HIROTO TABATA and
ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS

Blurred line: The birth of Architectural imagery and its recognition

 
The first viable  photographic named Daguerreotype  process was introduced in Paris in January 1839 by Louis Jacques Daguerre Mande who was a Parisian stage designer as well as who had trained to be an architect. The first practical method of photography was a small (average size of 8 x 10 centimetres) silver-coated metal, “considered magical reflections of reality.” 

Dagurre’s central intention towards the photography was to find more realistic way of rendering his image of captured “in his illusionistic spectacles and the dioramas.”6 William Henry Fox Talbot followed about four months later  announced his Calotype process. The British scientist, Sir John Robinson stated the incidence in  regard to the daguerreotype process in his letter to Royal Society of Edinburgh, &c. (Communicated by the Society of Arts) that “the original, are faithfully copied in these wonderful pictures” and he declared “accurate views of architecture.”8 He stated the discovery as the new method of recording of things in its a power of capturing details which went beyond a skill of naked eyes. Because of its high accuracy of photography as a medium for recording details, the photography began to free architects from producing countless number of architectural drafting and “blundering of the eye and hand”.  The recognition of photography was surely but slowly gaining a population through a reputation hailed by Building News “veraciousness of representation … like Caeser’s wife, it can ever not be suspected” 

For instance, a construction view of Palm house (1849), the new Louvre in Paris (1855) and the Crystal place in London (1855) were good examples of contemporary buildings captured in the early decades of photography. However, at the time, the use of photography was more of recording a process of construction due to its fast disappearance of building process. This is due to architects tended to see past drawings for their references thus photos of new age wasn’t something to be referred. Since a foundation of photography was not well-grounded yet it took time to be emerged to be recognised as specific genre of architecture photography. Besides all that, the development of photography was depending on various types of patronage as well as by counterpointing notions of medium’s role such as artistic, commercial and utilitarian, “that helped to determine not only what was photographed but also how it photographed”.

Ever since architecture photography was introduced, in the early stage, photographers were using examples from architectural drawings particularly for the elevation and perspective views. 

Manipulations: A history of being photogenic has afflicted architect’s imagination

" <...> the architectural photograph has come under increasingly intense attack for forcing “architecture into a straitjacket. the straitjacket go being photogenic, or at least comprehensible through photographers." -Robert Elwall 

After one and half century since photograph was regarded as a representational medium of architecture, arguably there has always been a close relationship between architect and architectural photographs however "The symbiotic relationship between photographers and architects at the time had a lot more meaning than just the photographers being used for marketing," said Redstone, the curator of the exhibition at the Barbican Centre which focused on exploring of how photographers have shaped public perceptions of architecture over the past century. 

In a social norm, prominent architects work had always captured by personal photographer such as Le Corbusier, for example, had a strong relationship with Lucien Hervé and stated that "You really have the soul of an architect" and worked closely with him for over two decades, Luigi Ghirri and Aldo Rossi, and Frank Gary and Pedro E. Guerrero. “<…> the work of Zaha Hadid is not in some way influenced by the photography of Hélène Binet.” The relationship had been a place to constantly challenge one another to inspire to produce another creativity, “Architects who have grasped the value of photography owe it many an idea or inspiration” says Giebelhausne. 

On the other hand, it seems that the meaning of architects working with photography has changed through out the decades. Practically, “photography is everywhere”, thus it is almost impossible not to see architectural photography, especially who involve themselves in the field of architecture. Therefore, architectural imaginary nowadays seems to takes up an imagination of young architects or architecture students and it is instilling in their mind of architecture to achieve their design to be ‘photogenic’. “A control of lens (photography) surely influence architecture (architects). The defensive stance against ‘to be photogenic’ makes architecture (architect) as if they were a fashion model”.  

Where have all the people gone?: 

 
The sterilizing of human existence on architectural photography Flick through any architecture magazine, or browsing any online architectural reviews, there is most likely an architecture stands there by itself as if they were a fashion model, and it is beautifully layered with nice tone and smoothed surface. However, besides a superficial aesthetic of its architecture, there seem to be no life being expected to happen. To borrow a word of Barthes, they are alas, inert and polite, they have no punctum.

In the history of architectural photography, an existence of human has always been kept out of architectural photography and it has been a controversial whether or not people. “Human figure may have a negative and positive effect on scene”, Schulz argues. Most of the cases, an absence of human existence is strictly prohibited or tactically setup. It tends to be believed that architectural photography works the best when there is no presence of people. It is to eliminate a distractive attention of human figure and to lead eyes straight onto architecture, which is to focus on a main subject, however, architecture completes with a presence of people. Or Architecture is for people, people and their habitation, a coexisting is the main subject of architectural photography. “Architecture creates a link between people and people” Otherwise, like, Elwall argues Architecture ends up being only photogenic as if it were built for photography, not for people.  

