# 6704-6708 / COMMON PLACES • COMMON THINGS ~ small is beautiful

September 15, 2023

AS I NEAR THE END OF WEEK 4 AT Rist Camp, I have made, by my count, exactly 50 INSTAX prints during my stay (so far-but another week to go). FYI, 20% of those pictures have been made in the kitchen. Add to that total another 65 INSTAX prints made at the Jersey Shore and I have quite a bundle of pictures that I need to figure out how to deal with.

My current what-to-do-with-them is, quite simply, my life-long affinity for small things. I do not have a clue as to how to explain it. That written, a fun example of this proclivity is the little tiny loon who lives on the binnacle-not be confused with the bonnet, boot or windscreen-of my vehicle’s instrument cluster. I find him (her?) to be very amusing as, when driving with “vigor”-the wife calls it excessive speed-through a string of twisty bits, the loon swims from side to side (g-forces at work) across the binnacle. It never gets old - I break out in a smile, if not an outright laugh, every time. One might suggest that simple pleasure goes together with a simple mind, but that’s another story.

In any event, my plan for this plethora of prints is to make 2-3 regular prints-non-INSTAX-of selected images from each collection. Then select 9 INSTAX prints from each collection to be presented as pictured below-not an actual framed piece, just some prints placed on a frame I had handy to see how it might look. As for the rest, I have discovered that there is a considerable number of picture albums for INSTAX prints.

One rather exquisite example is a fabric-covered, hard bound cover, 8x5 inch horizontal format (2 vertical prints per lay-flat page) album that holds 52 prints. It is right up my alley cuz…it’s small.

# 6537-42 / roadside attractions • kitchen life • around the house ~ more is better?

April 14, 2023

THERE WAS A TIME WHEN I MADE QUITE A number of diptychs. Even to the point that I put together an exhibition, Photographs In Conversation, wherein I invited a few blog followers and my son to participate. The idea was that I sent to them a couple of my photographs to which they would respond with one of their photographs. Ones which would create a “conversation” with my photograph. Alternately, they sent to me one of their photographs which I paired with one of my photographs. A good time was had by all.

Lately I have been noticing that, when I make a photograph, I often-at the same time and place-make another photograph which compliments the first photograph. But, to be honest, I never thought to pair them as a diptych.

However, I have been printing photographs for my An Adirondack Survey folio 2-up (just as they are presented here) on 14x24 inch paper to later be trimmed out to 11x11 inch size for the folio. And, surprise, surprise, I noticed that, pre-trimming, many of these pairings made interesting diptych possibilities. FYI, the pairings included in this entry were made from recently made photographs, not from An Adirondack Survey printing pairings.

iMo, this manner of pairing creates an impression wherein the cumulative expression is greater than the sum of its parts.

In any event, like it or not, you most likely will be viewing a number of diptychs on this blog.

# 6507-09 / kitchen sink • common places • common things ~ putting it all together

March 23, 2023

*at someone’s house-*NOT MINE-on St. Patrick Day ~ (embiggenable)

***a few samples from my*** An Adirondack Survey ***work*** ~ (embiggenable)

I HAVE NOT BEEN THINKING ABOUT BLOG WISE THINGS over the past week or so. Rather, my time has been occupied with editing out from my photo library approximately 120 pictures for my emergent body of work, An Adirondack Survey ~ as seen in pictures.

The body of work is comprised of pictures-in and of the Adirondacks-that were made over the past 22 years-the length of my Adirondack residency-of my picture making life. Many of these pictures were exhibited as converted-into-snapshot pictures in my solo gallery exhibition, Adirondack Snapshot Project (there are a few samples on my WORK page). In the case of this iteration, the pictures are presented as simple, straight photographic color prints.

In any event, the kick-in-the-butt instigation for assembling this body of work was the re-reading of a 1976 press release from MOMA-announcing the opening of the Color Photographs by William Eggleston exhibition-in which John Szarkowski was quoted as expressing the idea that:

…these photographs are perfect: irreducible surrogates for the experience they pretend to record, visual analogues for the quality of one life, collectively a paradigm of a private view….Eggleston, who lives in Memphis, Tennessee, finds his private, even insular subject matter in the commonplace realities of that city and its environs….While his photographs comprise a remarkable and surprising commentary on contemporary American life, his work is more the engagement of a personal vision than a social document.

My reading of the press release, taken in its entirety, caused me to look at my Adirondack pictures in a new light inasmuch as:

my photographs are visual analogues for the quality of my life, a private view of subject matter found in the commonplace realities of the Adironacks where I live. My photographs-an engagement of personal vision rather than a social documentary-comprise a somewhat surprising-as in rarely seen before-commentary on contemporary Adirondack life.

In order to circulate this work, I am in the process of making a 20 print portfolio and a 50 picture hardbound book for submission to a number of galleries / art institutions. And, I must admit to a degree of fear and trepidation inasmuch as I am laying it all on the line-my personal vision wise-with the submission-to important regional galleries / arts organizations- of this significant collection of my picture making life’s work.

