Sanatçı, Akademisyen, Küratör / Artist, Academician, Curator
tanselturkdogan@gmail.com
Türkiye
Antakya, 1969 doğumlu olan Tansel Türkdoğan, lisans ve lisansüstü eğitimlerinin ardından, 1989’dan itibaren ODTÜ’de sırası ile asistan, öğretim görevlisi ve öğretim üyesi olarak çalıştı. 1998’de doçent, 2004‘de profesör oldu. 2000 -2005 yıllarında, ODTÜ Güzel Sanatlar ve Müzik Bölümü Başkanlığı’nı yaptı. 2005 yılında Gazi Üniversitesi, Güzel Sanatlar Fakültesi, Kurucu Dekanı oldu. Türkdoğan, 90’ların başından itibaren, güncel sanat pratikleri ile ilgilenmeye başladı ve üretimler gerçekleştirdi. 1989 Yılından itibaren Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, Almanya, Arnavutluk, Belçika, Çin, Çek Cumhuriyeti, Gürcistan, Fransa, Hollanda, İtalya, Polonya, Yunanistan, Arnavutluk, Romanya ve Tunus’ta üniversitelerde, galerilerde çalışmalar yaptı; workshoplara proje ve grup sergilerine katıldı; yurt içinde ve dışında küratörlükler üstlendi.
“Çağdaş Sanat” ve “Modernizm Sonrası Sanat Tartışmaları-Sanat Kültür Politika” adlı kitapları bulunan Türkdoğan, bugüne kadar üçü yurtdışı olmak üzere 25 kişisel sergi açtı; uluslararası ve ulusal sempozyumlara, bienallere, proje ve bildirileri ile katıldı, TRT’de danışmanlık, UNESCO UPSD yönetim kurulu üyeliği yaptı; sanat dergileri ve günlük gazetelerde makaleler yazdı. Sergileri hakkında, kataloglar, pek çok kritik ve haber yazısı basılmıştır. Koridoor sanatçılar arasında yer almaktadır.
Türkdoğan, ODTÜ, Güzel Sanatlar ve Müzik Bölümü ve Mimarlık Fakültesi, Endüstri Ürünleri Tasarımı Bölümleri’nde dersler vermiş, Gazi Üniversitesi, Güzel Sanatlar Fakültesi’nde kuruculuk, akademik görevleri yanında, lisans, Y. Lisans ve Sanatta Yeterlik programlarında dersler vermiş, halen ODTÜ, GSMB, Ankara Üniversitesi ve AHBVGSF’de Resim Bölümü öğretim üyesi olarak görevlerine devam etmektedir.
Prof. Tansel Türkdoğan, sanatın güncel sorunlarına ve postmodern duruma ilgi duymaktadır.
Bu sunumda, modernist paradigma; sınıflandırmalar; normlar; postmodernizm; yeni paradigmanın getirdikleri; disiplinlerin birlikteliği; temsil krizi; değişim; değişen paradigma, değişen stratejiler başlıkları altında, bugünkü durumu tanımlamak için, modernizm üzerinden bugünkü pratiklere bakarak, karşılaştırmalı bir okuma yapılacaktır.
Modernizm, Güncel Sanat, Paradigma, Temsil Krizi, Değişen Stratejiler.
Nelerden Bahsedeceğiz?
Bugünkü durumu tanımlamak için modernizm üzerinden bugünkü pratiklere bakacağız paradigma, stratejiler, normlar, temsil meselesi, okumalar. Emmanuel Wallerstein, Chantal Mouffe , Arthur Danto, Larry ShIner, Jack RancIere, Edward Said, Nicolas Bourriaud, Suzan Sontag
• Modernizm normları ve onun fotoğrafa bakışı, bugünün paradigması
• Modernizm sınıflandırma dönemi: Kuşkusuz insanlığın yararı sözkonusu
Modernist Paradigma, Sınıflandırmalar
Modernizmin niyeti, stratejileri
Vaatler, niyetler, sanatın «estetik» durumu (güzel ile sanatın yapışması)
Normlar
• Modernizm’in postmodernizm’e normsuzluk suçlaması
• Sanatı üretmede biricikliğin kutsanması
•Tabular
• Orijinallik meselesi
• Fotoğrafın dışarıda bırakılması
• Yeteneğin ve el işçiliğinin kutsanışı
Postmodernizm
• Modernizm sonrası yeni paradigma
• Güncel sanatın grameri, temel soruyu sorarken ontolojik bir tavırla konuya yaklaşmalı
• Orta ve yaşlı kuşak sanatçıların paradigmaya göre sanatı okuma biçimleri veya paradigma ve yeni sanatın gramerleri önemli…
Yeni Paradigmanın Getirdikleri
• Yeni aktörler
• Yeni stratejiler
• Yeni taktikler-teknikler üretim aygıtları
• Fotoğrafın durumu
- Post Sanat’ın paradigması
- Modernizmin sanat ve sanatçı açmazı, yaşamdan kopan sanat
- “sanat=hayat” mottosu ve sanatı yeniden tanımlaması dolayısıyla modernist projenin post’u ile çatışması…
Disiplinlerin Birlikteliği
• Modernizm’in paradigması, tabuları ve sanatın ‘ne’liğine dair tabuları ve disiplin tanımları, duvarları…
• Sınıflandırma meselesinde ortaya çıkan disiplinlerarasılık
• Fotoğrafın yeni pozisyonu
Temsil Krizi
• Sanat vektörel bir olgu mu?(sanat tarihi eleştirisi)
• Sanat kendi mecrasında ilerleyen bir süreç mi?
