# 5872-74 / around the house ~ I get horizontal

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

the cat don’t care who wins the cup ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

ORIENTING MY IPHONE TO THE HORIZONTAL INCLINATION was not all that difficult to accomplish. In fact it made activating the shutter easier inasmuch as one of the volume buttons-which can be used as a shutter release-falls conveniently to my index finger (mimicing my "real" camera).

Now the question arises, inasmuch as the square format has been an integal part of my picture making identity, does making rectangular pictures compromise that identity?

I have no doubt about my ability to "arrange" the visual elements-line, shape, form, tone, color, space, et all-within an imposed rectangular frame in a pleasing manner. So that part of the change in format does not concern me. It the signature identity thing that makes me wonder about the change.

Maybe I just have to think about it as a new body of work cuz I do not believe that it will change the way I see. And, of course, it is not as if I am going to abandon the square format.

# 5869-71 / around the house ~ this way and that way

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

BEING A CREATURE OF HABIT, I ALMOST ALWAYS HOLD my iPhone in a vertical orientation when making pictures. That's cuz, since I primarily make square pictures, it doesn't matter which orientation I use. So, I use the orientation that I normally use when holding / viewing my iPhone.

Now that I am frequently playing with the Portrait setting for it narrow-er DOF quality, + the fact that there is no square setting-although I can crop to square in processing-in the Portrait Mode, + the fact of my use of (habitual) vertical iPhone orientation, all of the recent full frame pictures I have made are in the vertical format. This relationship of habitual practices and their result just dawned on me. Duh and more duh.

Time to break old habits and hold my iPhone in a horizontal orientation.

# 5793-95 / around the house•kitchen life ~ on the road again

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

n

LATER TODAY THE WIFE AND I BEGIN our 13 day moving about the country trip. First stop, flying to California for our son's wedding then driving (1,000 miles) to Santa Fe, New Mexico and environs for some leisure time hanging around.

So, for the immediate future there will be no entries, re: kitchen life, kitchen sink or around the house. Although, we will be staying in 2 different houses so....

In any event, my picture making intention is to use only the iPhone. Nevertheless, I am taking a full compliment of µ4/3 gear for some reason that is not clear to me other than the fact that old habits die hard.

#5768-70 / (ku) landscape•kitchen life ~ on discursive promiscuity

(

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

I TRULY BELIEVE THAT VARIETY IS THE SPICE OF LIFE, picture making wise:

"Photography is a contest between a photographer and the presumptions of approximate and habitual seeing. The contest can be held anywhere...One might compare the art of photography to the act of pointing. It must be true that some of us point to more interesting facts, events, circumstances, and configurations than others." ~ John Szarkowski

Which is why I am a practitioner of what I call discursive promiscuity. Consequently, my picture making contest, as Szarkowski suggests, can be held anywhere. And, it can be the focus of any given referent. That is cuz my eye and sensibilities can be pricked by, seemingly, the most unconventionable referents. That is, referents outside of the box of what is considered to be referents appropriate for the making of a picture. However, no matter the referent, my pictures are most always about form. In a way, kinda like Robert Adams:

"By Interstate 70: a dog skeleton, a vacuum cleaner, TV dinners, a doll, a pie, rolls of carpet....Later, next to the South Platte River: algae, broken concrete, jet contrails, the smell of crude oil.... What I hope to document, though not at the expense of surface detail, is the form that underlies this apparent chaos."~ Robert Adams

All of the above written, coming back to Scarkowski's idea of "more interesting facts, events, circumstances, and configurations", it took a comment from a gallery director who said, upon the viewing of my porfolio-which at the time was not divided into separate bodies of work-that no matter the diverse subject matter seen in my work, he would have no trouble identifying any of the pictures (when viewed as a stand-alone picture) as a product of my vision, which caused me to understand that the manner in which I pictured the world-that is, the identifiable configuration seen in all of my pictures-was the link which held all of the diverse referents together as a unified body of work. (My thanks to Hemingway for introducing the idea of run-on sentences as a writing divice)

That realization caused me to understand that promiscuous picture making was the way to go. After all, it would always be possible, long after the picture making fact, to harvest like-minded referent pictures from my total body of work and organize them, by specific referents, into separate bodies of work.

I recognize that this manner of picture making flies in the face of the conventional wisdom about picking a single subject / referent and concentrate on it, and it alone, for a protracted period of time in order to create a unified body of work. However, for me, when attempted, that mode of picturing leads me to a kind of picture making boredom which leads to a premature end of what I might have wanted to accomplish. What I have found from pursuing discursive promiscuity picture making is that I can add pictures, ad infinitum, to any number of separate bodies of work over a very long period of time.

In any event, I guess what I am suggesting in this entry is for giving it a try for a couple of months. Just picture anything and every thing and see what happens.

# 5756-58 / around the house•kitchen life ~ nice and easy does it

photo by Gordon Parks ~ (embiggenable)

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

ONE OF THE VERY FIRST PHOTO-BOOK MONOLOGUES I ever purchased was a photo book of pictures made by Gordon Parks. I do not remember which of his pictures that, at the time, pricked my eye and sensenbilities and caused me to purchase that book.

However, what I do know is that many of his pictures, especially his color work, exhibit a quality that I would label as delicate and lyrical. A quality, no doubt, enhanced by a narrow depth of field which was most likely the result of, in his square pictures, his use of a 120 film camera (a twin lens reflex?) and that era's slow color film speed.

In any event, I mention Gordon Park's work as an intro of sorts to an explanation of my attraction to pictures with narrow dof...

...suffice it to write that I never have been a fan of "sharpness". To be more accurate, the excessive sharpness which is now approaching the status of a photo fetish. In fact, since my day 1 of digital picture making, I have been adding a tiny dash of global Gaussian Blur to all of my pictures as well as corner vignetting. I am also prone to reducing the color saturation in many of my pictures as well. All done in an effort to reduce the digital "look". And, iMo, making pictures with a narrow dof contributes to the same idea of reducing the digitial look.

Quite obviously, making pictures with a skosh of blur, corner vignette and narrow dof softens the image. And, I'm willing to admit that I do such things in order to create a, some might say, nostalgic look, albeit subtle, to my prints. A look that mimics how pictures use to look back in the pre-digital era of picture making.

However, it is not just a trip down memory lane which drives my picture making and print making proceedure / technique. My eye and sensibilities are drawn to pictures which exhibit a sense of "softness"...not soft in the blurry sense, but soft, as in, with the digital edge ground down.

To my eye and sensibilities, pictures which exhibit such "soft" qualities tend to be more lyrical, poetic and I might even opinion as more visually seductive than those straight out of the digital box. One might even write, picture that softly hum rather than emitting a screeching-finger nails on a chalkboard-shout.

# 5751-55 / around the house (full frame) ~ beyond the square

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

A SOMEWHAT STRANGE THING HAPPENED yesterday, after making a picture of wilted flowers in a vase using the iPhone PORTRAIT setting, I opened the file for processing and, seemingly for the first time-actually most probably the second time-I noticed that the picture look very good as shot. That is, as an iPhone "full-frame" picture.

To clarify, when using the PORTRAIT picture making setting on the iPhone, there is no setting for the square picture format-as there is when using the PHOTO setting-so you end up with an uncropped-to-square, full-frame image file. Consequently, my standard processing procedure is to open such a file and, without even considering it as full-frame picture, I immediately crop to the square format. An almost Pavlovian, don't even-think-about-it response, aka: square, it's what I do.

In any event, yesterday, the seed was planted in my head as I was making the picture that, due to the way it looked in the iPhone screen, it looked damn good as a full-frame picture. So, upon openning it for processing, I did pay attention to its full-frame possibility. And, I liked it. Which lead to...

... my wondering how many PORTRAiT setting image files I might have let slip through the processing procedure without considering or even noticing their full-frame possibilities.

After combing through my un-processed image file library, for my original un-cropped, un-processed PORTRAIT image files-only 2 of which were actual portraits-I now know the answer to that question...25 image files.

That came as quite a surprise cuz, when making a picture with the PORTRAIT setting, I first compose the picture with the PHOTO setting set to square. Then I switch to PORTRAIT and, without considering the on-screen, full-frame image, I make the picture. The surprise was the result of the fact that most of the un-cropped image files worked really well as full-frame pictures without my paying any attention at all to that possibility at the moment those pictures were made.

To be certain, I do not think that the full-frame picture variants are any better (or worse) than their square variant counterparts. iMo, and to my eye and sensibilities, they are just different.

All of the above written, stay tuned for my next entry when I with attempt to explain why I have been a fan of narrow DOF since nearly the beginning of my picture making life. And, why I will be more frequently using the iPhone PORTRAIT setting-did I mention how much I really like the ability to adjust, for all time, the amount of DOF in a picture after its making?-in my future picture making.

# 5747-49 / still life•sink•around the house ~ familiar things made new

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

THREE OF MY CARVED-IN-STONE, BEDROCK BELIEFS, re: the medium of photography and its apparatus:

"If a medium is representational by nature of the realistic image formed by a lens, I see no reason why we should stand on our heads to distort that function. On the contrary, we should take hold of that very quality, make use of it, and explore it to the fullest." ~ Berenice Abbott
"To me, photography is an art of observation. It's about finding something interesting in an ordinary place.... I've found it has little to do with the things you see and everything to do with the way you see them." ~ Elliott Erwitt
"The two most engaging powers of a photograph are to make new things familiar and familiar things new." ~ William Thackeray

I also have a "warning"-a reminder of sorts-belief that I keep tucked in my back pocket for use in those occasions when I might be tempted to partake in the never ending prattling and nattering-re: gear, technicals and technique...

"Of what use are lens and light
To those who lack mind and sight?
"

...a quote often used in in the context of photography conversations. It is derived from an inscription-written in Old German-on a Brunswick Thaler (coin) in 1589- which reads: ""Torch and glasses will not help the old man who will not help and know himself."

In any event, if a picture maker has "mind and sight", there is no need to get involved with stuff that is best left to those who would not recognize a good picture-or what it takes to make one-even if they were to walk face-first into it on a wall.