Studium and punctum, as described by Roland Barthes in Camera Lucida, are two Latin words that refer to two aspects of photography. According to him, studium is what sparks interest in an image but is inherently unremarkable. This may be the “background” of an image or any aspect of it that gives the viewer a general feel for the atmosphere it was taken in. When a photographer takes a photo, they set an intention for the message that is being conveyed- it then becomes the responsibility of the viewer to decipher and interpret that intention based on all components of the image. Punctum, on the other hand, is described as being what “punctures” the viewer or makes them fall in love with and relate to an image. Barthes believes that punctum is the truly memorable and important part of any photograph. I think it is interesting that Barthes chose Latin words to describe these concepts, as he found none in French that he felt were suitable.
The Photographs of Marcel Sternberger: Portraits of the 20th Century exhibit is a stunning and expressive collection of black and white portraits. However in viewing them, I didn’t find elements of studium and punctum. Most of the portraits were done in the same style- the subject is close to the camera and in many cases looking directly at it with an expression they felt best represents themselves. Because there was such little variety in backgrounds, many of them simply being a gray backdrop or wall, it seemed like the faces of the people themselves were the only focal elements in the photos. It could be argued that their clothing and posture were secondary to the importance of the photos and were therefore elements of studium whereas their (in most cases, intense) facial expressions were punctum, but I personally viewed all of the subjects as a whole. Despite this, there were several portraits that differed slightly from the rest- those of the children. The description of this section referred to how “innately coquettish” young girls were and how he captured this. While I personally found it somewhat it appalling that young girls are still constantly sexualized, this perspective was definitely visible in the photos. In these, I would say that what is perceived as the “sexual qualities” of the girls were the punctum, and everything else from their clothing to the rooms they were in were studium.
Veronica Funk
hey buddy
I really agree with what you said about how Sternberger’s photographs didn’t really elicit sudium or punctum, except for the the ones of the young girls, which were oddly posed to draw the viewer in. I liked some of Sternberger’s photographs but most of them were kinda boring and didn’t do much for me.
I have not had a chance to read all the posts, but you are the first person to have said that the exhibit held neither photographic qualities. Secondly, I admit that I did not read descriptions of the pieces that did not hold much punctum for me, so I missed the descriptions of the girls. It makes me wonder who writes these descriptions, and I believe that these descriptions always bring a bias so I take them with a grain of salt. Great work Veronica!