KVT – Getting into the Momentum of the River’s Flow
 |   |
Australian photographer, Les Horvat, is a master in the use of digital manipulation and the photographs on show at the Bui Gallery make for interesting viewing. He is also a master in the incorporation of theatrical effects and the use of light.
Most amateur photographers will drool with envy as they wander the exhibition. So many of the landscape images are exactly like the ones they have tried to capture in that fleeting moment of ‘what a shot!’ focusing the camera and pressing the button. But no matter how hard they try it is impossible to attain the intricacies and style that Horvat adds with post production techniques and manipulations.
But then, Horvat is not aiming to get just any landscape photo. His purpose is to form a narrative within the landscape that adds an artistic and philosophic quotient. The photographs at Bui are fascinating reads and those who are purposeful wanderers through Vietnamese culture and landscapes will add their own texts of recognition. The actual geographical location of some images can be interchangeable with places from your own experiences and, until you read the title, you say, ‘hey, that’s part of my story.’
I can’t say that I was totally engrossed with the exhibition, perhaps because the scope was so large and the metaphoric river had a few too many tributaries to maintain its momentum, but those moments of recognition made it very worthwhile and a lot of the images are really wonderful and worth a wander to the Bui.
Horvat states that ‘landscape is anchored in human existence’ and his certainly are.
| Not a reviewer, not a critic, “Kiếm Văn Tìm” is an interested, impartial and informed observer and connoisseur of the Hanoi art scene who offers highly opinionated remarks and is part of the long and venerable tradition of anonymous correspondents. Please add your thoughts in the comment field below. |
The reviewer uses the word ‘manipulation’ twice in talking about this photographer’s work. Propaganda is another form of manipulation. This kind of photography is – to this viewer – one awful form of propaganda, one which ignores the obvious to those who have spent years here for what is obvious to those who spend weeks here.
This is slick, travel brochure photography couched in some voodoo metaphor of some nonsense river and self-apologetically justified as ‘an outsider’s perspective’. Unless you are some sort of bird attracted to shiny things, it is patently shallow and easily passed by.
It is one thing to be technically competent – this work screams at you “look how amazingly excellent at Photoshop I am” – it is quite another to have something original to offer. The last thing the tragically over-romanticized pictorial world of Vietnam needs is one more feel-good project like this.
I absolutely agree with Jamie’s opinion, but would just add that even technically, purely photoshoply speaking, this work is not anything amazing. The heavy HDR (high dynamic range) technique is often used on rather tasteless wedding shots and other car advertising pictures, visible all over flickr or other amateur / semi-pro photography websites.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/artiephotography/3513060620/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmueller/2158395487/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/peteleongphotography/2297493413/
Agreed with Mr.Graham from the post above.
In the words of a fellow photographer, all I can say is: Not this HDR garbage again!
aah… the purists!!! Are they the neo-cons of the photography world?
No, friend ‘parcifal’ – I would say we are neither purists nor neo-cons as you so inarticulately express it. What exactly is your understanding of the meaning of ‘neo-con’ and how does it apply here?
And rather than hurl petty dismissives at people who obvious care about photography – just not this photographer’s particular body of work – why not offer something constructive to the discussion? If you disagree with some assessment you read here, why not argue your point as to why we are, or I am, wrong? I am perfectly prepared to be convinced I am not right. If you see something in the work that I have overlooked, point it out to me. You seem to have a different opinion – offer it and defend it.
You lower your own standard of personal behavior and cheapen the debate by simply criticizing people from behind your avatar. I offer my name and my critique as honestly as I can. I see nothing of that from you.
The discussion is about this photographer’s work – it is not about how you see those who dont agree with it. Offer something useful beyond your own small-mindedness.
– Neo-cons always gave priority to technical before ideas
– Neo-cons love neo-postcards
– Neo-cons will call a purist the one who claims for a real involvement from the photographer
– Neo-cons don’t debate nor exchange ideas, they argue
– Neo-cons love cheesy cliches of what they arrogantly call a charming developing country
This exhibition was for me an odd mix of over photos-hoped postcards, with one or two wanna-be documentary, one or two trying to be more graphical, and the rest just being the most obvious cliches about Vietnam. And there was not any coherence between the pictures, no story, no series…