#6709-16 / zines ~ paging all photographers

all photos (embiggenable)

I HAVE LONG PONDERED THE IDEA OF WHY anyone would engage in picture making and not make physical / tactile objects-aka: prints, books, et al-of the results of that pursuit. The absence of such objects, leaves me perplexed, re: what’s the point? The only answer I can come up with is the old adage of “different strokes for different folks”, or, “whatever floats your boat”.

I, of course, am the poster boy for the making of printed photographs in one form or another; the current count of displayed photographs on the walls of my house is 124 (some prints display multiple photographs of my travels “snapshot” work). In addition there are 25 photo books laying around the place. And now, to add to the “clutter”, there is a growing body of zines.

FYI:

The word “zine” is a shortened form of the term fanzine, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. Fanzines emerged as early as the 1930s…A zine is most commonly a small circulation publication of original or appropriated texts and images. More broadly, the term encompasses any self-published unique work of minority interest…There are so many types of zines: art and photography zines, literary zines, social and political zines, music zines, perzines (personal zines), travel zines, health zines, food zines. And the list goes on and on. 

My interest in making zines is to: a) create easily made and economically inexpensive updates of my various bodies of work, b) make the zines available for distribution on an e-commerce component of this site, c) thereby getting my work, in printed form, in the hands of those who might be interested in it, and, d)duh, I like looking a prints of my work

My zines are printed by BLURB. BLURB zines are actually labeled as magazines on the site. The quality of their magazines is much better than typical zines-often hand-bound pages made on photocopiers-inasmuch as the paper and printing quality is very good. And, what I find amazing is the very low cost; typically a 20 page zine will cost about $10-12US (+ shipping*).

Re: the paper and printing quality is very good: I can write, without much reservation, that, if making zines on BLURB were to be the only method I could employ to print my work, I would be quite happy to cut pages out the zines and frame them for display on my walls. The print/paper quality is more than good enough for that use. Portfolio use or photo-”perfectionist” viewing, maybe not so much.

BTW, my current photo world fantasy is to create a curated site devoted to showcasing and selling photo zines. The biggest problem to doing that is finding a critical mass of zine-making photographers and, accomplishing that, getting the word out to a sizeable audience.

In any event, why not give it-making a zine-a try?

*BLURB shipping costs are, iMo, a bit high. So what I do, in addition to selecting the cheapest shipping cost, is to order at least 3 copies of a zine and split the shipping cost across the number of books)

# 6705-08 / in situ • common places-things ~ I contain multitudes

all photos (embiggenable)

LIFE IS BACK TO POST-HOLIDAY “NORMAL”. Been busy grinding out more SEEN magazine editions, most recently Issue No. 5, IN SITU. Also updated the IN SITU gallery on the WORK page. From the zine’s Artist Statement :

As I see it the medium of photography and its apparatus has as its primary capability making visible what something looks like when photographed. That characteristic is the impulse that drives my making photographs obsession….

…. Presented herein are photographs culled from my picture making oeuvre organized under the discriptor of in situ, aka: in the original place. They pay homage to the genre of street photography but not all are made on the street. My intent in the making of these photographs was to record, in a pictorially interesting manner, divine and sometimes quirky snippets of the human condition / comedy.

The other thing that has kept me somewhat busy is seeing-now 3 times-the A Complete Unknown movie. Wednesday evening I drove, to and from, a theater in Lake Placid during a moderate snow storm with 2˚F temps and a bitter, biting wind. Some might suggest that that certifies me as a Dylan fan-atic but, truth be told, I am not wrapped up, as so many others are, in the never-ending quest to unravel / decipher / understand the who and what of Bob Dylan.

