# 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.

# 5682-86 / miscellania ~ an assortment of "serious" cameras

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) KODAK Tower / 8x10 view camera

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) iPhone

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) µ4/3

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) Nikon F3

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) Polaroid SX-70

IF YOU WANT TO GET ME ALL WORKED UP, just point me to a link on the interweb which contains the phrase "serious camera". Especially so if it is used in a sentence along the lines of the iPhone is not a serious camera".

That written, do not be misled into thinking that this entry is made in defense of the iPhone cuz it is not. Rather, it is about the rather dumb idea that there is such a thing as a "serious camera".

The idea of denigrating certain types of cameras (and the people who use them) got a significant boost with the introduction of the first KODAK. "Serious" picture makers of that era considered the KODAK to be nothing more than a "snap-er's" device which according to a "serious" camera maker's manual stated that "...the photographer whose knowledge has been confined to pressing the button can never hope to make good pictures."

Adding to that thought, Stiegltz opined, "... thanks to the efforts of these persons [the] hand camera and bad work become synonymous." FYI, the "these people" Stieglitz was referring to were "...every Tom, Dick and Harry...[who] without trouble, learn how to get something or other on a sensitive plate." Steichen, on the other had, referred to them as "ye jabbering button-pushers".

In my picture making career, I experienced the not-a-serious-camera prejudice back in the mid-60s when I was handed a Graflex Crown Graphic as the camera for use by a US Army photographer. This dispite the fact that I was stationed in Japan, a country awash in 35mm SLRs. But, of course, those were not "serious cameras". FYI, my ongoing whining and caterwauling eventually led to the acquisition of not 1, but 2, Nikon Fs for my picture making use.

In any event, dispite the fact that the It's-not-a-serious-camera BS willnever die and as you may have deduced, in my picture making world, there are no "serious cameras". There are only good pictures ("serious" pictures?), no matter the picture making device used to make them.

ADDENDUM OK,OK. I wrote that this entry was not conceived as a defense of the iPhone. I still stand by that statement but I would be remiss to not provide a link to the iPhone Photography Awards (2020). Lots of "serious" picture makers making "serious" pictures with a "serious" camera. Be sure to check out each category (at the bottom of the page).

the new snapshot # 255 / SX-70 # 9-10 ~ a full plate

Notre Dame football ~ my Saturday obsession (embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • SX-70 camera / Time Zero film

(embiggenable) • SX-70 camera / Time Zero film

I COULD SPEND THE NEXT MONTH POSTING Polaroids ... but I won't. Instead, I have added a REAL POLAROIDS gallery to my WORK page wherein I have uploaded some not previously posted Polaroids and will continue to upload more Polaroids as I edit my way through the thousands (literally) of Polaroids I have.

As a result of my recent dive into my vast Polaroid collection of prints, it has struck me as somewhat incredible that I never done a serious edit of those pictures. Consequently, in a significant omission to my POD photobooks library, there is not a single book-there probably should be at least 3-of Polaroid pictures. A fact which makes me feel somewhat akin to an idiot.

The scary / intimidating thing about this situation is that it's gonna take some serious time and effort to right that ship. Like I need that now what with an upcoming heart proceedure (ablation), the holiday season, Hugo's high school hockey season and, not to mention, my desire to keep the iPhone (smartphone) Photography Gallery project moving forward.

The first thought which comes to mind is .... anyone want to volunter for the presitgious position of intern?

SX-70 # 8 ~ wink, wink

Marlene’s coffin ~ (embiggenable) • SX-70 Polaroid camera / Time Zero film

I AM NOT A FAN OF HOW-I-MADE-THIS-PICTURE stories. My feeling on the topic can were summed up quite nicely by Bill Jay:

...photographers who carry 60 pounds of equipment up a hill to photograph a view are not suffering enough, although their whining causes enough suffering among their listeners. No, if they really expect us to respect their search for enlightenment and artistic expression, in [the] future they will drag the equipment up the hill by their genitals and take the view with a tripod leg stuck through their foot.

