# 5958 / kitchen life ~ navigable space and recognizable subject matter

February 28, 2022

I HAVE RECOVERED FROM MY PISSED OFF AT Squarespace mood swing. So, I am moving on with my greatest challenge to making fine art photographs idea.

Simply written, it is my belief that the medium of photography and its apparatus, when practiced within the “confines” of the medium’s most unique characteristic amongst the visual arts, present some significant barriers to the creation of photographs that would fall into the world of fine art.

To clarify:

Re: “the medium’s most unique characteristic amongst the visual arts” - aka: the medium’s intrinsic / ingrained relationship with and to the real. That is, it’s capability of reproducing an accurate and faithful illustration of that at which the picture maker points his/her picture making instrument.

Re: “fine art” - is created and appreciated solely for its aesthetic quality and capacity to stimulate the intellect, aka: art for art’s sake, subject matter be damned. “decorative art”, photography wise, is all about subject matter, aka: the referent, principles of art be damned.

Working within “the ‘confines’ of the medium’s most unique characteristic” most often results in the making of straight photographs. That is, photographs made with the intent of creating an accurate representation-as much as the medium allows-of that at which the picture maker pointed his/her picture making instrument. No art sauce, aka: bullying of the subject matter into exaggerated angles and supersaturated colors, applied during or after the picture making moment.

Working thus presents a number of problems for most “serious” amateur picture makers (those who expend a fair amount of time, money and effort in making pictures) inasmuch as they have been told / taught that the sine non qua of picture making is the subject. The result of that prescriptive is that most serious picture makers set out to find and picture subjects that they are told are suitable-people, places, things representative of “conventional” beauty-for good picture making.

Hence the emergence of too-numerous-to-mention picture making cliches. And, since most “serious” picture makers realize-consciously or otherwise-that they are making pictures that are essentially the same as other “serious” picture makers are making-pick a genre, any genre-the game is on to employ techniques and effects in their picture making in order to stand out from the crowd. Goodbye, straight photography. Hello, decorative photography.

To be certain, most of these “serious” amateurs are making art. However, according to the dictates of the Fine Art World, it is not art that that world considers to be serious art. Setting aside that world’s distain for “artistic” cheap tricks, aka: art sauce, it is also worth considering their embrace of the concept of art fart about art inasmuch as that idea does not give a rat’s ass-even if it’s a picture of a rat’s ass-about the idea of subject matter.

No, iTo, the only things the Fine Art crowd consider worthy considering about a work of art are Content (aka: meaning) and Form. And they have elevated the idea of Concept (meaning) to a fetish, the sine non quo of their art world.

All of that written, one might think that I have no affinity for either art world. While it would be accurate to think that I have little interest in decorative art photography cuz it is just not my thing. On the other hand, much fine art photography is my thing, however…I do subscribe to the tenets of a subset of that world.

The vernacular of that subset does include the idea of art about art but not to the exclusion of subject matter, but not subject matter as the decorative art world considers it. Rather, it is about subject matter and its visual essence as indivisible. Consider this:

Unlike those contemporary artists and critics who denigrate subject matter as an adulteration of the art about art imperative, the most resourceful photographic formalists regard the complexion of the given environment as potentially articulate material…These formalists perceive real objects and interesting spaces as interanimating segments of a total visual presentation….Each photograph represents a delicately adjusted equilibrium in which a section of the world is coopted for its visual possibilities, yet delineated with the utmost specificity. The resultant image exists simultaneously as a continuous visual plain on which every space and object are interlocking pieces of a carefully constructed jig-saw puzzle and a window through which the viewer can discern navigable space and recognizable subject matter. ~ Sally Eauclaire / Color Photographic Formalism

Making pictures which meet the criteria expressed by Eauclaire’s articulate and insightful photographic formalist viewpoint is what I do. And, iMo, her description of Photographic Formalism could be applied to nearly every picture maker’s work that is regarded by the FIne Art World as fine art photography.

All of the above written, I am more than willing to admit that there quite a number of picture makers who do not give a hoot or a holler about whether their work is viewed as fine art or decorative art. On the other hand, many of those same picture makers do harbor a desire to make pictures which transcend the merely decorative, pretty picture modality. Many have tried the How To Master -(insert genre here)- book or workshop route only to find that those materials and prescriptives offer nothing more than gussied up reiterations of glib, decorative art picture making formulas.

