(embiggenable)
(embiggenable)
(embiggenable)
(embiggenable)
HAD TO LEAVE RIST CAMP FOR A FAMILY 3-day wedding event in Vermont. Not my favorite thing to do but family duty calls. In any event, a comment or 2 (or more), re: M. Johnston’s recent post about his methodology for making a body of work.
Johnston’s method broken down to its bare bones requires a year of daily picture making (of a defined idea) to create 400-1500 keepers which, after serious editing, will produce “40–60 pictures that work together in sequence and express my take on my idea.” This method stands in rather stark contrast to my current methodology…
ASIDE it should be noted that my methodology is entirely dependent upon the fact that a picture maker intent upon making a coherent body of work has a firm understanding regarding how he/she sees the world. An understanding which results in a subsequent picture making vision which directs-in fact, mandates-the manner in which he/she makes pictures. That’s cuz-in the Fine Art world, Photograph Division-rare is the picture maker whose entire life-long body of work is not created with a single, finely focused picture making vision. END OF ASIDE
….just earlier this week, “equipped” with my long-standing picture making vision-walking along a plank, dock-like walkway through a very small bog / swamp-within the span of approximately 30-45 minutes I made (iMo) 20 gallery exhibition quality (especially so in my neck of the-literally-woods), intimate landscape “keepers” (one of which is in this entry-more to come when I get back to Rist and some “serious” image processing) which would-and will-make a very nice photo book.
Lest this read like bragging about my super-human picture making abilities, my point this…the most demanding requirement for making a body of work is the time and effort it takes to realize one’s picture making vision. In some cases, that might take years. That’s cuz, iMo and iMe(xperince), a picture making vision can not be manufactured (do not confuse vision with a “creative” technique). Rather, it must flow from within, i.e. one’s nativism-the philosophical theory that some ideas are innate. And, recognizing one’s “native” vision often requires a substantial amount of introspective time, effort and picture making.
To be certain, I am not suggesting that, even after “finding” one’s vision, the making of a coherent body of work is as easy as falling off a log (say, after drinking a pint of high-proof bourbon). There could be many reason’s for extending the time and effort it might require to refine what it is that one is trying to convey. I, for one, will be returning to the aforementioned bog / swamp within the next week to have another look at it. An “effort” that will most likely result in the making of a few more “keepers”.
FYI, there will more to come on the idea of why I believe 20 pictures-no matter the total number of keepers I might have in a body of work-is the upper limit I would ever have in an exhibition or a photo book.