|
L/C: Could you please start by giving an overview of yourself and your practice? M.G: ...Well, let's see. I came into photography at a very early age and was lucky to have a parent, my father, who was a hobby photographer, and was able to teach me the fundamentals of photo processing and printing. We also had space in our home to set up a darkroom, and there was already an enlarger that my father had so I was able to work in the darkroom right from the start. This would have been in the late 70's, so everything was still completely analogue and hands on. I guess I just found the process really engaging, so I got hooked right away. The idea of becoming a professional artist back then, coming from Vancouver (this was, you know, when the whole Vancouver school was better known outside of Canada and was still gaining currency) really wasn't a practical goal, so at the time I considered taking a more commercial approach to photography. But that just didn't fit my personality so I quit that very quickly. At that point it seemed that photography, or art, would be something that I did for myself, on my own terms. It wasn't until the late 90's that I began to take photography more seriously as a vocation and got involved with other artists and began to become familiar with and meet some of the successful artists that were now established and living in Vancouver. It now became apparent that an art career was a possibility. I was introduced to Roy Arden, who happened to be my neighbour and he took an interest in what I was doing. Through his acquaintance I met the current Manager at Jeff Wall's studio and was brought in to do some small jobs, not related to production at all. Eventually I began to work on actual productions, my first one being 'In front of a nightclub'. This turned out to be a good fit and led to becoming a full time employee at the studio. That combined with my skills as a film processor and printer meant that there was a lot I could do at the studio. So, just dumb luck! Actually Jeff was lucky to find me, haha. So, in the end most of my art career choices have really been accidental I'm afraid to say. As for the work I do on set, although I am able to contribute ideas for the completion, Jeff, in his very meticulous method of production, generally makes all of the decisions as far as design and details are concerned. I do find, however, the work on sets to be one of my favorite jobs at the studio. There's something about doing that kind of close up work, with its necessary precision and yet lack of it that is incredibly satisfying.
L/C: Many sources declare that you use both digital and traditional photographic processes; what quality do you find in traditional photography that might not exist when taking a more modern approach?
M.G: When I first started making photos I was more interested in straight photography and my concern was to achieve technical perfection, with an emphasis on detail and finishing. I guess it must have been the use of digital technologies that got me moving in the other direction. It seemed like one could take advantage of the pixelization and noise that was common in the earlier generation of digital cameras. The look just attracted me and so I stopped worrying about high resolution. It may be that seeing a lot of the newer high res pictures that were later coming out I was inclined to do the opposite. Maybe, also, working with Jeff and his strict attention to detail and clarity influenced this choice as well, to do something different and go in the opposite direction from what I was surrounded by. I still shoot with an older model camera, it's a point and shoot. I love its portability, and its ease of use and its outdated picture quality, when Iphones are so sophisticated and high quality. Is it ironic to use an outdated up to date technology? Hmmm... The combined digital/film work that I'm practicing now is all shot originally on digital and then, sometimes, made into a film negative of which I can make a traditional print from. I do this, one for convenience because it allows me to do large scale works, but also because I like the combined elements of the digital pixelation having a layer of actual film grain over it. There is something unique about this method that I don't think can be achieved through strictly digital ways, such as photoshop, etc. It 'warms' the picture up, and to me, lends the image a more painterly look, which removes it even further from straight photography. Perhaps there may be an element of nostalgia for me as well. I still get a kick out of working in the darkroom. There is still something quite beautiful and satisfying about an actual darkroom print. I think this is probably why I still do mainly black and white pictures. I've always just been drawn to it. Aesthetically and emotionally.
L/C: The vast majority of your work is black and white, what pushes you to use colour in some of your work and create a mix of techniques such as in your series number Five?
M.G: There's no reason why the selection of photos on the page you mentioned are either black and white or colour, it just happened that way. At the time I was shooting more colour work. Though I have to admit, these days I do find I have to really feel that to do a colour picture there has to be a good reason for it. I almost always default to b&w now.
L/C: Finally, what advice would you give to art students who are currently struggling with finding their “style”?
M.G: How do you find your style? I'm not sure, but it may be that, in the end, it finds you.
|
