The national salon of the various art forms presented every five years is in fact, a celebration of all arts at the Kunsthalle, Budapest. When organizing the 2nd National Salon of Photography our primary aim was to address and ask each artist who have been creating significant works of art in the past five years in any field of photography.
We sent out letters of request to each artist, namely 129 photographers whose works were displayed at the previous national salon in 2016, Pictures and Pixels, and we also sent letters to those who were invited for the previous salon but for various reasons they finally did not exhibit their works. We invited all the artists who, in the past five years, received a photography grant from the National Cultural Fund of Hungary or the Hungarian Academy of Arts. Apart from them, the curator of the previous salon, Klára Szarka also selected more than twenty young talents who emerged lately. Curators themselves had their own suggestions, of course. We studied the latest photography exhibitions and the website of the Studio of Young Photographers. The majority of those invited to the exhibition, 208 photographers, were happy to accept the invitation, however there were a few who could not or did not want to take part of the exhibition – as they have not been active in photography during the past five years, for example.
We requested one work or one series of work from each invited artist, and in the letters we ensured them that we were looking forward to displaying the work they consider the most important piece of the past five years.
Institutions displaying exhibitions about visual arts, galleries and museums prefer organizing curatorial exhibitions around certain topics. Experience justifies that the authority of the organizer or the curator, their professional experience and taste guarantees the success of the exhibition to be displayed. After developing their own concepts, curators search for those artists and works that can be adjusted to the concept. From those works that are invited according to this concept, a unified, convincing, successful “show” can be set up.
The greatest profit of the canon forming curatorial exhibitions is their power to generate the genre’s elite, they provide examples to be followed by artists yet outside the canon, and they guarantee reliable orientation points for the art market and for the audience who wish to purchase art works.
However, the art of photography is an exceptionally wide field in art and curators inevitably walk by some more significant segments of the field unnoticed. Many of those artists remain “invisible” masters who do not care about mainstream trends, who walk their own paths even though as avant-garde artists they may use visual tools in ways so far truly unheard of or keep fulfilling their daily tasks while defining visual culture through their works.
If we wish to know what artists of a specific branch of art are doing, in this case the artists of photography in Hungary, then it makes sense to organize salon exhibitions on a regular basis. The true aim of the national salon is a kind of inspection. Creating art is undeniably an aristocratic phenomenon – due to their talent some artists are more important for us. However, there is a democratic form of organizing exhibitions. The national salon is such a venture since it addresses artists, who established their names by creating significant, recognized, public achievements; and the salon introduces them collectively. Thus the salon does not only serve art but the education of the public as well. It is quite telling that the salons of the Kunsthalle presenting various genres of art had a great success and attracted a large number of visitors – this was also true for other ages and for the salons of others countries.
Just as the previous salon of photography, this present exhibition is also freshly diverse and, according to our view, it is of a convincingly high standard. However, it is worth giving some thought to how the art field, whose top achievements we can see here and now, changed since the previous salon, during the past five years.
Since 1989, the turn of the communist regime, the idea emerged only perhaps twice that the structure and functions of the photographic scene should be analyzed more deeply through available data supporting any statement since this field of visual culture did not lose its significance as time passed; on the contrary, it was reshaped several times to become one of the ever more important genre of communication. The first such analyses which was initiated by the National Cultural Fund of Hungary about 15 years ago was not fully convincing: it was conducted by university professionals who have not gone really close to professional and practical problems. The other, smaller scale survey was terminated three years ago. The initiative is credited to the Hungarian Museum of Photography and the Alliance of Hungarian Artists of Photography. For instance, Zoltán Fejér pointed out professional institutions – primarily referring to the National Cultural Fund of Hungary and the Hungarian Academy of Arts – and said that their work (achievements, prestige and judgment) was deeply predetermined by the past circumstances of their structure and functions. Analyzing numerous uncertainties and inconsistencies present in middle and higher education of the art of photography, Mária Pecsics saw quite a number of contradictions between the uneven quality of trainings and the huge opportunities offered by positions in the European creative industry.
It would be necessary to start a new survey which is perhaps of a wider scope since visual culture and communication, virtual community spaces, market influences are deeply based on photographic tools and the modified digital photo view. To understand all these dynamic processes from image theory, through image distribution to educational strategies numerous fields have to be considered, fields that lie quite far from each other. Within that field the art of photography – the focus of László Haris – András Bán our salon – changes in such dimensions and to such a degree that it is difficult to follow even when we are able to surf the net freely. As nothing else is at stake but good images.
Although professional media reports daily on the emergence of new tools and technologies, in the technique of photography we could not see radical changes. The summary is a bit harder from now on as the authoritative professional fair, the Cologne Photokina suspended its activities after 70 years. Visual thinking has already accepted digital perspectives completely even before. This undoubtedly makes things a lot easier in official photography: previously image production gave rise to worries about several factors since when only one factor happened to go wrong the entire image was ruined. Digital image however means immediate control.
