攝影術(shù)是為著記錄客觀真實(shí)的目的而發(fā)明的，但在使用這個媒介，尤其是用它作為藝術(shù)表現(xiàn)的媒介時，卻首先會發(fā)現(xiàn)攝影并不完全是客觀真實(shí)的記錄手段。攝影只能框取天上人間大千世界中一定寬和一定長的某個局部，這既是它的局限又使得它因此能強(qiáng)調(diào)某一部分景物的重要性及其隱含的寓意;攝影只能定格流動著的時間中的一瞬，但它使這一瞬變成了永恒。黑白攝影是不真實(shí)的，但它又使繽紛的五彩世界抽象地轉(zhuǎn)化為黑白灰，呈現(xiàn)給我們一個異樣的世界，給我們一份驚喜。
攝影的不真實(shí)不僅由于技術(shù)層面上的原因，更多的還因?yàn)槲覀兣臄z時的主觀選擇。當(dāng)我們舉起照像機(jī)試圖去拍攝一個場景的時候，我們肯定是在運(yùn)用某一種觀念在指導(dǎo)我們的手指，否則我們?yōu)槭裁磿χ@一個場景而不是另一個場景，是在這一瞬間而不是在另一瞬間按下快門?即使是毫無目的的拍攝，也隱藏著某種觀念，也許旨在表明“我們的主觀選擇是錯誤的，我們要拋棄它”這樣一種觀念。只要是攝影就離不開選擇，而所有的選擇都是跟我們的主觀有關(guān)聯(lián)的，都是為某種觀念所引導(dǎo)，從這個意義上來說，所有的攝影都是觀念攝影，都帶著不真實(shí)的主觀的以至于強(qiáng)迫的色彩。反過來講，再怎么觀念的作品，都是用照像機(jī)和膠片在記錄下某種設(shè)定的場景，或者是從生活中截取的一個片斷，即使改頭換面到難以辨認(rèn)的程度，它總是客觀生活的一個翻版和記錄，從這個意義上來說，所有的攝影包括我們現(xiàn)在所指的觀念攝影都是帶有某種記錄性的。只不過為了討論問題的方便起見，我們把攝影用并不精確的詞語作了分類，分成紀(jì)實(shí)攝影、觀念攝影等等，這是我們所使用的語言的缺陷，而在我們思考問題的時候，是絕對不能把兩者截然分開，甚至相互對立。正是攝影的這種將客觀記錄和主觀選擇結(jié)合在一起的既矛盾又統(tǒng)一的特征加強(qiáng)了攝影作品的表現(xiàn)力度。我們借此或直截了當(dāng)或曲折含蓄地表達(dá)了那些雖然用語言等其它媒介也能表達(dá)但不夠全面，或者根本無法用語言來傳達(dá)的思想、觀念和情感，這就是攝影的力量所在。
攝影作品的尺寸原本不必專門提出來討論，小幅精致，大幅氣派，蘿卜青菜各有所好。但當(dāng)代藝術(shù)的發(fā)展使得攝影作品的尺寸不僅是大小問題，而且已成為某種美學(xué)問題，這就值得我們關(guān)注了。現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)中照片的尺寸越來越大，這多少是被大型的藝術(shù)展覽給逼出來的，因?yàn)樵?0世紀(jì)六、七十年代以前，大部分的攝影作品是在所謂的攝影沙龍里展出，規(guī)模小，觀眾也很陶醉于小幅作品精致的影調(diào)表現(xiàn);再者，手工制作大型作品的難度很大，尤其對于大部分不諳此道的藝術(shù)家來說更是如此。20世紀(jì)六、七十年代以后，以攝影為媒介的藝術(shù)作品大量進(jìn)入美術(shù)館，面對美術(shù)博物館巨大的墻壁和在同一個空間里展出的巨幅繪畫、裝置和雕塑作品，攝影作品迫切需要擴(kuò)大它的體量。在八、九十年代以后，隨著數(shù)碼打印技術(shù)的發(fā)展，印制大幅照片已經(jīng)成為輕而易舉的事情，作品的尺寸驟然膨脹。當(dāng)作品做大不成問題的時候，具體做到多大，什么樣的圖像質(zhì)量能為人接受便成了問題。
有一部分藝術(shù)家不在乎傳統(tǒng)意義上的圖像質(zhì)量，或者雖然在乎但能力有限無法兼顧，可以說這樣的圖像是被“撐大”的，但這批作品只要寓意深刻都已經(jīng)被默認(rèn)了;另有一部分藝術(shù)家堅(jiān)持使用大型相機(jī)，較大的底片尺寸使得照片即使在二三米以上也有傳統(tǒng)意義上的影像質(zhì)量，如Jeff Wall, Andreas Gursky, Thomas Ruff的作品，并發(fā)展出一種新的攝影語言：即“預(yù)先設(shè)想”這樣的作品是在一個大的展覽空間里以大尺幅的形式為觀眾所觀看，照片上所有的細(xì)節(jié)都會被依次看到，因而這樣的照片在拍攝當(dāng)初就已經(jīng)考慮到最終的觀看效果。與前面一種照片被“撐大”之后的觀看效果會變差正相反，這類照片在縮小(如印刷品)時會損失很多細(xì)節(jié)，以致于影響意義的表達(dá)。如Thomas Ruff的作品在印刷品里就像一張證件照，何奇之有?但熊掌與魚不可得兼，藝術(shù)家只能選擇其一，如果說小幅照片在看過印刷質(zhì)量上乘的畫冊之后就能領(lǐng)略其大概，再看原作不會有太多的驚喜;那么大幅照片則只能看原作，相信觀眾自會有許多發(fā)現(xiàn)和心得。這既是對作者辛苦勞動的回報，又對得起參觀展覽的觀眾，否則費(fèi)時費(fèi)力，車馬勞累，大老遠(yuǎn)的跑到展覽會上去干什么?
