We visited the National Portrait Gallery again, this time to view the National Photographic Portrait Prize. Our assignment was to pick what we thought should be the winner, and what we thought shouldn’t have even made it into the finals.
Dichotomia by Peter Brew-Bevan, 2008I chose this portrait as my winner. It immediately caught my eye because the white bodies against the white background make it stand out. The word dichotomy means a division, or duality. This is apparent in the portrait from the different facial expressions – one looks unsure and somewhat uncomfortable, while the other appears more content and almost devious.
Also, the mischievous left hand side is clutching 3 paint brushes in a hold that makes them stick out, seeming dangerous, like claws. The more submissive right side has his finger to his mouth, adding to his uncertain appearance, and holds the opposite’s hand hesitantly. His collar (yeah I can’t remember what these things are called…) also gives him an amusing, child-like look.
There is thought to be a certain degree of duality within a person - the devilish wild side, compared to the more straight-edged overall good side, and I think this portrait represents it well.
http://www.portrait.gov.au/exhibit/nppp2/images/photos/large/36.jpg
Nina and Paul by Emma Thomson, 2008
I really got nothing out of this portrait. To me it’s tasteless, and has nothing to offer the viewer. Visually it is flat and there is nothing that jumps out at you or catches your eye. It seems very point and shoot, as if no thought has gone into how it could have been shot.
Compared to a lot of the other portraits on display I find it weak. The way the subjects are positioned doesn’t represent them well, apart from the simple fact that the man enjoys photographing the woman in unappealing poses, shirtless...
Obviously this was the portrait I chose as the one that I thought shouldn’t have made it to the finals.
http://www.portrait.gov.au/exhibit/nppp2/images/photos/large/47.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment