# 6831-33 / common places • common things ~ surreal density and visual energy

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

OVER THE YEARS ON THIS BLOG I HAVE repeatedly mentioned my sought after picture-making concept of visual energy. That is, my seemingly preternatural disposition to make photographs chock full of visual information, and, I might add, to appreciate such photographs made by others. Best as I can tell, that’s cuz I enjoy it when my eye and sensibilities are invigorated / agitated / stimulated by the dance-instigated by a surfeit of visual information-required to navigate across the 2D surface of a visually complex print.

Coinciding with this disposition is the fact that I find this arousal of my visual apparatus’ erogenous zones to be heightened by the viewing of smallish-sized prints-as an example, my 8x10 color negative work was always printed as contact prints. And, it explains why I am so enamored of small INSTAX prints.

Stephen Shore has a related concept which he labels as “surreal density”:

…what I found attractive about the contact print was the almost surreal density of information. That here’s this thing that you can take in, in a couple of seconds. But, to actually stand on that spot, and look at every branch on this tree, and every shadow on this building, and the pebbles on the road—this could take minutes of attention. It was, like, maybe fifteen minutes of attention had been compressed into this thing you can take in, in a few seconds. That’s what I mean by “surreal density” of information.

iMo, and to my eye and sensibilities, a photograph with “surreal density” quite obviously invites-especially to those who are naturally curious-the eye to roam around the surface of the 2D print. As Shore also wrote:

I don’t have to have a single point of emphasis in the picture. It can be complex, because it’s so detailed that the viewer can take time and read it, and look at something here, and look at something there, and they can pay attention to a lot more.

All of that written, I strive to make complex pictures with “surreal density” which, when taken in, in a couple of seconds (easier to do viewing small prints), read as a meaningfully organized whole-the idea that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Nevertheless, cuz the surreal density of the photographs tend to invite a dive into the discrete parts of the whole, the viewer can “pay attention to a lot more”, all the while enjoying the visual pleasures of engaging with visual energy.

At least, that is how I see it.

# 5891-94 / the light (civilized ku) ~ a perspective on light

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

AS I WAS RUMMAGING IN MY PICTURE LIBRARY I DISCOVERED that; 1. I have quite a number of pictures which were made due to “the light” and, 2. even though I have made a the light photo book, I have never made a the light gallery for my WORK page.

As I was organizing quite few (40 and more to come) of my the light pictures, it came to my awareness that many of those pictures where made with the 1.5mm (13mm equiv.) on my iPhone or, from the way-back machine, the 12mm lens (24mm equiv.) on my µ4/3 cameras. In the case of the 4 pictures in this entry, they all include doors and the exaggerated perspective of an ultra-wide angle lens. All of which leads me to the question …

….should I pursue the making of a complete body of work titled, a perspective (pun) on light and doors (or some such title)? And, if I were to do so, would it also be pictures that are about photography? That is, pictures which illustrate a specific visual characteristic intrinsic to the tools of the medium (as an example). A characteristic like narrow DOF or, as in this case, exaggerated perspective.

FYI, a thought about my use of “the light”….obviously, for me, “the light” is not the light that so many pictures makers salivate over, late day warm Hudson River School light. Rather, my “the light” is just ordinary, everyday sunlight which, when streaming through an opening-a door, a window, et al-creates a visual element which I use as an piece in the visual jigsaw-puzzle field created by / imposed by my framing. Or, in other words, the pictures I make that are instigated by “the light” are not about or defined by that light.

# 5703-06 / around the house (sunlight)•civilized ku ~ that doesn't make me a shallow person, does it?

(embiggenable) • µ4/3

(embiggenable) • µ4/3

(embiggenable) • µ4/3

THERE CAME A TIME-ABOUT 12 YEARS PAST-THAT I purchased a "normal" lens-50mm equivalent-for my µ4/3 cameras. At that time, I had begun to desire soft backgrounds / foregrounds (aka: narrow DOF), relative to my point of focus, as opposed to the rather everything-in-focus characteristic of semi-wide>wide angle lenses when paired with a small(ish) sensor.

Truth be written, I never really committed to making pictures with that lens (25mm f1.8 M.Zuiko). It seemed that my picture making vision is inexorably linked to semi-wide lenses such as my much used 17mm f1.8 Zuiko (34mm equivalent). Although, I have comfortably transitioned to the 24mm equivalent lens of the iPhone.

In any event, over the past few days I have been making pictures with the 25mm Zuiko lens, a few of which are presented in this entry. It seems that my narrow DOF inclination has returned to the fore. An emergent condition that I would primarily attribute to my use of the Portrait feature of the iPhone. A feature which works really well 95% of the time, and, has the added bonus of being able to adjust the DOF (albeit background only) during the post-picture-making processing.