• Dinamiklere bağlı bir süreç mi?
TEMSİL KRİZİ – “Susan Sontag okumaları” Eddie Adams – Picasso, Guernica
AP ajansı foto muhabirlerinin yakaladıkları görüntüler çabucak Vietnam Savaşı ile eş anlamlı hale geldi. Bunlar arasında en ünlülerinden biri Eddie Adams'ın, Güney Vietnamlı General Nguyen Ngoc Loan'ın bir Vietkonglu subayı başından vurduğu sırada yakaladığı fotoğraftı. Bu görüntü kamuoyunun Vietnam Savaşı hakkındaki görüşlerini değiştirecek ve General Loan'u ölünceye kadar rahatsız edecekti.
Değişim
• En basit bir örnek çoğaltma-edisyon pratikleri olarak fotoğrafın ve baskı resmin daha tali bir tavırla sınıflandırılarak ötelenmesi…
• Çoğaltılabilirliğin-edisyonun aşağılanması söz konusu iken…
• En tercih edilen pratiklerden birisi haline gelen fotoğraf.
Bu olup biten ne idi -“kaza anı metaforu”. Sonrası geç kalmış tartışmalar.
1940’lardan itibaren telafuz edilen postmodern okumalarda “ne ile yaptığından çok ne yaptığının” öne çıkması ,güncel üretimlerdeki “statement”, bağlam ile kodları daha iyi görmek olası…
Güncel Sanat pratiklerinde Yeni Teknik Olanaklarla Güncel Sanat Yapıtı Olarak yeni stratejilerle değişen “malzeme” ve diğer komponentlerin yükselişi fotoğraf.
Modernizm’in izleyiciyi edilgenleştiren, izleyici pozisyonuna indirgeyen aslında abartılı sanat tanımları da değişti. Jack Ranciere’in “özgürleşen seyirci”sinde belirttiği gibi, etken, interaktif ve çözümleyici izleyici tipolojisi önerildi.
Sanat pratikleri “bilgi nesnesi” olarak tanımlanmaya başladı. Bu bilgi nesnesini anlamlandırmak zihinsel bir katılımı önermekteydi.
Değişen Paradigma, Değişen Stratejiler
Paradigma değişimi sanat pratikleri açısından, beraberinde yeni stratejileri de getiriyor.
Modernizm’in yol haritaları, sanatçılara önerilen öğretiler, yeni gramerlere kavuşuyor.
Modernizm’in pek de sevmediği ve tabu ilan ettiği tüm stratejiler, kavramlar sahada uygulanmaya başladı, örneğin mikro etnik pratikler, dökümantasyon v.b. …
Fotoğraf, video, bu toz duman ortamda, yepyeni bir okuma ile güncel sanat üretiminde oldukça prestijli bir yere oturmakla birlikte, kimyasal fotoğraf geleneği ve onun devamında, teknolojik alanı kullanan konvansiyonel fotoğrafçılarla sinema yönetmenleri ile güncel sanat pratisyenlerinin arası hiç iyi olamadı. Bu alanlardaki tutuculuk ve alanın terk ediliyor hissi vermesi, temeldeki sorundu. Bu, aslında temelde teknik bir konudan çok daha fazlasını içeren bir durum. Bu, sanatın ne olduğuna ilişkin temel bir problem alanı. Güncel sanat, fotoğrafı konvansiyonel fotoğrafçıların kullandığı ortak malzeme ile yapsa da yepyeni bir bağlam ile teknik ve taktik manipülasyonlar yapıyor, böylece, fotoğrafı fotoğraf olmaktan çıkarıyor.
Temel sorun da burada başlıyor. Kadrajın bozulması, teknik çekim mantıkları, senaryo ve yönetmen diktası, kompozisyon manipülasyonları gibi geleneksel öğretilerin baş aşağı edildiği uygulamalar, fotoğrafçıların zamanında kimyasal ve dijital için yaptıkları tartışmaların çok ötesinde, daha büyük bir tartışma alanı yaratmıştır. Bu, yukarıda da belirttiğim gibi, sanatın ne olduğu ve güncel sanatın buna verdiği yanıtta gizli bir durumdur.