In order to avoid going completely OT, I’ll bring it back around to photography, re: Paul Strand; who when asked about his work, simply stated that “the answer is on the wall”. Dylan has spent a lifetime of not answer any questions about his work and his private life. Which, in most people’s minds makes him enigmatic. I don’t think of him as enigmatic inasmuch as I believe the answer to Dylan is, simply stated, in the music cuz, after all, he was-and still is-aware that The Times They Are A-Changing, so consequently, he let it be know that (he) I Ain’t Gonna Work On Maggie’s Farm No More, and, he was-and still is-not afraid to tell his fans that It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue (..take what you need You think will last But whatever you wish to keep You better grab it fast). And, of course, if you still can’t figure it out, you might wanna remember that The Answer, My Friend, Is Blowing In The Wind.

What I appreciate / respect about any artist is their authenticity-true to one's own personality, spirit, or character-and an unrelenting commitment to their art. iMo, that’s true of many photographers, musicians, et al. Also iMo, I do not believe that in that regard Dylan has ever changed inasmuch as, no matter the musical “notes” / rhythms he pairs with his lyrics, his lyrics are always amazingly lyrical-think Nobel Prize for Literature.

All of that written, it’s back to photography, specifically, my photography. Like Dylan, I contain, photography wise, multitudes. Consider this from the In Situ Artist Statement:

During my 60 year picture making life, I have adopted no allegiance to any one photographic genre-landscape / nature, still life, people, street, et al. Rather, whatever pricks my eye and sensibilities is impetus for my discursively promiscuous picture making endeavors.

As I am creating multiple SEEN magazines representing many of my separate bodies of work-kitchen sink, in situ, life without the APA, picture windows, art reflects, poles, decay, autumn color / urban + nature, tangles scrub / thicket / trees, single women, all of which reside under the umbrella of discursive promiscuity-that endeavor serves to reinforce my understanding that ordinary life is my source of artistic inspiration, aka: my muse*. And, it should be made obvious that, like Dylan and his work, I refuse to be put in a box, referent wise.

Although, it should be made plain that I am not consciously “refusing” to do anything; rather, simply put, I am being true to myself and my muse, aka: being authentic. What others may think about what I create is of little concern to me** cuz I am doing just what it is I have to do.

*Some common synonyms of muse are meditate, ponder, and ruminate…. all these words mean "to consider or examine attentively or deliberately which describes precisely my picture making M.O.

**but, of course, I do appreciate that others may appreciate my work.

# 6585-88 / pinhole * common places-things ~ pin perfect

all photos (embiggenable)

WOKE UP THIS MORNING AND DECIDED I NEEDED TO make some new pinhole photographs for my pinhole collection. That meant hauling out the µ4/3 camera and mounting the pinhole “lens” in place of the regular lens. It also meant setting the ISO to 1250>2000 cuz the actual pinhole opening is the equivalent of an f125 aperture. FYI, the effective focal length is 22mm.

Yet another adjustment must be made to regular picturing routines; the camera’s viewing screen is basically a blank black screen making framing essentially a guessing game. That written, I kinda like that aspect of pinhole picture making cuz there is always a surprise or two along the way.

In any event, I would emphatically recommend giving it a try. There are many pinhole “lens” available for most cameras and they are not expensive. And, it is as “loose”-there ain’t a lot to shuffle and fret about-a way to make photographs as there is. Just let go of all the its-gotta-be-”perfect” crap and be open to surprises. You may actually learn a few things and grow as a picture maker.

# 6459-62 / people • foilage • sink • picture window ~ philistinish pleasures

645 medium format camera / transparency film ~ all photos ~ (embiggenable)

µ4/3 / square format

iPhone / square format

iPhone / full frame

8x10 view camera / color negative film

IN A RECENT T.O.P. ENTRY MIKE JOHNSTON prattles on (and on and on and on), re: that whatever a picture maker’s intent, meaning-wise, a viewer will make of it whatever they want, influenced by what mental / emotional makeup he/she brings to the viewing. A postulation which is totally dependent upon the idea that a photograph is capable of possessing / communicating a meaning. An idea that I-and many others-reject.

