grounds of its waste.

In the spirit of such environmentally enlightening hits as AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH and RIVERS AND TIDES, MANUFACTURED LANDSCAPES powerfully shifts our consciousness about the world and the way we live in it, without simplistic judgments or reductive resolutions.

JULY 6-12

NUART THEATRE
11272 Santa Monica Boulevard
just west of the 405 Freeway
West Los Angeles

Showtimes 7/6-12: Fri-Sun at 12:00, 2:30, 5:00, 7:30, 10:00;
Mon-Thu at 5:00, 7:30, 10:00
Buy Tickets Online
Please support this eye-opening film in its opening weekend!

For more information about the film visit our website
A Zeitgeist Films Release
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124823\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I. for one, find it sad that we cannot find refuge in a humble photography site like this without being subjected to your liberal, unproven, bias.  The man is a great photographer, of that there is no question.  But to equate his work with the other junk science idiots offends me and every other intelligent person that reads this.
Logged

The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/chauncey43
thompsonkirk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 26, 2007, 11:04:11 PM »
ReplyReply

What a striking opinion!  If you saw the documentary, you'd learn that Burtynsky is indeed deeply concerned about environmental issues, & this concern is one of the significant motivations behind his work.  This isn't some sort of ideological speculation, it's a commitment that he articulates quite eloquently.  What he thinks or hopes he's doing is surely relevant to his artwork, just environmental concerns were relevant to Adams' work (both Ansel & Robert) - & just as Salgado's political commitments, to give another example, are relevant to his.

There seems also to be some confusion behind your indignation, unless you can explain:

--Do you count Gore as a scientist, junk or otherwise?  He makes no such claim, though his book & film do try to offer accessible versions of some serious science.

--In what way do you regard Goldsworthy as a scientist?  That's as strange a view of him as I can imagine!
Logged
Geoff Wittig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1017


« Reply #9 on: July 04, 2007, 10:28:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I. for one, find it sad that we cannot find refuge in a humble photography site like this without being subjected to your liberal, unproven, bias.  The man is a great photographer, of that there is no question.  But to equate his work with the other junk science idiots offends me and every other intelligent person that reads this.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124840\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As Stephen Colbert would say, "reality has a well-known liberal bias." I suspect there are more than a few intelligent people reading this who are not offended by passing reference to the environmental problems that will dominate our grandchildrens' lives, like it or not.
Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 974


WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 06, 2007, 01:34:16 AM »
ReplyReply

I would understand a complaint about a photography site being overtaken with political prosteletizing if that were the case here, but wmchauncey seems to have taken offense at what amounts to a brief description of the content and theme of the show.  I'm rather surprised that a person of any political persuasion or any degree of confidence in the veracity of science would object to such an inert statement, taken straight from the films website.

I like Burtynsky's photos and find a number of his images to be quite extraordinary.  As big prints, I could see them having a similar impact to some of Andreas Gursky's work.  Much of what makes them stand out, though, is not the technical proficiency or interpretive nature of them, but the remarkable subject matter.  I don't mean to demean them because of that, and have to give the photographer a lot of credit for finding and choosing this subject matter, but it means that it is even more entwined with it's theme as a result.  

There is a clinical reportage feel to many of the images and I think that Burtinsky seems to have made a deliberate attempt to not call attention to himself in this work.  In a sense, then, when you deny the gravity of the content, you look past much of what makes this special.
Logged

thompsonkirk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 07, 2007, 12:04:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, I guess there's a clinical reportage element, but I'm more impressed by the way he's taken the formal values of classical landscape photography & merged them with critical environmental concerns.  Almost all of his work engages & troubles me with its paradoxical beauty & ugliness.  He's 'swallowed' & transformed the styles & concerns of both AAdams & the New Topographers:  formal beauty linked, now, with disturbing content.  

Kirk
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #12 on: July 07, 2007, 08:25:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I would understand a complaint about a photography site being overtaken with political prosteletizing if that were the case here, but wmchauncey seems to have taken offense at what amounts to a brief description of the content and theme of the show.  I'm rather surprised that a person of any political persuasion or any degree of confidence in the veracity of science would object to such an inert statement, taken straight from the films website.

I like Burtynsky's photos and find a number of his images to be quite extraordinary.  As big prints, I could see them having a similar impact to some of Andreas Gursky's work.  Much of what makes them stand out, though, is not the technical proficiency or interpretive nature of them, but the remarkable subject matter.  I don't mean to demean them because of that, and have to give the photographer a lot of credit for finding and choosing this subject matter, but it means that it is even more entwined with it's theme as a result. 

