# 6938 / around the house (20 years ago) • SX70 Polaroid ~ some expert advice

(embiggenable)

HAVING MADE MY THOUGHTS ON “EXPERT” ADVICE giving known, I naturally came to the conclusion that I should break out of my self-imposed restraint-–and practice–of not giving picture making device. I know the followers of this blog have been clamoring–many for a couple decades–for my advice*. However, to avoid disappointment, be forewarned that there will be no advice, re: gear nor technique.So, on with the show….

ADVICE #1 - do NOT make pictures that you hope will appeal to other photographers.

This item should be self evident / unnecessary cuz one should be engaged in making pictures that appeal to one’s self (identity, individuality, normal state of being). This ain’t rocket science. It’s simple enough. Just trust and understand the lesson that Rick Nelson learned at the Garden Party; “You see, you can’t please everyone, so you got to please yourself.”

ADVICE #1a - (addendum to ADVICE #1) avoid showing your pictures to other photographers.

To be more precise, avoid showing your pictures to “serious” amateur photographers. These people are hidebound practitioners of rules, gear / technique fetishism, and conventionality. They flock, quite literally at times, to locations, scenes, and things that have been decreed by the roving hordes to be acceptable picture making fodder.

Contingent upon these proclivities, in both their picture making and picture viewing, they are very unlikely to see anything beyond the literal identity of that which is depicted in a picture. Their first reaction and comment to a picture which is intended to represent something beyond the literal–or any picture for that matter–is apt to be, “What camera did you use?” To state it quite bluntly, they are literally unable to see beyond the obvious.

END OF ADVICE (more to come)

ASIDE - Ok, if a photographer shows up at your door to see your pictures and it’s John Pfahl–Pfahl is known for his innovative landscape photography such as Altered Landscape, his first major series of un-manipulated color photographs on which he worked from 1974 through 1978. His work has been shown in over hundred group and solo exhibitions and is held in many public and private collections throughout the world–as he did at my loft door, ignore Advice # 1a and let him in.

And, here’s the thing that blew me away during his visit; he entered my studio through my entrance foyer which displayed some of my commercial work-food, fashion, product, people, et al. After a quick tour, I handed him a beat up KODAK Ektacolor print paper box containing contact sheets made from my urban landscape / street 8x10 color negatives. He took his time browse through them.

About half way through the prints, he paused and said that he was quite confused. His confusion stemmed from the fact that, as he phrased, “You’re a commercial photographer and you should not be able to make good work like this.” I could not have been more delighted. But of course, that written, I shouldn’t have to point out that Pfahl was not a “serious” amateur photographer.

FYI, the SX70 Polaroid Time Zero photo in this entry; I have always been attracted to the image results one can get from so-called “crappy” cameras–Lomo, Diana, and the like. Some might even have considered Polaroid cameras to be crappy cameras. In any event, I’ll delve into this attraction in another entry.

*advice, re: emphasis on pursuing a Fine Art objective

# 6579-84 / landscape • instax • film ~ I contain multitudes

all Photos (embiggenable)

view camera - 8x10 color negative

MICHAEL JOHNSTON’S CALL FOR BAKER’S DOZEN submissions, re: film, got me to thinking about, well…film. Or, to be precise, making pictures with film and submitting one of my pictures that was made using film.

So, I took a trip down memory lane, picture making wise, and rummaged around looking for files of scans made from ancient pictures made using film. Came across a number of submission possibilities but ended up choosing one of the pictures from my death in ER series as the “winner” and sent it on to T.O.P.. That choice was based upon the fact that it depicts something ya don’t see or picture everyday and it was made with a camera-WIDELUX 1500 (120 film)-very few have ever seen much less used. Which got me to thinking…

….back in the good ol’ days, I used so many different cameras-35mm/120mm cameras, multiple view cameras 4x5>8x10, multiple Polaroid cameras, 2 different rotating lens panoramic cameras, half-frame cameras and other exotica + way too many film variants to mention. All of which I used to photograph all manner of things….which got me to thinking about Bob Dylan’s song I Contain Multitudes in which he wrote/sang:

“….I paint landscapes, and I paint nudes
I contain multitudes”

In any event and all of that written, it begs the question, do I miss it? Answer: kinda but not with much of a sense of longing to repeat it. To be precise, I do miss the look of C prints made from 8x10 color negatives. Nothing in the digital world equals it. In addition it is also worth noting that most of my family and friends and family/friends gatherings, events, etc. were photographed with the use of Polaroid cameras and films. And, I have thousands of prints to show for it.

