# 6979-87 / common places • common things • people ~ 2 fer 1

cover photo -The World At My Feet ~ all photos (embiggenable)

11 YEARS AGO I MADE POD PHOTO book titled The World At My Feet. In hindsight that title was a bit of a misnomer inasmuch as, while my picture making gaze was cast downward, neither my feet nor the ground / floor were integral to the photographs (with 2 exceptions). Retrospect suggests that a more appropriate title should been something like Looking Down, or, Eye Contact Down, or, Downward Gaze.

In any event, during the 11 years since the making of that photo book, I have made hundreds of downward gazing photographs, to include the 5 in this entry which were made over the last 2 days. And then there is the Eyes Downcast gallery on my work which, FYI, has not been updated for a few years. Update coming soon.

To be certain, I have never considered the photographs resulting from my downward gaze M.O. to be a body of work. However, I do believe that now is the time to round up the best of the bunch and make another photo book.

BONUS CONTENT:

all photos (embiggenable)

A TRIP TO NYC IS IN MY VERY NEAR future for the sole purpose of seeing the North American premiere of Constellation, the most comprehensive presentation–454 prints–of work by Diane Arbus. I must admit that I feel that viewing 454 prints replete with Diane Arbus subject content is an intimidating proposition. It might just require a 2-day viewing experience; day 1–a comprehensive walk-through to get a grasp of the scope and tenor of the collection, and, day 2–spend time engaging with some of the more captivating photographs. In any event, it should very interesting.

FYI, over the years I have made a few–very few–Arbus-like photographs. Strangely enough, most are of children. While my photos do not have the Arbus strange weirdness vibe, they are a bit on the quirky side.

# 6974-76 / kitchen sink • flora • landscape ~ they're not as sharp as they think they are

all photos (embiggenable)

“I’m always amused by the idea that certain people have about technique, which translate into an immoderate taste for the sharpness of the image. It is a passion for detail, for perfection, or do they hope to get closer to reality with this trompe I’oeil? They are, by the way, as far away from the real issues as other generations of photographers were when they obscured their subject in soft-focus effects.” ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson

REGULAR FOLLOWERS OF THIS BLOG HAVE PROBABLY noticed there have been more entries posted than is usual. That is most likely do to my new proclivity for using quotes to introduce one topic or another. FYI, as mentioned previously, I have collected quite a number of quotes from the interweb and from photo book––monographs––intros / prefaces / reviews. They act as a kinda instigator for entry topics, so much so that rarely have words poured from my penny pencil with such feverish fluidity.

Be that as it may, today’s topic was not instigated by the above HBC quote––I dug that out after I encountered the real instigator; today’s entry on T.O.P. in which M. Johnston made know his opinion, re: too much sharpness, resolution, micro contrast, et al known, i.e. he, like my own self, don’t like it at all.

Having written on the topic numerous times, I am disinclined to do so again. However, as an addendum to my previous thoughts on the subject, let me add this idea; the addiction to sharpness / resolution to-the-max is just one of many picture making afflictions embraced by those who are “as far away from the real issues” as possible. Just like the band Spinal Tap, who play their music with their amp volumes set to “11”, these dreck-conian picture makers have never seen a slider––hue & saturation, sharpness, vibrance, et al––that they don’t set to “11”. They often refer to that proclivity as “being creative”. Ha. Enough written on the topic.

FYI, one possible reason I have posted more often than usual is that the wife and I are headed to New Mexico tomorrow for some R’nR. Staying for a few days in a modest Pueblo-style, hot spring resort. Then on to Santa Fe for 2 days and a night for some luscious food and some culture. Followed by a visit to Denver to visit with some friends and family. That being so, I kinda think I’ve been cramming in a bunch of thoughts on some virtual paper before heading out.

In any event, I will post while I’m away although it might be more pictures than words.

BTW, writing about sharpness, the picture with the budding maple tree was made through a back porch screen. A “diffusion” filter, if you will. I didn’t have any other choice of making that picture from the same vantage point without involving a step ladder. iMo, it gets the point across quite effectively without any sharpness to-the-max.

