# 5987 / reflections on art (book) ~ it is exactly what it was

covers ~ (embiggenable)

spreads ~ (embiggenable)

spreads ~ (embiggenable)

statement ~ (embiggenable)

AFTER 8 YEARS I HAVE FINALLY GOT AROUND TO remaking the photo book, refections on art ~ the eye traffics in feelings. The photo book which was actually stolen. A happening that I consider to be of the highest compliment.

As I felt it necessary to mention in the book, I will write again here that the pictures in the book are straight out of the camera. They are not double exposures or composites.

FYI, I believe it is worth a mention, re: Mike Johnston’s OL/OC/OY notion, that I am not a such a picture making practitioner. I am (in my personal picturing), in fact, a OL/OC/IP - that is one lens / one camera / in perpetuity.

To clarify: in the making of pictures meant to be art / fine art, I have always, through a number of picturing “periods”, used one lens / one camera for a considerable length of time. In the beginning (c.1980) I used an 8x10 view camera and a Ektar (Kodak) 10in. lens for about 3-4 years. Later (c.2000, after a 20 year fine art hiatus), I used an Olympus µ4/3 camera (one iteration or another) with a 20mm lens on one camera and a 17mm lens on another-the 2 lenses were very similar in angle of view. Eventually, about 3 years ago, my “one” camera became the iPhone (one iteration or another) and using the “normal”, aka: semi-wide lens. During the 20 year hiatus I did use one lens / one camera to make a ton of personal snapshots ( and a some Fine Art pictures). That camera and lens combination was-I actually had 5 and still do-the Polaroid SX-70.

I mention this because I truly believe that one lens / one camera is the only way to find one’s vision and move on to making Fine* Art.

* for what it’s worth, in a series of books (mystery books by a single author) I am reading, a re-occurring character defines FINE as, Fucked up, Insecure, Neurotic, and Egotistical.