Must see: Photographing Climate Change

Posted on

"Must see: Photographing Climate Change"

The above pics are the Matterhorn, 1960 and 2006. The website DoubleExposure explains:

Global warming is affecting our planet in countless ways, not in some remote future, but today. DOUBLEXPOSURE documents one aspect of the warming climate through fine-art photography that brings the viewer into panoramas of glaciers once grand but now receding. The compelling comparisons put into stark view the fact of melting glaciers.

The actual photos are going on display in a few cities:

DOUBLEXPOSURE has an exhibition of paired photographs and educational panels to be presented at museums and galleries across the United States.

  • Springs Preserve: Las Vegas, Nevada – January 5 through March 31 of 2009
  • The Utility Exploration Center: Roseville, California – April 16 through June 5 of 2009
  • Fresno Metropolitan Museum of Art and Science: Fresno, California – May 9 through July 4, 2010
  • A small, but useful, way to show people what is happening to our planet now. For some, only seeing is believing.

    Related Posts:

    « »

    16 Responses to Must see: Photographing Climate Change

    1. The glacier images are most impressive. But I want to see the dates these were taken.. or the time of year. Otherwise much of this could be just Summer verses winter. I am sure DoubleExposure knows that.

    2. tidal says:

      @ richard pauli

      at their site, doubleexposure does – for the most part – provide the dates (and altitudues) at which the both the before and after photos were taken… e.g.:

      http://www.doublexposure.net/edu_blackstone.html
      http://www.doublexposure.net/edu_heney.html
      http://www.doublexposure.net/edu_valdez.html
      http://www.doublexposure.net/edu_hughmiller.html

    3. Brian says:

      And even if taken in the same season, what months? For example, beginning of Oct vs. early Dec. could make a difference.

      Too, even if taken at the same time, what years? Maybe one year was particularly warm.

      What would be better is to have a running series of pictures spanning a decade.

      As it is, one can hardly comment on the relevance.

      Agreed though – pretty pictures.

    4. Seth K says:

      Joe please comment on the “coal sludge” spill in TN. 1 billion gallons.

    5. Dano says:

      This isn’t a scientific project, it is a visual one. It is, in a sense, art. Art causes folk to talk.

      And, if one can’t find that two pictures decades apart obviously show very different scenes and the glacier is receding, then one doesn’t want to see, do they? 20 Mile Glacier.

      Maybe the only thing that needs to be added is a simple chart showing global glacier retreat – but that would make it less art, wouldn’t it.

      Best,

      D

    6. Baerbel W. says:

      Very impressive and disconcerting pictures! Browsing the website I found more information (under “educational panel”) with a kind of factsheet about four of the pictures of the glaciers and when they were taken. In those sheets there is quite a strong link to climate change.

    7. http://www.doublexposure.net/educational.html
      After they fix their web site links it will be much more interesting. Right now four links go to the same single PDF.

    8. john says:

      Dano’s right. If you want science, read an IPCC report or better yet, get the summary of the recent AGU conference.

      But art defines our culture and our zeitgeist as much or more than science. So, it makes a statement that resonates with the billions who don’t think in scientific terms, and therefore, it is important as it is … absent our scientific bias.

    9. Kaj Luukko says:

      There are such a big difference in the pictures that the season does not mean anything. A large mass of ice can not melt in a short period of time. It will take decades.

    10. Climate change needs to be confonted with brilliant new technology, especially for global Emissions reduction and truck/car anti-idling. It is on the way, and Australian inventors lead the charge! Look at this website and explore the world best technology, by far. Very lightweight Units; revolutionary. Solar aircon applications will appear soon also (houses etc): http://www.koolideas.com.au

    11. john says:

      No, we don’t need brilliant new technology. We need to use the brilliant and mundane old technologies that have sat on the shelf for decades — and much of it would actually save us money to use. Check out the post on the McKinsey report adjacent to this.

    12. Nick Santos says:

      Brian – My thoughts exactly.

      A better illustration would be a running series of the same date each year so that we can weed out years that are particularly warm – I’m sure we’d a clear trend of less snowpack if a series of images was used. If someone had this and put it in a viewer to scroll through, it would be powerful indeed.

    13. msn nickleri says:

      Brian – My thoughts exactly.

      A better illustration would be a running series of the same date each year so that we can weed out years that are particularly warm – I’m sure we’d a clear trend of less snowpack if a series of images was used. If someone had this and put it in a viewer to scroll through, it would be powerful indeed.

    14. Neil Harrington says:

      But why not introduce new technologies?

      Let’s get the world off the old oil/fuel economy? HYDROGEN is coming faster than you think. It’s on the way and this is an Australian invention (on-site Hydrogen Reactors, with no green house gasses etc.) It is the cheapest form of alternative energy on earth! And it is ready to go – after 14 years of research and development. Mass production starts this year! Forget Nuclear Reactors, wind power etc. On-site production of pure, safe Hydrogen is the Solution (for electricity generation and vehicles.)

    15. OO says:

      Neil Harrington: “On-site production of pure, safe Hydrogen is the Solution (for electricity generation and vehicles.)”

      You’re right, prepetuum mobile will solve eveything!