# 6418-23 / common places • common things ~ life as it happened

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

IN THIS ENTRY I’M TAKING A CUE FROM MIKE JOHNSTON AND THE Texas gear nutjob, both of whom laden their sites with lots of personal, non photography data. That written, this entry could be labeled as 24 hrs in the life of me, complete with pictures.

On Monday morning I awoke to a glorious Adirondack summer morning. The cat drew me out to the back porch where sunlight dappled the scene and the air was cool and fresh. I made a picture.

Going back into the house for my morning coffee, I noticed that there was an arrangement in the kitchen sink demanding my attention. I made a picture.

After completing my morning routine, I got in one of our cars-we have 3-and headed off to a doctor’s appointment-a followup to my recent prostrate procedure. Did I mention that I live at least 30 mile from everywhere? Although in this case, I live a 1 1/2 hour car drive from my urologist’s office. It’s a nice ride that includes a midpoint ferry ride across the 6th largest lake in North America. I made a picture.

After being cleared for normal peeing duty, I met the wife for lunch along with a couple from Denver who were in town-Burlington, Vt.-to visit their son who is a clerk for a Vermont Supreme Court-aka: appellate court-judge. I did not make a picture.

Next up, after lunch-no, we did not eat a EL CORJITO, the wife, her from Denver bestie, and I took a walk down Church St.-a pedestrian shopping, dining, entertainment district on the way to where I had parked my car. Along the way, I noticed a bookstore-I really like bookstores-and we went inside where the wife purchased a birthday-it’s 10 days away-present for me; the BOB DYLAN ~ MIXING UP THE MEDICINE book. FYI, she won’t let me read it until my birthday, even though it sits tantalizingly close on the kitchen counter. I made a picture.

Upon leaving the bookstore I notice the EL CORJITO restaurant. I made a picture.

Then it was time for me to head home. The wife stayed behind-she had one of our other cars-to spent the afternoon followed by dinner catching up with her bestie. No pictures that I know of.

Upon arriving home, I made a picture of a tomato I had been wanting to picture. Made my supper. Re-watched Asteroid City. Went to bed. No more pictures.

# 6879-81 / commonplaces-things • kitchen life ~ uncommon beauty

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

I WAS SEARCHING FOR A SPECIFIC STEPHEN SHORE QUOTE. Didn’t find it. However, in my search I came across this (an excerpt), written by Christy Lange, from a section-Nothing Overlooked-in the book STEPHEN SHORE:

“This was a new conception of the landscape picture….Each image is so sharp and detailed that it seems to have infinite centers of attention, or none at all. ‘If I saw something interesting, I didn’t have to make a picture about it. I could let it be somewhere in the picture, and have something else happening as well. So this changes the function of the picture-it’s not like pointing at something and saying, “Take a look at this”. It’s saying, “Take a look at this object I am making”. It’s asking you to not savor something in the world, but savor the image itself .”….Shore saw how the photograph ‘imposes order on the scene’ or ‘simplifies the jumble by giving it structure’.”

At the risk of sounding self-aggrandizing, this description of one of Shore’s pictures, Beverly Boulevard and La Brea Avenue, could easily have been written about most of my photographs inasmuch as, as mentioned in my last entry, I rarely make pictures that ask a viewer to “take a look at this”-aka: the literally depicted referent(s). Rather, I ask viewers to “take a look at this object I am making”-aka: the print in and of itself and the form depicted there upon.

Ya know, like in this entry’s pictures; for instance, I am not asking any one to “savor” the, as the wife calls it, clutter in a corner of my work room. Rather, my hope is that a viewer might “savor”, or at least appreciate / recognize, the form (Shore’s “structure”) I have attempted to illustrate as depicted on the surface of a print.

That is to write that I do not see so-called traditional beauty in the quotidian world around me but that I do believe that I make “beautiful”, visually interesting photographs thereof.

