Lee Friedlander

Lee Friedlander (born 1934) loved anomalies, quirks, best intentions gone astray, visual puns and conundrums. He worked with mirrors, reflections, signs, movie screens to get images within images.
He portrayed himself as a "stalking shadow". His pictures are often informal and the subjects at ease and touchingly vulnerable.

Alexander M Rodchenko

Alexander Rodchenko (1891-1956) used photo motion sequences in his photography. He wanted to educate man to see everyday things in new ways through unexpected perspectives and situations. He is "considered a pioneer in integrating the photographic gaze into the fine arts, while preserving and fostering photography's own qualities as a medium".

Herbert Bayer

Herbert Bayer (1900-1985) created dream pictures through photomontage. His series "Man & Dream" was published work in 1936 in a portfolio simply named II Photomontages. It was originally meant as a story in pictures. His self portrait was the most famous of this series:

Another self portrait, in the Lonely City Dweller series:

Walter Peterhans

Walter Peterhans (1897-1960) used photos as a means of aesthetic education. He liked to force 3D objects into 2D space. He brought out materiality of things through proximity to each other, textures, and composition. I see his work as original "photoshop" images.
He was a trained mathematician and preferred comprehensible photos to free associative works. He taught visual design and art history.

Psychology of Children's Artwork

At the insightful suggestion of my professor, I did some research on what childrens artwork "reveals".

The first article I read was found on http://artful-kids.com/blog/2010/03/01/what-does-your-childs-artwork-reveal/. "Artful Adventures is the Artful Kids blog, dedicated to the Young at Art, including features, creative projects and lots more". The author of this particular blog entry, Jude, stated "Children’s drawings, doodles and sketches have been the subject of study now for over a hundred years, and new theories and ideas about what they mean, how they develop, and how they can be used both educationally and therapeutically, are arising all the time. This week, I’m going to look at whether children’s drawings, especially younger children, can give any psychological insights into their character and thinking.  There is a school of thought that believes that children’s scribbles and doodles are in fact deeply revealing of intelligence, personality and emotional state, in the same way graphologists believe that handwriting is for adults.  Analysts will look at how the drawing sits on the page, the character of the mark making (for example whether it is bold or light) the colours used, and whether or not it fills the page." Jude then references some "findings" about what colors, shapes, placement, etc. say about a child's personality and security. I thought it was all really interesting and as I read it I thought of my own children's use of particular colors, themes and placement, however, it was Jude's summary that I really felt was accurate and worth pointing out: 

"I learned that in fact the validity of drawing tests as psychological measures (rather like that of handwriting analysis) continues to be called into question, and is not really consistently backed up with reliable research.  Most experts condemn the evidence of children’s drawings in isolation to identify specific character traits or problems.  The suggestion was that identifying what children draw, and the themes within them, may be more significant in understanding a child, rather than how they draw it, and that verbal input from the child is essential in understanding both the content of his or her drawing and the meaning he or she wishes to convey, especially if that content is unrecognisable to an adult.  The research generally suggested that analysing children’s drawings  according to a specific drawing feature (e.g. size of figures), was fraught with difficulties, as too many factors can come into play to influence it, and besides, different researchers attributed different interpretations to the same features.  Also, one of the most difficult things about understanding the emotional content of children’s drawings, is recognising that our own emotions as adults can get in the way without us even realising it.

All children have their own ‘style’ and their preferred subjects, and any individual child will produce artwork which is distinctively theirs, but when it comes to interpretation there seems to be broad agreement that a child’s drawing will be more reflective of their mood at that particular moment, than of a wider personality trait.   As parents, I think we are generally well aware of our children’s personality traits and do not really need drawings to inform us – what can be interesting is occasionally to see that reflected in their drawing, though I suppose if there was an issue in their life which we weren’t aware of, which was manifesting itself in their artwork, it would be good to be able to recognise that!"

There may be some truth to the psychology of childrens artwork, but as a parent I think children are unique and their artwork isn't a mathematical equation of this equals that. Different things appeal to each of my children and I love that they have their own creative way of seeing the world and their own unique "favorites".