Prologue

It seems I’ve caught the eye of the art world for my work on the internet, srsly! I am posting this interview on tysoncrosbie.com as news about what is going on with the art side of my business. I wanted to have my own record of the interview as it was sent out to the editor Brian Sherwin the well respected senior editor of MyArtSpace.com.

Considering Lying to Tell the Truth will likely use these questions as the basis of shows in the future, this is the best place I have for this post at this time.

**Also I am asking my twitter friends to help me out with the last question. If nothing else read the last question and let me have it! As one of the interests in interviewing me is my use of the internet to help gain a wider audience, I thought it only fitting to let that audience have a chance to speak their mind.**

Interview

Q. Tyson, my understanding is that you have pursued photography for over a decade. Can you give a brief history of your practice. For example, what inspired you to step behind the camera, so to speak?

My introduction to photography is one I consider backwards. It started in my High School darkroom developing prints for the year book. Never used the camera and quickly forgot about my experience.

I was a sophomore in the College of Engineering at Utah State University as a Mechanical Engineering student when I reintroduced myself to photography. My engineering career choice happened through a natural aptitude for spacial relations and mathematics. After two years in the program I started to realize that most engineering students do not aspire to create, just fix other peoples problems with math. Their main motivation and satisfaction is finding an answer. Beyond that the reality was that I did not want to call most of my classmates colleagues, they bored me in their khaki pants and plaid shirts. It was more than the conservative atmosphere of going to school in Utah. It tied to a deeper cultural rift, I was a dreamer and they seemed a mass of pragmatism that wore on me day after day.

I took the intro to photography as an elective course, probably just to fill a gap in my schedule. From the first moments of that class I knew I’d become a photographer. It just all made sense, all the contradictions I’d been struggling with in the Engineering program came together in photography. From the mechanics and the science of the process to the intuition and the ability to create and express through art. Most importantly I’d found a medium that allowed me success through asking more questions than providing answers.

USU had a traditional photography program, and I learned and respect that tradition in my current work. I’ve had the experience of shooting the whole gamut of photographic equipment from cameras I’ve built myself to high end studio and back again to digital. I’ve mixed my own chemistry and emulsions and experimented with 19th century processes that are nearly extinct, such as carbon printing. I’d be surprised if as I mature as an artist and I don’t return to these traditional and historical processes as time and circumstances allow.

Q. Tell us more about the thoughts behind your work. For example, do you adhere to a specific school of psychology or philosophy as far as your practice is concerned?

Nearly ten years is not enough time to develop any clear understanding of the meaning of anything. I am not so sure I’ll ever reach any clear understanding, I can speak to where I am now.

I view my work as an evolution, the most important image I’ve ever made is the next one. It is my goal to create a lifetime body of work that evolves as I do that is recognizable visually as a journey of a life. The first abstracts that I took in school were exercises in composition and theory. What I call the Mexico series was when I became self aware as an artist. Following that the early work is when my language really starts to develop and refine. My most recent work is confined by rules and language and far more complex and yet the subtleties of information that I can contain in the imagery fascinates me.

Of course it is my obsession to observe the world, this ties me to the medium of photography intimately. Still I am drawn to contradictions like; Creating work as a purist, a traditionalist and using digital media. Loving observation and information as a scientist and an artist. Believing that I am solipsistic and an existentialist and an egoist at times.

My big contradiction from my childhood was between perfection and truth and it still informs my work to this day.

The idea that there is a conflict that has no perfect answer for more than a moment is the basis of my understanding of evolution. My work is constantly evolving through the acceptance of any idea and then testing it repetitively over and over until you reach a beautiful unique conclusion. Not a perfect conclusion because that just doesn’t exist, just the best conclusion for that moment in time. When considering time and environmental change, this moment is so important. The record.

Q. How are those thoughts reflected in the equipment that you use?  Many photographer view the gear they use as part of the process– do you share that stance? Or is it just a means to an end, so to speak?

Meh. A camera is a black (without light) box with a hole on one side. It is a tool. I use a digital camera on my current project because it allows for a greater amount of iterations. I can move very quickly from one idea to the next and follow a much more intuitive path to the next choice.

I suppose it is all connected but my personal stance is that it is a dangerous path to give too much thought to the tools used. Photographs are made for our eyes, find the tools that are most pleasing to how you view the world or want to express your view of this experience.

The process is exciting when searching for the right tools. But this work is about obsession and finding that core part of a single idea, feeling or beautiful truth.