While I am never going back to photographing with an 8x10 view camera, I have added a instant print feature to my family/friends and events picturing activity; the addition of an INSTAX printer to my out-and-about kit. Just as making a Polaroid picture and passing it around was a big hit in the past, making a “snapshot” with my iPhone, sending it to the INSTAX printer and then passing that instant print around incites exactly the same kinda hit. And so, my INSTAX print collection grows and grows and grows.

A bit of photography history, re: the instant prints in this entry: In the book, The Art of the American Snapshot in the chapter titled, Fun under the Shade of the Mushroom Cloud - 1940-1959,

… Praised as a “worthwhile recreation” that teaches “observation, alertness, and patience.” photography was also an extremely popular diversion in the late 1940s and 1950s… by late 1944 and 1945, more Americans from all walks of life made more photographs than ever before… in the 50s as Hollywood opened the to the bedroom, snapshooters also began to share some of their secrets with their cameras, giving glimpses of what they did in the privacy of their homes… Not wanting to be left out of this profitable market, Polaroid advertised how it “Perks up a party” and suggested to hostesses that they throw a “Polaroid Picture Party”….

I believe that Polaroid was ideally suited to implementing the idea that “snapshooters also began to share some of their secrets with their cameras, giving glimpses of what they did in the privacy of their homes”. While some were snapping away at “secrets” with their Brownie cameras, Polaroid pictures came straight out of the camera thus avoiding the possibility of censorship and the potential embarrassment of trying to have your film processed at the corner drugstore or eventually at Fotomat.

In fact, although I do not know how it could organized but a curated exhibition of “snapshooter” photographs-let’s call it “erotica”-could be fascinating to see. I’d bet there must be hundred of thousands, if not millions, of such photos out there hiding in closets or under beds.

FYI, I never threw a Polaroid Picture Party” but I did take a Polaroid camera to a lot of parties.

my Halloween party costume ~ c. 1969

# 6409-6417 / polaroid ~ barrel o' monkeys fun

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

MUCH HAS BEEN WRITTEN, RE: THE JOY OF PHOTOGRAPHY but little has been written about flat-out, just screwing around fun with photography. And, iMo, when it comes to just pure fun with photography-different from the pleasure to be had in “standard” picture making-nothing, in my experience, comes close to the making pictures with Polaroid cameras or films. I can’t even guess, with any accuracy, the number of Polaroid camera/film pictures I have made. Multiple thousands for sure to include SX70 and Spectra camera-made prints, 4x5/8x10/ sheet film prints, 669 print film (3 1/4x4 1/4 pack film) prints.

A significant part of the fun of making Polaroid photographs comes from just screwing around making straight/ un-manipulated pictures with family and friends and sharing the instant gratification that derives from sharing the results - most often smiles all around, all the way up to fits of hilarity.

As much fun as that is, the inevitable next step up the fun ladder is when you realize you can push around the emulsion of an SX70 print-does not work with any other Polaroid material-before it hardens. This is rather addictive and those so addicted can find themselves carrying around a little kit of pointy tipped things (of varying thicknesses for different width strokes). Embracing and perfecting (a matter of taste) this technique kinda makes one feel as though they are an artist (of some sort).

Then, once ya got the art bug, the serious amongst us move up to the Polaroid image transfer process. This requires the use of a 4x5 view camera and a Polaroid 4x5 film back in order to shoot and process 4x5 Polaroid print film. The process is as follows:

  • have a tray of water, a roller instrument and a squeegee, and sheet of heavy fine art paper ready

  • make an in-camera exposure onto Polaroid print film

  • put the paper in the water, soak thoroughly, squeegee dry but still damp

  • pull the film pack of of the back to start the film processing

  • before the processing is complete, peel the film pack apart, place and then roll the film onto the fine art paper

  • wait 10 minutes and then peel the film off of the paper

  • Voila, the dyes from the film will be transferred to the paper

The fun part of this process is that you now have an image on fine art paper and have the ability to add hand-coloring or any other embellishments to the print. Artist, indeed.