That written, and to be precise, what I don't want to hear are stories about the gear and technique of picture making. On the other hand, some pictures have interesting stories about the why and circumstances, re: the making of a picture. All of which is my lead-in to telling you a picture making story, re: the graveyard coffin picture in this entry ...

Back in the early 80s, I lost a very good friend, Marlene, to cancer. Marlene was an artist-a 1-woman show at MOMA-of some national acclaim. I met her when I was converting a 6 story industrial building into Rochester, NY's first legal residential loft building. Marlene was one of the very first to sign a lease.

SIDEBAR: Over the course of a few years, we became good friends. Inasmuch as the building was somewhat of an experiment to see if it was a viable concept (for Rochester), the residents-as each floor was completed, it was fully leased-essentially created an interesting community comprised primarily of artists. Photograpers (4), illustrators, painters, writers, sculptors, craft artists and the like. END OF SIDEBAR

3 weeks before Marlene's death-she was in Manhattan at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center-the word went out that, if you wanted to say "goodbye", now was the time. I called Marlene to say I was coming down from Rochester for a visit and she asked me to give a friend-she deemed it important to mention that her friend, Donna, was not an "artist" friend-a ride down. No problem and together we drove to NYC on a Friday evening.

Donna and I got up early on Saturday morning and went to the hospital well before visiting hours, went to Marlene's room just as she was waking. Not knowing what to expect, we were quite surprised to find Marlene in a very sound state of mind and body. Mentally sharp and physically looking like she had always looked. We gave her a sponge bath, she ate breakfast and we settled in to what was to be a very remarkable day.

With her non-artist friend in a chair at the foot of Marlene's bed and me sitting bedside, Marlene began to pour out her life story to me. The story began with her proclaiming that she thought of me as her "platonic lover". Surprise does not come close to describe what I felt, at that moment, to hear that from Marlene on her death bed. However, that was only one of many surprises to follow.

I can not begin to go into detail about everything that transpired that day. But to mention a few notable highlights ... we heard about Marlene's childhood and her relationships (not the best) with her parents and a sibling, all of whom were now gone-she had absolutely no family connections left in her life. Then there was the bad marriage which led into some interesting anecdotes about what I would call her somewhat freaky pyschic-light abilities. Then came another stunner ...

ANOTHER ASIDE: On Friday evening Donna and I had had a very pleasant drive to NYC. We discovered we had much in common ... she was a high school teacher who had taught and knew well my then-wife's 2 trouble making brothers. We shared a passion for a particular author and we both had, at the top of our favorite movie list, the same film. Donna and I discovered our connections, to include Marlene (but without complete disclosure from Donna), during the car ride and a halfway stop for dinner in a nice French restaurant. END OF ASIDE

... while Marlene did not dwell much on her bout with cancer, it was at this point in our conversation-during all of which Donna was a rather quiet observer-that she mentioned that her "non-artist" friend Donna was, in fact, her cancer friend. Having already survived her first bout with breast cancer, Donna was a guide, a cancer sister, for Marlene during her breast cancer treatment. A fact that Donna had never shared with me during our prior evening ride. And, in a turnabout, Marlene was a guide cancer sister for Donna during her second bout with breast cancer.

I was stunned and, to be honest, very impressed with the stoicism and, dare I write bravery / fortitude with which Donna sat silently by in support of her cancer sister. I mean, holy s++t, Donna was, literally and figuratively, staring in the face of what could possibly be in her future.

As the day continued, a parade of wellwishers came and went. However, as Marlene and I continued our rather emotionally intense, wide ranging life stories conversation-it was a conversation inasmuch as I was relating some of my own experiences-the wellwishers tended to become a rather passive audience to the day long conversation. The conversation had become a main-act show for the assembled "audience". Marlene and I were barely aware of the "audience" for extended periods of time. We were sorta in our own little "bubble".