# 6969-73 / common places-things • landscape • in situ ~ nominal subject matter

“John Szarkowski has used the expression “nominal subject matter”. I think that’s perfect for my behavior here. I am not interest in gas stations or anything about gas stations. This happens to be an excuse for seeing.… I don’t care if it was about a gas station or if this is a rubber raft or if this is a crappy little house. That’s not my subject! The gas station isn’t my subject. It’s an excuse for a place to make a photograph”….

…. “I take a picture of the subject and its context––the subject as it stands with everything else…. I’m trying to make an atonal photograph where everything is as important as everything else…. I think it’s possible to make a photograph in which the photographer lays back enough so the viewer comes into the photograph and has a chance to perceive the thing on his own terms, instead of only seeing what the photographer has hooked him to see. I think one of the reasons I’m using the 8x10 camera is that I felt I could work with the large camera and make photographs in which the subject was everything in the frame.” ~ Joel Meyerowitz

I RECENTLY WROTE THAT I DO NOT TITLE MY photographs onaccounta I do not wish to call attention to the literally depicted referent in my pictures cuz my pictures are rarely “about” the literally pictured referent. As an adjunct to that practice, at an exhibit of my photographs I have always wished for red velvet ropes strung 3-4 feet in front the gallery walls to prevent viewers from sticking their noses where they don’t belong––that is, so close to a picture that they can not see the print in its entirety. That’s cuz seeing the print in the all together is the only way in which a viewer can actually see what my pictures are about.

My “excuse” for making a photograph is the potential I see in isolated––by means of framing––sections of the quotidian world to create visually interesting form; form that results from the fact that everything within my frame is as important as everything else within the frame. In other words, creating visually interesting form is my subject, aka: what my photographs are about. It is not about the literally depicted things in my photographs.

FYI, if I were to title any of the above photographs, the titles might be something like; my son wearing a new hat, or, my grandson eating lunch at the Statue of Liberty, or, my daughter and her cousins reading on the beach. However, for the life on me, I just can not imagine how those titles would improve, in any manner, a viewer’s reaction to / appreciation of / understanding of the pictures. In fact, iMo, the titles might very well lead a viewer to think that that information had something to do with why I made the pictures which, in fact, had absolutely nothing––nada, zero, zip––to do with why I made the pictures.

# 6984-89 / landscape • roadside • (un)common thing ~ Spring sweetness

On the boil in the sugar house ~ It takes 40 gallons of maple sap to make 1 gallon of maple syrup. all photos (embiggenable)

“I've worked out of a series of no's. No to exquisite light, no to apparent compositions, no to the seduction of poses or narrative.” ~ Richard Avedon

THE THING ABOUT SPRING HERE IN THE ADIRONDACKS is mist, fog, and raging water.

Of added Spring time interest is the very short weather window for maple syrup making. There are quite a number of so-called sugar houses doting the landscape. FYI, a sugar house is a small shack-like structure where maple sap is boiled down to produce the correct density for maple syrup. Standing in a sugar house during the boil feels / smells like you have coated the inside of your nose with, well… maple syrup. And, tasting the syrup straight out of the boil is a taste sensation that is simply amazing.

ASIDE Don’t know what will happen with the price of maple syrup this year cuz, thanks t-RUMP, most of the maple syrup in the US of A that originates in Canada will be hit with tariffs. The current price for pure maple syrup here in our neck of the maple tree woods is $34.95 / quart (32oz.) END SIDE

# 6959-66 / common places • common things ~ what's to gain by letting a picture stare back at you?

pinhole ~ all photos (embiggenable)

FIRST AND FOREMOST, A HEARTY THANKS TO John Babineau who left a comment / suggestion on the just making pictures entry:

“Mark, please read the obit re Peter Elbow in the March 3, 2025 NYT.
Very interesting following this post of yours!”

