The Coral Gables Times

"Sleeping Child" Arthur Leipzig

"Fish Nets" Ken Heyman

Fine Art?

BY IVAN DMITRI Director of "Photography In The Fine Arts" Exhibits Look at the photographs on these pages and judge for yourself IF YOU ARE A STUDENT of art and you wish to see examples of the finest work produced in the past, where do you go? To the museums, of course. So, too, with prints, etchings, and drawings. Now. if a student of photography wishes to see fine photographs, where can he go? In most cities the answer is nowhere, really. Most museums haven't even got a photography department. We are aiming to correct this through The Project, as we call "Photography In The Fine Arts." We want to rouse the museum curators to the fact that the best work being done in photography deserves to be hung alongside Renoir and Picasso and Rembrandt and other masters. Incidentally, many photographers need rousing, too. This project has been a dream of mine for over 20 years. Three years ago I decided to add my efforts to the good work that has already been done, so I left my job as a working photographer. My first step, and the big one, was to gather together a committee of art experts from all over the country who agreed to judge photographs submitted by a variety of sources such as photo agencies, national magazines, and camera clubs—and PFA was launched. There have been two different touring exhibits since we began. Each year a panel of judges selects what it considers aesthetic photography, works that will stand the test of time . . . that are indeed works of art. And what makes a photograph a work of art? What qualities do all of these pictures have in common that make them worthy of being hung in museums all over the world? They were judged, first, as any other work of art would be. Form, composition, perspective, technique, movement, and emotion were some of the factors considered. But, as we know, a work of art is more than this. AS ONE JUROR put it, each one of these, when you come upon it suddenly, has such vitality that it "makes the pulse jump slightly." Each is more than just a careful record of reality—is rather an expression of a great moment, a great idea, caught forever on film. They are not all beautiful moments, although in art all that excites is beautiful. Some are tragic, some historical, some even ugly, but never aesthetically ugly. Our juries receive no instructions other than to seek out the great photographs, those inspiring this sudden shock of recognition, those that they feel will outlive their subject matter, even the memory of their subject matter. We've had plenty of opposition, often by potent influences in the field of photography. Edward Steichen, a great photographer and director of the Department of Photography at New York's Museum of Modern Art, has called our project "the most damaging thing that has ever happened to the art of photography." He has accused us of being "slipshod" in our methods of collecting photographs for our jury. We've also been attacked by some of the trade publications in the field, one of which published a story after our first exhibit opened, entitled, "The Day Photography Got Kicked In The Head." Our second exhibit is now on tour in 28 museums around the United States and in several foreign countries. We expect the storm of controversy to increase as the exhibit tours, but this can be good. We welcome all constructive criticism; we learn from it. The more people who come, who see, who talk and argue, the better. We believe that photography as a fine art must eventually be accepted by almost every museum and gallery in the world. Perhaps it will happen within the next six or seven years. And when it does, we will happily go out of business. Suburbia Today, April 1961 17