# 6259-61 / common places • common things ~ on shooting up the place

September 28, 2022

THE TOPIC OF “WORKING THE SCENE” HAS COME UP ON TOP. My immediate inclination is to call BS. That’s cuz the idea of working a scene brings to (my) mind the notion of aimlessly firing a machine gun at a target in the hope that one of those bullets will hit the bullseye. Whereas I believe the best way to hit the bullseye is carefully considered aim, the bullseye firmly fixed in one’s sighting device, and a relaxed squeeze of the trigger.

OK. I apologize. Those last 2 sentences are a bit heavy on the metaphor scale but I think that, most likely, you get my point.

That written, I am not declaring BS on the idea of working the scene inasmuch as a little bit-a very little bit-of working the scene can be useful every now and then. FYI, by a very little bit of working the scene I mean a matter of inches as opposed to firing off shots while break-dancing around a scene. I can write, without reservation, that I have never utilized the making of pictures as part of my calisthenics routine.

All 3 of the pictures in this entry were made over the last 24 hours with but a single pull of the trigger (sorry, yet another metaphor). One shot wonders, all. That written, I did employ my idea of working the scene inasmuch as, before I pulled the trigger (sorry), I did move the camera (sorry, the iPhone) a little bit-inches-while viewing the scene on the iPhone screen in order to get the framing and placement of visual elements where I wanted in order to manage a direct hit on the bullseye with just 1 shot (sorry, sorry, sorry).

The reason that this picture making process works for me, most of time, is that I see with soft eyes which, when a referent pricks my eye and sensibilities, I am able to identify, in my peripheral vision (no eye movement), surrounding visual elements and subsequently (and quickly) recognize how I might use them to create an interesting visual form, the true “subject” that I am always trying to create. Consequently, I am able to get right to the “right” POV with very little wasted effort, cuz I am ”just” photographing what I see.

And, FYI, writing of picture making calisthenics, if I were to be using a tripod-which I no longer do-it would need only 2 head-height positions. 1 set to my standing eye level and the other to my sitting eye level. That’s cuz 99 of 100-or some very close number-pictures I make are made from my eye level. In the case of tripod use, the head might be tilted up or down to one degree or another but, cuz I photograph what I see and, literally, how I saw what I see, it’s all a eye level POV for me.

In any event, re: working the scene, my manner of working a scene works for me. It may not work for many others. Although, it is most likely how those who work with a view camera work. That written, I probably average 2 pulls of the trigger per picture. I do some exposure bracketing and, every once and a while, I move the iPhone an inch or so in order to get an ever so slightly different POV. That’s cuz I wanna be sure I hit the bullseye (sorry).

# 6256-58 / kitchen sink • common place • common things • civilized ku ~ what something will look like photographed

September 26, 2022

AS MIGHT SEEM OBVIOUS FROM THE PICTURES IN this entry, I am back home after our 1 month + at Rist Camp. Got some work to do sorting through the 141 finished pictures I made while at Rist. Shutterfly is having an unlimited free pages offer. Maybe it’s time for a really big book.

A recent entry contained a quote from Alfred Stieglitz…

“My aim is increasingly to make my photographs look so much like photographs…”

…which brings to (my) mind a quote from Garry Winogrand:

“I photograph to find out what something will look like photographed.”

Both of these quotes, iMo together with the way that I read them, suggest to me that a photograph is something different from what has been photographed. That is a concept that is not news to me inasmuch as I have writing / saying for years that ”a printed photograph is a thing in and of itself, independent of what is depicted.” You can quote me on that.

Re: the Stieglitz quote: I do not think that Stieglitz was suggesting that there is a specific manner in which a photograph should look other than it should not look like a painting, aka: in the manner of the Pictorialism school of picture making. A school from which Stieglitz had previously graduated and subsequently disparaged. In other words, to utilize, in an unadulterated manner, the inherent / intrinsic characteristics of the medium.

Re: the Winogrand quote: I do not think that Winogrand was suggesting that a referent would, in and of itself, look any different in a photograph than it does to the naked eye. Rather, that a referent, when photographed with judicious framing and attention to the “arrangement” of color, form, line, shape, space, texture, and value, might be perceived in a manner different from that of the unaided viewing of it in situ.

iMo, to understand these 2 quotes is to understand the “genius” of photography. That the camera, in the hands of photographer who can truly see, does not need “tricks”, flashy techniques, bigger sensors, lots of gear in order to supplant the inclination to indulge in habitual seeing. Habitual seeing, a manner of seeing that may illustrate much but illuminate little.

# 6241-42 / landscape • common things ~ more important than sex

September 9, 2022

”Don't knock rationalization; where would we be without it? I don't know anyone who could get through the day without two or three juicy rationalizations. They're more important than sex.” ~ from the movie, The Big Chill

BACK IN THE DAY WHEN I WAS BUYING “REAL” (DIGITAL) CAMERAS, I always acquired “last year’s” model . That is, soon after the introduction of the latest-and-greatest updated camera model variant, the market was usually flooded with the prior latest-and-greatest version. At that point, I would acquire a new-to-me “upgraded” camera.

