Skip to main content

Edward Burtynsky

 1. Initially, I was in awe of the wide, "zoomed out" shots that characterize much of Burtynsky's work, as well as curious as to what they were. It was often hard to discern the patterns and realize that they were actual landforms, but the focus on patterns is what makes his work so successful. It really puts into perspective how small and uniform our manmade landscape can be.Edward Burtynsky | Ivey Business School


2. I would categorize Burtynsky's work as aerial landscape photography. His focus tends to be shots of a natural environment, changed by humanity in some way, but taken from a bird's eye perspective or from far away to capture all of the subject.


Edward Burtynsky - Water - Exhibitions - Sundaram Tagore Gallery

3. Tom Hegen is also an aerial landscape photographer. Much like Burtynsky, his purpose is to expose human impact on nature through photography, utilizing repeating patterns in landforms. I enjoy both of their works, because it brings awareness to the global impacts of humans, more specifically, industrialization, urbanization, etc.

Hegen                                      Burtynsky

Tom Hegen's Aerial Photography Captures Spanish Olive Groves on Rollin...Edward Burtynsky | Flowers Gallery

4. I believe that if someone remade Burtynsky's work today, it would be much the same, as his work already focuses on the modern issue of climate change and general human impact on Earth. More advanced technology would likely be utilized to capture higher-quality photos.

5. I agree with Burtyensky's quote, and I think he does well to reflect his desire to connect with and make an effort to preserve nature through his work, just by bringing awareness to the fact that humanity as a whole is destroying it.


Edward Burtynsky - Arthur Roger Gallery

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Michael Kenna

 1. I immediately fell in love with Kenna's work when I first saw it, because it is simple and yet stark. I love the mysterious and sometimes a little spooky energy it has due to the shots being in black and white. His work has a peaceful, almost nostalgic energy due to the long exposure that makes it feel like the viewer has been suspended alone in time and space. 2. Michael Kenna is a monochromatic landscape photographer. He often finds simple objects, natural and manmade, and captures them in a way that makes them stand out, despite (and perhaps because of) being in shades of gray, black, and white. 3. Michael Kenna and Ansel Adams both captured the beauty of black and white landscapes, utilizing the contrast between light and dark to emphasize certain elements of their photos. Adams gravitates towards impressive, sprawling landscapes in places like Yellowstone National Park, or Yosemite, while each of Kenna's photos tends to focus on one complete subject, like a tree, rathe...

Josef Sudek

1 . The work is calming and a little whimsical. In my opinion, it perfectly captures the calm after the storm and the beauty in abandonment/isolation. The shots have a beautiful, dark gray aesthetic, which I enjoy a lot. 2.  Sudek's work is classified as neo-romantic, but if I had to categorize it I would say it is melancholy life photography, just based on the gray tones, solitary objects, and places relatively void of bustling city life/people, etc. 3.  Fan Ho and Josef Sudek have some similar shots in the way they capture rays of soft sunlight filtering between buildings/architectural structures, as shown below. Sudek has less work featuring this motif, but Ho often focuses on that. Overall, I prefer Fan Ho, but between the photos shown below, I enjoy Sudek's more. 4. If someone made Sudek's work today, it would more heavily focus on ruination and abandonment, really honing in on the decline of our world in terms of the current conflicts and division we face globally. 5...

David LaChapelle

1. The only way I can describe my initial reaction to LaChapelle's work is "weirded out". His work is of good quality and it's compositionally interesting, but it's incredibly bizarre, and just not the type of art I typically enjoy. 2. David LaChapelle is a commercial photographer because he photographs mainly celebrities for magazines to promote their image and allow the magazine to profit. 3. Marino Testino's portraits of celebrities are very tame compared to LaChapelle's. He has also worked for popular magazines such as Vogue and Vanity Fair, but his images follow the mainstream: they capture celebrities in all their glory and glamour, perhaps adding a bold feauture or two. LaChapelle, on the other hand, magnifies the bold features and makes them the theme of his work. I'm not a huge fan of either of their works, but I don't hate them, either. There is clear craftsmanship involved for each, and I respect that, even if LaChapelle's is a litt...