IN THE MAGAZINE

DON’T SAY CHEESE

Thomas Ruff Is Not Interested in Photography

Published November, 2009

INTERVIEW BY MAGDALENA VUKOVIC AND DAVID BOGNER



Thomas Ruff is one of Germany’s best living photographers. He has his roots in the type of sterile, objective photography that loves water towers, silos, and other vertical piles of industrial cement that somehow became a big part of German photography’s legacy. He did it better than most.

But then in the 80s Ruff starting shooting massive half-body portraits of people sitting there staring intensely into the lens, and it was a total revelation. The sheer magnitude of this series made it seem like nobody before Ruff had ever thought to take a picture of a person’s face. Before this approach could even be scooped up by market-making ogres, Ruff had found a new fascination and switched to rendering his mad vision of downloaded internet porn. The critics were either baffled or offended or both. The result was Nudes, a book you should go out and buy the second you’re done reading this entire magazine.

Since that book’s publication Ruff has quietly gone about his business of being one of Germany’s best-loved, lowest-profile photographers. When we were finally able to track him down, we were happy to find a kindly gent with a refreshingly plainspoken take on what it is he does.


Vice: I recently read up on a lot of what’s been written about you and your work—in particular the texts that accompany your photography. Do you read this stuff?
Thomas Ruff: I have to admit that I don’t care much about the texts. I read them once and that’s about it. I spend enough time doing my work. I don’t feel like providing theories or trying to put them into perspective. I know what I do and I can explain it. But I don’t have a superstructural theory or ideology that is above all my work.

I think many people are drawn to your portraits. Any idea why?
It might be because there is nothing more interesting or beautiful than a face or a portrait. As a student I only did small formats because I had no money for big prints, and everybody patted me on the back, saying, “Great, Thomas, nice photos. Keep it up!” Still, nobody bought them. I didn’t earn money.

Did you consider giving the large-scale fine-art work up for something more commercial?
I thought I would have to do commissioned work for the rest of my life and do art photography alongside. Then with the art portraits, everything turned around. This was the emancipation of contemporary photography in the art scene or on the art market.

Buyers and gallery-goers starting coming around.
Suddenly that stuff was in galleries or art fairs and people saw it and couldn’t believe it, that a picture of that size was possible. People who didn’t give a fuck about photography looked at a photo and liked it.

Why is that, do you think?
The big format simply has this physical presence—you just couldn’t ignore it. It didn’t matter anymore whether it was silk-screened or photographed.

Who are the people in the pictures?
These were all my friends and colleagues from the art academy in Düsseldorf. Once a year they have this walkabout, somewhat of an open-house week. The classrooms are cleaned up and the stuff you did last year is hung on the wall. In 1981 I put my first portraits up—since then whenever I asked somebody if they would sit for a portrait, they said yes. Ninety percent are colleagues, the rest are people I met in Ratinger Hof, a nearby bar. They were medical students, art historians, fashion designers, and so on.

---

See all articles by this contributor

Comments

	Branstrator, on Dec 12, 2009 wrote: He’s OK. One of the better articles VICE has put out on photography in a long time. However, if VICE truly believes this is some of germanys best photography... I’d like to see an article on what would be considered the worst. Here is some serious talent from germany - www.dirkbader.com www.maerzinger.de Just because you can make something "look cool" doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a good photographer. And it certainly doesn’t mean you are one of the best. That’s why the holga camera is such a joke. These days someone could vomit on a photograph and have it pass as art in some hip boho gallery in downtown brooklyn. Anyone can knock the focus ring off and shoot a blurry photograph. Does it look cool... yes! Does it take any skill what so ever? Absolutely not. Who knows, this guy might know everything in the world about strobe, medium format, etc... However, if he does... I would really love to see some of that stuff. and if not, whatever. The guy found a niche and he will stick with it for a while. Maybe I should find start mushroom stamping all of my photographs, and call it my "Thing". Have people OO and AWE about it, and forget everything I’ve learned about photography.
Anonymous, on Dec 12, 2009 wrote: "The porno pictures are fucking amazing. They really kill me." Stop talking like a tard
Anonymous, on Dec 12, 2009 wrote: Oldschool, I see.. before this was turned into a "look" and became "popular"
	Taylor, on Dec 7, 2009 wrote: Would have like that better with a black garter.
	yoyoeggbo, on Nov 26, 2009 wrote: he’s like... okay. not my favourite.
Anonymous, on Nov 26, 2009 wrote: I remember someone doing a presentation on this guy in art school, talking about how he works with pornography but it’s OK because it’s "not his sordid little hobby", it’s Art. He got a similarly snotty endorsement on Radio 4 a while back. He even feels the need to say "I searched on and accidentally stumbled across those teaser pages of porn sites." It’s not that I don’t like the results, but let’s admit that a big part of the appeal probably comes from the original image, and it’s not like he’s blurring up Playboys or something we’re all familiar with.
Anonymous, on Nov 25, 2009 wrote: I love his work, check his Jpeg series.
Anonymous, on Nov 24, 2009 wrote: The porno pictures are fucking amazing. They really kill me.
Anonymous, on Nov 23, 2009 wrote: i actually really like the distorted nude pictures. they are beautiful and risque but because the images are unclear they dont come off as obscene.
Anonymous, on Nov 23, 2009 wrote: gay blowjobs are much better blurry.
Anonymous, on Nov 23, 2009 wrote: I know plenty of photographers that do commission/ad work on the side. What’s wrong with that? They’re still doing their trade for a living and for the most part they still have more than enough time to get all their personal work done too.
	tanger, on Nov 23, 2009 wrote: "As a student I only did small formats because I had no money for big prints, and everybody patted me on the back, saying, “Great, Thomas, nice photos. Keep it up!” Still, nobody bought them. I didn’t earn money." that’s called people bullshitting you.
Anonymous, on Nov 23, 2009 wrote: weird that he went from rigid objects like buildings to soft, out of focus humans.
	The Host, on Nov 23, 2009 wrote: The blurry ones are nice but I’m not crazy about the mugshot style of the others.
Anonymous, on Nov 22, 2009 wrote: did he just take photos of his computer screen ? sweet
	daddybourbon, on Nov 16, 2009 wrote: where can i find this book nudes?