No doubt, one can also make photos with mobile phones – there are pictures made by mobile phones displayed here, in this exhibition. In the past years smart phones had more and more photography tools condensed in them. Consequently the market of mid-range cameras are declining. On the other end of the product range there are 400 megapixel cameras on offer. “Of course the technical equipment used by people is not equal to the novelty of professional fairs – says Zoltán Fejér, one of the leading experts of the field in Hungary. Even the fastest followers cannot catch up quicker than 4 or 5 months. Novelties appear in daily use only occasionally.”
Available high-end tools have become incredibly sophisticated and of course they are still distributed at high prices. Beyond the built in image modifiers, image editing options, the easier treatment of color, contrast and speed of lens the use of full HD recording of motion pictures, GPS localization registry and wi-fi became evidences. Professional cameras having no mirrors at all are becoming better and better. And the opportunities of 3D recordings are becoming also wider and artificial intelligence, virtual reality offer more and more possibilities. Tools for image editing, transmission, storage and printing change rapidly and of course they all influence image users as well as the press, while public collections are still embarrassed by digitalization. Although image recognition systems can be handled more and more easily, copyright and individual right issues repeatedly emerge, just as questions regarding long-lasting storage formats and their permanency.
Photography, which technically often has a very high quality, pursued as a hobby is also changing dynamically. Popular photography shaped its own communication methods, values, stars, technical nuances – and its occasional stock-photo marketing options. Several small but deep changes are on their way. We list only two examples. For previous camera use the comfortable camera hold made vertical image formats evident and this was the optimal arrangement for computer screens as well – still, due to the use of smart phones, horizontal images also became popular. In the past few years the wide availability of drones is also a new development therefore views from above also became fashionable.
Besides mass production and mass consumption the market for ‘gourmets’ is also expanding which is a surprise. ‘Hand-made’ photography is trendy again similarly to black vinyl records and traditional boardgames coming into vogue again. Users of these tools and technologies “do not insist on analogue photography out of nostalgia, fear or defiance but they use them in search of new experiences differing from the habitual, digital average.” (David Sax) The professional version of this intention is present in the salon with large size sheet films and chemical processes.
After summarizing some technological issues let us embark on describing changes taking place in our closer environment now regarding the institutional structure of Hungary. At the time of democratic changes in the 1990s photography experts faced the fact that there were hardly any schools providing education in photography in higher education, there was no photography museum, there were no agencies, and although public opinion considered most photography an art there were still no Kossuth award winners among professional photographers. This last statement, however, is no longer valid. According to the numbers we still have only few photographers honored with awards still, Péter Korniss was the first artist followed by Demeter Balla, Tamás Féner, László Kunkovács and presently Éva Keleti who received the Kossuth award. Besides honors and grants tradi tionally having a long history – in these five years two honorable artists and the annually two, and in 2019 four Rudolf Balogh awards were granted – new prizes appeared such as the Hemző Károly Award, the Szőts István Award and the prizes honored by the Capa Center.
The trend of gradually narrowing opportunities of grants in these five years turned around.
We can consider a 2016 event an important development as the Photography Art College of the National Cultural Fund of Hungary was established that year. The college published proposals for artists’ grants, exhibitions and for the enrichment of collections; the budget of which doubled during these five years. Compared to previous calls album publishing and web site development proposals fell behind but in the pandemic year of 2020 opportunities were expanded by professional translation proposals – as one can do translations at home as well. Another important development is the call for grant proposals published by the Hungarian Academy of Art for middle generation artists – providing a monthly stipend of 200 thousand forints for three years – among the three hundred supported artists seventeen are working in the field of photography. Two artists may also be granted support by the Film and Photography Department of the Hungarian Academy of Arts.
Besides the substantial support given to artists keeping them in the profession (the József Pécsi grant, the full time DLA degree course stipends, the grants by the National Cultural Fund of Hungary and the Hungarian Academy of Arts) the circumstances of starting a career are still vague in their outlines. The position of photography education has not changed – it rather got worse. High standard higher education photography degree courses are still running at MOME, at METU and at the University of Kaposvár offered for a rather small number of students – moreover the University of Kaposvár will be subject to integration processes and the consequences cannot be foreseen. And lately, photography is also carving out its own space more and more in the visual education training programs run by the University of Eger which can be regarded as an example with its open structure. However, unfortunately middle level vocational training has been shattered in its foundations, and it has not been discussed at all how photography may become part of the basic visual, cultural, or at least art education in general. The position of free schools is not very promising either, in the past five years few of them could survive.
The circumstances of photography collections have not changed either, while the generation of great photographers faces the fact that their oeuvre is becoming a heritage – having an often uncertain destiny. It seemed quite a few times as if the fate of the photography museum would change for the better, however, up to this day one of the most marketable Hungarian cultural legacy has no representative exhibition hall. Hosting the Capa collection, a collection that was moved to Hungary first, is still in the phase of planning meanwhile the larger material of André Kertész is also on its way home. Those masters who stayed home are displayed at temporary exhibitions – sometimes in an exemplary manner.
The methodology of working with a collection or a personal photo legacy is still under way. There are huge collections, for instance the archive at the MTI (Hungarian Telegraphic Office) where processing began fast and then it came to a halt, just as the publishing of the material stopped. What we can refer to as being an undeniable success story is the Fortepan exhibition whose methodology was truly simple (to save and publish then trust the audience with the processing) and whose name became a brand in its own right for the public speaker as well.