Walter Benjamin yeni teknik olanakların üretim biçimleri ve onun sanata eklemlediği durumu ve yeni önermeleri incelediği çalışmasında (bkz; “work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction”, "tekniğin olanaklarıyla yeniden üretilebildiği çağda sanat yapıtı"), mekanik üretimin sanat eserini "aura"sından uzaklaştırdığını, sanat eserinin tarihi kanıtlarını ve dolayısıyla otoritesini tehlikeye attığını belirtir. Bu Modernizm’in sanat eseri ve sanatsal yaratı süreçlerini ve onun nitelik sorunlarını gündeme getiren bir saptamadır. Yani, sanat nesnesi konvansiyonel öğretinin yolundan giderek, kendi var oluşunu gerçekleştirmektedir.
Oysa postmodern gardrobu kullanan güncel sanat, bu yaklaşımı tamamen dışlayarak sanat nesnesini “üretirken”, konvansiyonel veya güncel her türlü üretim biçimine, malzemesine ve disiplinine açık olduğu gibi, sanat eserinin niteliğini de yeni normlu bir yere taşımıştır. Güncel Sanat, Modernizm’in üvey evladı fotoğrafı ve onu üretme biçimlerini, yeni bir içerikle, sanat, sanat eseri ve izleyici kavramı ile yeniden buluşturan bir bağlamda ele almıştır.
Şüphesiz, fotoğraf artık Benjamin’in öngörüsündeki modernist yeni yerin çok ötesinde, sayısal teknolojilerinde katkıları ile güncel sanat projelerinin temel malzemelerinden birisi haline gelmiştir. Burada önemli olan ise, bugün fotoğrafın hangi bağlamlarda değer bulduğu ve sergilendiğidir. Bugün, teknik çözümlemeler güncel sanat projelerinin temel derdi değildir. Bugünün sanatının her ne teknik kullanılırsa kullanılsın en temel sorunu “bağlam”dır. Bağlam ile işi kurgulayabilir ve işi oluşturabilir, belki de işi tamamlamadan süreci gözler önüne serebilirsiniz, hatta projeyi düşünce sürecinde bırakarak var edersiniz, burada teknik manipülasyon yine sizin seçiminizdir.
Tüm bu tartışmaların ötesinde, telaffuz edilen “kültür endüstrisi”nin veya “pazar”, “küratör” gibi aktörlerinin tüm etkileri bir yana, bir modernist proje olarak “avant-garde”ın da yerini alan bir kavram olarak, “yeni” kavramı ile burun buruna gelmiş durumdayız.
In this presentation, a comparative reading will be made by looking at today's practices through modernism in order to define the current situation under the titles of modernist paradigm; classifications; norms; postmodernism; what the new paradigm brings; unity of disciplines; crisis of representation; change; changing paradigm, changing strategies.
Modernism, Contemporary Art, Paradigm, Crisis of Representation, Changing Strategies.
Born in Antakya, 1969, Tansel Türkdoğan has worked as an assistant, lecturer and faculty member at METU since 1989, following his undergraduate and graduate studies.. He became Associate Professor in 1998 and Professor in 2004, and served as the head of METU Fine Arts and Music Department between 2000-2005. In 2005, he became the Founding Dean of Gazi University Faculty of Fine Arts. Since the early 90s, Türkdoğan has been interested in contemporary art practices and realized productions. Since 1989, he has worked in universities and galleries in the United States of America, Germany, Albania, Belgium, China, Czech Republic, Georgia, France, Netherlands, Italy, Poland, Greece, Romania and Tunisia, participated in workshops, project and group exhibitions, and curated in Turkey and abroad. Türkdoğan, who has books titled "Contemporary Art" and "Post Modernism Art Debates - Art Culture Politics", has opened 25 solo exhibitions, three of which are abroad, participated in international and national symposiums, biennials with his works, projects and papers, worked as a consultant at TRT, UNESCO UPSD board member, wrote articles in art magazines and daily newspapers, catalogs about his exhibitions, many critical and news articles have been published.
Prof. Türkdoğan has lectured at METU Fine Arts and Music Departments and Faculty of Architecture, Industrial Design Departments, and besides his founding academic duties at Gazi University Faculty of Fine Arts, he has lectured at undergraduate, graduate and doctorate programs, and still continues his duties as a faculty member in the Department of Painting at METU GSMB, Ankara University and AHBVGSF.
Prof. Tansel Türkdoğan is interested in the current problems of art and the postmodern situation.
Araştırmacı, Editör, Eğitimci / Researcher, Editor, Educator
HOLLANDA / NEDERLAND
Marc Prüst (1975) fotoğraf endüstrisinin görsel ekonomisi konusunda uzmanlaşmış bir araştırmacı, editör ve eğitimcidir. Groningen Üniversitesinde doktora öğrencisi olan Prüst, araştırmasında, fotoğraf endüstrisinin tanımlanabilir ve açıklanabilir modeller tarafından nasıl yönetildiğini incelemektedir. Akademik çalışmalarına ek olarak, Macaristan, Budapeşte’de Fotoğrafçılık Yüksek Lisans programlarında ders vermekte, ağ oluşturma, üretim ve çağdaş fotoğrafçılığın profesyonel ortamına odaklanmaktadır. Fotoğrafik hikâye anlatımı üzerine iki kitapçık yayımladı: Hikâyeni Anlat (2020) ve Hikâyeni Düzenle (2024). Uzmanlığı küratörlük, danışmanlık ve yayıncılık alanlarında olan Prüst, günümüz fotoğraf pratiğini şekillendiren ekonomik ve sosyal yapılara özel bir ilgi duymaktadır.