I pursued this approach to camera buying for 2 reasons:

While I could afford the latest-and-greatest camera model upgrade, I thought it better to let the must-have-the-latest-and-greatest suckers-it’s an addiction-take the inevitable depreciation hit that would come soon enough with the next camera model upgrade.
To be honest, since my ability to create photographs that end up on gallery walls is not dependent upon the particular tools I use to make my photographs, I probably could still today be using my first -acquired digital camera with the same gallery wall quality success rate.

RE: back in the day when I was buying “real” cameras - “back in the day” ended about 7 years ago when I last purchased a new-to-me “real” camera. I believe I can write that that purchase will be my last “real” camera-actually 2 cameras-purchase. That’s cuz those cameras still work, on those increasing rare occasions when I feel the need to use them. A need dictated by the need to use my 50-200mm lens (my now “real”camera “normal” lens).

An additional reason, perhaps the most important reason, that I believes drives my never-again “real” camera buying is, quite obviously, the iPhone. Simply written, it meets, and most often exceeds, most of my picture making needs. And, to date, I have had a number of my iPhone made pictures-printed to 20x20 inches-on gallery walls (in juried) exhibitions. There is also the possibility of a solo exhibition of pictures made exclusively with the iPhone-although the gallery committee is unaware of that fact, which is a testament to the quality of the prints.

All of the above written, I must confess to the fact that I have become a victim of the latest-and-greatest camera upgrade affliction…enter the iPhone 14 Pro. While I did skip the iPhone 13 Pro upgrade, there are just enough improvements-most notably (but not exclusively), low light picture making-in the 14 to justify (see the above quote) the upgrade. And, I am reasonably certain, since it just another iPhone, that the wife will never notice the difference.

# 6238-40 / landscape • common places ~ b + w + some gray stuff in between

September 8, 2022

…”flat, leaden skies, intermittent rain. Damp and dark. And dull.” ~ Mike Johnston

IMO, IF YOU ARE GONNA DO MONOCHROME, you must embrace the world in all its weather glory cuz, to paraphrase Paul Simon, all the world's not a sunny day, oh yeah. And I might add, iMo, if you can’t make a rainy, cloudy day look like more than dull, maybe monochrome ain’t your calling.

Then again, I am not a monochrome guy, so what the hell do I know about it?

FYI, BW conversion in Photoshop / LAB Color Space.

# 6232-37 / commonplaces • landscape • rist camp ~ (pre) chimping

September 7, 2022

“CHIMPING”, aka: a colloquial term used in digital photography to describe the habit of checking every photo on the camera display (LCD) immediately after capture, is very often used as pejorative in the picture making world. A variety of reasons have been offered as to why chimping is considered to be a bad thing but, whatever the case may be, I bring the word to your attention to lead you to the fact that I consider myself to be, in my picture making manner, a practioner of pre-chimping. I.E., using an LCD screen to see how picture will look before making the picture.

However, it should be noted that I have been pre-chimping for decades, long before the advent of digital cameras with LCD screens. That chimping was performed-in my commercial picture making days-with the use of Polariod film in a variety of Polaroid film backs-different backs for different film camera formats (I even had a Polaroid back for my 35mm Nikon cameras). That chimping was done for the edification of clients-art directors, designers, and the like-in order for them to see and approve how the final picture would look.

Of course, I didn’t need no stinkin’ Polaroid prints to know how the finished picture would look cuz, for a significant majority of my commercial work, I used cameras-view cameras and medium format cameras-that had large-ish viewing screens, most often called ground glass and/or focusing screens. Whatever you choose to call them, the point is I was not looking through a viewfinder.

What I was looking at was an image on a flat “screen” which presented that image in a manner similar to how it would appear on the flat surface of a finished print. That is to write, more 2d-like. Therefore, a much better manner in which to see form-the visual characteristic I seek to create / capture in my pictures.

All of the above written, you could (and probably should) assume that I was never preoccupied with the development of the digital camera EVF. Even with those digital cameras I own that have an EVF, I always make pictures with the use of the LCD screen, the only exception being picture making situations which feature fast action. I am not at all bothered by the perception of some, especially “serious” amateur picture makers, that I appear to be, when holding a camera out in front of my face, a lame / clueless snapshooter. Or, much less how, on the other hand, I am perceived when holding my Phone in front of my face while making pictures.

Needless to write, one of the reasons I really enjoy using the iPhone is that very nice viewing screen where upon form hits my eye like a big pizza pie. My only wish is that Apple would put all of their iPhone picture making goodness into the iPad cuz using an iPad screen for picture making would take me straight back to my 8x10 view camera days. Plus, I would no longer look like a clueless / lame , sappy snapshooter cuz I would mount the iPad on a tripod and use / hide under a view camera darkcloth to make my pictures. So instead, I would be perceived as the big-time, hot-shot picture maker that I really am.