I very much appreciate this comment as it is remindful of how thing used to be on my blog; readers chipping in with links, references, opinions, and facts, all of which contributed to a rather vibrant vibe. Thanks again John. And now, on with the show….

“I connect to things in a visceral way. There are things that surprisingly move me and often I am shocked at the unpredictable character of these things. The camera is a reflex for me. It rises to my eye and opens up to take in that thing out there––sensation, feeling, cohesive elements that appear in front of me. It is a way of matching and absorbing the response I have to the world. It captures my consciousness and, later, this allows me to read my consciousness back like a text and understand my relationship to things or moments.” ~ Joel Meyerowitz

I HAVE, OVER THE YEARS, AMASSED QUITE A COLLECTION OF quotes––like the Meyerowitz one above––from photographers / creatives that align with my thoughts and practices, re: the medium of photography and its apparatus. Keys points for me in this quote are: connecting in a visceral way / camera as a reflex / taking in that thing out there–sensations, feelings, cohesive elements / and, especially for purposes of this entry, reading my consciousness back to me like a text.

Re: reading my consciousness back to me like a text. A number of years ago I stumbled upon an idea that struck a chord with me; the concept that a photograph is capable of staring back at the viewer––for all intents and purposes, a metaphor for the experience of a good photograph’s capability of holding the attention of a viewer. This fanciful notion captured my interest cuz, like Meyerowitz perceives, my photographs (as wells as photos made by many others)––to use the metaphor––stare back at me and, in doing so, assists me in understanding my relationship to things, moments, and event as encountered in the real world. Call it what you like, the idea that a good photograph––or for that matter, any visual art–– can hold a viewer’s interest ain’t exactly a secret.

That written, the NY Times has a running series, every first-Monday-of-the-month, The 10 Minute Challenge. Each month the Times picks a well known work of art that is presented on a neutral background with the “challenge” for a viewer to look at it for 10 minutes––there is a running timer that the viewer can activate when ready to begin. FYI, a viewer can zoom in/out if desired. After whatever time when a viewer is finished viewing, there is a comment section for the viewer to record what he/she derived from the viewing experience.

The current challenge is a Henri Cartier-Bresson photograph––his famous puddle jumper picture (not my HC-B favorite). This link will take you to the challenge page but the NYT is a subscription site so I do not know if you will be able to take the challenge. Nevertheless, there is nothing from preventing you from selecting a photo (mine or anyone’s) and isolating it on your screen and looking at it for 10 minutes. ASIDE 10 minutes ain’t a mandated / magic number, and, iMo, it is best to let your eye wander about the image instead of zooming in or out END ASIDE

IN any event, you just might see / experience something––a sensation / a feeling / a recognition of cohesive elements––that you probably would have missed with a much more abbreviated viewing.

# 6957-58 / common places • common things ~ good advice

ode to Berence Abbott ~ all photos (embiggenable)

“If a medium is representational by nature of the realistic image formed by a lens, I see no reason why we should stand on our heads to distort that function. On the contrary, we should take hold of that very quality, make use of it, and explore it to the fullest.” ~ Berenice Abbott

FYI, I believe my photo, c. 2008, is of the exact same location as seen in Abbott’s 1935 photo (click on her name above to see her Gasoline Station, Tenth Avenue , NYC, 1935).

# 6946-50 / pinhole • common things • around the house ~ I needed a kick in the butt

1 ~ all photos - pinhole lens / (embiggenable)

2

3

4

5

OK, TRUTH BE TOLD, I HAVE A COUPLE ENTRIES ON deck ready for posting but, for one reason and some others, I have been reluctant to actually post. That written, with intention of avoiding any deep-dive self-analytical malarkey, I awoke this AM with a resolve to get off the schneid, posting wise.

FYI, that resolve was partially instigated by an entry on T.O.P., re: high mp / resolution picture making devices (in the form of FF digital cameras); a subject which has been known to tip me over the edge, re: resolution / sharpness as a component to making one’s pictures “better”. The topic always instigates flood of comments similar to those found on the T.O.P. entry:

“I believe resolution makes a huge difference in the quality of a photo …..” or, “I have no interest in ~24 MP sensors as they don't match my need for resolution …..”

