Upload
andy-diggle
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
1/31
The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
Andrew C Diggle
040478610
Lincoln School of Architecture
ARC3023 Dissertation
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
2/31
- 1 -
Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tvo da gloriam
Figure 1: Untitled, Milan. Developed and Printed from 35mm Film. Photograph by Author
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
3/31
- 2 -
Contents
Page 1: Acknowledgement and Frontispiece
Page 2: Contents Page
Page 3: List of Illustrations
Page 5: Chapter 1 Introduction
Page 8: Chapter 2 Optical Truth? Debates About the Optical Truth of Photography
Page 11: Chapter 3 Bernd and Hilla Becher Analogue Objectivity
Page 15: Chapter 4 Thomas Demand Constructed Realities
Page 19: Chapter 5 Josef Schulz Digital Subjectivity
Page 22: Chapter 6 Optical Truth and Architecture
Page 25: Chapter 7 Conclusion
Page 26 : Recommendations for Further Research
Page 27: Appendix 1
Page 28: Bibliography
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
4/31
- 3 -
List of Illustrations
Figure 1: Untitled, Milan. 1
[Source: Photograph By Andrew Diggle (2004)]
Figure 2: The Camera Obscura, 1646 8
[Source: Beatriz Colomina, Privacy and Publicity.
Modern Architecture as Mass Media. (Cambridge MA,
MIT Press. 1999), 79]
Figure 3: Bernd & Hilla Becher, Neville Island, Pennsylvania,
USA 1980. 11
[Source: Michael Mack, Reconstructing Space: Architecture
in Recent German Photography. (London, Architectural
Association, 1999), 40]
Figure 4: Bernd & Hilla Becher, Cleveland, Ohio, USA, 1980. 11
[Source: Michael Mack, Reconstructing Space: Architecture
in Recent German Photography. (London, Architectural
Association, 1999), 41]
Figure 5: Bernd & Hilla Becher, Industrial facades 12
[Source: Michael Mack, Reconstructing Space: Architecture
in Recent German Photography. (London, Architectural
Association, 1999), 33]
Figure 6: Thomas Demand Draughting Room 15
[Source: Colomina and Kluge, Thomas Demand. (London
Serpentine Gallery, 2006), 74]
Figure 7: Thomas Demands 2006 exhibition at the Serpentine Gallery 17
[Source: Colomina and Kluge, Thomas Demand. (London,
Serpentine Gallery, 2006), 126]
Figure 8: Josef Schulz, Form#10, 2004. 19
[Source: William Ewing et al. reGeneration. 50
Photographers of Tomorrow 2005-2025. (London, Thames
& Hudson, 2005) 173]
Figure 9: Josef Schulz, Brick, 2003. 19
[Source: William Ewing et al. reGeneration. 50
Photographers of Tomorrow 2005-2025. (London, Thames
& Hudson, 2005) 174]
Figure 10: German Pavilion, Barcelona, Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe 23
[Source: Stelljes Bau. Online Portfolio.
http://www.stelljes-bau.de/gl_image_19.htm
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
5/31
- 4 -
Accessed: 26.01.2007 01.14am.]
Figure 11: German Pavilion, Barcelona, Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe 23
[Source: Stelljes Bau. Online Portfolio.
http://www.stelljes-bau.de/gl_image_20.htm
Accessed: 26.01.2007 01.16am.]
Figure 12: Administration Building, California, Uncorrected 27
[Source: Julius Schulman, Photographing Architecture
and Interiors. (Los Angeles, Balcony Press (2000) 28]
Figure 13: Administration Building, California, Corrected 27
[Source: Julius Schulman, Photographing Architecture
and Interiors. (Los Angeles, Balcony Press (2000) 28]
Figure 14: First Methodist Church, California. Wide angle view 27
[Source: Julius Schulman, Photographing Architecture
and Interiors. (Los Angeles, Balcony Press (2000) 57]
Figure 15: First Methodist Church, California. Normal angle view. 27
[Source: Julius Schulman, Photographing Architecture
and Interiors. (Los Angeles, Balcony Press (2000) 57]
Figure 16: First Methodist Church, California. Narrow angle view. 27
[Source: Julius Schulman, Photographing Architecture
and Interiors. (Los Angeles, Balcony Press (2000) 56]
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
6/31
- 5 -
Chapter 1
Introduction
This thesis commenced with my looking into the relationship between architecture and its photographic
representation. As my study progressed the notion of the optical truth status of photography started to
play a larger role in the research I was conducting. I saw that truth was something that had been
discussed a great deal in literature, particularly in relation to photography. This is primarily because of a
fundamental paradox in photography between image and reality, but more recently the debate has re-
emerged due to digital imaging technologies and the supposed threat they pose to the photographic
truth.
This is a key time for the photographic representation of architecture, whose history was only created
less than three decades ago. This creation of history coincided with the restructuring of knowledge
commonly termed postmodernism and the subsequent admission of photography into art galleries and
museums, collectively known as the exhibition space (Crimp in Wells, 2003: 424; Krauss, 1989: 134).
It could be said that as photography gained its licence as art, it simultaneously gained a history. It is
important to note the extent to which the technology of photography has played a part in the
development of society and culture since its inception. This is impossible to accurately describe, but
Sarah Kember reasonably states that like any other form of technology it has neither determined or
been wholly determined by wider cultural forces, but it has had a part to play in the history of how
societies and individuals represent and understand themselves and others (Kember in Wells, 2003:
206).
The importance of photography in relation to architecture is increasing and there has been a notable
shift in the way that we learn, think about and experience architecture since its involvement with the
mass media. Clare Zimmerman suggests that architecture is dependent upon photography so much so
that it has become an internalised habit of the discipline, to use photographs when speaking about
buildings (Zimmerman, 2004: 335). She does note however that this is based upon an assumed
distinction between architectural space and its representation in a photograph (ibid.), a distinction I feel
whose boundary has become somewhat blurred of recent times. Zimmerman also states that photographs
are remarkably poor sources for information about their architectural subjectbut only if we wish to
understand them as conduits of architectural information (Zimmerman, 2004: 332).
The modern movement was the first movement in art history, whose communication, other than that in
person, relied primarily upon photographic evidence (Colomina, 1999: 14). Previously architects had
relied upon personal experience, drawings or conventional books to communicate their ideas and learn
about architecture (ibid.) and this argument is of prime importance to this thesis. The theory, one
posited by Beatriz Colomina, examines the relationship between architecture and the media, proposing
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
7/31
- 6 -
that modern architecture is all about the mass-media image. Thats what makes it modern, rather than
the usual story about functionalism, new materials and new technologies (Colomina & Kluge, 2006:
21). This reliance has also been adopted by postmodern architects, and to a large extent has been
exacerbated by the introduction of the new discursive space of the internet. But the reliance is no
longer used to prove the honesty or truth of the building, rather the reliance now comes from the
perceived requirement of architecture to interact with the media, for reasons of commodification,
architectural history and celebration of the status quo.