The day was one of the most memoralble days of my life. It was intensely emotional and very deeply connective on a human-to-human level. I learned, from someone on her death bed, about things deeply personal in her life and, by inferrence, things in my life. It would be accurate to write that the day was intense, emotion laden, life affirming (yet so close to death) and wierd.

In any event, after visiting hours were over, it was just the 3 of us again. Marlene had dinner. We gave her another sponge bath, said our goodbyes and off we went.

2-3 weeks later Marlene was dead. There was no funeral service other than a grave-side memorial event. A grave site donated by one of her cancer doctors on his family plot.

After the crowd dispersed, and as I, my then wife and Donna were walking away, I turned to make a picture of the site. And, as serendipity, and perhaps intuited by a bit of rubbed-off (from Marlene) psychic ability, would have it, I pushed the shutter just as a beam of sunlight struck Marlene's coffin. One shot. No redos to get it "right".

Was it a wink from the beyond grave or just a coincidence? I can't help but wonder every time I look at this picture.

SX 70 # 1-7 ~ life squared (literally)

sunflower

the Cinemascapist, my son, as a kid

kitchen sink

Puxsutawney Phil and me

teen magazine assignment

broken fence

assignment - Pittsburgh: A Day in the Life

all pictures ~ SX 70 Polaroid camera / Time Zero fIlm (embiggenable)

A QUESTION, BY JONATHON WEBER, HAS BEEN ASKED:

I have always wondered how you became a devotee of the square format...

my response: I never really pondered on that idea but, question asked, my first thought was that I adopted the square format almost immediately after I moved, c. 2002, to the digital picture making side of things. Prior to that date, my personal "art" picture making was created with view cameras which have a 4:5 (8:10) crop ratio which, while it ain't square, it's pretty damn close. So, it's safe to write that my personal picture making vision was somewhat attenuated, re; the 35mm format (2:3).

That written, as my thinking on the subject grinded on, it occurred to me that, duh, I had been making zillions of square pictures for decades, starting, c. 1974, with my first purchase of an SX-70 Polaroid camera. FYI, I acquired and still possess 5 SX-70 cameras. And, yes, at times, I used those camera to make "art", as well as commercial assignments-a lot of editorial / magazine- pictures. SX-70 made pictures were quite in vogue at that time.

ASIDE All of the above written, I have always had a knack for so-called "composition". That is, arranging lines, shapes, colors, tonal values, et al on the flat 2D field (surface) of a print, no matter the given dimensional format of any camera. Although, to be accurate, in my professional / commercial career, a large portion of my work, no matter the camera format used, was created to fit the 8.5x11 inch format of the printed page. END OF ASIDE

Truth be told, my square format SX-70 picture making was performed with what might be called an "intuitive" compositional sensitivity. That is, I didn't think about it, I pretty much just did what felt "right". It wasn't until my digital picture making began that I thought seriously about the square format. That is to write, that I consciously and with forethought adopted the format.

I did so because the square format fits the way I see, vision wise - literally and figuratively .... when I see a referent which pricks my eye and sensibilities, it has done so in the center of my vision, what I see with my eyes. Consequently, when I picture what I see, I tend to place that referent-which might be simple or complex-in the center of my picture's arrangement of visual properties.

To my eye and sensibilities, that center placement is an exercise in visual emphasis. And, by such placement in a square format, other visual "distractions" are limited, relative to a rectangular format. And, just in case you haven't noticed, I alway create a blurred and darkened vignette in the corner of my pictures which puts even more emphasis on the center of the picture.

It should also be noted, re: the vignette, that blurring and darkening of the corners mimics the way human vision works ... the human visual apparatus creates maximum definition in the center of one's vision and those areas of vision which fall along the periphery / edges of human vision lack defintion. And, for better or for worse, I am very conscious of the difference between the center and the edges of my vision.

To sum it all up, I became a "devotee" of the square format when I thoughtfully and deliberately adopted the format-as opposed to having to work with it by limitations imposed by equipment (SX-70 cameras)-in the early 2000s, c.2002. I stick with it because it fits the way I see, both literally and figuratively.