Bu bildiri Hollanda fotoğraf endüstrisini, Deborah Poole tarafından önerilen görsel ekonomi çerçevesinde incelemektedir. Fotoğrafçılık genellikle görüntüler üzerinden analiz edilse de aynı zamanda üretim, dolaşım ve değerlendirme ile şekillenen bir endüstridir. Araştırma, bu sektörün yapısal organizasyonunu incelemekte ve kültür politikası çerçeveleri içinde, görünürlüğü ve tanınırlığındaki önemli boşlukları ortaya koymaktadır.
Hollanda fotoğrafçılık sektörüne ilişkin bir vaka çalışması, sektörün görünmezliğine katkıda bulunan sistematik veri toplama eksikliğini vurgulamaktadır. 2024 yılına kadar Hollanda Kültürel Monitörü'nde yer almayan fotoğrafçılık, devletin kültür politikası içindeki marjinalleşmesini yansıtmaktadır. İstatistiksel verileri ve sektör paydaşlarıyla yapılan görüşmeleri kullanan çalışma, üretim aşamasının nispeten iyi belgelenmiş olmasına rağmen, dolaşım ve değerlendirme aşamalarının yeterince araştırılmadığını ortaya koyuyor. Müzeler, galeriler ve fotoğraf festivalleri gibi kurumlar, devletin sınırlı işbirliği veya desteği ile izole bir şekilde faaliyet göstermektedir.
Fotoğrafçılığın üretim aşamasına odaklanılması, sektörün bütünlüğünü daha da zayıflatmaktadır. Fotoğrafçılar kurumsal desteğe erişmekte zorlanırken, sektör örgütleri daha yakından tanıma ve finansal destek konularında geri kalmaktadırlar. Fotoğrafçılığın Kültürel Monitör'e dahil edilmesi meşruiyet yolunda atılmış bir adımdır, ancak uygulayıcılar, kurumlar ve politika yapıcılar arasındaki kopukluğu gidermek için, daha fazla çaba sarf edilmesi gerekmektedir.
Görsel Ekonomi, Fotoğrafçılık Endüstrisi, Kültür Politikası.
This paper examines the Dutch photographic industry through the framework of the visual economy, as proposed by Deborah Poole. While photography is often analyzed through its images, it is also an industry shaped by production, circulation, and appraisal. The research investigates the structural organization of this sector, revealing significant gaps in its visibility and recognition within cultural policy frameworks.
A case study of the Dutch photographic industry highlights the lack of systematic data collection, which has contributed to the sector’s invisibility. Until 2024, photography was absent from the Dutch Cultural Monitor, reflecting its marginalization within state cultural policy. Using statistical data and interviews with industry stakeholders, the study demonstrates that while the production stage is relatively well-documented, the circulation and appraisal stages remain underexplored. Institutions such as museums, galleries, and photography festivals function in isolation, with limited collaboration or state support.
The focus on the production stage of photography further weakens the industry’s cohesion. Photographers struggle to access institutional support, while industry organizations lack the capacity to advocate for better recognition and funding. The inclusion of photography in the Cultural Monitor is a step toward legitimacy, but further efforts are needed to bridge the disconnection between practitioners, institutions, and policymakers.
Visual Economy, Photographic Industry, Cultural Policy.
When studying photography, we often look at images, but photography can be considered an industry. Indeed, many practitioners complain that it is difficult to make a sustainable income, that rates are under pressure, and that generative AI, as amateur photography, digital imagery, and digital manipulation before that, threatens the future of the medium. These complaints, however, have little to do with the iconography of images. It therefore makes sense to look into the workings of the industry. Can it indeed be argued that we can speak of a ‘photographic industry’? How is it organised, and how should we approach this sector when researching or discussing it?
In this paper, I take my report published in February 2025 ‘Fotografie en de Cultuurmonitor’ (Photography and the Cultural Monitor) on cultural photography in the Netherlands and how it can be quantified as a case study to answer these questions. (Prüst, 2025) In this report I identified indicators, or specific numerical data, that can be used to measure the state and development of the sector. Such indicators are the basis for the state financed Boekman Foundation to report on photography in their annual monitor on the cultural sector, the Cultural Monitor. Until 2024, photography did not figure at all in this overview. Indeed, photography is not considered an independent discipline within the Dutch government policy. Inclusion into the Cultural Monitor may be a first step to the recognition of the medium as a discipline. Upon the publication of the report, the Boekman Foundation indicated they intended to start reporting on the Dutch photographic sector.