These practices in turn have established canonical works, which could most readily be described as
authoritative works of architecture, which have become exemplars of modern thought. In a historical
context these works of architecture have become points of reference through which we understand the
ideas of modernity. In this context I would include photographs of Villa Savoye by Le Corbusier,
Falling Water by Frank Lloyd Wright, The Barcelona Pavilion by Mies Van der Rohe and countless other
buildings which have all been subject to a media construction.
I decided to examine the work of three architectural photographers who place their work into the context
of art. This is for several reasons; firstly I wanted to look for ways that photographers operate around
the notion of optical truth to construct an argument, and as I looked more deeply it was clear that
there were constraints placed upon commissioned architectural photographers who were bound to
communicating architectural intention; secondly, photographers who work in the field of art are free from
these constraints; and finally, in his introduction to his book Rethinking Architecture Neil Leach talks of
critiques internal to the modern project, which if heeded may have prevented its demise (Leach, 1999:
4). I see these photographs as internal critiques, beyond what many would consider to be relevant to
architecture, but nonetheless I feel that an examination of their work will provide significant results
relevant to the practise of architecture today.
The literature that has informed this thesis is broad ranging and starts with art-historical accounts of the
origins of photography to the postmodern speculations and critiques about the implications of digital
imaging. It was important to me that I thoroughly understood the origins of the optical truth status in
photography which are firmly embedded in a Cartesian conception of space, positivism and the
enlightenment. These have since been compounded by modern practices of architectural representation. It
is the reciprocation between certain modern architects and architectural publications, books and journals
that has established discursive spaces that place photographs into a heavily objectified context suggesting
their reliability as true representations of architecture.
I have been informed particularly by the work of Rosalind Krauss, Beatriz Colomina, William J Mitchell,
Douglas Crimp, Kim Dovey, Stuart Hall, Susan Sontag, Mitchell Schwarzer and Sarah Kember. Some of
these critics are specifically related to architecture and others are not, so it has been the aim of this
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
8/31
- 7 -
dissertation to apply all of their thoughts into an architectural context and consider their relevance.
Moreover it has been a matter of tying together relevant information in an attempt to trace a relationship
between the optical truth, architecture and its representation.
I agree with Hall and Gieben (Hall & Gieben, 1999) when they assert; what we mean by modern is
that each process led to the emergence of certain distinctive features or social characteristics and it is
these features which, taken together, provide us with our definition of modernity. In this sense, the
term modern does not simply mean that the phenomenon is of recent origin. It carries a certain
analytic and theoretical value, because it is related to a conceptual model (ibid.: 6). In this context
modernity is not only characterised by the canons of modern architecture although this is an
undeniable facet of modernity but is also contained within the discursive spaces, theories, and
underlying structures that have been created for and as a side effect of modernity.
All photographers herein operate within the construction of contemporary critical art, a discourse that is
allowed certain privileges and primarily operates around aesthetic discourse. This more explicitly means
that they create their work specifically to function within the gallery space. Matters of composition and
technique are discussed. The photographs operate as representations of the gallery and the status
afforded to them as Art. Whether public museum, official salon, worlds fair or official showing, the
space of exhibition was constituted in part by the continuous surface of wall a wall increasingly
structured solely for the display of art (Krauss, 1985: 132).
Through a continuum of representation that runs from analogue objectivity to digital subjectivity, I will
argue that canonical works of modern architecture were reliant upon the optical truth status of
photography to preserve the truth, precision and materiality of their buildings and to develop a growing
relationship with emerging discourses. This in turn created modern discursive spaces that are necessarily
resistant to opposition. I will further argue that postmodern thought, particularly the notions of
uncertainty and digitisation, broke the perceived causal relation between object and representation, forcing
upon the photograph and architecture the perception of subjectivity.
In the first chapter I will introduce the idea of optical truth. In the subsequent chapters I will then
discuss the work of Bernd and Hilla Becher, who uphold the modern tradition of analogue objectivity;
Thomas Demand, a postmodern photographer who opposes the notion of optical truth by photographing
constructed realities; and Josef Schulz, another postmodern photographer, who engages in digital image
manipulation to prove the subjectivity of his images. I will then look more closely at the relationship
between optical truth and architecture before concluding my argument.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
9/31
- 8 -
Chapter 2
Optical Truth? Debates About the Truth of Photography
In this chapter I aim to place the theory of optical truth into a historical and social context, looking at
some of the key arguments that have been proposed. I will suggest that the perceived truth of a
photograph is something that has been constructed through our conception of the photographic process
as objective and the way that we see the photograph as a medium to prove event occurred. I will also
consider the ramifications of digital imaging to optical truth and the possibility that photographic images
maintain a control over us through the knowledge and understanding gain from them.
The debates around the optical truth of the photograph relate to the extent to which the photograph is
an accurate representation of reality and are fed by the central paradox between reality and
representation. The classical, humanist argument is that the photograph is a transparent representation
of a real scene (Colomina, 1999: 77) and resides in the analogical paradigm of the camera obscura
(ibid.), a model informed heavily by the laws of optics, the behaviour of light and a Cartesian
conception of space (Damisch in Wells, 2003: 88). Notably, the way that light produces an image,
through the chemical reaction on the filmic plane presents this process as objective and without direct
human intervention (ibid.). Damisch defines this as being a deceit inherent in the process of
photography, but states that this is not the only deception the photographic image contains (ibid.).
Figure 2: The Camera Obscura, 1646.
Damisch argues that the camera and the photographic lens were moulded to a conception of space that
preceded photography and accordingly informed how the camera and lens should be constructed (ibid.).
This he states is a historical deceit which is far more subtle and insidious (ibid.). Damisch is of
course referring to the Cartesian conception of three-dimensional space and the sixteenth century
ordering of vision known as perspectivalism. The camera is itself a box obeying perspectival and
architectonic laws (Haus, 1997: 85). That photographs conform to these conceptions is essential to
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
10/31
- 9 -
our understanding of these images as correct, or more fundamentally, true. Any deviation away from
these conceptions would cause us to question the reality of the photograph.
In a similar vein, when we look at photographic images we refer to an ideological framework and an
existing knowledge structure to establish if the image is plausible (Mitchell, 1998: 37). We
automatically check images against what we know to be true and in doing so refer to our knowledge of
the referent. This is an automatic process of understanding and testing the credibility of the information
contained in a photographic image.
