#6794-96 / common places-things • autumn • food ~ autumnal pleasures

all photos (embiggenable)

I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON AN ENTRY FOR THE PAST 4-5 days that requires that I “get it right”. The entry is a follow up to my last entry wherein I suggested that I believe that most “…. hardcore / driven-to-make-pictures photographers consider their bodies of work to be their ‘greatest’ hit”. In the new entry I discuss general ideas about bodies of work and, here’s the get-it-right part, I also discuss my bodies of work and how they came into being. That written, the entry is about 70.85% complete and should be ready shortly.

In the meantime here are few pictures made over the past few days during an early-arriving Indian Summer–i.e. a period of unseasonably warm, sunny, and hazy weather that occurs in late autumn, usually late October and sometimes into November, after a period of cool temperatures.

Indian Summer is specially delightful when, after pulling out long sleeve shirts, sweaters, and turning on the household heat, we sit, lightly dressed / libations in hand, on our back screened-in porch at the end of the day, listen to the quiet, watch the sun go down and the moon, in this case, the harvest moon come up knowing full well what will follow, weather wise.

Coincidentally, round about Indian Summer time, the concord grapes are in. That means I must turn my attention to making several concord grape pies. There many things I like about Autumn but, near the top of the list is a slice of warm grape pie along with a glass of fresh, cold apple cider. FYI, all of the ingredients for the above are grown an harvested within a few miles of my home.

6774-78 / common things • landscape ~ raison d'être / flash in the pan

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

THERE ARE SO MANY WAYS OTHER THAN THE ORGASMIC picture making orgy of blazing Autumnal color to herald the arrival of Autumn.

WHILE WE ARE ON THE TOPIC OF “GREAT” PICTURES (my definition thereof pending), it is my belief that “great” pictures are the unintended byproduct of the endeavor of creating a body of work.

FYI, in this conversational context I am considering to be “great” those pictures which come to define a body work and almost always/invariably, pop into one’s head when the name of the maker thereof is mentioned …. although, perhaps “Signature” picture is a better phrase. As examples, say “Eggleston” and think tricycle picture, or, say “Shore” and think Beverly Blvd / La Brea Ave picture, or say “Frank” and think Trolley picture.

To be certain those pop-up pictures are not necessarily the picture that comes to mind when hearing / reading those photographers’ names. However, show someone* any of those pictures and the maker’s name will most likely come to mind.

In any event, here’s where I’m going with this topic …. those pictures which have been designated as “signature” or “great”-–by whatever means, opinions, process, et al–probably came as surprise to the makers of those pictures. That is to write, that at the time–neither before nor after–of their making, the photographers in question were most likely not thinking that they had made a “greatest hit” picture. They were just doing their thing and then relegating the results to a specific body of work.

Which is not to suggest that as time went by they did not periodically review the work and, in doing so, come to recognize some the pictures as “better” than some others in expressing their vision. However …. in my fantasy photo world, I would be able to ask, as an example, Eggleston , Shore, Frank what photo of their making they consider to be their “greatest hit” and I would not be surprised if they had difficulty naming even one photo as their best ever photograph.

I write that cuz I believe that most, if not every, hardcore / driven-to-make-pictures photographer considers their bodies of work to be their “greatest” hit, individual “greatest hits” be damned. Furthermore, I believe that to be the case cuz whichever photograph comes to be considered to be “signature” or a “great hit”, more often than not, makes no sense when isolated from the context of the greater body of work from which it emerged.

iMo, in the greater scheme of things, photography wise, a “greatest hit”, without a body of work to validate its raison d'être, is little more than a flash in the pan.

*someone interested in the medium and its apparatus.

# 6758-63 / ~ landscape • common things ~ my involvement with the medium of photography over the past couple days

all photos (embbigenable)

“Great light makes great pictures.” ~ Michael Johnston

“There is no such thing as “good” or “bad” photographic light. There is just light.” ~ Brooks Jensen

"Light makes photography. Embrace it. Admire it. Love it. But above all, know light. Know it for all you are worth, and you will know the key to photography". ~ George Eastman

SO, OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS I HAVE made some pictures, an endeavor which should not come as news to many. However, in addition to that satisfying activity, I was also very agitated, annoyed, and perhaps even apoplectic in fact.