Unfortunately, iMo, the art world has, over time, reached a point wherein content-what a piece of art “says”-is valued over form-what a piece of art looks like. Me?… I subscribe to K. B. Dixon’s idea that:

“The contemporary fine-art establishment is a coalition of vested interests. They are not doing the medium any favors by relegating the idea of “visual interest” to the scrap-heap of philistinish pleasures. In a photograph, as in a painting, the photographer wants to see something he wants to look at. He does not want some ancillary item—some half-baked idea of intellectual profundity.”

Call me a philistine but I much prefer visual interest in a photograph-or any art form-over “intellectual profundity”. Or, to put in another way, I believe a photograph is meant to be seen, not “read”. I want a photograph to hit me in the eye like big pizza pie cuz that’s amore. If you wanna read, get a book.

I believe Susan Sontag got it right when she wrote:

“Photographs, which cannot themselves explain anything, are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation, and fantasy… the very muteness of what is, hypothetically, comprehensible in photographs is what constitutes their attraction and provocativeness.” ~ Susan Sontag

I also think she got right again when she wrote:

“Interpretation is the revenge of the intellectual upon art. ”

That’s cuz I believe that, if you want to suck the life out of a photograph-or any piece of art-try turning it into words instead of letting it seduce and captivate your visual senses.

FYI the pictures in this entry are meant to represent the fact that there is no “magic” format for creating interesting form. No cropping was employed in processing / editing these photos - full frame only.

# 6455-58 / decay • landscape • around the house • people ~ it's a better world

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

MORE NEGATIVE NATTERING FROM THE Doomsday crowd, Photography Division:

Doomsayer # 1: “It's clear to me that we're in the sad twilight of the era of photography as a serious hobby.”

Doomsayer # 2: “I'm interested in what stuff looks like now. And I'm much more interested in the popular media for viewing images now. The web. The monitor. The screen….I've been to too many galleries that cater to customers my age.….Mewing over the "wonderful tonality" of a print with content as boring as a tax audit. While all the good stuff is floating around in the ether….. It's like art stuck in amber…. I haven't shown a print or made a print in at least ten years.”

Re: “the sad twilight” - pure BS. I live in a small town (p.600) in a rural area. Every once n a while, aka: when I get the itch, I post a notice on an local online newsletter that I am conducting a improve your Phone picture making class. It regularly draws 6-8 people. People who are what I would call the new “serious” picture making hobbyist inasmuch as they are “serious” about making better pictures and they spent a fair amount of time and creative energy making those pictures. And, I might add, it it just delightful be around picture makers who are not gearheads, who just go out and make pictures.

And, while it constitutes just anecdotal evidence, I also have 2 baseball-style caps that I wear which display photo related messages; one simply has the KODAK logo, the other simply says 18% Gray. Both hats are frequent conversation starters with complete strangers who are, not surprisingly, amateur picture makers. The KODAK hat draws out a surprising number of film picture makers. Not surprisingly, the 18% Gray hat draws out the true cognoscenti. However, in either case, it is interesting to discover how many picture makers are out there hiding-unadorned with cameras-amongst the populous .

Now if your picture making (dimwitted) prejudices dictate that you can’t be serious unless you have “serious” gear (or wear a “photo” hat), then I guess the millions of such picture makers as described above are just flotsam and jetsam that have been thrown off the true-believer (photography) ship of state. Which, iMo, is a good thing inasmuch as all the killer sharks are actually on the ship.

Re: “I haven’t shown or made a print in at least 10 years” MORONIC - I am a true believer in the adage that it’s not a photograph until you make a print. That’s cuz it seems very obvious to me that a photograph is a thing - a physical / tangible object. You know, an actual thing that one can find in a shoe box after the person who made the thing is dead and gone.