I am not certain where this is headed, picture making wise other than to write that I will be taking a µ4/3 body, with the 25mm M.Zuiko afixed, along with me when I leave the house. Even gonna give it a try with my idea of picturing old / "traditional" gas stations.

(embiggenable) • iPhone / narrow DOF simulated in processing (not the Portrait feature)

# 5698-5700 / around the house ~ a love story

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

MY INTENTION IN YESTERDAY'S ENTRY WAS TO include a link to a book which, iMo, is one the best ever photo books about light. However, in the search for a link to a site where the book could be purchased, I discovered a big surprise.

The book, Office Romance by Kathy Ryan (the director of photography at the New York Times Magazine)-see some pictures here-is apparently out of print. Or, as indicated by the publisher-Aperture-out of stock. I searched a bit more looking for book sellers who might have it in stock. That search returned just 2 available books.

The big surprise...1 book was available for $1,060USD, the other for $2,000USD. FYI, I paid, 5-6 years ago, retail-$29.25USD-for my copy of the book.

I purchased the book (published 2014)-a little gem at 5.5x8 inches with 140 photographs-in large part because all of the pictures were made with Ryan's iPhone. At the time of that purchase, I was just beginning to explore the capabilities of my iPhone's camera module and I was eager to see some iPhone images on paper and...

...I was also intriqued by the fact that all of the pictures were made in a single place-not unlike my around the house pictures-the New York Times Building in Times Square, New York. The building's architect / designer, Renzo Piano, wrote the book's Introduction and one of his comments...

"I really appreciate how these photographs contribute to the story of the New York Times Building. And I'm happy that it turns out to be a love story."

...which has caused me to reimagine my around the house pictures as my love story (of sorts) to the home in which I live. And, my recent book search tells me that I need to find a place in my home to keep and protect the ROI on my "investment".

# 5557-59 / odes to ~ you are what you eat

The Desert Seen-ish ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

Osbow Archive-ish ~ (embiggenable) • µ4/3

Wald-ish ~ (embiggenable) • µ4/3

"As great a picture can be made as one's mental capacity--no greater. Art cannot be taught; it must be self-inspiration, though the imagination may be fired and the ambition and work directed by the advice and example of others." - Edward Weston

ON YESTERDAY'S ENTRY, A COMMENT WAS LEFT BY Thomas Rink:

"As you already pointed out, there is neither "good" nor "bad" light. Each kind of light has its own particular quality, and will reveal different kinds of pictures. For example, consider "Oxbow Archive" by Joel Sternfeld, "The Desert Seen" by Lee Friedlander, and "Wald" by Michael Lange. All made under totally different lighting conditions. Mr. Sternfeld used decidedly picturesque lighting conditions to depict the New England landscape as a stage for Thomas Cole's pictures. "The Desert Seen" was made under very harsh light, and the washed out highlights and grayish shadows create an atmosphere which I would associate with scorching heat and aridity. "Wald", on the other hand, has been photographed in German forests at dusk, often in pouring rain. Mr. Lange told me that these conditions arose a certain mood within him that he considered quintessential for what a forest represents to him. I'm pretty sure that in all three cases the choice of light has been a conscious decision; Mr. Sternfeld didn't use this light since the peers in his camera club told him to do so, Mr Friedlander certainly hadn't just been too lazy to get up in time for the blue hour, and Mr. Lange didn't venture into the forest under ungodly conditions in order not to have to spend the evening in front of the TV together with his wife.

I believe that next to the choice of what should be in the frame, a kind of light suitable to convey the pictorial intent (for a lack of better words) is important to create a subjective, expressive picture. It is only "artistic sauce" if a certain kind of light is used in a mindless way - for example, the camera club buff who only goes out during the blue hour, or the MFA student who goes for the deadpan look just because Robert Adams did so. Understanding what light does, and how to employ this knowledge for my pictures, is what I try to learn.

my response: Thanks for the great comment. Much appreciated inasmuch as, while I am very familar with Sternfeld (I have 2 of his books) and Friedlander (I have 2 of his books), I knew nothing of Michael Lange.

In his comment, Thomas mentioned the work of Sternfeld, Friedlander and Lange as examples of his point. That caused me to dig into my photo library to see if I could find examples of my own work that bear more than a passing resemblance to their work in order to make a kinda Ode to ______ entry.

Then I dug out the Weston quote-from my quotes library-cuz it seems appropriate for this entry which references the work of others as learning examples of one kind or another.

re: the imagination may be fired and the ambition and work directed by the advice and example of others. I have a large collection of photo books. They are all mongraphs of individual picture makers. In additionto that resource, I have spent a lot time in my adult life visiting stand-alone and institutional photo galleries where in I have viewed the work of many of the big name picture makers and was lucky enough to have chatted with some ... such as Meyerowitz, Shore and Pfahl. So, it is fair to write that my overview of the medium is broad, deep and diverse.

