In my opinion photography is able to go beyond the photocopying of the world. Of course I'm not trying to belittle the ability of the photography to transform the world and to create your own illusory world based on the reality. Yet there is plagiarism at the heart of the nowadays photography. Why copy when you can create from scratch? I fully share the views of V. Kandinsky and K.Malevich in this approach. Photography does not have the same fullness of freedom as painting. As a result, it is forced to rely on real objects. Is it possible to avoid such dependence? Yes, it is!
So, if the photographer stops shooting the world, what is there going to be in the frame? Let’s remember that the word photography translated from Greek means light painting. If you focus on this definition, it becomes obvious that the photo can be based particularly on light and be free of objects. This is a chance to independence and creativity free from the outside world, from its material, cultural, political and other influence, subject to continuous change. This approach provides a certain sterility, purity and even louder – an absoluteness of the light-based photography, which helps to gain only creative goals. Light reborns from a means into a unique object.
There may be an impression that light-based photography just copies the random behavioral variations of light. That’s not true. There is the creative component that comes to the forefront. Photo artist draws with the help of light in space, he selects “brush” color and type, strokes form, their intensity, etc. Such photo artist is a real photographer, creating his pictures directly from the light. It is this self-expression in the photos I have been associated as free from mirroring, the true.
Photo paper, wood board