Q. You have said the following, “Copyright is dead. Through digital media, and the ability to make a copy so efficiently that there is NO difference between the original and the copy, the founding idea of copyright has become obsolete.” Can you go into further detail about that? What is your stance on copyright?

Sometimes to wake people up you need to yell. This question actually made me consider many things I had not previously. It reminded me of Nietzsche’s statement that “god is dead” from the gay science. Realizing that the fight that is going on in the commercial world of photography is likely to rage on well past me. Lets just hope I don’t face the same fate as our friend Nietzsche.

Honestly I don’t really know the answer to this question yet. I’ve certainly been playing around with the idea in the commercial world, challenging some of the conventions. I see that the domain of copyright is getting dangerously out of control. It is a thing that if left unchecked will begin to erode at free expression and already is limiting what is possible. I think it is well understood that nearly any idea you could execute is in the context of history just repeating a previous idea. If we are to get led down the path of the current copyright model we would have to believe that those ideas are owned by the originators of the idea AND all derivatives.

I understand that the product of an artist is of vital importance to the survival of artists in a marketplace but the copying and distribution of that product can only be controlled with an army of enforcers or by limiting yourself to obscurity. As I currently practice any copyright it is by controlling the quality of free distribution and the availability of physical products.

Q. Tell us more about your influences. Are you influenced by any specific artist or art movement?

I hope that I am influenced by as many as I am exposed to. Obviously my work is most heavily influenced by the abstract expressionist movement. Motherwell, Rothko, Johns, and Reinhart even Tapies and those are just the painters. I could go on and on endlessly. When my access to information increases, so in turn does my ability to view, respond, and dissect the elements that are truly my work. These elements that I draw from become increasingly complex and each is a part of the whole of each product.

Q. Do you mind discussing some of the techniques that you use?

I am an observer and a recorder. I take from my immediate environment what most appeals to my current mode of language. I am a purist in that I don’t manipulate my environment or my final images, they are presented as straight images just as they were found. I use a digital camera and print on RA-4 paper and adhere to a pretty traditional gallery presentation. I edition my work 1/1 to protect the value of the finished work.

The scary thing about this question is that it implies there is some secret or magic to the process of photography. I certainly do not ascribe to this. All of the techniques of the mechanics of photography can be learned in a matter of a couple months.

Q. Is there any specific message that you strive to convey within the context of your work? In other words, what do you desire viewers to take from your work upon viewing it?

Honestly I can’t even begin to think about it. They do what they do for their own reasons.

Q. What are you working on at this time? Also, will you be involved with any upcoming exhibits?

I am working on my annual series Phoenix 21 and a new catalog of work from a sister city called Tempe 20. I am hosting soft edits of both projects on Flickr.

I also produce a weekly vlog on my gallery site Lying to Tell the Truth and run a successful commercial studio in Phoenix.

Two shows are currently planned for 2009 and I will be aggressively pursuing other opportunities to show until the work is completely sold. A solo show at the gallery inside Off Madison Ave in Tempe Arizona is planned for the second Quarter. Also working on a collaboration and group show with local artist Kyle Jordre in the month proceeding that solo show at his studio.

Q. You have obviously taken advantage of the internet as a means of gaining exposure for your work. What are your thoughts on how the internet is opening new doors for artists?

Only a select few will take advantage of what is available and possible online. Because most calling themselves artists are painfully insecure and believe they need assistance to do business, market themselves and succeed. I still see it all the time, there are sites that function as galleries for artists and taking the same roll as the traditional gallery by taking a percent of sales. For what? These sites are even more dangerous to the artist than the traditional gallery system, in that there is NO critical voice. And at least in a traditional gallery they respected the market and strove to curate work that appealed to their patrons. The online artist communities fail on this very basic need of the market- there is no audience.

The internet will only be a valuable tool for an artist once they get over the fear that they are incapable of controlling the business process as much as they control the creative process.

I guess what I am trying to get at is there isn’t a new door opening online. It is the same door that existed before. And beyond that door are all the very real dangers that exist from sharks to snake oil salesman. It still is true that the only way to be successful as an artist is to understand that a projection (the internet) of this world is only as valuable as the reality. It does no good to declare that the gatekeepers are dead if your only solution is to establish new ones.

Let me have it:

Q. Finally, is there anything else you would like to say about your art?

I asked on twitter for responses to this question. search.twitter.com search for #MASInt