# 6195-97 / kichen life • common places ~ what you see ain't always what you get

August 5, 2022

left, AFTER / right, BEFORE ~ (embiggenable)

AS MENTIONED BEFORE, THE iPHONE CAMERA MODULE IS not perfect. While it does, in fact, produce files that require only minor adjustments-primarily bright sunny day pictures. Where it “fails” to get it almost right are those picture making situations that have; a. low contrast, and, b. night / very low light scenes. In those situations the computational bits seem to be programed to deliver a full-range (nearly pure black > nearly pure white) file. That is, a file that does not match what the eye sees in situ.

In some cases, a simple adjustment with a BRIGHTNESS slider gets you very close to where you want to go. In other cases, a more nuanced use of the CURVES tool is called for. In either case, the fact that you are working with a fairly rich file-no, not RAW rich but way more than adequate-gives one lots of room with which to work. Neither fix requires an advance degree in Rocket Science or software engineering.

FYI, I am going to try a few experiments with making pictures with the Scene Detection and Smart HDR disabled to determine the difference, if any (I assume there will be), that those setting create.

PS all of my file processing is performed with the intent of accurately reproducing, as much the medium and my memory allow, what my eyes perceived, in situ, at the moment of making a picture.

# 6175-77 / common places • common things ~ Gutenberg would say, "Print it!"

July 28, 2022

IF IT IS TRUE, ANOTHER I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THING, re: picture making, is the notion that the making of photo prints is on the wain. I find it difficult to believe that “serious” amateur picture makers do not make prints. Why would anyone tote around a “serious” camera with which to make pictures and then not make prints?

In my case, I have 121 photo prints on the walls of my house. Add to that number 30+ photo books-let’s say an average of 20 pictures/book-sitting around the place and, it is safe to write, that I am not numbered amongst the do-not-make-prints crowd.

One way of looking at it (that’s sort of a pun), is that, in effect, I have approximately 800-900 printed pictures ready to go, posterity wise. And, since the work has been printed-in one form or another-over the past few decades, it was, and continues to be, a relatively painless endeavor.

Posterity wise, the most valuable printed pieces are the 12-picture, hard-bound, lay-flat pages, year-in-review calendar photo books that I make every year-for the past decade-as an Xmas present for the wife. The calendars are a collection of pictures of significant events, travels, and the like.

All of the above written, what is the point of picture making if you do not make prints?

# 6146-47 / common places • kitchen sink ~ there is plenty left to do

July 9, 2022

***camera module output*** ~ (embiggenable)

I AM FOLLOWING, WITH MORE THAN A MODICUM OF INTEREST, Mike Johnston’s new-found embrace of the “modern miracle” known as the iPhone camera module. After years of expressing his thoughts-based upon the use of vastly outdated iPhone camera modules-re: iPhone / smartphone picture making capabilities, he has now arrived in the future with his acquisition of a new iPhone 13 Pro. Whereupon he is now waxing, if not poetically, wondrously about the the iPhone’s capabilities, most notably the Night Mode, declaring it to be…gasp….superior in that regard to a “real” camera. In addition to Mike’s enthusiastic response to the iPhone’s picture making capabilities, the TOP comment-ariat are chiming in with endorsements as well.

All well and good, but only up to a point. That point being the application of George Eastman’s early marketing slogan of, “You push the button, we do the rest” wherein it is being suggested that after you push the “button” on an iPhone, the camera module’s AI does the rest. To which I respond, “Bull shit.”

To be perfectly clear, I have been an iPhone picture maker, almost exclusively, for the past 3+ years and I would be amongst the last to deny that the iPhone picture making AI handles a remarkable number of “difficult” picture making scenarios very well. However…

iMo, based upon my expansive use of the iPhone camera module, I can write that the picture making AI has one significant flaw-at least for those seeking to capture a realistic rendition of the light found in wide range of picturing situations-that being that the AI software developers seem to think that all the world’s a kodachrome-like sunny day complete with nice bright colors. A “flaw” that I am quite certain makes the average non-”enthusiast” picture maker very happy. Me, not to so much.

That written, the iPhone picture making AI does not always get it perfectly right. Close, maybe, but not perfect. I find that, to get the results I am am seeking, I do as much processing work-corrections and adjustments-on an iPhone picture file as I have done in the past on a “real” camera picture file. Although, it can be written that much of that works is less “extreme” on iPhone files than on “real” camera files. In that regard, and Mike has it right, go can go very “deep” in making adjustments / corrections with iPhone files, even with jpegs. The files are remarkably rich in information.

The diptych in this entry is a good example of my point. The file from the iPhone displays a result typical of that made on an overcast day-with any picture making device-wherein a prominent referent in the pictutre is in the shaded area of the scene. It takes more than a simple adjustment of the color balance slider to balance the color balance for the both the shaded area and the non-shaded area in the scene. (FYI, I got the color balance “right” by making color adjustments in LAB color space. I never touched the color balance adjustment slider.) In addition, global and selective area contrast and brightness adjustments were made. And, is almost always the case with iPhone files, a bit of color saturation adjustments were applied, both globally and on selective colors.

All of the above written, I just wanted to bring a bit of reality to the wonders of the iPhone picture making capabilities. Those capabilities are impressive but no one should think that the end of image file processing days are over. After you push the “button” there is plenty of the rest for you do.