There is a clinical reportage feel to many of the images and I think that Burtinsky seems to have made a deliberate attempt to not call attention to himself in this work.  In a sense, then, when you deny the gravity of the content, you look past much of what makes this special.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126790\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Oh man, why did you have to go blow it by making reference to Gursky? Big is better (not your claim, perhaps, I can´t quite decide)! How interesting and convenient: big pic magically equates with big bucks!

But then again, perhaps I´m in a minority of one; posibly, just possibly, big pics of dull buildings might really have a charm that I fail to see... Some years ago, the 70s as I recall, the Tate Gallery in London paid ten thousand pounds for a pile of bricks.

Sharks and sheep in formaldehyde also come to mind - funny, what?

Beware whom you praise as an example of artist!

Ciao - Rob C
Logged

Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 974


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 07, 2007, 07:53:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Oh man, why did you have to go blow it by making reference to Gursky? Big is better (not your claim, perhaps, I can´t quite decide)! How interesting and convenient: big pic magically equates with big bucks!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126982\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm not really interested in the money aspect of either photographer's work, although the size and cost are obviously intertwined.  

For my $0.02, though, I think that Gursky's work is more impactful when you are standing in front of one of those monumental prints, and while he has certainly gained notoriety from their scale, it is not just about bigness.  I don't think I would find a wallet size print of his as engaging, but it is not size alone that gives it interest.  The large print allows the viewer to peer into the minutia, without giving up the broader composition.  

Both photographers have a way of finding subtle patterns and textures in the mundane and somehow, paradoxically, they find beauty in banal human creations.  What they seem to do, in my eye, is romanticize without using any of the tricks of traditional romanticism.  In both photographer's work, the sum is greater than the parts.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2007, 07:57:24 PM by Colorwave » Logged

thompsonkirk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


WWW
« Reply #14 on: July 07, 2007, 09:57:56 PM »
ReplyReply

"Both photographers have a way of finding subtle patterns and textures in the mundane and somehow, paradoxically, they find beauty in banal human creations. What they seem to do, in my eye, is romanticize without using any of the tricks of traditional romanticism. In both photographer's work, the sum is greater than the parts."

IMO your 2 cents are right 'on the money.'

Large prints do have an effect of their own - there's an amazing difference between the effect on the viewer of a little print that you can hold in your hand, and one that puts you in your place: the small print is 'subordinate' to you, & the large one really 'dominates' you.  

Bigness may be a fad, but it's a possibility with real potential if the images call for it & the subject matter and image-organization were conceived that way.  Large prints & murals  used to look kind of tacky, because of technical degradation; but now the high quality prints can be made from view-camera scans in large sizes.   It's not just a fad, it's an important development that changes the relationship of the viewer with the image.  

It also makes life a bit harder for ordinary artists-with-day-jobs who don't have ready access to a 44" printer.  

It seems to me that Burtynsky's newer China work - more recent, that is, than the dam work - is much closer in conception, patterning, & effect to Gursky than his earlier work was.  I don't think this is a 'mistake,' just a development - I like both versions.

Kirk
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #15 on: July 08, 2007, 06:50:37 AM »
ReplyReply

´It also makes life a bit harder for ordinary artists-with-day-jobs who don´t have ready access to a 44" printer.´

This may well be true - no, it certainly is true, but I don´t see that disadvantaging one set of people validates another person´s aesthetic stance.

I´m afraid that we are very much indeed talking about the relationship between size and bucks per square foot! That´s exactly the ethic which allows corporate buyers to throw cash at otherwise unremarkable work. The name of the size game is impact. Impact does not have to equate with quality and possibly doesn´t do so  very often.

This game of public relations impact has gone on for as long as I can remember. I fell into the same trap myself many years ago when I bought my first Hasselblad which ended up useful to me only in the studio with electronic lights because of the impossibility of working hand-held and mirror-up with models. The Rollei that it replaced, on the other hand, had no vibration problems at all and allowed hand-held work outdoors too; the 150 Sonnar that I used for head shots in the studio was not as ´nice´ as the 180 on the Mamiya TLR that it had elbowed aside. But the ad agency people I was trying to impress loved it and imagined I was a better photographer because I owned the gear. I would suggest that the 8"x10" camera art movement is singing to exactly the same hymn sheet.

But there you are, it all makes the world go around and some make a fortune whilst others shrivel and die.

Ciao - Rob C
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad