civilized ku # 1317 ~ to see the "unseen"

(embiggenable) • iPhone

A CRITIC WRITNG ABOUT THE PAINTINGS OF VERMEER wrote:

....beneath the accidents of nature is a realm infused with harmony and order, and, in giving visual form to the realm, the poetry existing within transient moments of human experience is revealed.

Over many years, this quote is one of many I have discovered which relates to my way of seeing and, consequently, to my way of making pictures.

That is, as I have written more than a few times, my pictures are rarely about that which is depicted, aka: the referent(s). Rather, my pictures are most often about the "harmony / order" I see-and isolate within the frame of my picture-in the patterns of line, shape, tone, color presented to me by "accidents of nature". While I have never thought that my pictures revealed "the poetry existing within transient moments of human experience", I can see how some might see it that way.

That written, whether or not one views my pictures as poetry-perhaps a better word would be poetic*-my picturing intention is to use the dipicted referent(s), "featured" and subordinate, to hint at or "point" to something which lies beyond the "mere" surface of the 2D print. Consequently, therein is the reason that I don't care about maximized resolution / sharpness in my pictures.

To wit, while, by the nature of the medium of photography and its apparatus, I am drawing a viewer's attention to the thing(s) depicted, it is most certainly my intention that a viewer not get "hung up" on the literal(ness) seen in my pictures but rather to move beyond that to a more metaphoric or allegoric sensitivity. And, to my eye and sensibilities, a "softer" image-relative to that produced by super hi-res sensors- is the picturing and processing device I use to attempt to bring viewers along to my POV.

*having an imaginative or sensitively emotional style of expression

civilized ku # 1317 ~ sing softly to me

CORONAVOGRAPHY update: new pictures posted today. More to come. Still waiting on a number of indicted participants to respond.

IT SEEMS TO BE SOMEWHAT OF AN ASIDE, re: the current life-during-wartime situation, to be ruminating on the medium of photography and its apparatus things but I can't help myself. So, here are some of my current thoughts....

.... in my picture making, striving for maximized photographic "realism" has never been a goal. Although, by the strict definition of realism-the quality or fact of representing a person, thing, or situation accurately or in a way that is true to life-it has always been my operative M.O.

However, what I mean by photographic "realmism" is that that partcular picture making fetish defined by maximized resolution / sharpness, ultra color fidelity (most often accompanied by a little help from the SATURATION slider) and other considerations driven by the quest for technical "perfection". A picture making pursuit which, to my eye and sensibilities, results in pictures that express "hyper"-realism. Or, to borrow the Tyrell Corporation motto, pictures which are "More Real Than Real".

It is quite possible that my dislike of maximized realism stems from the fact that, picture making wise, I was raised on a steady diet of film-even more specifically, color negative film. A film which was less sharp than transparency film and produced much more subtle color than transparency film. A film which yielded up gentle-on-the-eye, "soft"-yet detailed-prints which exhibited a "liquid"-like color and tonal quality.

The epitome of the soft / liquid print made from a color negative was a print made from an 8x10 color negative. Unfortunately, very few have viewed such prints and I believe that includes most "serious" amateur picture makers. In addition to my prints made from 8x10 color negatives, I have been fortunate to view those of many fine art picture makers - Shore and Meyerowitz, to name just a few.

And, FYI, I can still spot a print made from a color negative from a mile away. Those prints "sing" while the others just "shout".

The next entry will deal with why "soft" and "liquid" fits the way I "see".

civilized ku # 3607 ~ inside and out

(embiggenable) • iPhone

EVEN THOUGH I HAD A VERY PLEASANT SPRING-LIKE TOP DOWN drive about yesterday-after giving the Abarth a spring cleaning-it seems like it might be time for concentrating on some indoor activities for the near future. That is, inasmuch as I am in the high-risk category, re: coronavirus, my out-of-house activities will be limited to those that involve only very limited contact with other prople.

Apparently, my idea to update various bodies of my work hatched at just the right time. Although, getting out on my own to make landscape / natural world pictures once Spring starts to spring is well within reason. Case in point, getting out wise, even yesterday's Abarth cleaning felt great with the sun warming my body after a long Winter season.

before / after ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

THE ABOVE COMPARISON PICTURES are a pretty good ilustration of what can be had from an iPhone image file with some carefully applied processing.

The picture making situation was a challenge .... all black referent in shadow backed by an all white wall in direct sunlight. I probably could have exposed for more shadow detail and still protected / rescued the highlights in processing but I wanted to see how much deep shadow detail could be "rescued" in processing.

civilized ku # 3604 ~ one of things is not like the other thing

it is whatever you make of it ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

IN YESTERDAY'S ENTRY, WHEN WRITING ABOUT collecting vintage snapshots, I wrote:

....old snapshots can be described as "mysteries". One can never know anything about their making or the people depicted. Although, they are quite enjoyable to look at and wonder / ponder.

I have always felt that, relative to my eye and sensibilities, if a picture-any picture, not just a vintage snapshot-is, at first glance, enjoyable to look at*, I am inclined to spent some time and expend some effort to ponder it. And, when pondering a picture, I prefer to have my pondering un-infected by a statement from the picture maker who made it.

AN ASIDE I have no issue with artist statements unless they are little more than an obtuse / convoluted ramble of artspeak gibberish or narcissistic self-psychoanalytical navel gazing. However, my preference is to read them after I have viewed the pictures made by the artist. END OF AN ASIDE

In other words, I want my viewing and pondering to begin with a blank slate affected only by that which I bring to the viewing experience. Of course, that means that the results of my encounter with a picture will be predominately subjective / highly personal. However, that does not mean that the result(s) of my picture viewing experience can not be subsequently altered or expanded to accommodate the input from a well written artist statement or the option of another viewer. I do try to keep my eye and mind open to other points of view(ing).

All of the above written, when pondering a picture, I am never attempting to discern the meaning of that picture. Let me repeat, NEVER. That is because, iMo, art is best seen and felt.

When I experience a feeling instigated by the viewing of a picture (piece of art), that feeling almost always causes thoughts-connected directly to the picture-induced vibe I am experiencing-to come to my mind. HOWEVER (and this is important to my ultimate point), because I am a visual thinker, those thoughts which come to mind are in the form of pictures, not words. And, those mind-pictures are images drawn from my life experience memories. Memories of place / situation / people experiences which relate directly to the feeling(s) I am experiencing from the viewing of a picture (piece of art).

Since I am a visual thinker, I am more apt to seek out / experience the feeling(s) incited by a picture (piece of art) rather than some form of meaning associated with a picture (piece of art). Meaning construted with words, aka: the provenance of word thinkers.

So, I get it .... some picture / art viewers seek feelings while others seek meaning. For me, that seeking is determined by the difference (genetics at work) between visual thinkers and word thinkers ... although, that idea should not be understood to mean that one type of thinker or the other seek only feeling(s) or only meaning(s).

In conclusion, in an enlightened world (that would be a world filled with open minds), I would have to write, "vive la différence".

* "interesting to look at" might be a better phrase. One way or the other, it should be understood that what is enjoyable / interesting to one person is apt to not be so to another person.

civilized ku # 3601-03 ~ odd assortments - kinda off topic

singing with the band ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

our cars~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

scotch and bourbon ~ ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

I THOUGHT OF NAMING THIS ENTRY "SOME THINGS I COLLECT RATHER THAN CAMERA GEAR". But then it occurred to me that it might rather be titled, "Why I can't afford to collect camera gear".

Point in fact, the only pictured thing that I actually collect-in the traditional sense of "collecting"-is the BW "snapshot"-made by me-of a local mentally-challenged woman singing with the band-she is not a band member-on New Years Eve. That is to write, I do not collect my own snapshot pictures but, rather, I do collect old snapshots-made by others-which are almost always pictures of people.

Collecting old snapshots is not an expensive endeavor. They can be found in odds-n-ends / curiosity / low-end antique shops and usually cost about 10 cents each. There is a high-end of the snapshot market but I avoid that marketplace. Collecting old snapshots is fun and enjoyable insmuch as old snapshots can be described as "mysteries". One can never know anything about their making or the people depicted. Although, they are quite enjoyable to look at and wonder / ponder.

Re: the cars. 3 of the 4 cars depicted-the Abarth, Mercedes and Elantra GT (next to the porch in the driveway) belong to the wife and me. The Abarth may actually, in time, turn out to be a collectible car. On the otherhand, I own it because it's a blast to drive so it will not end up in "Concours" condition. Although, it is only driven in late Spring, Summer and Autumn and is in the garage during the Winter. BTW, you might notice that we like black cars.

Re: liquor. I drink bourbon and scotch and have a liquor cabinet full of very nice expressions of both. I even have 3 bottles of the the very difficult to obtain Van Winkle bourbons-2 12 year old "Special Reserve" and 1 very rare 20 year old "Pappy". Two of my current favorities, Heaven's Door label, are Bob Dylan's whiskeys. Yes, that Bob Dylan, who owns a distillery and actually is involved in the distilling process.

While it is accurate to write that I have a collection of bourbon and scotch, I do not "collect" them inasmuch as I drink them. They are, after all, a consumable.

civilized ku # 3596-98 ~ mish-mashing around

3200K + 5200K ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

THIS ENTRY'S PICTURES ARE A PRETTY GOOD ILLUSTRATION of my discursive promiscuity manner of picture making. Pictures wherein a consistent vision, aka: way of seeing, combines pattern and color to create a feeling of visual energy which holds a series of pictures together as all of a whole. And, FYI, visual energy is a visual characteristic that I prize, not only in pictures made with the medium of photography and its apparatus but also in any of the other visual arts.

civilized ku # 3588 ~ something I just learned about photography

(embiggenable) • iPhone

STRANGE FACT - I WAS BORN LESS THAN 10 hours after the feast day of St. Veronica, aka: the Patron Saint of Photographers*. Coincidence or a harbinger of my fate?

*Veronica is also the Patron of Laundry Workers which makes me happy that my relationship with her is about photography not laundry. It is also worth noting that Veronica is not an official saint but is, nevertheless, afforded the honor of being a Patron.

civilized ku # 3583-85 ~ let it be what it is

all pictures ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT THE PRIMARY CHARACTERISTIC of the Medium of Photography and Its Apparatus which most distinguishes it from the other visual arts is its intrinsic relationship with the real. Or in simple terms, its ability to record the real world in a manner which is a very accurate representation of that world (emphasis on the word "representation"). That written, because of that belief, I make pictures of the real world-using the medium and its apparatus-with the intent of those pictures being as accurate a representation of the real world as the medium and its apparatus are capable of achieving .... a picture making practice which is often labeled as straight photography.

While I believe that unique charateristic is the medium and its apparatus' greatest asset / strength, I believe that it is also its greatest impediment / weakness, re: the medium and its appparatus' accceptance as an art (as opposed to a craft). Consider the oft heard comment, anyone can take a picture, or, the ever popular, it's "just" a picture of (insert referent discription here).

I certainly believe there is a difference between taking a picture and making a picture. However, I do believe that a picture is, indeed, just a picture ....

.... that is to write, to my eye and sensibilities, a picture is not a document to be read, a picture is not an interpretation to be deciphered, and (amongst many other things it is not), a picture is not-other than pure propaganda-capable of having a fixed / singular meaning.

I understand that a picture-and the making thereof-can be / mean anything anyone wants it to be / mean. I believe that to be true of all of the visual arts. However, to my eye and sensibilities, a picture and/or any other visual arts object is a thing to be enjoyed in and of itself. A thing which tempts and teases my visual sensory apparatus. A thing which I want to feel as opposed to a thing I want to think about. A thing I want to look at and feel something.

Or, when looking at pictures (or any art), I want to experience, as Susan Sontag wrote: ....

.... the luminousness of the thing in itself, of things being what they are.

All of that written, the thing that caused me to write this entry can be found here. And, I swear to you, if I had to follow this prescription to look at pictures, I would never make or look at a picture again.