@ 6868-77 / travel ~ excelsior, you fathead

birthday cannoli ~ (embiggenable)

Brooklyn ~ (embiggenable)

Cooperstown~ (embiggenable)

my kitchen + Brooklyn sink with window ~ (embiggenable)

EVERY YEAR-FOR THE PAST 5 YEARS-THE WIFE and I go to Cooperstown, NY where the wife has an annual conference. While she attends the conference, I play golf and hang out around the very upscale hotel on the lake. The trip also coincides with her birthday so we always go out for a nice meal. This year we also went to NYC / Brooklyn for a couple days before heading to Cooperstown (the home of the Baseball Hall of Fame). All of which brings me to the point of this entry…

….I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GONNA TAKE THIS ANY MORE…

To be precise, the “this” in question that makes me mad as hell is any utterance such as:

“It's fantastic for the things it's meant for and designed to do, but it's mainly a communication device. It can be exasperating as a camera.…they”-iPhone files-“fall far enough short of the best "real" cameras that ultimately they're just not terribly satisfying…”

iMo, those who make such utterances are; a) those who have not made the effort to understand the in and outs of how to use the iPhone photo making capabilities, b) those who are not using the RAW capture capabilities or c) don’t know how to process RAW files for maximum results, d) those who, like the commentator quoted above, are using older generation iPhones, and, e) those who are gearheads who make photos that are tack-sharp with saturated color and high dynamic range but are, nevertheless, rarely worth a second glance.

Now, to be certain, I am not proposing that an iPhone “camera” is ideal or well suited to every picture making task or that it can “satisfy” every picture maker’s aesthetic. However, that written, I am emphatically emphasising that it is perfectly capable of producing photographs that are as good-that is, expressing the intent of the photographer-any other picture making device.

Any one (me, being a prime example) who has used a wide variety of cameras-8x10 / 4x5 view cameras, medium format cameras, 35mm cameras, Polaroid cameras, and the like-knows that every camera has its own distinct peculiarities, both in their use and their rendering results. However, the only thing that matters to the picture making artist is that any given camera helps in producing his/her picture making intent.

All of the above written, just let me declare that, in a “perfect” picture making universe, I wish that picture makers would just pick whatever camera device is best for them and their intent and vision-if they even have one-and then keep their fucking yap shut and concentrate on making pictures that “satisfy” their eye and sensibilities. I might not like their pictures but that sure as hell it won’t be because of the camera they used.

FYI, during the 6 day trip I covered a lot of ground, picture making wise. l returned with 25 “keepers” which spanned multiple photography genres: landscape, street, people, night, and still life. All of the pictures were made with my iPhone 24 PRO Max camera device set to produce RAW files. And, to my eye and sensibilities, the results were very satisfying and, BTW, the “cmaera” served all of my picture making intents very well, thank you very much.

#6893-94 / common things • around the house ~ what's in a name?

all photos (embiggenable)

photography noun pho•to•gra•phy /fəˈtäɡrəfē/ : the art, application, and practice of creating images by recording radiant energy, especially light, on a light-sensitive surface.

IN AN ENTRY-The future of photo blogs-ON A “PHOTO” BLOG (as so labeled by the author), it was stated that:

“…it's almost like the joy of discussing new gear and new techniques has been wholly replaced on most of our photo blogs by personal observations about day-to-day routines, life's struggles, diets, and photo walks….”

Now I could go on a 5,000 word rant about the “joy of discussing new gear” but I won’t. Instead, I will attempt to discuss, with a modicum of intelligence, what, iMo, qualifies-and does not-as a photo(graphy) blog.

A simple / concise description of my idea of what constitutes a righteous photo(graphy) blog is one that features photographs. Blogs that feature photographs + thought-provoking words regarding the medium and its apparatus (aka: its conventions, applications, practices) are a bonus.

Or, in other words, I like blogs that, first and foremost, feature photographs that poke, prod, tickle, and challenge my visual senses. Toss in a few words / a little brain stimulation along the lines of what-the-hell-is-a-photograph-(any photograph)-anyways? and I’m hooked and the site is earmarked.