The Visual Economy
There seems to be a mismatch between how photography is perceived and studied and how the photographic industry actually functions. I aim to understand how the photographic industry functions and do so by searching for a system that explains and clarifies this industry. Deborah Poole has offered a valuable format for analysing the industry with her book on historical Andean photography, and the term she coined: the visual economy. According to Poole the visual economy is a way to describe how different communities may have very different visual cultures but may still be part of the same visual economy. The term ‘economy’ also suggests that indeed there is a system that can be described and analysed. A visual economy consists of three levels in which photographic visuals accrue value. The production stage, the stage of circulation and that of appraisal. Each stage is ‘needed’ for visuals to gain, or loose, value. This analysis goes beyond the mere visual analysis of iconography but takes this division into these three levels as its starting point. (Poole, 1997) Value can be seen as economic value, or as social value, or ‘impact’.
The production stage includes the technical aspects of photography: the development of photographic techniques and how it has led to decreased costs of production and increased numbers of practitioners. The production stage of the visual economy is also concerned with the practice of taking photographs. It seems on the surface that this level has received most attention in research, but is also the main perspective when perceiving the photographic industry.
The second level is concerned with how photographs move in circulation. Several research projects have aimed to shed light on the functioning of this stage circulation stage, and have shown that, especially in photojournalism, it is not the photographer but the position of the ‘image broker’ that is crucial in bringing photographs into circulation.(Gürsel, 2016) (Bair, 2020) (Campbell, 2008) (Yuksel & Butter, 2020) The image brokers are crucial in assigning the photograph with value through this process. In my report I did not specifically look into the role or position of these image brokers.
At the third level of the visual economy, that of ‘appraisal’, images are discussed, judged, interpreted, and studied. The academic world that researches and describes photography as a medium and as an art is part of this level. Also, gallery and museum exhibitions that are discussed and reviewed in the media, discussed in art programs, can be considered to be part of this stage.
Poole’s system of the visual economy is a relevant tool to analyse the photographic industry and to identify that value accruement happens at different stages. This approach helps to distinguish clearly between production and circulation and indicates that to better understand the industry a study into the process of circulation, and not a study into iconography of visuals, is relevant. David Campbell has indicated such in his work into the visual economy (Campbell, 2008). This paper follows this logic and applies the visual economy concept of Poole and Campbell.
The Dutch Case: Aiming For Visibility Through the Cultural Monitor
Using my case study into the Dutch photographic industry, I test whether indeed the production level of the visual economy is indeed the main focus of the photographic research and analysis. I also analyse how the stages of production and circulation relate to each other specifically in the cultural sector and what conclusions we can draw on the realities of the sector when taking the visual economy theory as the framework for analysis.
When I started looking into the Dutch photographic industry, I realised there were practically no data available from the sector itself, there is no central point where data are collected for interpretation or usage by policy advisors or researchers. I therefore collected data myself to provide an insight into the photographic sector. The National Statistics Bureau (CBS) collects data on ‘photography’ based on branch codes (SBI-codes) and for the data until 2024 we can distinguish four branch codes concerned with photography.
46434: Wholesale trade in photographic items
47781: Shops in photographic items
74021: Photography
74202: Development stores
74203: Development centrals
Photography (with branch code 74201) is defined as the ‘taking of photographs for consumers and businesses’, it is a class that includes the making of imagery, only. Codes 74202 and 74203 are concerned with developing and printing of analogue photography. Taking a photograph was indeed an economic activity in times of analogue photography, which no longer is the case with digital photography.
With the CBS data we see that in the Netherlands most photographers are independent freelance photographers, that in 2023 there were almost 25.000 photographers with photography as their main activity, 15.000 of them work full time as photographers, and 1500 are employed. The vast majority works as freelance entrepreneur. The annual average income from photographic activities is 9700 euro. [1] The CBS also reports that in 2023 there were 100 wholesale traders and 250 stores in photographic items. Notably, the CBS has no specific branch codes for image brokers, or companies working in the business of photographic circulation.
Two unions for photographers exist in the Netherlands, one specifically for photographers working in news media, one for all kinds of photographers. Together they have a little over 2500 members, or 10% of all photographers with photography as main activity.
The development stores and centrals have become irrelevant as economic entities and as of 2025 they no longer appear in the CBS data.
No other data concerned with photography are collected by the CBS. To gain an insight in the institutions working with photography I collected alternative data. I focused this research on the institutions in the cultural photographic sector: museums, archives and collections, and platforms such as commercial and non-commercial galleries.
Using the annual reports of photography institutions, I collected relevant data that give an insight into the sector. I calculated that in 2023 the Netherlands had 6 photography museums, 30 museums with a photography collection, 34 museums with a collection and regular photography exhibitions. There were 8 photography festivals, 52 commercial galleries, and 8 non-commercial galleries. In total they organised 250 photography exhibitions, with little under 600.000 visits.
The research included several interviews with stakeholders from the industry. From compiling the report, I was able to make the following analysis.