What set me off, you might ask? All it took was reading the title of a Mike Johnston entry entitled; Great light makes great pictures. I can not explain fully–perhaps psychoanalytic counseling is called for–why I find this so overwhelmingly annoying but let me try to explain; simply stated, that idea is exceedingly stupid, amateur-ish rubbish in so many ways….

…. first and foremost, in order to even begin to understand that postulation one must define what-in-the-hell is “great” light and/or, for that matter, what-in-the-hell is a “great” picture? Seeking the answer to those 2 questions might not ever lead to a consensus so good luck with that quest.

Ignoring that potential pitfall, we can all most likely agree that in order to make a photograph of any kind–great or not so great–requires the availability of light cuz, as we all know, making a photograph is writing with light. So once again, belief wise, I think we can all agree that light is an essential ingredient employed in the making of a photograph.

However, that written, does or can light “make” a photograph?

The dictionary states that the primary meaning of the word make is to form (something) by putting parts together or combining substances. iMo, based on that definition, an actual person is the only maker who can put together all of the many “parts”–ya know, things like vision, technique, gear, subject selection and visual organization, et al–needed to make a photograph. Indeed, light is one of those parts and, in some applications, it can be a very important part but, nevertheless, a “great” picture requires more than just the light, no matter how “great”, in order to be considered to be “great”. In other words, quite literally, light can not make a picture.

That written, the dictionary also iterates other possible meanings of the word make, one of which is to assure the success or fortune of; as in, seeing her makes my day. That meaning of the word could be employed by some viewers of a picture (with “great” light) to state, “The light in that picture is what makes it for me”…..OK, I get that but, if it is only the light that stirs that reaction, then I would suspect that the picture is most likely little more than a sappy, romanticized rendition of something.

All of that written, I categorically reject the idea that great light makes great picture. Sure, sure, some great pictures exhibit the skillful use of great light but, truly great pictures are always about more than the light.

And, please, please, please, don’t get me started regarding serious amateur-made pictures that are “about the light”–with a subset of those that are “about color”–cuz it feels like I have now mellowed out enough to resume regular living.

# 6744-48 / common places-things • picture windows • adirondack survey ~ magnum opus

all photos (embiggenable)

“Our artist in the Adirondacks has contrived to tell us his own story, in his graphic way, with the pencil camera, and explanation by the pen is therefore hardly necessary.” ~ excerpt from from the Saturday, September 21, 1872, edition of Appleton’s Journal featuring a wood engraving entailed “Our Artist in the Adirondacks”.

MY An Adirondack Survey / in plain sight BODY OF WORK IS APPROACHING the 650 pictures mark. Inasmuch as that number will continue to increase (where it will end, nobody knows) raises several questions. The most obvious one; whether (or not) it is time for some serious editing? Ya know, get the number down to a more “manageable” body of work. Next question; what about providence, aka: making a provision for the future? Ya know, I want the work to pass on after I pass on. After all, it is my magnum opus.

RE: editing? - simple answer: not gonna happen. While the body of work, as it currently exists, could be edited down to a more manageable number of so-called “greatest hits”, that procedure would, for all intents and purposes, dilute–if not completely destroy–the essence of what, iMo, the body of work is about; quotidian life in the Adirondack Park*. Here’s the thing ….

…. if the Adirondack Park were to be a state, it would rank as the 37th largest in the US. Within the blue line–the line drawn in blue to define its borders when the Park was created in 1892–there are 105 towns and villages with approximately 130,000 year-round residents. Yes, the Park is considered to be–and marketed as–an outdoor, natural world playground (with some nice civilized amenities throw in), but the fact is that it is also a place where the residents go about the business of paying the rent of daily living. In other words, it’s a big place with a big story, so to speak.

That written, realistically, I realize that I will most likely have to edit the collection down–for exhibition / book purposes–to approximately 300-400 photographs. FYI, that number will be determined by the number of folio edition photo books I am creating (see below).

RE: providence? - I believe that this body of work is an important collection; nothing like it has ever been undertaken. Fact is, most picture makers, tourist and accomplished locals, make, almost exclusively, pictures of the “grand” outdoors / natural landscape. If you want a picture of the Adirondack natural landscape, they are–or should be–a dime a dozen. ASIDE truth be told, I have sold–with a very hefty price tag–quite of number of that type of picture END ASIDE.

