# 5940-42 / around the house • kitchen life ~ there is no OFF button

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

“To know ahead of time what you’re looking for means you’re then only photographing your own preconceptions, which is very limiting, and often false.” ~ Dorohea Lange

“It’s about reacting to what you see, hopefully without preconception. You can find pictures anywhere. It’s simply a matter of noticing things and organising them.” ~ ELLIOT ERWITT

REACTING TO WHAT YOU SEE WITHOUT PRECONCEPTION as method of making pictures is both a blessing and a curse. On one hand, there are, in fact, pictures everywhere. On the other hand, one is apt, like me, to end up with 12,000+ “keepers” (and multiplying every day) in one’s photo library.

# 5925-27 / around the house • still life ~ the wife thinks we have too much stuff

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

BEEN GETTING TOGETHER FEW CANDIDATES FOR SUBMISSION to Mike Johnston’s “Objects” Baker’s Dozen. My selections all fall under the heading of “little things”, of which there must be nearly 100 of them spread out-on display, stored in boxes and cupboards-around my house.

There is no overarching thematic imperative to my procurement activities other I like little things. Some of the objects have been acquired during my wife and I near-and-far travels. Those objects tend to be representative of the place in which they were acquired. So, in some cases, the objects have embedded memories of our travels together.

I any event, I have so many little thing objects that I have started a still life body of work-cheerleader with rooster and nativity set-of random groupings of little things….

….which brings this entry back the to “Object” Baker’s Dozen. Mike Johnston has posted a few pictures of submissions. They represent pictures which could be labeled as documents which depict the visual characteristics of objects but nothing more. They have no value as photographs other than as documentation. That written Johnston posted them for reason’s other than their merit as interesting photographs.

So, when I was looking for a picture or two for submission, I was looking for candidates that went beyond mere documentation. I found a few that I thought met that criteria-USA rooster with Coca Cola things-but it occurred to me that I should make a picture for submission. So I did-Minox Leica with dried rose and mini Tabasco bottle.

I believe that these pictures evoke something beyond mere documentation. That written, it is quite possible that they do so only for me.

# 5923-24 / around the house ~ simple is as simple does

(embiggenable) ~ straight out of the iPhone with a little fine tuning

(embiggenable) ~ straight out of the iPhone with a lot of fine tuning cuz the iPhone’s AI wants every picture to be like a bright sunny day

AN ADDENDUM OF SORTS TO YESTERDAY’S ENTRY: re: not thinking while making a picture. One of the ways in which I do not think when making a picture is linked to the gear I use. From that standpoint, this entry also derives its subject matter form the T.O.P. entry about “simple” cameras.

One of the standard pieces of advice for those picture makers seeking to find their picture making vision is the one camera-one lens-one year idea. The point of that exercise is to minimize one’s involvement with the gear so that the focus can be on seeing. In short, set it, forget it, then start making pictures. Although the idea that, if you find your vision using that methodology, you can then start changing lenses or bodies is ludicrous. iMo, what should be done at that point is to duct tape the lens to the body and keep making pictures.

In any event, every digital camera I have ever owned was a simple camera inasmuch as, within 30 minutes-maybe a little more, maybe a little less-of getting my hands on a new camera (always from the same camera maker) I: 1.) set the shooting mode to MANUAL, 2.) designate 2 dials/wheels, 1 ea. for shutter speed and aperture, 3.) set the focus / metering settings to the center of the viewfinder / screen, 4.) set the rendering intent to NEUTRAL, 5.) engage the IS, and, 6.) make sure I have easy access to the ISO menu. In essence I have made my camera as simple to operate as my first late-60s Nikon F. And, at this point what I am looking to achieve with my set up is to end up with a rich image file, full of useful information which can be fine-tuned to any visual state I wish to achieve.

This set up has served me well during my “real” camera days. Although, in some extreme high dynamic range lighting conditions, it required a bracketed frame or 2 to blend either highlight or shadow detail-at times, both-into the master file to achieve my desired result. Note that virtually all of the “work” to achieve my desired result came after making the image file. Nothing got in the way of seeing. Also note that, by creating a rich / “straight” image file, all of how the final image will look is up to me, not the machine or the AI software programers.

Which brings me to the iPhone…but that’s for another entry.

# 5917-19 / kitchen life • little things ~ it is not what you see, it is how you see it

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

“Why do most great pictures look uncontrived? …if the goal of art is to be reached: only pictures that look as if they had been easily made can convincingly suggest that beauty is commonplace.” – Robert Adams

“The everyday, or the commonplace, is the most basic and the richest artistic category. Although it seems familiar, it is always surprising and new. But at the same time, there is an openness that permits people to recognize what is there in the picture, because they have already seen something like it somewhere. So the everyday is a space in which meanings accumulate, but it's the pictorial realization that carries the meanings into the realm of the pleasurable.” Jeff Wall

I have always thought that the best pictures are those that look like the picture maker saw something and then made a picture of what he/she saw with the intent of showing us what he/she saw. No flashy technique or slathering of art sauce in either the the making of or the post processing thereof cuz the picture maker is confident enough, re: his/her vision, to leave well enough alone. Consequently, I am very comfortable with Adams’ proscription other than…

….his idea that “beauty is commonplace”.

My feelings about the commonplace is much more aligned with Jeff Wall’s idea that; a) the commonplace, is the most basic and the richest artistic category, and b) it's the pictorial realization that carries the meanings into the realm of the pleasurable.