The debate about optical truth in photography can also be associated with the notion of proof; if
something is true, then it can be proven. As Susan Sontag comments in her book On Photography,
A photograph passes for incontrovertible proof that a given thing happened. The picture may distort, but
there is always a presumption that something exists, or did exist, which is like whats in the picture
(Sontag, 1979: 5). Sontag goes on to state that a photograph any photograph seems to have
an innocent and therefore more accurate, relation to visible reality than do other mimetic objects (ibid.,
6). Much of this presumed innocence stems from the parallels between the camera and the eye, just
as light passes through the lens to focus on the retina, light passes through a lens to focus on the
filmic plane.
This filmic plane is inherently different in definition to the planar constructed surface of the drawing or
painting (Berger, 1977: 8). Although they both lead to a representation, that of the constructed surface
of a drawing or painting is viewed to be inherently subjective and will at best be selectively truthful.
With emphasis being placed on composition and aesthetics, delegating the role of truthful representation
to secondary. The pictorial frame resembles both the photograph and the painting, but both modes of
representation are inherently different.
Painting is a constructive act, a process of building an image or representation with pencil lines or
brush strokes. Through this constructive act there results an image that is highly personal in character
(Mitchell, 1998: 30) constructed over a period of time and with no guarantee that the referent existed
(ibid., 29). Photography on the other hand is an act that takes place in an instant that involves a
change of states; a chemical reaction or the changing of data. With photography though there is a
causal relationship between a depiction and the object [referent] to which it refers (ibid.). In other
words, to have a photograph of something, then firstly that thing must have existed (Sontag, 1979:
5). This causal relationship is another reason why we consider photographic images to be true.
The process of digitisation appears to threaten the truth status of photography (Grundberg, 1999: 222-
229; Kember, 1998; Mitchell, 1998; Ritchin, 1990; Rosler, 2004: 259-317.). Photographs would no
longer be images that arrive by the causal relationship between the depicted and the depictions through
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
11/31
- 10 -
the mechanical, seemingly objective characteristics of light. But would become tarnished by a process
whose function we perceive in relation to digital imaging technologies could be to distort and
misrepresent (Mitchell, 1999: 7). Talking in contrast to the emulsion coated surface of the negative,
Mitchell argues the essential characteristic of digital information is that it can be manipulated easily and
very rapidly by the computer (ibid.), thus involvement in the digitisation of photographic images results
in a lack of credibility on the terms of the image (ibid.).
In his critique of the implications of new digital imaging technology In Our Own Image where he
predicts a Coming Revolution in Photography Fred Ritchin argues that the photographic attraction
resides in a visceral sense that the image mirrors realities (Ritchin: 1990: 2). He later posits that if
the truth status of the photograph were to become suddenly tenuous then we would have to re-
consider it as a system of representation (ibid. 2). He was of course stating that this was indeed
the case and that alongside many others (Kember, 1998; Mitchell, 1998; Rosler, 2004) a critical
re-evaluation of the truth status of the photograph is now required in the light of digital imaging
technologies.
Both Rosler and Kember agree with this proposed re-evaluation, but see the digital imaging technologies
merely as an exacerbation of existing concerns over the photographic real (Rosler, 2004: 259; Kember,
1998: 17) opposed to bringing about a new concern or a revolution (Ritchin, 1990: 3). There is no
doubt that digital imaging technologies have brought about new methods of manipulating photographs,
thus posing a threat to the photographic real. But the photographic real is so ingrained in our culture,
so invested in socially and psychologically that it continues to maintain a control over us in the terms
of power and knowledge and in the terms of desire and subjectivity (Kember, 1998: 18).
Kember is referring to the way photography has become part of the way we learn about the world
around us. We build up an image of the world and our situation in it, socially and historically not only
through the people we meet and the places we visit, but through the photographs we see. For
example, you may have never been to Sydney, but the likelihood is that you will be able to describe
how the Opera House looks, possibly even its situation within the harbour. Kember posits that this
amounts to a control over us in relating to us knowledge and our social relations.
I have stated that the notion of optical truth lies in the analogical paradigm of the camera obscura, and
the conceptions of Cartesian space and perspectivalism. I have also discussed the relation of proof to
the photograph and have established that photography exerts a control over us in the way we learn
about and understand our position in the world around us. I will now go on to discuss the work of
Bernd and Hilla Becher who use the optical truth status of photography in a manner so as to preserve
their buildings in a neutral and objective manner.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
12/31
- 11 -
Chapter 3
Bernd and Hilla Becher Analogue Objectivity
In this chapter I will discuss the work of Bernd and Hilla Becher in relation to the ideas of objectivity
and their technique. They are an example of photographers who uphold the modern tradition of
objectivity. I will draw relation between their work and the seventeenth century encyclopaedic project
suggesting that this is one inspiration for their prolific body of work. I will discuss how their work is
arranged and the way that could be seen to be analogous to the way architectural discourses are
formed and begin to rely upon the photograph as a representation. Finally I will consider the photograph
as a form of art.
Figure 3: Neville Island, Pennsylvania,
USA 1980.
Figure 4: Cleveland, Ohio, USA, 1980.
The photographs of the Bechers are categorically modern and operate within the rhetoric of objective and
truthful photography. They consciously employ the use of rigorous, near scientific technique to capture
their photographs, which is a modern characteristic (Mitchell, 1998: 8) inherited from the encyclopaedic
tradition. The Bechers photographs are pictures of vernacular industrial structures, blast furnaces, water
towers, cooling towers, gas tanks, and grain elevators (Schwarzer, 2004: 175) and contain a feelingof nostalgia for these remnants of the industrial era. Though this is the case, the objective front-on
position gives their photographs an artificiality like the buildings are posing form the picture (Robinson &
Herschman, 1988: introduction; Schwarzer, 2004: 175).
The Bechers photography emanates from a position opposed to the openly subjective representations of
architecture. which, more often than not, employ an oblique view of the referent for compositional and
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
13/31
- 12 -
aesthetic effect (Mack, 1999: 20). We are reminded that although the front-on method of
photography is associated with objectivity and the oblique view with a subjective representation, they are
both expressive devices (Robinson & Herschman, 1988: introduction) and as such are both valid
ways of making critical statements about architecture (ibid.).
That the Bechers employ the use of the front-on position is no surprise. Their work harks back to the
tradition of the encyclopaedic project (Marcoci, 2005: 12) which used a similar but less controlled
method of representation informed by the architectural draughting standards of the plan, section and
elevation (Lenman, 2005: 45). Emphasis here was upon the documentation of never seen before
referents for originality, rather than the recent pre-occupation with technique to make a critical statement
(Robinson & Herschman, 1988: introduction).