All of that written, my fun with Polaroid continued over into my professional work inasmuch as I made many manipulated SX70 prints and Polaroid transfer prints for quite a number of advertising clients and editorial assignments.

Unfortunately, as they say, all good things must come to an end. And, yes, there is a sad ending to this barrel o’ monkeys’ fun. To my knowledge, none of this is possible today. RIP Polaroid.

Photo captions (top-bottom, l-r): 1) my ex, 2) good friend and then par amour, 3) son 1, 4) son 2, 5) Pittsburgh magazine special issue ~ 24 hours / a day in the life, 6) national teen magazine article ~ teen life in a small West Virginia town, 7) regional magazine article - boxing gyms, 8) regional magazine cover ~ rebuilding the rust belt article, 9) University of Pittsburgh magazine ~ School of Dentistry article

PS I have created a new Fun with Polaroid gallery on my WORK page.

# 6469-78 / people • places • things ~ instant satisfaction

me on a hot day photo shoot ~ (embiggenable)

all pictures embiggenable

IF, AT THE TIME OF MY ENTRY INTO THE picture making life, the Photo Gods had called me aside and declared that I could proceed but only if I limited my picture making to Polaroid materials, I probably would have declined and stuck to sketching. However, if the Gods had set forth the same condition in 1972-the year the SX-70 camera / Time Zero film was introduced-I would have been happy to agree.

That written, lest you think that I would have been stuck with just the SX-70 camera and film, the fact was that, by 1972, I had Polaroid film backs for all of my “real” cameras-35mm, 120, 4x5, and (by 1973) 8x10 cameras. ASIDE the 4x5 Polaroid Type 55 film produced a seriously nice 4x5 instant BW print and a best-I-ever-used 4x5 negative. END ASIDE

My use of Polaroid professional films was primarily for my commercial picture making activities. Even though I did use the SX-70 / Time Zero tandem to make pictures for commercial clients, they were my go-to picture making tools for my personal picture making pursuits. And, using it as such was a pure joy. Especially due to the fact that passing around an actual print just moments after the picture was made is surefire crowd-pleaser if ever there was one. The SX-70 camera is the most fun camera I ever owned.

While I am on the subject of Polaroid, I can honestly write that if those same Photo Gods were to limit me to owning only 1 photo book-a book of pictures, not writing-that book would be THE POLAROID BOOK ~ Selections from the Polaroid Collection of Photography.

The Polaroid Collection of Photography is comprised of over 23,000 Polaroid pictures from over 2,000 photographers. The book features approximately 300 pictures made with a wide variety of Polaroid cameras and film. Each picture is accompanied by the artist’s name. The book Index has small icons of each picture with artist name, picture title, date made, and film type. The reproduction and production values are outstanding.

My only-one-photo-book-stranded-on-a-desert-island choice of this book is based upon the fact that; 1) the photos display a wide-ranging approach, aka: vision wise, employed in the making of pictures, 2) most of the pictures could be labeled as straight photography, 3) there is not a single word of art-speak anywhere to be read, and, 4) I could view the pictures in this book in a 1-picture-day manner until the end of time and never, ever come close to being bored.

The book is highly recommended and for those who might need (picture making wise) a kick in the butt, a knock upside the head, or a broom to clear out the cobwebs.

6313-17 / people ~ some people I know about whom you may care less

medium format camera - (embiggenable)

SX 70 camera - (embiggenable)

iPhone camera - (embiggenable)

µ4/3 camera with pinhole “lens”- (embiggenable)

µ4/3 camera - (embiggenable)

THE PICTURE MAKING IDEA OF PORTRAITS HAS been on my mind cuz there is a gallery group exhibition requesting submissions for consideration. Consequently, I have been rooting around in my photo iibrary for pictures which would be construed as portraits. That is, considered to be so per the submission guide lines:

A great portrait reveals something of the depth, history, and emotional state of the subject, at least as captured in a single moment in time. Although many portraits zero in on the face, many fine images don't show the face at all, instead using light, gesture, context, and other nuances of expression to create an informative portrait.

For this exhibit we seek portraits, self- or otherwise, that go beyond the surface to explore a deeper vision of the subject and, hopefully, draw an emotional response from the viewer.

