Documentary FRPS Panel - Mark Phillips FRPS

‘Embargoed’ Havana and ‘bustling’ New York, both dense urban spaces, but worlds apart. Space for sports and recreation are confined, competing with the demands of city life. In Havana, the few Áreas Deportivas Urbanas are little more than reclaimed derelict sites. Often hidden away, they are confined by decaying walls or metal fencing, with basic equipment and concrete ‘pitches’ roughly marked out in paint. By contrast, New York City has thousands of well-maintained and well-equipped courts, fenced off for safety and security. They are places to compete, or to exercise, to socialise or just escape; providing a refuge and insulation from the daily urban pressures. Superficially, they may seem a world apart, but in essence, they are the same.

The step-up for Fellowship; it is one of those things that is on the one hand so difficult to articulate, but on the other, so recognisable when you see it. With this successful submission from Mark Phillips I wish to focus on that element that makes a Fellowship, the ‘distinctive body of work’.

The subject, recreational facilities in New York and Havana, difference and similarity, all in one body of work. We could discuss comparisons and oppositions within the work at length, one of the first things that I read from the images being the importance of that escape from the rest of life. The escape from a routine that is provided by recreational activity and yet at once the feeling of confinement in these spaces with high concrete walls and mesh fencing.

The ‘distinctive body of work’ as listed within the RPS distinctions criteria is perhaps best described as a combination, or amalgamation, of a number of factors within the photographers decision making process. The ‘cohesion’ with which the work holds together, the artistic, creative or ‘individual vision’ within the work, and the affinity with the subject the ‘understanding’ author can communicate. These factors are criteria in their own right and will be assessed on their own merit. But the way I can best disseminate the ‘distinctive’ nature of a work is to look at the ways in which a photographer manipulates and combines these factors of their work, generating interaction between them. We might recognise this as a greater hold on our attention, a clearer communication or a more distinctive aesthetic, perhaps dependent on the photographer or their specialism.

In Mark’s body of work there was no overtly clear delineation between the two locations in the presentation of the work, as might easily have been assumed that there would be. In places one can make a guess at the location, but in others it is certainly ambiguous. Such decisions add to the individuality of a piece. The work creates and allows cohesion to flow through the use of colour, light and shadow. This is very effective in maintaining the viewers’ attention, directing the gaze to concentrate on the narrative. This level of consideration, intent and cohesion within this body of work is where the photographer has not only demonstrated an individual vision, but also a distinctive approach. The connections between the particular images used are thought through in great detail. The shadow of a ball amongst a group of participants…the ball itself frozen in flight, with just the shadows of the participants. Blocks of strong colour and strong dynamic lines creating interest and further holding the viewers’ attention. The compositions used have all been carefully considered, right down to the final, red, full stop.

As photographers it is impossible to create an image without making a decision, even if it is as basic as which direction do I point the camera. I know there are texts on removing your influence from the photograph, but is the only way to stop imposing any influence on your photography not to take photographs? So some may argue this is a stylised documentary, perhaps even too contrived. However, it is in that individuality of vision with which we are presented, where a personal voice has space to come through. It is not about whether you “like” a body of work or not, certainly at distinctions, we never assess on whether something is liked. It is about whether it communicates in a clear voice the intent of the author and whether that distinctive individual vision is demonstrated in doing so.

In this work Mark has crafted and selected images to explore honestly and with purpose his chosen narrative. His development of understanding around his subject as well as consideration of how it will be effective as a body of work, have created that distinctive portfolio. That step-up to Fellowship.

Mark’s panel is featured on the RPS website as one of the example FRPS submissions. rps.org/qualifications/frps/example-fellowship-panels

The project actually started as a side project. I was actually working in Havana on another project about repair and sustainability. But it was only possible to photograph this between 10 am and 4pm usually indoors when the workshops were open. The project took me well away from the typical tourists’ spots. As I was walking around, I noticed these small makeshift sports areas and they intrigued me. Who had made them? Who used them? I thought this might be something interesting to explore before the repair workshops opened and after they closed, when the light was still good. So, I started tracking them down. It often required word of mouth or searching street by street, as many are hidden behind walls and gates. Over a number of visits the work expanded, I got to know some of the locals and photographed them several times. I’d take photographs back and hand them out. I then met the charity that had created them and did some work with them, and things grew from there. Then a few years later I had the opportunity to photograph in New York and decided to expand the project to compare and contrast the cities. I’m still planning to do more, in other locations, when Covid restrictions lift.