# 6362-65 / nature • kitchen sink • kitchen life ~ confined to quarters

December 17, 2022

YESTERDAY AT APPROXIMATELY 3:12PM-9 hours into a 24 hour snowstorm-I was a couple minutes away from hitting the SAVE icon on an entry when, off went the electricity (town wide) and, poof, went the entry.

Happens on a regular basis when we have a heavy, wet snowfall. However, this time electricity was back in a few minutes but only as brown-out. Not enough juice for computer usage but, fortunately (and surprisingly), enough to operate our heating system (air-air heat pump). That situation lasted for a couple hours at which time we were plunged into heat-less darkness.

We lit candles all over the house and started a fire (in the fireplace) for warmth. That lasted for a couple hours and then the electricity returned at full strength. That lasted for 3 hours and then we were again light and heat-less for approximately 9 hours-midnight to10:30AM this morning.

All that written, I did not leave the house for approximately 30 hours so my picture making was confined to our kitchen.

# 6350-52 / common places • common things ~ I'm a shooter

December 6, 2022

I'm a shooter

he's a shooter she's a shooter we're all a shooter
aren’t you happy to be a shooter too?

I AM BEGGINING TO COBBLE TOGETHER A FEW words, re: the introduction essay, for the Philosophy of Modern Pictures project / book. The above words-tip o’ hat to the early Dr. Pepper I’m a Pepper tv commercial jingle-are the leading candidate for the essay title.

The use of the word shooter derives from the aforementioned mentioned-a previous entry-interaction with a young hipster-body jewelry, “cool” hair style + color, et al-bartender in an upscale restaurant bar who asked me if I was a “shooter”. I was confused-was she asking if I wanted a shot of bourbon? was I packing heat? Noting my confusion, she pointed out that she had noticed my cap with the KODAK logo. Thus informed of that, it gave me license to answer that, “Yes. I’m a shooter.”

Apparently the younger generation thinks it cool to be a shooter. That being the case, for purposes of the book, it’s good enough for me.

Re: we’re all a shooter - OK. I get it. Not everyone is a shooter inasmuch as not everyone has a picture making device, However, with the fact that 1.7 trillion pictures are made / taken (whatever) a year and that there are 8 billion humans on the planet, the average number of pictures per human is 125 per year. And, this might be a bit of a surprise, 92.5% of pictures are made with a picture making device which can also be used to make a phone call. Only 7% are made with a “real” camera.

FYI, while the book will have some facts, figures, history, re: picture making, the emphasis will be on how, as the result of the ease of making “good” pictures-i.e. sharp, correctly exposed, referent in focus and the like-the boundaries of what can be pictured and how it can be pictured has expanded like never before.

# 6329-33 / common places • common things • landscape ~ form-it-able

November 17, 2022

“There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs….The so-called rules of photographic composition are, in my opinion, invalid, irrelevant, immaterial.” ~ Ansel Adams

“Consulting the rules of composition before taking a photograph, is like consulting the laws of gravity before going for a walk.” ~ Edward Weston

IN MY LAST ENTRY, re: ideas on making an interesting photograph, I mentioned the idea that it is form, rather than the depicted referent, that is the most important element in creating interesting an photograph. And, I described form as the visual expression of “how the picture maker has “arranged”-by means of his/her framing and POV-line, shape, space, tone (value), and color across the 2D visual field of a print.

That written, it is quite possible that I should not be using the word “form” to describe the visual characteristic that I strive to illustrate in my photographs and appreciate in the photographs made by others. Technically, according to Tate Modern, my usage is correct:

In relation to art the term form has two meanings: it can refer to the overall form taken by the work – its physical nature; or within a work of art it can refer to the element of shape among the various elements that make up a work.

As you might surmise, I hang my picture making hat, re: form, on the idea of the element of shape among the various elements (to include line, space, tone, and color) that make up a work of art. However-and here’s the rub, re: maybe I should not use the word “form”-cuz if you were to search the interweb for “form in photography” you would discover that the genii in the photo commentariat world have decided that form…

“…refers to the three-dimensional appearance of shapes and objects in a photo…[and] is all about subjects that stand out as if they're 3D objects.”

and, get this awesome insight..

“Successfully conveying all three dimensions in a two dimensional medium is a great artistic accomplishment”

ASIDE from the song Assholes on parade: Assholes to the left…And assholes to the right … I once heard it said…That old assholes never die…They just lay in bed…And multiply END ASIDE

another ASIDE I realize the preceding aside is rather harsh but…the interweb is chock full of bad photo making advice, especially so from “experts” and workshop leaders and it gets me to setting my teeth on edge. END ASIDE

I’m sorry, but, the use of leading lines and value (tone - you know shadow and light) to create the faux appearance of 3D shape and/or depth in a 2D art form, aka: photography, is a very fer piece down the pike from a “great artistic accomplishment”. And, it has little to do, if anything, with the idea of form as seen and perceived in the Art World.