To help achieve clarity in their photographs, Bernd and Hilla Becher use a large format, analogue
camera, which due to its precision manufacture and large negative size can be adjusted to eliminate any
distortion through the lens (Mack, 1999: 20) and the back plate which holds the negative can also be
tilted to correct the effects of perspective (Schulman, 2000: 23). They work from a slightly raised
position to enable them to organise the picture around a central point of perspective (Mack, 1999:
20). Any corrections that they make are to keep the resulting image in direct relation to the ideas of
Cartesian space and orthographic draughting techniques. Namely, they will select the correct focal length
lens for distance between the camera and the building to eliminate any curvature of the image, and
they will also tilt the back plate so that straight lines remain parallel to each other and to the edge of
the picture plane.
Figure 5: Bernhard and Hilla Becher, Industrial facades, each 18 x 22 framed.
This link between the Bechers work and the encyclopaedic project does not end here though. Through
being photographed, something becomes part of a system of information, fitted into schemes of
classification and storage (Sontag, 1979: 156). Photography displaces architecture from its original
setting into an image-idea that can be transported (Schwarzer, 2004: 175). Consequently buildings
from different places and periods could be placed side-by-side and compared with each other (ibid.:
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
14/31
- 13 -
176). Thus the development of photography during the second half of the nineteenth century may have
contributed to the emerging field of architectural history, helping advance its arguments on both
connoisseurship and stylistic succession (ibid. 175).
The Bechers usually show the buildings they photograph as types, arraying typologically similar features
from different complexes (ibid.). This changes our reception of the images from focusing on the
relationship between composition of the faade, to a comparison of features within certain groupings
(ibid.). This comparison is primarily intended to take place within the context of the gallery which has
established for itself a discursive framework which centres around aesthetic discourse, and what
constitutes the status of Art. Rosalind Krauss argues that photographs assume a certain expectation in
the user of the image through the knowledge they communicate (Krauss, 1985: 132). In her critique
of Photographys Discursive Spaces Krauss states that the gallery wall became the signifier of
inclusion with everything that was excluded being marginalized with regard to its status as Art
(ibid.).
It follows that architectural photography has not always been considered an art. There had always been
a strong link between the architecture and its photographic representation and had quickly been
established as a classic subject matter for photographers (Robinson & Herschman, 1988: introduction).
But the depictions of buildings, structures and cityscapes had been adopted by publishers of books and
journals who employed photographs as a reference or as proof of something built or event occurred.
This displaced the idea that photography could be thought of as an art, which had as a consequence
of photography been pushed to be more experimental and less representative (Gombrich, 2002: 524).
It took until the re-organisation of knowledge referred to as postmodernism (Lyotard, 1997) for the
photograph to be accepted onto the gallery wall and by this time architectural discourses were heavily
reliant upon photography as a system of representation (Crimp in Wells, 2003: 423).
The photographs of the Bechers attempt a closure of meaning which could be interpreted as a final
act of publication in which the ultimate signification is enclosed (Mitchell, 1999: 51). Their work is an
example of a high level of attempted control over the representation of architecture, which extends to
the way that the photograph can be interpreted after its final closure. This is very much representative
of modern objective thought which implied that meaning was inherent in the image, rather than
something that is socially constructed a thought which was posited by Barthes in 1977 (Schwarzer,
2004: 172).
I have considered the Bechers as modern architectural photographers, who use objectifying techniques as
a means of preserving the buildings they photograph and entering them into history. I have considered
the role of the gallery in their work and the way that they use it to discuss photography as a means
of objective representation. I have also considered the way modern architectural photography built
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
15/31
- 14 -
discursive spaces upon its assertion of truth and reliability within systems of information. I will now
consider the work of Thomas Demand, who opposes the modern notion of photographic proof.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
16/31
- 15 -
Chapter 4
Thomas Demand Constructed Realities
In this chapter I will examine the work of Thomas Demand who opposes the staged nature of modern
photography. I will discuss his photographic technique and the way his criticism functions through the
use of incongruous imperfections in his otherwise perfect models. I will then discuss the thoughts of
Beatriz Colomina in greater depth, on the relationship between modern architecture and architectural
photography. I will consider her assertion that much modern architecture was constructed for exhibition
and the camera. I will finally place Demands work in the context of postmodern thought.
Demand constructs with his works, consigning to the viewer the same tools with
which it begins to become legitimate to be suspicious of any image. The That
has been of Barthes, the irrefutable proof of existence of the photographic referent
is no longer valid here. And yet, each encounter with an image by Demand
seems to renew our fascination with images, and simultaneously our desire to
question them
(Beccaria, 2002: 28)
Thomas Demands photographic technique starts by culling images from the media, these are usually
sites of political and social significance. He then recreates these images in three-dimensional form from
paper and card. With a camera angle in mind, Demand creates sculpture that in reality is deformed by
the camera and constructed around the lens. The camera makes an imprint upon these models, which
are built at life-size, so that the final photograph is formally perfect and as intended apart from small
imperfections which are a clue to the fabricated nature of these photographs.
Figure 6: Thomas Demand - Draughting Room C-print/Diasec 183.5 x 285cm.
These incongruous imperfections are not initially easy to find, but start to become more apparent the
more closely we study Demands photographs. Besides, there is an unusual flatness to all of his
images; light reflects from the matte surfaces of the paper and card in an unsettlingly consistent way,
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
17/31
- 16 -
which immediately causes one to think that the image is wrong. The photographs are too perfect, too
clean and too consistent but this is all resisted by the thought that it must be representing something
that is real. Thomas Demands photographs work against the notion of the real in photography. By
creating something that is so real in mediation with the camera, he forces us to discover that these are
a constructed reality.
The Sinar large format camera which Demand uses for his work allows maximum control over the
resultant image and renders an extremely sharp image with subtle gradients from light to dark and from
hue to hue. This maximum control results from the way the lens can be angled or tilted to correct
distortions caused by the lens and the proximity of the camera to the photographed subject. This kind
of large format camera also has precision interchangeable lenses allowing different focal length lenses to
be attached which would be decided upon by the operator to best suit the project. Each of these
lenses will have unique characteristics, which will depend upon the type of optical glass used in the
lens, the configuration and number of the converging and diverging elements and the particular type of
effect the lens designer wanted to achieve with his design (Langford, 1998: 17).
Demand originally photographed his work as a means of documenting his sculptures before they fell
apart. When he photographed them though, he noticed certain optical distortions were occurring altering
the formal relationships of the initial sculpturesHe [then] began to duplicate each of his sculptures, in
order to render a second version with proportions intended solely for the photographic lens (Beccaria:
2002: 8). The spatial distortions, initially unforeseen, were developed intentionally and controlled by the
artist, who designed each model with the point of view from which he would photograph it in mind
(ibid.: 8).