Research activities in the history of photography began at a greater speed when the Hungarian Society for the History of Photography was established 15 years ago, although there is little result to be seen on bookshelves or on the net. The balance of work done so far shows a few basic research initiatives, three conferences and the introduction of a yearbook. However, strengthening professional identity is already a worthy achievement in itself. The history of Hungarian photography has still not been written. At certain public collection units, mainly at the photography storage department of the National Museum high standard professional workshops are running. The research institute of the Hungarian Academy of Arts commissioned a series of interviews with elderly photographers – quite a few of such conversations were recorded before and it would be great if they were collected on a common (obviously web) platform.
During the past five years Mai Manó Ház and the Capa Center at Nagymező street, Budapest, displayed a series of exhibitions. However, several other exhibition halls also organized or hosted photo exhibitions, some of which were very successful. Due to their nature festivals are truly suitable for drawing attention. Events of the Budapest Photo Festival supported by the capital and the Photography Month managed by the Association of Hungarian Photographers are both noted by the public. The annual national and international press photo exhibitions still receive many visitors invariably. In the background significant professional workshops are at work– in the press only surviving on the net – and support the youth in starting their careers.
Among the commercial galleries those displaying works of photography survived during the past years and even new ones, having their own profile and art circles, entered the scene. Galleries involved in exhibiting fine arts that present themselves at thematic international photography fairs are a new development, just as the emergence of photography booths at fine art fairs.
The profession’s journal, Photography is still published although after two and half decades Péter Tímár, having been somewhat tired of the difficulties posed by paper based publication, passed on the editorials to others. From time to time professional blogs emerge; the blogs run by Mai Manó Ház and the Capa Center are undeniably popular. Unfortunately the number of photo albums decreased during the past years. However, the publishing house by the Hungarian Academy of Arts launched a new, representative monograph series and five significant volumes have already been published.
Lately the attitude towards personal rights and copyright issues has changed considerably, fraying the nerves of photographers. Legal practice expands copyright protection to an incredibly large field: “…only those works of photography are not subject to copyright law in which individual decision is not a factor and the composition of the image cannot be influenced. The directives accepted are justified by mentioning the automatic traffic control cameras and the public camera machines worked by inserting coins as such devices where the product cannot be justifiably considered an art work based on the presented criteria.” – writes a freshly issued statement by an expert. Theoretically this approach is destined to protect artistic and creative contents uploaded on the net but with little success. The legal regulation restricting photographers – as formulated by Bea Bodrogi – states the following: “Ever since the modification of the Civic Code in 2013 to make a photo, the subject’s consent is needed. Images made without the subject’s consent is an offense resulting in violating the rights to be in the possession of one’s own image. In such cases the offense becomes obvious when the image is published as the subject’s consent is needed for publication as well.” Fortunately changes so far led to court trials in only a few cases. In practice, photographers can do their work but they can hardly protect their own intellectual products.
After briefly introducing the institutional structure we can take a look at the artists’ individual lives and commemorate fellow artists who have deceased since the last salon. Demeter Balla, Lajos Erdélyi, Csaba Habik, Ildi Hermann, Dávid Horváth, Kandó Ata, Iván Kocsis, Ferenc Markovics, Normantas Paulius, Bertalan Pethő, Zoltán Szalay, András Szebeni, Márton Szipál, István Tóth, László Török, Erzsébet Winter (we also have to commemorate Béla Albertini and Gyula Munkácsy who were experts in writing about photography). It is a painful list and not even complete regarding the wider profession and those living farther away.
When we started to divide up the material of the annual salon according to thematic groups as we did at the Pictures and Pixels exhibition of 2016 – supporting the work of arrangement and the viewing activities of the visitors – we had to come to the László Haris – András Bán conclusion that these loosely established thematic groups do not say much about the perspective and views of these images. In the “socio”, the observation methods of daily phenomena detailed approach is just as present as the more symbolic, more complete appeal. And the same is true for portrait photography as well as for landscape photos and other character based thematic groups. If we have to share observations about the totality of this high quality image collection first we can point to a lack and then to a characteristic new phenomenon. Images sent to be presented at the salon are devoid of events and lack any political aspect. This might be self-evident, one might say, since those sort of images are mostly sent to press photo exhibitions. For a salon of this kind even press workers select works of image experiments and meditative shots. Another observation: a new generation is present and this is great news. The approach to images for this generation is remarkably different from those of the previous ones. Young photographers mostly selected photo series; individual photos have been shot with the ease of digital cameras, photo series are characterized by a strange, associative, enigmatic and somewhat film-like structure, a kind of floating on the border of what has already happened and the possible.
After all, the salon, by its nature, cannot be arranged around one unifying thought as curatorial exhibitions can be since its concept entails its multi-colored nature. It offers the chance to become familiar with and to accept one another even during a short encounter or when discussing emerging problems. This will give this salon its true value.
László Haris – András Bán
curators of the 2nd National Salon of Photography