So, in my use of the word form to describe an important visual tool in my photo bag of tricks, I worry that the mis/mal-informed out there might get the wrong impression.

All of the above written, stay tuned for my next entry wherein I describe in greater detail much more exactly what I believe to be the good form that I strive to illustrate in my photographs.

PS the pictures in this entry all present, if one chooses to look at them in that way, a sense of depth. That, however, is not how I view them nor is why I made them.

6222-26 / common places-things • kitchen sink • rist camp ~ deception

August 28, 2022

“Why do most great pictures look uncontrived? Why do photographers bother with the deception, especially since it so often requires the hardest work of all? The answer is, I think, that the deception is necessary 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

This Robert Adams quote has always held my attention inasmuch as it kinda, sorta skirts around the edges of my picture making intentions. My eye and sensibilities are unquestionably pricked by the commonplace and the avoidance of the grand geste (picture making wise) but, I can not write that I fully embrace the idea that “beauty is commonplace”.

To put a finer point on that idea, iMo, there is not a lot in the commonplace world that is visually beautiful in and of itself. However, within the domain of picture making, much of the commonplace world contains visual fodder for the making of beautiful things, “things” being photographic prints which give to evidence to finely seen and pictured form.

That written, while there are some who can see an actual blade of grass and perceive / feel / experience the every-thing-is-connected beauty underlying the universe, it is probable that they might not experience the same thing while gazing at a rather mundane picture of that same blade of grass.

By the same token, I also believe that many viewers, looking at a picture of that same blade of grass which-in its totality across its visual plane-evidences a depiction of a finely seen sense of form, might be incited to exclaim, “That is beautiful.” However, is the viewer remarking on the blade of grass itself or the depiction thereof? I wonder cuz, without a doubt, the blade of grass and the depiction of it are most definitely not the same “thing.”

All of that written, I am still faced with the is-beauty-commonplace question. And, the best answer I have been able to come up with is that, no, within the context of the real world, beauty is not commonplace. However, within the context of picture making, the commonplace is rife possibilities for coaxing beauty from the seeming rubble of the mundane.

# 6203 / kitchen life • common things ~ writing about photography as art

August 14, 2022

Consider this, re: good field strategy:

THE VISUAL TEXTURE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH derives from an optical mix of steadfastly articulate, recorded facts that have been presented in a manner calculated to emphasize the subject matter’s cumulative rather than individual visual appearance.

FYI, I consider the subject and its visual essence to be indivisible and the complexity of any given environment as potentially articulate aesthetic material.

The preceding is a slightly modified-by me-excerpt from Chapter 2: COLOR PHOTOGRAPHIC FORMALISM in the book the new color photography by Sally Eauclaire (a friend for whom I was a consultant on the book). I have co-opted it to make 2 points:

Eauclaire’s idea, re: Field Strategy, pretty much describes the (my) picture which accompanies this entry.
writing about art, subset photography as art, can get pretty “academic” / art-speak wordy at times. Some might even suggest that it can get rather obtuse.

So, my answer to the question raised in the preceding entry - why we don't talk more about the "art" of photography instead of going over lots of gear and technical work?- is that if one wishes to write or read about the “art of photography”, one needs to write or read about art in a more general sense. That is, if one aspires to making pictures that are considered to be Fine Art (as opposed to Decorative Art), one had better read up on what the FIne Art World considers to be Art. And, there is precious little written about Art in general, photography in particular, on the interweb.

Much of what has been written about Art, in book form, has been written by academics who, seemingly by natural inclination, are devoted to shunning simple English….

…formalists perceive real objects and intervening space as interanimating segments of a total visual presentation. They test every edge, tone, color, and texture for its expressive potential and structural function. Each photograph represents a delicately adjusted equilibrium in which a section of the world is co-opted for its visual capabilities. yet delineated with utmost specificity. The resultant image exists simultaneously as a continuous visual plane 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.

My point: if I, or anyone, were to write about the art of photography in any manner resembling the preceding excerpts-which I firmly believe are actually quite on point, photography as art wise-I believe the “average” reader of just about any blog would stop dead, eyes glazed over, at “real objects and intervening space as interanimating segments”, not to mention “expressive potential and structural function”, “delicately adjusted equilibrium”, and “co-opted for its visual capabilities”. I mean, how many of you out there have a “field strategy”?

So, why bother going down that road? The audience would be minuscule.

All of the above written, I must admit that I have read quite a lot about Art and the subset of photography as ART and it hasn’t hurt me none. Some of that reading has even helped me discover and understand what the hell I am doing-acting more intuitively (recognizing and expressing my “inner” self) rather than acting out a conscious intellectual strategy-in my picture making endeavors. And, I would highly recommend to those wishing to discover and understand what the hell they are doing, picture making wise, to read as much as they can stand about Art with the objective of cultivating a “feel” for the making of Art.

However, writing about the art of photography is not something I pursue on this blog. What I have written about photography on this blog has been more concerned with the idea of what exactly is a photograph? or, what are the medium’s intrinsic characteristics / strengths? And that is what I will continue to do.