With the photographs that Thomas Demand produces for the context of the gallery he follows in a line
of photographers who opt to use very large Diasec photographs, such as Andreas Gursky. In many
ways these photographs with their bold colours, exactly controlled statements and size could be
considered to be more than real, they could be considered to be hyper-real. Producing a new reality
within the confines of the frame (Colomina, 1999: 80). With Demands work this apparent hyper-reality
which exudes from the photograph serves to emphasise the way we perceive photography as a truth.
So much greater is the re-vision once we realise that what is represented is not a tangible reality
as our initial perception asserts but that what is represented is actually a fabrication.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
18/31
- 17 -
Figure 7: Thomas Demands 2006 exhibition at the Serpentine Gallery Photographs could be
considered hyper-real.
Thomas Demands work hints to and criticises the modern tendency to photograph buildings un-inhabited,
un-used and literally staged. Much architectural photography, particularly that which is commissioned
shows buildings as new and pristine, before occupation and use (Schwarzer, 2004: 171). It became
a trait of many modern architectural photographers such as Ezra Stoller, Julius Schulman and Bill
Heidrich to re-discover the original intention of the architect through photography. This mode of working
drew heavily from the position that architecture is a conceptual matter to be resolved in the realm of
ideas, that when architecture is built it gets mixed with the world of phenomena and necessarily looses
its purity. And yet it is significant that when this same built architectural piece enters the two-
dimensional space of the printed page it returns to the realm of ideas (Colomina, 1999: 114).
Colomina argues that much of the modern architecture that we are now familiar with was built in the
exhibition context and thus was dissembled after several months of display. Significantly all that remained
were the photographs that had been taken which were then disseminated in a variety of contexts
(Colomina in Colomina and Kluge, 2006: 22). This is significant because of the way that we learn
about many modern buildings which may have been destroyed or dismantled - solely through
photography rather than experience.
With these examples of modern architecture we have to rely upon the photographs as evidence of the
built experience and also the narrative constructed by the photographer. Even though this is the case,
photography can establish canonical works such as the German Pavilion, Barcelona 1929 by Ludwig
Mies Van der Rohe. The German Pavilion or Barcelona Pavilion as it is more commonly termed is
a prime example of what Colomina refers to as being architecture as a media construction and has
coincidentally now been re-built.
We could consider that Demands work is the consequence of a re-appraisal of architectural photography
as an art and as a cultural record. This re-appraisal constituted a re-reading of these historical
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
19/31
- 18 -
photographic representations of architecture in a new context. We must realise that in order for this
new aesthetic understanding to occur, other ways of photography must be dismantled and destroyed
(Crimp in Wells: 2003: 423). Crimp states that this re-appraisal or new aesthetic understanding is
part of a much more complex re-distribution of knowledge taking place throughout our culture. This re-
distribution is associated with the term postmodernism (ibid.: 424). He argues that as a modernist
practice photography could not function as art because it was too constrained by the world that was
photographed, too dependant upon the discursive structures in which it was embedded (ibid.: 424).
Integral to this redistribution of knowledge was the construction of a specialised history of architectural
photography. If the principal conditions for establishing such a history were access to large bodies of
original and published work, and a theoretical framework within which to organise material and to situate
representative and seminal bodies of work, then these conditions did not exist before the early 1980s
(Lenman: 2005: 44). Krauss questions if this retrospective construction of history is not illegitimate,
the composition of a false history (Krauss, 1985: 134) and particularly comments upon the
transposition photographic material from the discursive space of literature and their consequent
reconstruction in the wall of exhibition (ibid.). Decorously isolated on the wall of the exhibition, the
objects can be read according to a logic that insists on their representational character within the
discursive space of art, in an attempt to legitimate them (ibid.).
I have argued that Thomas Demand opposes the truth status of photography through the construction
and photographing of models and the way that his photographs act as a criticism of staged
photography. I have linked his work to the theories of Beatriz Colomina and have placed his work in
the arena of the postmodern. In the next chapter I will go on to consider the work of Josef Schulz
who challenges the truth status of photography in a less constructivist and more deconstructivist manner.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
20/31
- 19 -
Chapter 5
Josef Schulz Digitised Subjectivity
In this chapter I will discuss the work of Josef Schulz, particularly in the context of postmodern digital
imaging. I will investigate how Schulz makes his images subjective and link this to the uncertainties of
science and digitisation. I will argue that digitisation leads to a perception of a loss of credibility in the
photograph, but this does not lead to a complete negation of the truth status of the photograph.
But others will see the emergence of digital imaging as a welcome opportunity to
expose the aporias in photographys construction of the world, to deconstruct the
very ideas of photographic objectivity and closure, and to resist what has become
an increasingly sclerotic pictorial tradition
(Mitchell: 1998: 8)
If Thomas Demands photographs constitute a constructed reality playing on the truth status of the
photograph, then Josef Schulzs work constitutes a deconstruction of the photograph and a heavily
analytic method of achieving a final image. But if this is indeed a deconstruction, it is a deconstruction
of the conceived ideas about photography; of convention and the way architecture is projected onto a
plane. Schulz accepts the subjectivity of the photograph, his quest is to show us just how subjective
photographs can be, particularly in the age of digitisation. He does this by digitally manipulating the
analogue photographs he takes on a 5x4 medium format camera (Ewing: 2005: 172). His aim is to
remove any visual clues that could specifically link to a particular place, time or environment (ibid.).
The resultant images, masquerading as photographs are highly subjective and uniquely his own.
Figure 8: Josef Schulz, Form#10, 2004. Figure 9: Josef Schulz, Brick 2003.
C-Print 120 x 170 cm. C-Print 100 x 130 cm.
Josef Schulz, in contrast to the Bechers employs the use of the oblique view to construct his
photographs. These result in a more expressive and spatial mode of description than the front-on view
(Robinson & Herschman, 1988: Introduction). In terms of perspective representation, this spatial
description is achieved by using the camera to construct a two-point perspective by means of orientation
with the referent of the picture. This, instead of rendering the picture plane flat, opens up the plane
which inherits spatial characteristics.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
21/31
- 20 -
These images become like Albertis finestra apertaor Benjamins window. But Schulz does not visualise
an ideal world, nor does he show us a place that we would want to be his photographs are like a
computer screen where facts seem indistinguishable from falsehoods and fictions and where immanent
paradox continually threatens to undermine established certainties (Mitchell, 1999: 191). His
photographs are of modern pre-fabricated buildings, their ubiquity lends itself to his intentions of
subjectivity and digital intervention (ibid.). Mitchell links the postmodern era to digital images, stating
that we can assume the tools of digital imaging are more felicitously adapted to the diverse projects of
our postmodern era (ibid.: 8).