Photography is an effectively a technique to capture an existing moment of architecture and its aesthetic as a spatial quality, visual and material value of the architecture. Therefore, an images of the architecture should be the most realistic representational which can provide readers a high realistic sensation. Most of photographers tend not to see where it ends. Pressing a button on a camera does not deliver and define architect’s thoughts and its responsibility to the digital screen or any other mediums, architecture sits in the environment as a public art and the presence must reflect a life of events, not only purely extracted shiny surface of its design. In the past it was used for a specific purpose for advertised area. However, the radical statement of architectural photography today has lost its own essential part and it has become a commercial in nature. While the internet is a key infrastructure in making knowledge globally available, it accelerates a hypnotizing an image of architecture photography. As Joan Fontcubeta states “We are surrounded by the capitalism of images and excess that, more than just plunging us into suffocating world of consumption, confronts us with the political capability of dismissing, reducing, or ensuring them”.  This is probably not a new trend as there is a story of Lucien Herve in a collaboration with Le Corbusier for Marseille Unite d’Habitation. Herve brought back 650 photographs which was depicting a harmonious coexistence of photography and architecture, however, it was refused to be published in France Illustration due to its lacking of revelation of trendy controversy whereas while Corbusier enthusiastically appreciated Herve. 

Essence of reality: Introducing a people’s habitation on architectural photography

American Architectural photographer, Julius Shulman is known for his work The Stahl House, Case Study House #22. Julius Shulman's architectural photography presented another avenue and provided a clear path through to an expression on the photograph of places and people. Shulman's work revealed an essential part of architecture, building is for the people and his photograph sold a lifestyle to the world. The 20th century architects, Frank Lloyd Wright and Mies Van der Rohe and others commissioned Shulman for their representational architectural image of their architecture. 

He is also known that he gave very sensitive direction to locate interiors, where to locate flash lights and the lightings and even what models should wear or where they should stand. Shulman states his lighting method that "The subtle interplay of light and shadow on a building is "paint" an architectural photographer uses on his canvas of film."44 It can be argued that a house is a stage of living for people, therefore,  to set up or  render (mise en scène) a photography like Shulman represents a history of western architecture history since their history of  performing arts and architecture has a close relationship. Shulman often involved models, his friends, inhabitants in his architecture photograph in order to achieve a drama of life to be true rather than simply showing a brutal photogenic object by itself. "Empty buildings are not for Shulman"  writes Bainbridge. 

In terms of providing a reality through rendered image like, a Shulman’s The Stahl House, Case Study House #22 might bring a controversial over whether it is a realism or a fiction. However, what exposes a reality of human is the photograph which captured the decisive moment and be documented as a documentary or a snapshot. Inserting people on the architectural photography blurs a border line between the realism, snapshots and setup rendered image, in another word, it blurs a border between a documentary and a fiction. An appearance of man renders another perspective to architectural space and its atmosphere. Man’s motion, man’s action and man’s visual line brings another will to the photograph. Man’s appearance itself indicates the presence of will. There happens to be another story whilst architecture itself seems to have one immovable story.  

Exposed life: capturing a raw relationship with architecture and human habitation 

 While Shulman was establishing his way of approaching to a relationship between people and architecture, William Klein was pursuing another vision towards the relationship between places and people through his lens. 

 “I used photography to see what I could do to shake up representational, realistic photography because there was no real experimentation in that area like what was happing in the other art”.

 Klein is known for his no taboos photographic technique of grain, contrast, blur, decomposition, accidents, "whatever happens." Klein was not intentionally shooting architecture or people itself in the city of New York, however, Klein's work on NEW YORK represents a real condition of the relationship between places and people. (236-237, A monster Third Avenue Elevated subway station) Klein comments " The El, an achievement when built, had become a headache and eyesore. Within more or less liveable Manhattan it was torn down. It's still up, however, in Harlem, the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens." William Klein represents a local habitants in a city and he portrays the irrelevant moments which extracts the mystery of the city as a series of vibrant moments, "it was more like, a slap in the face. Hamilton argues that Klein's NEW YORK is not an ordinary travel picture book which shows a colour those who wanted to see the city in all its glory."54 In fact, NEW YORK was only published in France and it was never published in the States until 1995. 

 John Szarkowski argues that Klein's photography twenty years ago was way beyond standards, therefore it was not easy to understand. However, it expanded a language of photography in its representation what a reality of life can look like. “If you look carefully at life, you see blur. shake your hand. Blur is a part of life.”   

“If you look carefully at life, you see blur. shake your hand. Blur is a part of life.”  

Role of photographer: forming a raw sensitivity without a standard 

Today, an architecture criticism never happens without an architectural photograph. Therefore what promotes architecture is surely the photography and it is the most influential medium. "

<...> exposure to the public is a sensitive matter and frequently the dividends are significant."

 To speak a role of architectural photography in a simple term, it should provide readers a condensed information. Which means to have a striking imagery is the most influential. Brad Yendle, an art director of Architects Journal writes in his response to an article 'Where have all the people gone" that there are many cases why those architecture photographs end up being empty. However, most of the times, main reason can be because it looks less messy or to avoid the space being imagined small. In another case is that photographers may want to sell it to other publishers. 

Architect, Herman Hertzberger criticizes a flattened standard of conventional architectural photography being “cut off from life and unpeopled”.  Elwall, in the discussion of Dutch photographer Johan Van Der Keuken's work, in his book “Building with Light, Elwall states that “pleaded for photography to concentrate on the ‘habitable space between things…to where ordinary day to day lives are lead…’”. Elwall comments on Keuken’s work, that this “new sensibility” is “well seen” .  

Shulman argues that photographer's responsibility is to "show it the way it is" and regardless the weather and other things, photographer should accept the condition and carry on, just take photographs. He also argues that "the photograph would not necessarily be of the value towards projecting the architect's design intention."