FYI: that written, the single benefit-in addition to the pleasure of viewing the work-of such activity, for me, is not firing up my imagination but rather firing up my ambition / drive for making pictures. Not for making pictures which mimic work that I have viewed but rather for making pictures in the manner that my imagination guides me.

I was somewhat surprised to find the pictures displayed in this entry cuz, believe it or not, I was not familiar with Sternfeld's Oxbow Archive nor Friedlander's The Desert Seen. And, as mentioned, I was not familar with Lange's work at all. So, I found it interesting that I was able to find a few pictures which displayed a similar feel and look to that of the aforementioned picture makers.

In light of my viewing consumption of so much work, I guess the old adage is true...you are what you eat.

# 5552-56 / the light ~

Pennan, Scotland ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone / µ4/3

"Surrealism, the mystery of place, solitude, and a heightened sense of the nature of things - night photography seems a worthy vehicle, a ritual to express these themes." ~ Tim Baskerville

WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THE DIFFICULTY OF MAKING AN INTERESTING PICTURE of the real world as the the medium of photography and its apparatus record it, aka: straight photography, most picture makers resort to adding art sauce, of one kind or another, to what comes out of the camera. iMo, that practice is a manifestation of a picture maker's inability to connect with "an internal rather than an external part of life"...

"Photographs should be symbolic rather than descriptive...they should suggest to the reader an internal rather than an external part of life." ~ Erich Hartmann

Or, the inability to recognize that there might be "messages from another world" to be had...

"The camera is much more than a recording apparatus. It is a medium via which messages reach us from another world." ~ Orson Welles

An unfortunate fact of the human condition is that most people tend to want to escape from the real world rather than to attempt to connect with it. Consequently, re: the medium of photography and its appparatus, art sauce laden schlock out-"sells" straight photograph by a wide margin. That's cuz, for most, what is on the "surface" of a picture is the thing and an awareness of what might be beyond that surface is not part of the program.

Now, to be certain, we all need an "escape" now and again. That too is part of the human condition. However, that desire should be balanced with the idea that we all need to "get real" as well. Without that balance, it's all koyaanisqatsi.

# 5545-48 / the light ~ there is just light

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone / µ4/3

5 MORE POSSIBILITIES FOR SUBMISSION TO THE Finding the Light juried exhibition.

While the first group of possibilities feature more dramatic light, this group features less dramatic light. Nevertheless, the light does highlight the pictured referents quite nicely. That written, both groups were created with daylight. My next group will feature after dark available light.

In all probabilty my final group of 5-6 pictures for submission will contain a mixture of pictures from each group.

# 5539-43 / the light ~ pursued or in pursuit

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone / µ4/3

ON ONE HAND, GEORGE EASTMAN said (or wrote):

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

On the othe hand, Brooks Jensen wrote:

"There is no such thing as "good" or "bad" photographic light. There is just light".

Obviously, these 2 ideas about light are quite contradictory. While one opinion treats light with the utmost reverence, the other treats in a rather casual manner. Nevertheless, one way or the other, in the absence of light, there is no photography.

From day one in my picture making life, I have scrupulously avoided following the "chase the light" school of picture making. That's the one described by Sally Eauclaire-in her book, THE NEW COLOR-as ...

"....many photographers consider visual and/or sentimental excesses as key to expressivity...Their lust for effect is everywhere apparent. Technical wizardry amplifies rather than recreates on-site observations. Playing to the multitude of viewers who salivate at the sight of nature (in the belief that good and god are immanent), such photographers often choose such picturesque subject matter as prodigous crags, rippling sands, or flaming sunsets. Drawing upon the Hudson River School's legacy in painting, they burden it with ever coarser effects. Rather than humbly seek out the "spirit of fact", they assume the role of God's art director making His immanence unequivocal and protrusive."

I have avoided playing the role of God's art director inasmuch as I am much more interested in seeking out the "spirit of fact". A practice which most commonly is labeled as "straight" photography.

All of that written, there are times when, as I have written in the past, that "the light" has chased me. At those times, unlike most of my picture making, it is "the light" itself which causes me to make a picture. Unlike the "light chasers", I have just been lucky enough to have been in the "right" place at the "right" time with the "right" light, presenting me with the opportunity to make an interesting picture.

In any event, this entry was instigated by the fact that I have been rummaging through my picture library looking for pictures to submit to a a juried exhibition with the theme of Finding the Light. I have narrowed it down to about 25 possibles. The real challenge is getting it down to 5-6 pictures for submission,