Artist’s Statement for the exhibition
Between Past and Future-New Photography and Video from China(2004-2007)
Miao Xiaochun
Photography was invented for the purpose of recording objective truth. However, while using this medium, especially using it as a medium of artistic expression, one will discover that photography does not completely record reality. Any photograph can only depict a certain section of the world, with a certain width and a certain length. This is not to be considered solely a limitation, for it can be used to emphasize the importance of a part of the scene and its implied meanings. Photography can only record a split-second record of time; nevertheless, it makes that second eternal. A black-and-white photograph may be untruthful, but it transforms the colorful world into black, white, and gray in an abstract way, presents us with an unusual view of the world, and can bring us much joy.
Photography’s untruthfulness arises primarily from our subjective choices. When we hold up a camera to photograph a scene, it is guaranteed that some concept is guiding our fingers. Otherwise, why is this scene, and not another scene, to be photographed? Why is the shutter pushed down at this split second and not another? Even a photograph taken without any obvious purpose might express the concept that subjective choice is wrong and should be abandoned. Choice is always involved. From this perspective, all photography is conceptual photography. On the other hand, even if a photograph is a conceptual work; it still records something with camera and film. Even if the appearance is changed and it is difficult to recognize, it still records something in the world. Thus all photography, including our so-called conceptual photography, is at one level documentary. We only divide photography into inaccurate categories for the convenience of discussion; in actuality these two cannot be separated, nor are they antagonistic. Photography combines objective recording and subjective choice, which intensifies the expressive power of the work. We use this feature to either directly or indirectly express thoughts and feelings that might only be incompletely expressed by language or through some other media, or that cannot be expressed by language at all. This is the power of photography.
It may not seem necessary to discuss the size of photographic work. Small ones are delicate, large ones are striking, and each scale is unique in its own ways. But it has become an aesthetic issue that needs close attention. Today photographs are getting bigger and bigger, a phenomenon prompted in part by large exhibitions. In the 1960s and 1970s, most photographic work was displayed in so-called photography salons, where delicate photographs were appreciated and praised. Moreover, it was difficult to produce large photographs. Later a vast amount of photo-based artwork entered art galleries. With gigantic painting, installations, and sculptures displayed within vast museums, photographic work was driven to enlarge its size and volume. After the emergence of digital printing in the 1980s and 1990s, this became an easier task. All of a sudden, photographs were huge. The questions then became: how big is big, and what kind of image quality is acceptable for an audience?
Some artists do not care too much about image quality in a traditional sense, or if they do care, they do not have the ability to deal with both scale and quality. This kind of work is already accepted as long as it is meaningful. Other artists insist on using large cameras and negatives, which results in high image quality in the traditional sense even though the resulting photographs are over two or three meters. The works of Jeff Wall, Andreas Gursky, and Thomas Ruff are of this kind. A new photographic language is developed, and such photographs will probably be displayed to an audience in gigantic galleries where all their fine details can be seen. In this sense, the end result of this kind of photograph is already known while the work is still nascent. This is the exact opposite of “expanded” photographs with a poor image quality. Small reproductions of this kind of photograph will lose a lot of detail, even effect the expression of meanings. But you cannot have both, and artists need to decide which one they want. If an audience already knows the meaning of a small photograph after seeing the good-quality reproduction, then seeing the original work afterward will not bring much joy; for large photographs, it is better to see the originals. This is the return to an artist’s hard work, and also to the pleasure of being part of the audience. Otherwise, why go out of your way to see an art exhibition?
【編輯：小紅】