The involvement in digital media also has ramifications for the closure of the image In general,
computer files are open to modification at any time, and mutant versions proliferate rapidly and
endlessly (Mitchell, 1999: 51). This causes a change in our conception of art as stable, enduring,
finished works (ibid: 52) to one which acknowledges the possibility of continual change. The optical
truth of the image hence becomes depleted and questionable (ibid.). Benjamins age of mechanical
reproduction (Benjamin in Wells, 2003: 43) is superseded by the age of digital replication (Mitchell,
1999: 52).
As soon as the image is captured onto digital media, Schulz starts to remove information from the
photograph. It is highly significant that Schulz should use the technique of digitising the image as this
transposes the photograph into another mode of representation whose difference is grounded in
fundamental physical characteristics that have logical and cultural consequences (ibid.: 4). The once
analogue photograph is transposed into a raster grid which is a two-dimensional array of integers
(ibid.: 5). Each integer is linked to a cell based upon a finite Cartesian sub-division known as a
pixel (ibid.). The photograph becomes digital image.
What is significant in this procedure is that once again a conception of Cartesian space is imposed on
the image and that this enables quick and easy manipulation by computer (ibid.: 7) but more
importantly that this intervention could be invisible or undetectable. The lossof information in Schulzs
photographs when considered in analogue terms is rather a changeof information in digital terms. This
change of information is done to isolate the images from any context that may be inherent, any hints at
place. This technique is not unlike the method that Le Corbusier used to decontextualise and impose a
purist aesthetic upon the published images of Villa Schwob (Colomina, 1999: 107). By eliminating site
he makes architecture into an object relatively independent of place (ibid.).
That we know they are manipulated causes us to look for incongruities, to try and place the
photographs somewhere and to construct an identity. The photographs are anonymous and consequently
become filled with our character. Even without the knowledge of alteration there is something that does
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
22/31
- 21 -
not make sense. Junctions between forms do not seem to correspond, there is something intrinsic to
the image that shouts photoshop but it is hard if not impossible to pin down or identify exactly where
or how it has been done. The more you study the photographs of Josef Schulz, the more you question
that anything contained is actually real or actually existed. This is the paradoxical nature of his
photographs, that in a similar way to Demand causes us to question the reality and the authenticity of
the photographic image.
I have proposed that Josef Schulzs photographs are in actuality digital images masquerading as
photographs. I have argued that the subjectivity of the images is derived from the uncertainty of the
digital processes he subjects his images to, the oblique view he uses to compose his photographs, and
also from the lack of information regarding place and environment. The type of process he subjects his
photographs to is emblematic of a postmodern deconstruction, but this amounts to more a change of
information rather than a physical deconstruction and thus is really a deconstruction of the ideas
underlying photography particularly its optical truth. I will now go on to consider the relation between
the optical truth of photography and architecture, looking particularly at the way modern architecture
utilised optical truth to preserve its buildings and the architectural consequences of a postmodern break
with objectivity.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
23/31
- 22 -
Chapter 6
Optical Truth and Architecture
In this chapter I will examine the relation between canonical works of the modern project and optical
truth. I will argue that modern discursive spaces still operate around optical truth and that their
postmodern critique is found in the gallery space. I will state that postmodern thought evident in
photographic representation, notably the break with modern notion of objectivity, was also evident in the
physical and theoretical formations of architectural practise.
It then became clear to me that it was not the task of architecture to invent
form. I tried to understand what that task was. I asked Peter Behrens, but he
could not give me an answer. He did not ask the question. The others said,
What we build is architecture, but we werent satisfied with this answersince we
knew that it was a question of truth, we tried to find out what truth really was.
We were very delighted to find a definition of truth by St. Thomas Aquinas:
Adequatio intellectus et rei, or as a modern philosopher expresses it in the
language of today: Truth is the significance of fact
(Mies Van der Rohe 1961, in Frampton, 2002: 161)
There was a strong relation between the now canonical works of modern architecture and the optical
truth status of photography. This was primarily derived from the closed perfection that the architect strove
to achieve through composition of form, structure, proportion and materiality. Photography was
undoubtedly the best medium to preserve the building, not only from the environment, but also from the
future and worldly phenomena returning the building to the realm of ideas (Colomina, 1999: 114).
This interaction with the realm of ideas also allowed an integration to history through comparative and
classificatory systems that sought to place architecture socially, politically and culturally. The emergence
of these systems coincided with the rise of the media representation to heighten the importance of the
image in the architectural sphere. It was no coincidence that structure started to be emphasised and
walls rendered at the same time that photography was starting to become a primary form of
representation in architecture (Haus, 1997: 85). This emphasis of structure and rendering of walls was
adapted to the black and white photographs of the time guaranteeing a preservation of the building in
the way intended by the architect.
This mode of practise was existent at the time when academic journals, architectural periodicals and
architectural history texts were beginning to use photographs as their primary sources of evidence to
prove event occurred of more aptly building built. These emerging discourses were primarily
constructed because there was a need to disseminate architectural information throughout the profession.
This required a certain authority, and alongside a credible editorial team, credible photographs were used
in a generic way to communicate new and past achievements of the profession.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
24/31
- 23 -
Figures 10 & 11 : German Pavilion, Barcelona (Reconstruction), Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe.
Photograph by Stelljes Bau.
These, of course, are discourses that operate primarily around the notions of empiricism, rationality and
progress. Because of these foundations they had good cause to publish only aesthetically pleasing
pictures that put their establishment and architecture into a good light. To print bad pictures would be to
undermine their profession and their livelihood. And so began the rise in the importance of the
photographic image; not only as a preservation of the architectural spatial construct but also as a means
of communication; on one level as a signifier of progress, rationality and empiricism, and on another
level the signifier of a product being placed into a market. Each one of these notions were dependant
upon credible and truthful images as a representation of architectural values.
This strong link between optical truth, architecture and its representation in printed discourses is still
evident today, which maintains the evidential truth of a photograph. This is the way that the discourses
have been constructed, accordingly, they are resistant to attack or criticism. These discourses could be
said to be self-regulating systems, and because of this have resisted criticism from semiotic analysis
and later from postmodern critique (Kember in Wells, 2003: 202). This is why architecture is still
presented through printed media as fact; significantly true. The same conditions do not, however, occur
in the discursive space of the gallery; a different type of knowledge is required (Krauss, 1985: 132).