The two levels of production and circulation are connected, but there is a distance between them. On the one hand we see the sectors for which the CBS collects data and provides detailed insights: the practitioners, film development (shops and centrals) and wholesale and shops in photographic items. These sectors are all on the production level of the visual economy. For the circulation and appraisal levels of the visual economy, no statistical data exist. We can however distinguish individuals and institutions within the cultural sector for which the CBS collects no data. Institutions such as museums, platforms, and galleries self-identify as photographic organisations and they considered themselves to be part of a photographic sector. On a governmental level however they remain largely invisible as they are not represented as a sector in reports or policy documents.
As photography is not a discipline, this has led to a mismatch in the Dutch situation of the cultural sector between funding requirements and opportunities for organisations and practitioners. Only state funding for visual art, applied design, or discipline specific projects such as film, exist. Photographers and institutions have therefore limited possibilities for funding for photographic projects, or institutional support. This means that photographic projects, both for production as well as circulation, such as exhibitions or books, are often not judged by photographic criteria, but by criteria of other disciplines. It also means that photographic projects that receive funding are not recorded as such, leading to further invisibility of the sector. A few private funds exist though that focus specifically on photography, they offer funding for the creation of new work by photographers. Specific institutional support for photography initiatives does not exist in the Dutch system.
This lack of financial opportunities from state funding leads organisations to focus on their own activities and financial survival. They are not in a position to gather data or organize themselves into joint lobby activities. We see little connection between institutions.
The linkage between practitioners and the institutions is limited. We see a distance between photographers on the one hand and presentation platforms, archives and collections, and museums on the other. Photographers are largely unaware of the criteria that are used by the institutions or the considerations by which they make decisions. Photographers’ union density of 10% further limits their clout towards policy influence.
Conclusion: The Perspective of Circulation to Enlarge Visibility
This paper examined the Dutch photographic industry through the lens of the visual economy, demonstrating the clear distinctions between production on the one hand and, circulation and appraisal on the other. The findings show that indeed we can speak of a photographic sector or industry in the Dutch situation but also of a significant gap between the realities of this sector and its recognition within cultural policy frameworks. The lack of statistical data, institutional support, and coherent representation within the cultural sector has contributed to the invisibility of photography as an industry in the Netherlands.
The research confirms that while production is well-documented through national statistics, the circulation and appraisal stages remain underexplored and under-supported. Institutions that facilitate the circulation of photographic works, such as museums, galleries, and photography festivals, operate in relative isolation due to the absence of a collective organizational structure or state support. This fragmentation limits the industry's ability to advocate for its needs, secure funding, and establish a robust professional framework.
Furthermore, the focus on the production stage of photography has contributed to a disconnect between practitioners and institutions. Photographers often lack knowledge of the criteria that determine access to institutional support, while institutions operate without a comprehensive understanding of the industry's broader economic landscape. The low membership rates in photographers' unions further weaken their ability to influence policy or negotiate better financial conditions.
By applying Poole’s concept of the visual economy, this study underscores the necessity of analysing the photographic industry beyond the production stage. A more integrated approach, one that considers circulation and appraisal as equally important elements, can help to develop a sustainable industry model. The recognition of photography within the Cultural Monitor marks a potential turning point in the Netherlands, but further steps are needed to ensure that photographers, institutions, and policymakers work towards a more cohesive and visible industry. Future research should deepen and widen the understanding of the sector, develop further the perspective of circulation, and aim to foster stronger connections between practitioners and cultural institutions. Addressing these challenges will be key to securing a sustainable and recognized position for photography within the Dutch cultural landscape.
[1] Median income in the Netherlands is 39,100 euro https://longreads.cbs.nl/nederland-in-cijfers-2023/wat-is-het-inkomen-van-werkenden/ in the same period (2023).
Literature
Bair, N. (2020); The decisive network Magnum Photos and the postwar image market; University of California Press.
Campbell, D. (2008): The Visual Economy of HIV/AIDS.
Gürsel, Z. D. (2016); Image brokers : visualizing world news in the age of digital circulation. University of California Press.
Poole, D. (1997); Vision, Race, and Modernity : a Visual Economy of the Andean Image World; Princeton University Press.
Prüst, M. (2025); Fotografie en de Cultuurmonitor
Yuksel, C. & Butter, E. (2020); Moslima, Een onderzoek naar de representatie van Moslima’s in de beeldbank van het ANP.
Marc Prüst (1975) is a researcher, editor, and educator specializing in the visual economy of the photographic industry. He is a PhD candidate at the University of Groningen, where his research examines how the photographic industry is governed by identifiable and describable models. In addition to his academic work, he teaches on the Master’s programs in Photography in Budapest, Hungary, focusing on networking, production, and the professional landscape of contemporary photography. He has published two booklets on photographic storytelling: "Tell Your Story" (2020) and "Edit Your Story" (2024). His expertise spans curating, consulting, and publishing, with a particular interest in the economic and social structures shaping photographic practice today.