In the visual arts world the thing is the thing. Sure, sure; in some quarters digitally created and digitally viewed images qualify as a visual art but ya can’t go the gallery gift shop and buy a postcard of it that you can place on your refrigerator door. Or…

Consider this…since we are discussing photography, it is safe to assume that, if one is creating art that is a reflection of one’s unique vision, then it also safe to assume that one tries to express that vision on the surface of one’s prints. That is, a print which exhibits / presents to a viewer one’s vision is a precise-fixed size, specific surface texture, color /tonal balance-and permanent manner. Qualities and characteristics that, quite simply and truthfully, can not be had in the digital domain on a display screen.

Forget the idea of making art and just consider the making of pictures of family, friends, travels, events, et al. The best way of sharing these pictures is in print form. I make both photo books and prints of our travels and events which, of course, include family and friends. The prints are on walls and in piles of small prints all over our house. They are constant, ever-present reminders of our life experiences and are a constant source of curiosity for friends and visitors.

(embiggenable)

All of that written, I believe we are in a happy decline of the traditionally embraced ideas of what constitutes a “serious” picture maker. The result of which is a freer / looser picture making attitude that is slowly but surely producing more diverse and interesting photographs.

I also believe, as demonstrated by the growth and popularity of online print making services- prints and books-and the emergence of combined print making + framing services, the walls of homes will be adorned with more framed photographs than ever before.

# 6447-48 / kitchen sink • diptych ~ allusive, formal, and breathtakingly efficient

Frienze

“These collections of the photographer’s are pictorial notebooks—efforts to capture an evanescent emotional reaction to a visual stimulus. He is not really trying to say this or that has existed, but that this or that has existed for him in a particular way.” ~ K.B.Dixon

iMo and to my eye and sensibilities, the very best of photographs are those made by a photographer who see the world in their own innate / particular way; an M.O. that is most often labeled as their vision. And, the success of those photographs is most often conditioned upon, not what they photograph, but the resultant photographs which exhibit an exquisite sense of form.

Some might opine that creating form is just another picture making cliché; a tried and true formula for making pictures. To which I would write that, if it is true that everything that can be photographed has been photographed, I believe that it is true that no matter what one photographs there are endless possibilities for the creation of new form.

And, photographs that exhibit an allusive, formal, and breathtakingly efficient sense of form are those that separate the really good photographer from the merely talented picture makers.

#6444-46 / doors • travel ~ Marco Venturini Autieri, this one's for you

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

ON MY LAST ENTRY, Marco Venturini Autieri wrote, re: my hometown porches photos:

“They are soooo different from what I would see around me (Tuscany). Another world.”

So Marco, right back atcha; last time I was in Tuscany, the front entrances to homes were soooo different from what I see around me (Au Sable Forks). Another world (and I really liked it).

6904-12 / people ~ RIP

Mel, picture by me with a pinhole lens ~ all photos (by Mel) embiggenable

I LOST A VERY GOOD FRIEND THIS WEEK. IN FACT, the only photo friend I have ever had in my entire life.

I am pleased to write that in all our time together we never once talked about gear. Photo wise all we ever discussed was photos, primarily his and/or mine. Over the years we would send-emailed-each other some of our current our photos (he lived in New Jersey) to keep abreast of what we were picturing. During the past few years I was “mentoring” Mel with his fascination with making iPhone pictures.

I met Mel through my wife’s sister, they were neighbors. It seems-without much exaggeration-that every time we were visiting my sister-in-law, especially when other family members were present, Mel was there with a camera documenting the goings on. And again without exaggeration, he must have amassed hundreds of pictures of the family’s gatherings; pictures that he made without ever putting the camera to his eye.

Mel was, without a doubt, in his professional career an exceedingly successful photographer. He leaves behind an amazing body of work which, iMo, deserves nothing less than a retrospective exhibition and a series-too much work for a single monograph-of books. Read his obituary to understand the volume and breadth of his work.

In any event, if such an exhibition / book(s) never happens, he would rank as one of the top unknown photo making greats.

FYI: from his obituary … “For over six decades, Melchior “Mel” Di Giacomo has captured moments through his camera, spurred by a friendly competition with his best friend.” the best friend who spurred him on was Jay Maisel.