So, rather than writing a 10K word scree on the subject, I thought that the best course of action for me would be to grab one of my µ4/3 cameras, slap on the pinhole “lens”, and make a bunch of res?what res? pictures (#2-4 above, #1 made earlier). Taking my own advice, I have, over the past few days, been making such pictures. And, FYI, it did, in fact, calm me down.

However, in closing (cuz I gotta get in some kind shot across the bow of that ship), let me write that, iMo, in all but a few examples, re: really good photographs, state-of-the-art sharpness / resolution has little or nothing to do with it. In fact, iMo, current state-of-the-art sharpness / resolution, in the trade aka: “perfection”, makes it nearly impossible–to my eye and sensibilities–to even look at, much less appreciate, such a photograph cuz I simply do not give a crap about technique. Pictures with visually obvious technical / technique “perfection” are an absolute non-starter to my eye and sensibilities.

# 6942-45 / common places • landscape-urban / nature • kitchen life ~ throw out the rule book

pinhole photo ~ all photos (embigenable)

IN THE LAST ENTRY WHEREIN I INTRODUCED THE idea of reducing the whole of the medium and its apparatus to a concise paragraph, there are 2 phrases–a rhythm in the world of real things / a precise organization of forms–which are commonly referred to as composition; a topic which has launched thousands of zillion word ships in an effect to codify / understand / “master” it. That written, here’s an example of an attempt to reduce the topic to a concise paragraph:

“In a photograph, composition is the result of a simultaneous coalition, the organic coordination of elements seen by the eye. One does not add composition as though it were an afterthought superimposed on the basic subject material, since it is impossible to separate content from form…. one composes a picture in very nearly the same amount of time it takes to click the shutter, at the speed of a reflex action….. Composition must have its own inevitability about it.” HC-B

Once again–just like the HB-C quotes in the last entry–this notion, re: the idea of composition, makes perfect sense to me. And, once again (again), that’s cuz, when making pictures, what pricks my eye (and sensibilities), aka: what I actually see, is a rhythm / organization of forms as it exists in the world of real things. Which is another manner of writing that the content of my photographs and the form visible therein are one and same.

Consequently, I never give a thought to composition–iMo, a bourgeoisie concept if ever there was one–when making a photograph. That’s cuz the visual rhythm / organization to be seen in my photographs is the inevitable result of my vision, literally and figuratively.Ya know, how I actually see the world.

ASIDE FYI, the fact that my vision is organically attuned to rhythm and form explains another fact; I rarely, if ever, “work” a scene–95.8% of the time-leaving aside a few exposure brackets–it’s one and done. END OF ASIDE

And now, a bit of speculation and going out on a limb – I suspect that most of the medium’s “greats” approach the practice of composition in the same–or a reasonably close–manner as HB-C describes. That is to write, they trust what their eyes tell them and then photograph what they see. I believe that to be true whether they carry around a 35mm rangefinder camera with preset shutter speed / focus and aperture and a reflex-action attitude, or, whether they expend a great deal of effort to haul around an 8x10 view camera / film holders / light meter / tripod /et al and a very methodical attitude. In effect both are point and shoot picture makers inasmuch as they point their camera at what they see and make a picture.

With speculation taken care of let me climb a tree and hope the limb holds sure and true –I believe–no speculation about it in my mind–that the ability to compose a picture in very nearly the same amount of time it takes to click the shutter is nigh unto impossible to teach or learn. That is cuz it is not a technique nor a theory that can be plotted out in a book but rather a native recognition–some might say an intuitive feeling–that the visual organization / rhythm you have imposed on your subject utilizing your POV and framing, when viewed on your picture making device’s viewfinder / ground glass / screen, just plain and simple, flat-out looks and feels “right”.

And in the end, lo and behold, there is not a single rule of composition to be seen anywhere on the surface of your print.