The gallery wall is where the critique of optical truth occurs; the mere act of placing a picture of
modern architecture on the gallery wall stimulates criticism and comment. Only when read as postmodern
art do the photographs of Demand and Schulz take on their full meaning. But where it seems logical
and instinctive to draw comparisons between the work of the Bechers and the canons of modern
architecture with its distinct categories and taxonomies the same task is not as easy when
considering postmodern architecture. The work of Demand and Schulz is certainly postmodern, attempting
to distance themselves from modernist dictum and both incorporating a certain irony in their work. But
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
25/31
- 24 -
their architectural comparison is hard, if not impossible to find. Still, both oppose the modern concept of
optical truth, and in doing so they also oppose the modern theoretical foundations for its formation.
Postmodernity, then, could be said to be united in its opposition of modernity; opposed to its underlying
tradition and/or its dominant mythologies (Grundberg, 1999: 6). Critics have identified two
contradictory strains of postmodernism a postmodernism of reaction that repudiates modernism and
celebrates the status quo, and a postmodernism of resistance that attempts to continue the project of
modernism while subjecting it to critical re-evaluation (Leach, 1999: 207). Paradoxically, neither can
completely reject modernity because it is too reliant upon the discursive spaces created by modern
practise to function. It is as though postmodernism, while trying to oppose modernism, has selected
parts and incorporated them into its own way of looking at the world.
The postmodern declaration is, then, first and foremost, to do with ideas and subjectivity, how we think
and signify: it is not primarily a claim concerning material reality (McGuigan, 1999: 2), but even if
these thoughts are not primarily to do with material reality, they find their materiality through architecture
and consequent representation through architectural photography. McGuigan goes on to state that the
declaration is supported by the assumption that there is no objectively discernable reality; in any case,
not one situated beyond thought and signification (ibid.). Consequently, if there is no objectivity, then
there can be no closed perfection.
This break away from objectivity is not without ramifications for architecture, which has responded at
both physical and theoretical levels. On a physical level this is most commonly understood to be
characterised by spatial and syntactic ambiguity, the re-introduction of symbolic form, a playful historicist
irony and the use of surface iconography. On a theoretical level opposition took on deconstruction and
cultural theory as a way of opposing the underlying ideas of modernity. Primarily, postmodernism
intended to create new spaces and ways of working, which allowed freedom away from the rules that
modernity had imposed. Postmodernism brought about an end to the modern ideas of objectivity and
closure in architecture, and in so doing, challenged the modern foundations upon which architecture
stands.
In this chapter I have examined the relation between canonical works of modern architecture and optical
truth. Coming to the conclusion that the canons of modern architecture exhibited a reliance upon optical
truth not only to preserve their buildings, but because of a growing relationship with emerging
discourses, namely within architectural publications and the discourse of architectural history. I argued that
the postmodern critique of optical truth is found in the discursive space of the gallery and that a break
away from objectivity also had consequences for architecture. In my final chapter I will now summarise
the key points of my study and conclude my argument.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
26/31
- 25 -
Chapter 7
Conclusion
Throughout this thesis I have attempted to trace a relationship between optical truth, architecture and its
representation through photography. I placed the representation of architecture into a continuum that runs
from analogue objectivity to digital subjectivity and argued that the canons of modern architecture were
reliant upon the optical truth of photography to uphold their truth, honesty and clarity of design intention.
I argued that this practice was compounded by the emergence of modern discourses which relied upon
the photograph as a source of evidence to elucidate their arguments and further their own causes.
The notion of optical truth lies in the analogical paradigms of the camera obscura, of Cartesian space
and perspectivalism which still permeate our conceptions of the photograph (Damisch in Wells, 2003:
88). Although this is the case, we are having to re-evaluate our understanding of the photograph in
the light of digital imaging technologies due to the uncertainties of manipulation and closure, which have
upset the causal relationship evident in analogue processes (Grundberg, 1999; Kember, 1998; Mitchell,
1999, Ritchin, 1990, Rosler, 2004). My discussion considered the relation of proof to the photograph
and established that photography exerts a control over us in the way we learn about and understand
our position in the world socially and historically (Kember, 1998: 18).
The Bechers are examples of photographers who uphold modern tradition of using objectifying techniques
as a means of preserving the buildings they photograph and entering them into architectural history.
They use the wall of the gallery to discuss photography as a means of objective, truthful representation
(Schwarzer, 2004: 175) and show how modern architectural photography built discursive spaces upon
its assertion of truth and reliability within systems of information (Sontag, 1979: 156). Thomas Demand
and Josef Schulz on the other hand oppose the truth status of photography. While Demand causes us
to question truth through fabricating models based upon mediated images, Schulz deconstructs the
meaning behind the image by subjecting it to the process of digitisation and alteration.
Through examining the relationship between optical truth, architecture and its representation I conclude
that the canons of modern architecture exhibited a reliance upon optical truth not only to preserve their
buildings, but to develop the growing relationship with emerging discourses, namely within architectural
publications and the discourse of architectural history. These discourses are still functioning today and
still rely heavily upon optical truth, even if postmodern architecture no longer strives to achieve an
ultimate objective truth. Finally, a break with the modern idea of objectivity occurred in both photography
and architecture. Causing a response on both physical and theoretical levels and an imposition of
subjective perception upon the built environment.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
27/31
- 26 -
Recommendations for Further Research
Throughout my research I have been looking at the way that architecture is presented as an optical
truth in photography. I feel that there has been little research into this subject and think that this is
partially due to the way that a reliance upon the photographic image has been internalised into
architectural practise to communicate information; more explicitly, I feel that within printed discourse we
accept the authoritative thrust of photographic representation too readily because of its nature as
evidence in this context. I feel that this is part of a larger more complex intersection of social, cultural
and economic factors that were beyond the scope and time-frame of this research. Accordingly I would
recommend a continuation of research into this area, looking particularly at the way discursive spaces
have been constructed around photography as evidence, and the way they seemingly hold a degree of
authority and control because of this.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
28/31
- 27 -
Appendix 1
Figure 12 Figure 13
Administration building, California, Uncorrected. Administration building, California, Corrected.
Taken from the same point with a large format camera these photographs show how dramatically the
tilting or perspective controls can effect the final image.
Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16
Wide angle view Normal angle view Narrow angle view
Taken from exactly the same point these pictures show the effect of increasing the focal length of the
lens.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
29/31
- 28 -
Bibliography
Ackerman, James S. The Photographic Picturesque. Artibus et Historaire. vol. 24 no. 48, 2003 pp.73-94.
Ackerman, James S. On the Origins of Architectural Photography. Essay in Rattenbury, Kester (2002).
This is Not Architecture. Routledge. London.
Barthes, Roland trans. Richard Howard (1981) Camera Lucidia: Reflections on Photography Hill and Wang.New York.