In my pursuit of making-the act of pictorial realization-objects, aka: photos in one form of print or another, that fall into the realm of the pleasurable, aka: interesting to look at / view, I am drawn to the commonplace for its wealth of picture making possibilities. I am drawn to it, not because the commonplace is intrinsically beautiful-quite the contrary, it is most often chaotic and unremarkable in and of itself-but rather for “challenge” of documenting the form, without any sublimation of the literal referent’s surface detail, that underlies the apparent chaos.

To be certain, I am not in the business of making pictures which suggest that beauty is commonplace. On the other hand, what my pictures might suggest (for those looking for suggestions) is that the fodder for making a beautiful object, a photo print in and of itself independent of what is litteraly depicted, is everywhere to be seen in the everyday / commonplace world around us.

# 5914-16 / around the house • landscape • places ~ craft vs technique...

all pictures made within the last 24 hours

(embiggenable)

1932 Olympic Arena* / Ice Rink ~ (embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

…OR IS IT CRAFT + TECHNIQUE?

My first thought is that the idea of craft-a skill of making things by hand-has little to do with the practice of making pictures. Exception - making prints by some archaic print making process. If one were to press the subject one could venture the opinion that one uses one’s hands in the making of prints. But, I would counter that with the fact that the use of hands in making pictures is limited that of pressing buttons or keys on a keyboard.

That written, the use of one’s hands/fingers on buttons or keyboards is guided by the use of one’s brain. In the best of cases, the use of one’s brain is engaged in the pursuit of employing the techniques needed to express one’s vision. Which, might lead one to be considered to be a very good technician (a person skilled in the technique of an art or craft) as opposed to a very good craftsperson, re: in the making of pictures.

In any event, I do not give a damn one way or the other, re: what label-craftsman or technician-is slapped on me and my picture making as long as the label includes the descriptor picture maker.

All of the above written, my hands and/or fingers are guided by my brain during the picture making process-most notably during image file processing-in pursuit of my desire / intent to create a printed pictures which are an accurate representation of whatever was in front of my eyes and my camera. A picture making pursuit most often labeled as straight photography.

That is why, on the last page of my photo books or at the end of an Artist Statement for an exhibit, I always include this disclaimer:

No filters or special effects were employed in the making of these pictures. All pictures were made with a (device name here). The resulting image files were processed in an image processing software for minor color balance, contrast, brightness, highlight and shadow adjustments / corrections. All adjustments / corrections were performed in order to insure that the finished prints are an accurate representation-as much as the tools of the medium allow-of that which was in front of my eyes and camera.

*the ‘32 ice rink is just down the hall from the ‘80 Olympic Arena, aka: the MIracle On Ice Arena.

# 5911-12 / around the house • kitchen life ~ it's not important for them to understand, it's only important for me to understand*

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

Every artist I suppose has a sense of what they think has been the importance of their work. But to ask them to define it is not really a fair question. My real answer would be, the answer is on the wall. ~ Paul Strand

I HAVE NEVER THOUGHT THAT MY PICTURES HAVE ANY IMPORTANCE. A statement to which many might respond, “That’s a good thing cuz your pictures are not important at all.”

Strand’s statement resonates with me. Although, perhaps not in the way Strand intended for this statement to be understood. Not knowing the context in which the statement was made, I am uncertain about his use of the word importance inasmuch as I am uncertain about the manner in which he meant it to be understood…did Strand mean his real answer be understood in the context of the academic art world? the photography world? the culture at large? historically? his reputation as an artist?

My (very educated) guess would be that his statement was instigated by a question about his pioneering activities, as evidenced by his pictures on the walls of many galleries and art institutions, in the movement to shift from the soft-focus Pictorialist aesthetic to the straight approach and graphic power of an emerging modernism. Considered in that context, his was work quite important.

That written, the idea that the answer is on the wall resonates with me in the context of my being asked, “What are your pictures about?” Which, btw, I consider to be fair question. My true answer to that question should be, “The answer is on the wall.” However, I just can not go there cuz to do so I am certain that I would be perceived as an arrogant butthead. So, my response is to mutter a few words about content + form and then talk about the weather.

*an adaptation of a Gen. George Patton quote from the movie, Patton. Patton was a forcefull speaker and given to uttering some outlandish and vulgar words. When told by an aid that “Sometimes the men don’t know when you’re acting.” Patton response was, “it’s not important for them to know. It’s only important for me to know.”

# 5909-10 / kitchen life • photos by others ~ hot time in the old town (house) tonight

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

THERE ARE THOSE WHO BELIEVE A PICTURE CAN TELL A STORY. I am not one of those people.

Case in point, the picture of Hugo on his butt during a hockey game. The caption, aka: words, tell us that it is Hugo Hobson, that he is scoring his team’s 2ng goal of the game, and he did so Tuesday in Lake Placid. Without words, all of that information is unknowable just by viewing the picture.

Case in point #2, the picture of stuff on my kitchen island counter with sink counter and window in the background. About the only thing one might deduce from the picture is that I must read some blogs, that the corkscrew implies that I might drink wine, and that light is streaming in the window. What a viewer would never know without words is that I am having coffee and light breakfast fare, waiting for the kitchen to warm up from the fire I have just started (in the fireplace).

I have started a fire cuz it’’s -11F outside and we have been without a furnace for two-and-a-half weeks. A viewer would also not know that I am awaiting the arrival of the heat pump distributor to inspect the installation of our whole-house cooling and heating heat system, and then fire the sucker up so we get some heat.

One other unknowables without words is that the, at times, the wife gets gently annoyed by the fact that I refuse to discard dead flowers-or let her discard them-cuz I like the way they look and I just might make a picture of them.