To be certain, I have a number of issues with the idea that a portrait can reveal “something of the depth, history, and emotional state of the subject”, or that a portrait can “go beyond the surface to explore a deeper vision of the subject”. That’s cuz I am a firm believer in the idea the medium of photography has a problem with imbuing a photograph with definitive meaning, i.e. Photographs, which cannot themselves explain anything, are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation, and fantasy~ Susan Sontag.

That written, a photograph which illustrates a reasonably accurate likeness of a person, when viewed by someone who possesses experiential knowledge and interaction with the depicted subject, may prick memories of and associations with that subject-Barthes’ punctum. But, iMo and experience, a viewer with no immediate connection to the depicted subject, not so much.

Re: the emotional state of the subject / an emotional response from the viewer. Without a doubt, photograph, in many examples, can convey a general sense of the emotional state of the subject. However, without some supporting evidence, visual or otherwise, that general sense will have little or no “depth”, the why? factor. And, also without a doubt, a photograph which conveys a sense of the subject’s emotional state may incite a simpatico response in the viewer thereof.

All of the above written, in my commercial picture making life, I was considered to be a top-tier people picture maker. My people pictures were on countless magazine covers and in magazine feature articles, in annual reports, and accent-on-people-like my Ray-Ban on models work-advertising / marketing campaigns.

I studiously avoided traditional studio portrait work other than for family and a few friends. The “portrait” pictures I enjoyed the making of the most were-and still is-my spontaneous, casual pictures of family, friends, and acquaintances. Usually made with no specific intent other than just fooling around in all kinds of situations while using all kinds of cameras and techniques.

In any event, I have yet to decide if I will be submitting work for the aforementioned exhibition. My time might be better spent putting together a nicely printed folio of my personal portrait work for submission to galleries in pursuit of a solo exhibition.

# 6311-12 / commonplaces • people ~ all hallows' eve

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable, if you dare)

TOP: A HOUSE IN DOLGEVILLE, NY AS STUMBLED UPON during a self-impused detour drive just outside of the southern foothills of the Adirondacks along the Mohawk River Valley, aka: The Leatherstocking Region.

Bottom: Me in my Halloween costume-the porn photographer-c.1980.

Happy All Hallow’s Eve to one and all.

# 6305- 6310 / polaroids - people, places, things ~ more fun than a person can handle

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

CURRENTLY, I HAVE 19 CAMERAS IN MY LIFE (including the iPhone). Format wise they range from 8x10, 4x5, 120 format, 35mm format, and a widelux pano (all film cameras), plus 5 µ4/3 (digital) cameras + iPhone + 4 SX 70 cameras . My primary picture making device is the iPhone with the occasional use of one of my µ4/3 cameras (with a tele lens for sports / action pictures).

I can honestly attest that I have thoroughly enjoyed making pictures-commercial and personal-with each and every camera. That written, I can also attest that I never “loved” or fetish-ized any format or camera brand. To my way of thinking, they were all very nice tools which answered various picture making demands. In just about every case, switching brands would have never impacted my picture making results. …with one notable exception…

…that is the camera I would choose if I were forced to choose one camera to use for the rest of my life-the SX 70 Polaroid camera-with, of course, a lifetime supply of Time Zero film.

The enjoyment that came with the use of that camera knew no bounds, but, it was not just about the camera. Although…it must noted, who could not like the sleek folding design and the wonderful (and loud) slap of the mirror and the whirl of the motor as it ejected the print?…The camera itself was just a part the the picture making universe you entered when using it cuz the Time Zero film it used was something of a trip down the trip-the-shutter-and-who-knows-what-you will-get lane. And, of course, what you got was almost immediately available, and here’s the clincher, in the form of a print.

In addition to the unique look of the SX 70 / Time Zero prints, there was also the ability to play etch-a-sketch on the surface of the Time Zero print. I had a self-created kit of burnishing tools for use in pushing the Time Zero emulsion around as it developed. Countless hours were spent on this technique.

I used my SX 70s for both commercial-mainly editorial-and personal work. It was always a wonder to me how Polaroid went out of business cuz, as the photo gods must know, I thought that I used enough Time Zero film to keep the company going all by myself. I have 3 large poly bins loaded with what must be a couple thousand Time Zero prints. And, guess what, they are, literally, just tossed into the bins cuz, short of an encounter with a fire or a shredder, they are practically indestructible.

So, OK. Fine. I’ll admit it. I loved that camera(s) and the picture making universe it created and inhabited.