If one takes the time to find and follow some good leads, aka: links, I find that there are a surprising number of blogs / sites out there that satisfy my aforementioned wants. Rarely does a week go by during which I do not discover something new and interesting. There is a surprising amount of really good work out there being made by no-name photographers.

As for the “joy” to be had by discussing new gear, new tricks, how to-s, et al, I have to write that, for me, the “joy” eludes me. And, quite frankly, it annoys me to a certain extent that blogs which traffic in such subjects call themselves photo blogs. Whereas, at best, they might legitimately considered to be photo related blogs. Although, for example, gear related blogs most often fall into a category more accurately described as object fetishication related. AND, don’t get me started, re: “photo” bogs that constantly veer off into what the author’s eating, drinking, driving, exercising, recreating, et al habits and preferences are.

All that written, I do have an interest in reading about what an accomplished artist-big name or no name-might have to express about their vision as an integral part of what drives him/her to make pictures. However, that written, my interest in the medium of photography and its apparatus has always been about the pictures.

# 6883-86 / common places / things • people ~ on the subject of magic

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

WHEN IT WAS MENTIONED TO WILLIAM EGGLESTON THAT the design of most of his pictures seemed to radiate from a central, circular core, he responded that this was true, since the pictures were based compositionally on the Confederate flag. This response, in the opinion of John Szarkowki, was…

“…presumably improvised and unresponsive, of interest only as an illustration of the lengths to which artists sometimes go to frustrate rational analysis of their work, as though they fear it might prove antidote to their magic.”

Re: rational analysis - it is the provenance of art critics and academics to delve into the rational analysis-the techniques-and the art theories-the aesthetics-employed in the making of any given piece of art. In most cases the rational analysis is intended to assist a viewer of any given piece of art in more fully understanding, aka: the ability to “interpret” and discover meaning (aka: content”)-and appreciating it. Or, in some cases, to assist a viewer in recognizing that a piece of art is actually a piece of crap.

In any event, whatever the merit(s) of rational analysis might be to some, one prevalent demerit, iMo, is the constant ascription to artists-PhotographyDivision-of consciously / deliberately using techniques and aesthetic devices in the making of their pictures. An assertion that is based upon the ignorance of critics and academics who, for the most part, are not practicing and/or accomplished artists themselves. That is to write, that based upon their voluminous technique and art theory expertise, they are predisposed to miss the forest for the trees.

Re: magic - To continue with the “forest” metaphor - the most interesting picture forests-in this discussion Photography, Fine Art Division-are germinated and fostered by picture makers who tend, on the whole, to understand that art theory and technique-other than what they need to make their vision visible-are nothing more than a hill of beans in their world.

iMo long-considered opinion, their “magic” springs fully formed and, seemingly, unbidden from their innate, personal vision-literally and figuratively how they see the world. Simply written, it’s all about the pictures…

“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

All of the above written, and getting back to the idea of fearing that rational analysis “might prove antidote to their magic”… I get it. Breaking down one’s vision-in this case, so called “magic”-into its individual components might, like Humpty Dumpty after the fall, be never able to be put back together again.

That’s cuz true vision is not formulaic. It is not a collection of parts glued together to create a operations manual. Rather, vision, like a photograph itself, it is an organically synthesized whole that is somewhat akin to magic-i.e. possessing the power of apparently influencing the course of (picture making) events by use of mysterious forces.

So, iMo, it is best to embrace the magic and go with its flow.

PS 2 new galleries - POLES and EYES DOWNCAST - on my WORK page.