In the quest for inspiration, I would suggest a few things….read The Art Spirit (published 1923) by Robert Henri (easily and inexpensively found at many sources), read the first 2 chapter intros-The Problematic Presedents / Color Photographic Formalism in Sally Eauclaire’s The New Color Photography (long out of print but copies can be found at a reasonable cost). And, as a general rule, avoid any book / workshop that promises to make you a “Master” of anything.

Neither book has any “how-to” gibberish. Eauclaire’s book spends deal of effort describing what good photographic art looks and feels like. Henri’s book spends an equal effort describing the mindset. aka: spirit, one might develop and foster in the cause of making good art.

# 5948-56 / kitchen life (in the morning) ~ starting the day

February 19, 2022

“Anything that excites me for any reason, I will photograph; not searching for unusual subject matter, but making the commonplace unusual.“ ~ Edward Weston

“There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs.” ~ Ansel Adams

ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH A DISCURSIVE PROMISCUITY (albeit a “good” issue iMo) manner of making pictures, AKA: making a lot of pictures of any thing and/or every thing, is that, on occasion, I have “discovered” a body of work (hiding in plain sight) comprised of pictures that were randomly intermingled within my voluminous picture library. I found one such unknown body of work ( approximately 38 pictures)-I have labeled it as morning coffee-a couple days ago.

BACKGROUND (not an Artist Statement): virtually every morning that I am at home, I have a morning routine that begins with sitting at the kitchen island and having my morning coffee, sometimes with a side of a cinnamon sugar donut or a bowl of oatmeal loaded with blueberries. I read the newspaper and check out the NY Times and a couple photo sites on my iPad. During that time I am, on some occasions, “distracted”-that is to write that my eye and sensibilities have been pricked-by the morning light in combination with the “arrangements” on the kitchen sink counter. On those occasions when the combination feels right, I make a picture.

On other occasions when that combination just is not right, I often notice-when getting a coffee refresh-that something interesting is going on in the kitchen sink or on the counter and/or island. Of course, the kitchen sink pictures end up in my kitchen sink body of work where, up ‘til now, they remained hidden and out of sight, morning coffee wise.

One of the things I find interesting and somewhat surprising about finding the morning coffee pictures is how many of them, approximately 20, were made using the full iPhone frame. Conversely, most of the sink / counter pictures were made in the square format. In any case, I feel comfortable with the full-frame pictures inasmuch as I am secure in my ability to see and find interesting form in that format.

The next trick, re: morning coffee, is to come up with an Artist Statement that is, a.) short and sweet, and, b.) makes sense.

# 5943-44 / kitchen life • civilized ku ~ because the individual is different

February 13, 2022

“The photographs that excite me are photographs that say something in a new manner; not for the sake of being different, but ones that are different because the individual is different and the individual expresses himself. I realize that we all do express ourselves, but those who express that which is always being done are those whose thinking is almost in every way in accord with everyone else. Expression on this basis has become dull to those who wish to think for themselves.“ ~ Harry Callahan

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

February 12, 2022

“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.

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

January 30, 2022

“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.

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

January 24, 2022

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

January 21, 2022

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.

# 5901-04 / around the house • kitchen life • kitchen sink ~ easy does it

January 12, 2022

***note from a gallery director to staff*** ~ (embiggenable)

ON A RECENT POST ON ANOTHER SITE THE IDEA OF EDITING one’s work came up. The general response to the post was that editing one’s own work is hard / difficult work and there were suggestions by commenters, re: how to make editing easier.

In my little corner of the picture making world, editing my work has never been hard or difficult. That is so for a number of reasons. One important reason is the fact that, even though I make a lot of pictures (nearly 13,000 pictures in my “finished” picture folder, all made over the past 20 years), those pictures are the result of making very considered single POV selections for making a picture. I rarely “work” a scene other than an exposure bracketing so in most cases it’s one-and-done. The result? There are not a lot of frames to sort through.

Add to that situation, the fact that I have a very high good picture success rate (feel free to call this a conceit), I do not spend much time having to decide whether a picture is a “keeper” or not. That written, some of my keepers are better than others.

How I determine which pictures are merely good, which are better, or which are best, aka: editing, is based upon the same premise I employ in my picture making…that is, trusting my vision-both literal (what my eyes perceive) and figuratively (perceiving forms that are recognizably derived from real life). Or, to put in in other words, I picture whatever pricks my eye and sensibilities and I determine whether my pictures are good / better / best based upon how they prick my eye and sensibilities.

That is, when a picture hits my eye like a big pizza pie and then shakes my nerves and rattles my brain, it slides into my “best of” folder and usually ends up on a wall (my home, in a galley) or in a photo book.