MA, PhD candidate, University of Groningen, Research School for Media Studies, m.h.c.prust@rug.nl
Sanat Yönetmeni, Küratör / Artistic Director, Curator
PORTEKİZ, PORTUGAL
(Lizbon, 1968)
2011 / 14 - Tiyatro Prodüksiyonu Yüksek Lisansı1990 yılından bu yana, kültür endüstrilerindeki çeşitli kurumlar için, yaratıcı yapımcı ve proje yöneticisi olarak çalışmaktadır. Nuno Salgado, hem yapımcı hem de yaratıcı olarak, görsel sanatlar (fotoğrafçılık), festivaller, sahne sanatları (tiyatro), multimedya (sinema, video ve televizyon), müzik, yaratıcı pazarlar, uluslararası kültürel ağlar ve konferanslarla ilgili projeler geliştirdi. Yılın Portekizli Yapımcısı 2014 - Prémio Natércia Campos Ödülü'nü aldı.
Procur.arte Associação Cultural e Social'ın kurucu üyesi ve Yönetim Kurulu Başkanıdır (2005).
2022/… - Sanat Yönetmeni, Procur.arte Yaratıcı platform mekanı
2021/22 - Sanat Yönetmeni ve Baş Koordinatör “Flâneur ao Centro”
2017/21 - Sanat Yönetmeni ve Baş Koordinatör, PARALLEL - Avrupa Fotoğraf Temelli Platformu
2015/17 - Sanat Yönetmeni ve Baş Koordinatör, “Flâneur - Yeni Kent Anlatıları”
Flâneur, fotoğraf temelli bir sanat ve değişim projesidir. Son 2 yıldır 11 Avrupa ülkesinin kamusal alanlarında dolaşan 20 ortaktan oluşan büyük ölçekli, çok disiplinli ve çok katmanlı bir ağdır.
Avrupa'yı bir baştan bir başa geçmek, aynı zamanda farklı kültürlere, davranış biçimlerine ve alışkanlıklara uyum sağlamak anlamına geliyordu. Aynı hafta içinde İngiliz, Alman veya Portekizli ekiplerle çalışıyor, ardından Litvanya'ya ve hemen ardından da İspanya'nın kuzeyine seyahat ediyorduk. Keskin zıtlıklar ve beklenmedik benzerlikler vardı ve bunların hepsi ortak bir kamusal fotoğraf sanatı projesinde bir araya getirildi.
Bu sanatsal çalışma 7/24 yerel halkla paylaşılmak üzere tasarlandı. Süreç boyunca tüm mekanlarda bulunma ve farklı halkların sergilerle nasıl etkileşime girdiğine tanık olma fırsatım oldu.
Flâneur, Avrupa, Kamusal Paylaşım.
Flâneur is an artistic and exchange project based on photography. It’s large scale, multidisciplinary and multi-layered network of 20 partners that has been wandering around the public spaces of 11 European countries during the last 2 years.
Crossing Europe back and forth also meant adjusting to different cultures, attitudes and habits. The same week, we’d be working with English, German or Portuguese teams, then travel to Lithuania, and right after to the north of Spain. There were sharp contrasts and unexpected similarities, all mixed and brought together in a collaborative photography public art project.
And last, but not least, the public: this artistic work was conceived to be shared 24/7 with the locals. I had the opportunity to be at all the venues and to witness how different publics interacted with the exhibitions.
Flâneur, Europe, Public Sharing.
Presentation in “elevator pitch” style: Flâneur is an artistic and exchange project based on photography. It’s large scale, multidisciplinary and multi-layered network of 20 partners that has been wandering around the public spaces of 11 European countries during the last 2 years.
After countless hours of work, trips, talks and photos, we are finally taking a moment to stop and think, to realise what it has all meant to us. So, instead of my usual approach, I chose to share a few of my personal views, my own experiences and emotions about the project. Flâneur stirred up a lot in me, an array of emotions, mostly pleasant, positive, good vibrations… It has been a long road since we first started to dream about it. And now we are on the break of the final exhibition and project catalogue.
Almost unbelieveable.
What an adventure…
All stories have to start somewhere, Flâneur’s started in the stunning vineyards of the Douro, in the north of Portugal. We were finishing a 3-year project called Entre Margens (literally “between the river banks”), with exhibitions in several cities of the region, bringing artwork to the middle of the streets and squares. The feedback, both from the artists and the public, was enriching and unforgettable. And it also became the catalyst for the idea: why not to do this across Europe?
The first step was building a network, finding likeminded people to work with us. Extensive contacts were made with curators and producers of photography events, artists and others. Informal meetings also played a part in this partnership - some of our strongest relationships were forged over wine tastings or even on dance floors.
With the network on the move, Skype quickly became our meeting room, those on-screen talks were key to discuss ideas and to expand the project. Skype became so symbolic, that we even chose it to film the interviews for the final documentary.
On and offline, we spent hours and hours planning, pondering and assessing the different needs and challenges of our task.