Initially, a lot of time was spent just talking to people, building trust. I also took along an instant camera and gave away photos, as a ‘thank you’. There was little hostility in Havana. People were quite welcoming. These are not tourist areas. I eventually met the charity that had created these sports areas, BarrioHabana, and through Pavel (the charity leader) gained access to many events, including a local football tournament, where I took images for them and some of the team coaches to use. None of those are in this panel, but they are still part of the body of work. I’m still in contact with them and hope to go back one day and see their progress. They have now expanded into creating urban gardens (that may be another project?).

New York was a little bit different. I was told by a local about West 4th Street as ‘the place’ to go. It is locally known as ‘the cage’. It consists of a street basketball court and three handball courts, fenced in. I was probably the only tourist or visitor inside ‘the cage’. It was initially hostile, as some thought I must be an undercover cop. So, to start with, there was no camera, just talking to people, showing them some of the work from Cuba, and explaining what I wanted to do. Over a number of days, going back to the same places, I built up enough trust to be allowed to photograph pretty much unimpeded (apart from one area that was “off limits”!). I have many images from there that I could not include, but it is a fascinating place. Another location was in Coney Island, again this was recommended by the locals. Like many of these urban sports areas, your background is irrelevant, its simply about the place, the sport, the friendships.

Over 70% of the global population now live in urban environments. Those seem to be getting denser as commercial demands encroach on what little open space there is. I originally just wanted to give a sense of the spaces. As spaces to escape the urban jungle. I have coached sport on and off for years, so I understand the importance and some of the culture in these spaces. They have an energy and a strong social hub. What I loved in these spaces was the energy and freedom they provided, despite being small, walled or fenced in.

I wanted to take images that conveyed something about the place and the people, but not necessarily be ‘sports’ shots. So, I deliberately omitted the ball in some images, I was more interested in the person, or the movement, or their expression.

I use fairly minimal equipment, two Fuji XPro-2 bodies with fixed manual lenses (equivalent to 24mm and 40mm). That is a bonus in situations like this. These spaces have limited room and few places to stand. That clearly limits potential viewpoints and camera angles. But after spending time and becoming accepted, I could pretty much stand where I wanted, even on court sometimes (at my own risk). That was important - the close-ups are by being close. Most of the images are simply cropped (at most) with minimal processing. I like to think of this as working in digital, but in the spirit of film.

No. There is so much colour in these places. They are fun places too. Whilst they are all very graphic images they would lose something if monochrome.

It hard to pick a personal favourite as they are all part of a wider story. But the one image that has been the most successful in its own right is image 15. Which was shortlisted in Sony World Photography Awards a couple of years ago and exhibited in Rotterdam, Trieste and part of an award at Siena.

They all had different challenges, but technically probably the simplest is the most difficult - image 3.

I’d been to the location several times before, in Coney Island, it is between an ugly Trump housing estate and the boardwalk. So, I had an idea of what I wanted and knew when best to go (late afternoon). It is taken handheld using manual focus. I wanted the ball to be super sharp and in focus, and the people (shadows) all in the right place and have enough light in the late afternoon to keep the ball sharp. So, I used zone focussing and just kept at it for around 10 minutes. I think I had about 20 or so attempts over a maybe ten minutes … as I didn’t have long before the light went.

Yes. Loads. Probably my favourite that didn’t make it is a basketball shot in Chinatown, NY.

The reason it didn’t make it is purely aesthetic, the colour tones are different and were not consistent with the vibrancy of the rest of the panel. It is also is a bit too literal, a bit too obvious, whereas the other images convey in the panel some degree of ambiguity. But it does make the cut on two counts …. colour balance and ‘ambiguity’. In my view that is also important as a way to engage the viewer.

I think for the Fellowship I would not significantly change it. I played with lots of different options. I do that using small prints on a large (A0) magnetic white board. So, I can live with a sequence for a while. There is a deliberate flow that plays with sequences of shadow and highlights, colours, motifs and graphic shapes, that aims to create a link between the images. Also, they are mixed up in terms of location, I deliberately wanted to move from image to image and it’s not always be obvious which was Havana and which was New York. Some are obvious, some not. And that is important to align with the statement and the idea behind the project.

Not for this project. Not yet, anyway. Four of the images have recently appeared in a book for the Urban Photo Exhibition in Trieste. Some also won a Remarkable Artwork Award at Siena International Photo Awards (2020). If I get to do more work on the project in other cities, then I might look to produce a book showing 5-6 different locations. I’ve already done some research at the MPF library looking at ‘sports’ based work for ideas on this.