[Leica] Portfolio rant part 2c

[Mike Johnston <michaeljohnston@ameritech.net>]

[CONTINUED....]


Here's where I'd like to introduce the idea of consistent dissonance. It's
basically this: things can be as disparate as you want, as long as
everything has more or less the same degree of separation from everything
else. Let me make the case using a simple, mechanical example. Let's say
you're going to crop your prints. And, in every single case, you crop to a
different rectangle. That works, because the proportion of the pictures are
_all_ different. But then let's say that out of 17 pictures, you present 16
that have the same 35mm aspect ratio of 2 to 3, and one that's square. Well,
the square picture sticks out, doesn't it? It doesn't fit the group. In the
group where everything is different, the square would fit right in. In the
latter case, you establish a base, an expectation, and then go against it:
inconsistent dissonance.

It's the same way with very different pictures in a portfolio. If you decide
that your work is all over the map, you can actually work with that--as long
as you keep the dissonance between all the pictures more or less equivalent.
I've seen strong portfolios built up from pictures that are all different
genres, even that are all different techniques--and that can actually work.
But if your portfolio has one gum print, one platinum print, one lith print,
and so forth on through all the alternative processes, you can't get away
with including three similar cyanotypes of flowers. You can get away with
using _one_ of them, because that's consistent with the differences you're
establishing. But not three.

The academic portfolio idea--the conceit of the "body of work" (which almost
never is, but that's another story)--is that there can _be_ no dissonance at
all from picture to picture--all the pictures have to be uniformly
consistent with each other. That's nonsense. It just has to be proportional,
consistent, aptly judged--well modulated.

Well then...I haven't even talked about methods of presentation and the
psychological pitfalls of getting the final work done (there are some, as
people who have actually gotten that far will probably agree). Looks like
the disquisition will have to go to a Part 3. More to follow in a few days.

- --Mike