Actualizado: 15 de dic de 2020
Stefano Regondi, multifaceted photographer and always oriented towards new experimentations, has answered some questions from FMB Art Gallery.
• What was your first approach to photography?
I have always taken photographs since I was a child, but I remember with pleasure the construction of a camera using a shoebox during technical education classes in middle school. Maybe that event was the first step towards technical understanding of photography.
• What about the most significant steps of your artistic career?
I have always drawn, painted and taken photographs (albeit in a very "shallow" way) until someone pointed out to me that they could potentially become good photos. I bought a good reflex camera paying for it in instalments and enrolled in serious photography courses to deepen all the technical and composition aspects that I ignored. At the same time, I started to shoot in an almost compulsive way also to understand which were the topics and areas most related to me. I have not yet fully understood it.
• Is there a series in particular (already published in the gallery or that will be exhibited in these days) that you consider more relevant or representative?
Actually the series are born during the editing of all the material I have. I almost always don't work on a specific project (except for some assignment or particular situations such as the piers and sea places that fascinate me a lot). Fixing my photos then I realize that I follow very precise paths that are summarized in the series then edited. But it is a "post-shot" awareness.
• Is there any great photographer who has influenced your work? (if yes, in what way)
There is not one in particular but many, let's say I'm very fascinated by streetphotography and travel reportage. The faces, the variety, the colours. To quote a great photographer and say that he influenced me more than others would not be true, perhaps because my tendency to shoot in such a heterogeneous way does not lead me to focus my attention on the work of one or a few great photographers, but to have an all-embracing use of art photography.
• What is the most insidious aspect of photography in your experience? And what is the most satisfying one?
The most insidious aspect of photography is certainly the fact that it has a scientific and very technical basis, made of calculations and proportions, of very correlated variables and I, due to my character and predisposition, am not very inclined to rigour. However, they are basic factors of the technique and, like it or not, they must be taken into account despite I consider them insidious. The satisfaction comes from the fact of reaching a fixed goal: I want to make a shot with certain colour characteristics, light, exposure and in the end I succeed. Or from unexpected sometimes a random and unthought out shot gives an unforeseen and enjoyable result. But it's a matter of luck.
• Are there any shots you are particularly proud of or feel particularly attached to?
Of course, Fisherman! Exactly what I wanted to capture: the light, the movement, the unconscious subject, the pier, the sea. There is everything I wanted to tell about a fisherman crossed by chance at sunset in Calabria.
• Is there the perfect photo for you or is there a photo you would like to take most of all?
As I have already said about great photographers, there is not a single photo that I consider perfect but a lot of them. There are also a lot of photos on the social media, maybe taken by amateur photographers, that I think are great and that I would like to have taken myself.
• We have understood that you prefer not to work on the photo with editing programs, but you prefer to create effects through the specific use of the camera itself. What do you think about post-production, then? Do you always consider it to be avoided or do you believe that there are adjustments that do not compromise the authenticity of the final result?
I admit some minor editing on exposure and light as far as my work is concerned. In case it is a matter of totally upsetting a photo and transforming it into something else from the original, then no. At that point it means that I didn't take a good photo or at least it wasn't what I had in mind. As for the work of others, there are those who create wonderful images with post-production, but I think it's a completely different work that takes its cue from a basic photograph to create an artwork different from what is naked and raw photography. Moreover, the real photography would be the analogical one and already using a digital camera there is a deconstructive process of the real and reconstructive image in digital. Adding further digital modifications would seem to me too much.
• The Sperimentale series was born from the desire to experiment with the camera, in particular the blurred images of London Vague and Wien Vague what do they want to represent? How should we read the choice to act in this way on the focus?
What I like about blurred images are the spots of colour that remain blurred up close but as we move away they give an idea of the subject. They are images that could be traced back to any place and that's why in the titles I have specified the shooting locations. I love them very much because I find them graphically pleasing to the eye and indefinite as dreamlike and unclear images. In reality they are simple shots that do not require any particular technique except to adjust the focus. The important thing is to find the right light and colours that balance the result and, of course, the subjects and context suitable for the purpose.
• Among the photos exhibited in the gallery, none is in black and white, what is the reason for your choice to avoid working on B/W?
Actually it is a case that the choice of the gallery has been mainly based on colour photos. I shoot a lot also in black and white, especially when it comes to architecture where
this technique increases depth and shadows.
© All rights reserved FMB Art Gallery / FMB Globo Arte srls