Beccaria, Marcella ed. Shore, Marguerite trans. (2002) Thomas Demand Castello di Rivoli, Skira Editore.
Milan.
Benjamin, Walter (1973) Illuminations Fontana. London.
Berger, John. (1977) Ways of Seeing Penguin Books. London.
Chard, Nat. Positioning and the Picture Plane. The Journal of Architecture, vol. 8, Summer 2003.
Colomina, Beatriz (2001) Privacy and Publicity; Modern Architecture as Mass Media MIT Press. Cambridge
MA.
Colomina, Beatriz and Kluge, Alexander (2006) Thomas Demand Serpentine Gallery. London
Czerniak, Julia. Challenging the Pictorial: Recent Landscape Practice. Assemblage, iss 34, December 1997.
Dovey, Kim (1999) Framing Places Mediating Power in Built Form Routledge. London.
Edwards, Betty (2001) Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain Harper Collins. London.
Evans, Robin (1997) Mies Van der Rohes Paradoxical Symmetries in Translations from Drawing to Building
and Other Essays pp.233-277. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.
Ewing, William et al. (2005) reGeneration. 50 Photographers of Tomorrow 2005-2025 Thames and
Hudson. London.
Flusser, V (1984) Towards a Philosophy of Photography European Photography. Gttingen.
Fraser, I and Henmi, R (1994) Envisioning Architecture. An Analysis of Drawing Van Norstrand Reinhold.
London.
Frampton, Kenneth (2002) Modern Architecture. A Critical History Thames and Hudson. London.
Gernsheim, Helmut (1969) The History of Photography from the Camera Obscura to the Beginning of the
Modern Era Thames and Hudson. London.
Gombrich, E H (1995) The Story of Art Phaidon Press Ltd. London.
Grundberg, Andy (1999) Crisis of the Real. Writings on Photography Since 1974 Aperture. New York.
Hall, S and Gieben, B eds. (1999) Formations of Modernity Polity Press. Cambridge.
Haus, Andreas. Fotogenic Architecture. Daidalos, vol.66, December 1997, pp.84-91.
Jameson, Fredric (1992) Signatures of the Visual Routledge. London.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
30/31
- 29 -
Kember, Sarah (1998) Virtual Anxiety. Photography, new technologies and subjectivity Manchester
University Press. Manchester.
Krauss, Rosalind (1985) Photographys Discursive Spaces in The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other
Modernist Myths pp.131-150. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.
Langford, M (1998) Advanced Photography Focal Press. Oxford.
Langford, M (2000) Basic Photography Focal Press. Oxford.
Leach, Neil. Walter Banjamin and the Dreamworld of Photography in Borden, I and Rendell, J eds. (2000)
Intersections: Architectural Histories and Critical Theories Routledge. London.
Leach, Neil. (1999) The Anaesthetics of Architecture. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.
Leach, Neil, ed. (1997) Rethinking Architecture: A Reader in Cultural Theory Routledge. London.
Lenman, Robin ed. (2005) The Oxford Companion to the Photograph Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Lyotard, Jean-Francis trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi (1997). The Postmodern Condition: A
Report on Knowledge Manchester University Press. Manchester.
Mack, Michael. (1999) Reconstructing Space: Architecture in recent German Photography AA Publications.
London.
Malik, Ali, 1997. The use and abuse of photography in architecture, Precis 14 [Online] Columbia, Graduate
School of Architecture Planning and Preservation, Columbia University.
Available from: http://www.arch.columbia.edu/Pub/Precis/site/14/articles/amalik/amalik.html [Accessed
29th December 2006]
Manopoulou, Yeoryia. The Interior of Vision: Becketts film and experiments with viewing instrument 1. The
Journal of Architecture, vol 9, Autumn 2004.
Manopoulou, Yeoryia. Unformed Drawing: Notes, Sketches and Diagrams. The Journal of Architecture, vol 10,
issue 5. November 2005 pp.517-525.
Marcoci, Roxana (2005) Thomas Demand Museum of Modern Art. New York.
McGuigin, Jim (1999) Modernity and Postmodern Culture Open University Press. Buckingham.
McQuire, Scott (1998). Unstable Architectures. in Visions of Modernity: Representation, Memory, Time and
Space in the Age of the Camera Sage. London.
Meili, David. Architecture and Photography. Essay in Tillmanns, Urs (1993). Architectural Photography:
Creative Large Format pp.8-23. Sinar AG. Feuerthalen.
Mitchell, William J (1992) The Reconfigured Eye. Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era MIT Press.
Cambridge MA.
Phillips, Christopher, ed. (1989) Photography in the Modern Era: European Documents and Critical Writings
1913-1940 Aperture. New York.
Rattenbury, Kester. (2002) This is not architecture. Routledge. London.
Ritchin, Fred (1990) In Our Own Image. The Coming Revolution in Photography Aperture. New York.
8/2/2019 The Optical Truth Status of Architecture
31/31
Roberts, John (1998) The art of interruption: realism, photography and the everyday Manchester University
Press. Manchester.
Robinson, Cervin and Herschman, Joel (1988) Architecture Transformed. A History of the Photography of
Buildings from 1839 to the Present. MIT Press. Cambridge MA.
Rosler, Martha (2004) Decoys and Disruptions. Selected Writings, 1975-2001 An October Book, MIT
Press. Cambridge MA.
Ruff, Thomas (No Date) Josef Schulz is a photographer
Available from: http://www.fotofront.de/josef/textrufe.htm [Accessed: 26.01.2007 01.53am.]
Sausmarez, Maurice De (2002) Basic Design. The Dynamics of Visual Form A&C Black. London.
Schulman, Julius (2000) Photographing Architecture and Interiors Balcony Press, Los Angeles.
Sontag, Susan (1979) On Photography Penguin Books. London.
Steadman, Philip (2001) Vermeers Camera Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Thompson, Jerry L (2003) Truth and Photography. Notes on Looking and Photographing Ivan R DeePublisher. Chicago.
Tschumi, Bernard (1996) Architecture and Disjunction MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.
Ursprung, P (2004) Pictures of Architecture. Architecture of Pictures: A Conversation Between Jacques
Herzog and Jeff Wall Springer-Verlag. New York.
Venturi, Robert, Scott Brown Denise & Izenour, Steven (1977) Learning from Las Vegas. The Forgotten
Symbolism of Architectural Form MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.
Wells, Liz, ed. (2003) The Photography Reader Routledge. London.
Zimmerman, C. Photographic Modern Architecture: Inside the New Deep. The Journal of Architecture, vol. 9,
Autumn 2004.
Zimmerman, C. Tugendhat Frames. The Harvard Design Magazine, Fall 2001 pp.24-31.