With this body of work, the major challenge for me is to find an art institution that will acquire the body of work. To that end, I will be creating 8-10 photo books (several copies of each), serial folio-edition style, each book containing 30 photographs that I will be circulating to a number of institutions.

Needless to write, I have my work cut out for me.

* An anecdote … early on I showed my first An Adirondack Survey / in plain sight photo book (70 photographs) to a couple I was just introduced to. From the art they had on the walls of their home (we were there for dinner), I judged them to be rather art conscious so I pulled out the book and they, separately, took the time to look through it, front to back. The initial comment from the wife, seconded by her husband, was, for me, quite telling …. she said that they had just returned home from a trip out side the Park and what immediately struck her about the work / book was that it expressed an overwhelming feeling of their recent drive through the Park.

Needless to write, I was delighted to know that they “got it”. And, that was confirmed when they each picked out 1 photo apiece for purchase to hang in their home.

# 6725-31 / travel • common things ~ picturing the obvious

all photos (embiggenable)

Twisted Dunes ~ my favorite golf course

I MADE IT BACK ALIVE FROM THE JERSEY SHORE only to start packing again for our 5 weeks at Rist Camp. Yesterday I sat staring at my desktop screen for the better part of 2 hours trying to come up with a topic, photography wise, to write about that I haven’t written about seemingly multiple times prior. Nothing came to mind.

That written, I’ll have lots of alone time on my hands at Rist and maybe I might just come up with a new slant on how / what I write about–rest assured, always on the topic of things photography wise–on this blog.

One thing I resolved to do while at Rist is get out and make pictures of the natural world, a referent I have been, if not actively ignoring, not pursuing with any vigor. Considering the fact I live in the largest protected area in the contiguous United States–the Adirondack “Park”, larger than Yellowstone, Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Glacier National and the Great Smokey Mountains National Parks–it seems like an obvious subject for picture making.

# 6714-16 / common places-things • people ~ OT interim entry

all photos (embiggenable)

THE WIFE AND I ATTENDED THE MICHIGAN-FEST YESTERDAY. The festival has nothing tho do with the state of Michigan but rather, it is all about a local food commodity, aka: the Michigan hot dog. No one knows how the word “Michigan” was applied to the thing–a steamed all-beef hot dog in a steamed bun, topped with a seasoned meat sauce–but it has been suggested that perhaps the man (a traveling salesman?) who “invented” it while he was in Plattsburgh might have been from Detroit, Michigan.

In should be noted that I am not a Michigan fan. First, and foremost, a good hot dog–some are not so good–should never be boiled cuz, after all, we are not British. In addition, the meat sauce, despite the ingredients, is most often rather bland and does not have much singe. Put the combination in a plain white hot dog bun and the result is, iMo, rather bland.

So, you might be wondering, why the hell did we go to the Michigan-fest? With nothing else on our Saturday schedule and it being a fine Summer day, I thought that maybe that, with a gathering of multiple Michigan venders–food trucks and restaurants–there just might be some interesting variations on the Michigan recipe. But alas, that was not the case. Apparently, diverging from the tried and true is just not in the cards. It is, when all is said done, a very popular item hereabouts so why mess with success? Nevertheless, it was a relaxing afternoon having a couple good beers in the beer garden, meeting and conversing with a few interesting people.

FYI, I made the SUNY Plattsburgh DEI table photo cuz no one was visiting it. The wife and I had just watched the South Park episode, Sermon on the 'Mount .…

…. wherein Cartman is grappling with the loss of his ability to offend the world, raging that, in Trump’s second term “woke shit is off limits” and that his unique brand of bigoted misanthropy has become the norm…”now everyone rips on the Jews .… it’s OK to say retarded”, plus the devastating news that President Trump canceled NPR, thus ending Cartman’s limitless free access to hearing liberals whine about current events cuz, as Cartmen laments, “That was like the funniest shit ever.” ….

So, I took the fact that no one was stopping at the DEI booth as a sure indication that, as Carmtan fears, “WOKE IS DEAD” and made the photo. A sad, sad sign of the times.

#6709-13 / people • flora • common places-things ~ at times a few words never hurt

view from 1st hole tee on the Mountain Course - all photos (embigenable)

the 3 of us

“My photographs are visual analogues for the quality of my life, a private view of subject matter found in the commonplace reality of the Adirondacks.”