I can’t stress how important this was to the success of the project.
Flâneur started as a dream, shared by our local team and partners across Europe. But to turn it into a reality, we had to adjust to new working methods and face unexpected trials. First, such a large scaled project needed proper funding. As you can imagine, it wasn’t an easy step. We searched, knocked on doors and filled dozens of applications. After a failed attempt, finally we were granted the Creative Europe and the UNESCO support. We were ecstatic and almost couldn’t believe that we had won, not one, but both grants. We immediately started working. There was a critical sense of urgency - we had committed to a programme and an event schedule, even if it was not perfectly attuned with the European funding bureaucracy.
Since the beginning, we had a clear idea of the kind of design and lay-out our exhibitions should have. Flâneur’s artwork would be displayed on a modular structure of light boxes, ensuring that everyone could walk around and over them.
It had to be adaptable to different settings, fast and easy to assemble, movable and also retain an aesthetic identity. The ingenious solution was created in a small, family-based locksmith’s workshop in the outskirts of Lisbon. Working closely with them, we managed to create this light, unobtrusive and versatile structure. Seeing it in place now, nobody would guess that it actually weighs about 11 tonnes… Moving all that material around Europe was another challenge, and required skills that seemed more related to a rock band tour than to a photography exhibition. In each city, different logistics and regulations, we were always learning… But we never let that us hold back - during these two years, Flâneur’s installing teams travelled more than 21.491 Km.
Crossing Europe back and forth also meant adjusting to different cultures, attitudes and habits. Yet another challenge. In the same week, we’d be working with English, German or Portuguese teams, then travel to Lithuania, and right after to the north of Spain. There were sharp contrasts and unexpected similarities, all mixed and brought together in a collaborative photography public art project.
A special word to the exceptional relationship we had with each festival and with local curators - essential to accomplish the aims of the project. Each of them chose the artists who would work in their own city, sharing and debating their artistic approach with us – the leading team and general curators of the project.
The photographers would be asked to share their insight about the two main goals of the project: to promote an artistic reflection of Europe and its cities, in a moment when the touristification and gentrification seem to be changing these territories irreparably, and to explore how photographers can act as flâneurs in an era of image overproduction.
The Flâneur photographers came from different countries and cultural backgrounds, most of them travelled to another city, photographed there, some for the first time, bringing us a fresh vision of each territory. The diversity of their points of view is certainly one of the strengths of the project.
Each artist approached the flânerie and the urban fabric in their own way - some were more focused on people, others on animals, architecture or social relationships. Others were more interested in the wandering as a creative process.
All the photos were new productions, specially commissioned for this project – another one of the many peculiarities of the Flâneur. When we started, no one knew what the final result would be. Once more, believing and taking the risk. No regrets…
The number of people involved and the outpour of work was impressive: in total, Flâneur commissioned 24 photographers and 3 collectives who produced around 700 new images about today’s Europe. In this catalogue, we finally have the chance to see them all together.
We showed this large new body of work in 15 exhibitions in the public space of our partner’s cities. The Flâneur exhibitions went to squares, gardens, streets and alleys of European capitals and small towns. And in each of them, the Flâneur installation was different and uniquely special.
And last, but not least, the public: this artistic work was conceived to be shared 24/7 with the locals. I had the opportunity to be at all the venues and to witness how different publics interacted with the exhibitions. It was rewarding to see all kinds of reactions and to be a part of a process that brought together artists, cities, artwork locally produced and the public who came out to enjoy it. It is with a great sense of fulfilment that I come to the end of this long adventure. In the favourite words of my good friend Brian Griffin, I feel we can all say: “Job Done!”
Finally, we have time to relax and say thank you:
To all the fantastic people who worked hard to make this project happen; To all their patience and supportive families;
To the international and local funds that supported the activities in each location; To the partners, an essential part of the whole concept;
To the artists who produced such an outstanding body of work;
To the cities and the people who live there, who inspired, welcomed and cheered us and the photographers.
Thank you all! I’ll be seeing you soon with another project!
(Lisbon, 1968)
2011 / 14 – Master of Theater Production
Working since 1990 as a creative producer and project manager for several institutions in the cultural industries. Both as a producer and as a creative, Nuno Salgado developed projects related to Visual Arts (photography), Festivals, Performing Arts (theatre), Multimedia (cinema, video and television), Music, creative markets, international cultural networks and conferences.
Received the Award for Portuguese Producer of the Year 2014 - Prémio Natércia Campos
Founding member and Chairman of the Board of Procur.arte Associação Cultural e Social (2005).
2022/… - Artistic Director Procur.arte Creative platform venue
2021/22 - Artistic Director and Head Coordinator of “Flâneur ao Centro”
2017/21 - Artistic Director and Head Coordinator of PARALLEL – European Photo Based platform
2015/17 - Artistic Director and Head Coordinator of “Flâneur – New Urban Narratives”
Procur.arte; nuno.salgado@procurarte.org