# 6879-82 / kitchen life ~ who could have imagined?

All photos (embiggenable)

IN MY LAST ENTRY I WROTE ABOUT THE MATURATION of the medium, c.1970s, a key element of which included the realization of its unique and intrinsic relationship with, and as a cohort of, the real world wherein any thing and every thing was color-ed and considered to be referent acceptable. Or, as Szarkowski wrote…

“… [an] encompassing motif [that] is itself so broad and hopelessly unformed, with so many aspects, angles, details, sotto voce asides, picturesque subplots, and constantly shifting patterns-and none of this clearly labeled…”

This casting aside-by the fine-art picture making crowd-of the then conventional what-is-appropriate-subject-matter wisdom was, iMo, a very belated-case in point, re: hidebound, insular thinking-recognition / realization of the picture making practice employed by the ubiquitous, next door snapshot-ers ever since the advent of the earliest amateur, handheld film cameras. Snapshooters who-as an English writer observed in 1893-

“… run rampant over the globe, photographing objects of all sorts, sizes and shapes, under almost every condition, without ever pausing to ask themselves, is this or that artistic? … They spy a view, it seems to please, the camera focused, the shot is taken! There is no pause … To them, composition, light, shade, form, and texture are so many catch phrases…”

As photographers, Fine-Art Division, pursued / explored this expansive picture making possibility landscape, the pictures they produced tended to have-to the casual viewer-the look of amateur-ish color snapshots. And, in an almost humorous, historic recurrence, the response-from “serious” amateurs and photo critics alike-to this sea see change was a nearly word-for-word repetition of the aforementioned 1893 “run rampant” observation. Case in point, Szarkowski’s introduction of the William Eggelston’s Guide exhibition / book was greeted by the then “traditional photo world with outright derision and scorn: “must be a joke”, “a put-on”, “can’t be serious”, etc., etc. Quite obviously, Szarkowski had a different opinion:

“… such pictures often bear a clear resemblance to the Kodachrome slides of the ubiquitous neighbor next door … it should not be surprising if the best photography of today is related in iconography and technique to the contemporary standard of vernacular camera work, which in fact, is often rich and surprising. The difference between the two is a matter of intelligence, imagination*, intensity, precision and coherence.”

Szarkowski recognized that what was happening at the time; a significant group of phorographers where striving to break free of conventional picture making “wisdom”, all the while in pursuit of creating a distinct art form with a unique visual syntax.

an ode ~ (embiggenable)

*I never imagined that my kitchen would be such fertile ground for picture making. On the other hand, once I began to make pictures therein, I continued to do so cuz I could, if I kept my eye and sensibilities open, imagine that a world of unknown picture making possibilities might just be lurking therein.

I believe that what one is drawn to-or chooses-to photograph is a creative act-innate or conscious-of one’s own unfettered imagination.

# 6749-56 / landscape • rain • kitchen life • sink ~ autumn drive with pie

SATURDAY PAST I TOOK A MEANDERING COUNTRYSIDE DRIVE TO a farm stand to procure some fresh apple cider, concord grapes, and some produce. The weather was absolutely enchanting with rain, mist, and a leaden overcast. The landscape provided a bounty of picture making opportunities.

The fall harvest bounty was put to good use. I made a grape pie with the concord grapes. On Sunday the wife made roasted acorn squash-cut in half to make bowls-filled them with her homemade beet borscht soup with dollop sour cream. Then served them for dinner with a side of pan fried kielbasa. All in all, it made for a great weekend during which we celebrated our 26 wedding anniversary.

# 6709-12 / landscape • kitchen life • people ~ a time for reckoning?

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

RECENTLY A GREAT DEAL OF INK HAS BEEN SPILLED (or keyboards pounded) on TOP and VSL, re: what am I doing here? That is, the respective authors thereof seem to very concerned about their very raison d’etre, blogging wise. So I thought I might chime in on that topic but not on the comments section on those sites cuz, in both cases, the comments are fan-boy inspired I-love-everything-you-do, don’t change anything, I think you are absolutely fabulous.

Right off the top / outa the gate let me write that I do not consider either of these sites as to be about the medium of photography and its apparatus (conventions and practices, not gear).

In the case of VSL, there is never any content about the medium itself. Rather, it is all about-elevated to the level of fetish-the tools of the medium. The author seems to think that he can show us-literally, with pictures-the rather subtle difference in sensors and lenses even though he readily admits that the medium of the interweb, image display wise, pretty much obliviates those differences. