The reintegration into visual culture of archive images#1

I'll start a series of about 5 posts in which I will explain and exemplify the photograph as document

The need to recontextualize some banal, family-like images in new works of art is fixed in the idea of working with photography as a document. 

In 1998,  Roy Arden  wrote a nice text about vernacular photography. Here it is a fragment

The source of much of the confusion around photography's status as art steems from the binary opposition of art vs. document, which formed almost immediately after the medium's invention. It was the instrumental potential of photography that was perceived as a threat to its candidacy as an art medium. In order to make the case for photography as art early pictorialists insisted on pictures which either mimicked academic painting or frustrated the documentary capacity of the photograph with stylistic techniques such as blurring. The illusion was destined to fade, and even Stieglitz (one of the most important pictorialists) eventually came to regard the movement as a failure.

Today the photos that have the most credibility as art are those which set out to depict the world in the manner for which the camera was designed. The camera is itself the fruit of centuries of experiment in paint and pencil, with the laws of perspective and other problems of representation.

In the next post I'll write about realism and documentary photography.

This post was the teaser of the series. That's why it's so short :)

In my Hello Steemit post I attached some archive images found in a flea market

link to the post - https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@mekas92/hello-steemit

With those images I made a series of collages. I tried to decontextualize what I found by looking at images and recreating another story. 

How we understand today inter-family relationships and especially what we can perceive from the family photos?Document or a particular aesthetic? 

 Here are some of them

Thanks for reading!