I visited the Photography Centre at the V&A on Tuesday, assuming that it would be like most other collections in the V&A, absolutely top class and outstanding, but have to say I was very disappointed. The history, and the technology, of photography were poorly presented (very little of either) and show a lack of imagination. A whole gallery was devoted to the RPS Book Library collection but you could not read any of them! But most disapponiting of all was that there was no display of iconic images ... surely a must? (4 Bill Brandt images do not make a complete display, however remarkable they are.). So many opportunities seem to have been lost here.
Am I just being a "grumpy old man" or does anyone else feel the whole thing needs to be brought up to V&A standards?
Replies
I find the exhibitions in the two main rooms generally very inspiring - and they change with about the same frequency I visit (2 - 3 times a year) - but yes I agree that the other rooms are a wasted opporunity to show more or get more creative about how to show information. For example - what is the point of the library taking up a whole room when it doesn't seem possible to read or look at the books? Maybe there is a way to do that but it seems for some of those books (less valuable) there should be away to sit and browse and also be inspired? This is after all meant to represent the best public collection of old photographs in the UK.....
I am also disappointed with the photographic section. I have now visited it twice and still no improvement. Considering all the hype before it opened originally it's very disappointing. Perhaps they need a bigger area as it's a big subject.
Yes a bigger area might help, but I think opportunities have been missed in the current display themes. For example, Room 95 "Inside the Camera" is woeful ... as a technically oriented person I found the displays boring and unlikely to inspire or inform any young person. Room 100 "The Bern and Ronny Schwarz Gallery" likewise was boring; for example, there are 4 modern stereo viewers (nice ones!) set up, but the stereo-photos are just uninteresting and not good quality ... are they trying to put people off stereoscopy? And why no hands-on Holmes Stereoscope for kids and adults to play with? (I'm mentioning stereo because of the early, and occcasionally recurring, popularity of stereo in the history of photography ... maybe we should enlist the help of stereopath Brian May! Stereo connects to modern day augmented reality.)
I'm going to make another visit in the next year, and this time take notes so I can feed back some detailed positive ideas to the V&A. In sense, the devil is in the detail, and they fall short on the detailed implementation. I strongly suspect they don't have any technical experts in photographic technology (yes, I realise the V&A focuses on art but photography is very much a combination of art and science/technology).
Yes I agree I don't think there's anyone working there with the interest or technical know how in photography they probably all studied art and art history degrees. Brian May would have been a brilliant idea.