THE OPENING LINE IN MY ARTIST STATEMENT FOR MY Adirondack Survey body of work could, with a slight modification, be used for just about all of my various bodies of work – substitute “in my life long walk about the planet” in place of “in the commonplace reality of the Adirondacks” and there you have it, a one size fits all statement that is applicable to just about every photograph I have ever made (commercial work excepted).

I mention this pursuant to my last entry wherein I reiterated my promise to not turn this blog into some kind of written personal diary. But, truth be told, my photography is in fact a visual personal diary of sorts. That’s cuz I do not make pictures of things, I make pictures of life in all its forms and locations. Hence my propensity for discursive promiscuity.

Despite that propensity, I have numerous individual bodies of work which fall under the headings of “traditional” photo genres–people, places, things, street, landscape, still life, et al– but, that written, I rarely make a photo with a genre-driven idea in mind. Virtually all of my individual assemblies of genre-related photos were organized together well after the fact of their making.

In any event, on occasion I do post photos that do seem to call for a caption / description of sorts. Say, like .… those in this entry ….

a.) I do not write about my golf game but I do post photos of my golf experiences, most often in the form of a landscape photo. However, yesterday, I played golf with my son and grandson on our home course–the Lake Placid Resort Course (45 holes, 2 18s and 1 9 hole par 3 course)–where we are privileged to play for free. That written, the real “story” here is that I am so lucky, fortunate, and graced with the opportunity to play with my multi-generation progeny on a regular basis–although grandson is only home from college for the summer. And, FYI, independent of that story is the fact–which may be understood by just looking at the pictures–is that, no matter how well–or not–one is playing, the old saying of “Golf is a good walk spoiled” does not apply on this course. It is always a grand and glorious good walk.

b.) Bet ya didn’t know that the Adirondack chair most often seen in photos are a later day version of the original Adirondack chair, aka: the Westport Adirondack chair. That chair design was the very first Adirondack chair which dates back 1903 and the Adirondack village of Westport. iMo, and to my eye and sensibilities, that chair is the most simple and elegant chair, of any kind, ever designed. That’s why we have 3 of them on our front porch. And, BTW, our cat also likes them.

# 6701-04 / kitchen life • landscape • common places-things ~ At the risk of hyperbole, couldn't this be regarded as a coup of some sort?

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

“I'm not sure why and when artists decided their role was primarily to be enactors of head-hurting philosophical conundrums, but it's never been a good look …. You hardly ever read an artist's descriptive statement of their "practice", now, without being told quite explicitly how this or that gesture, mark, or aesthetic choice "references" this or that important issue, from complex philosophical debates and cutting-edge scientific theories to controversial matters of race, gender, and politics. Why? Because I say so! How? In the way I say! Read the bloody manual statement!” ~ from: idiotic-hat.blogspot.com

THERE IS NO DENYING THAT THE MEDIUM OF photography and its apparatus encompasses a multifaceted means of artistic expression, genre wise. One could postulate that it is all good as long as nothing or no one is harmed in the making of its output. That written, I reserve the right to hold, in relatively deep dislike, both pretty-picture dreck and Academic Lunatic Fringe flapdoodle and green paint pixtures.

Re: the Academic Lunatic Fringe - setting aside setting aside the facts that practitioners thereof profess to be “lens-based artists”–ya know, as opposed to being just “pedestrian” photographers– and that their work product is rarely visually pleasing / interesting to view, what really gets my goat is that they, have for all intents and purposes, virtually hijacked the exhibition worlds of galleries and fine-art museums.

As these practitioners are spewed out of advanced BFA / MFA / Doctorate programs, many rise to positions of gallery directors and heads of photography departments in universities and museums where they rarely exhibit non-conceptual photography. iMo, that practice is most likely dictated by their smug and ingrained prejudice that any “non-educated” idiot can press a shutter release and make a picture. That, plus they all know that a simple-minded photographer can not possibly write a zillion word artist statement loaded with obtuse / nearly incomprehensible artspeak and theory–a “skill” that is deemed absolutely essential to advancing one’s work in the ALF art world.

All of that written, in addition to my outright dislike of ALF work, I am finding it more and more difficult to find fine-art galleries / museums that are exhibiting “traditional” photography. It is my belief that there are some damn good contemporary photographers out there who are making some very good pictures that, consequently, are not seeing the light of day–gallery light, that is. Mores the pity, as they say.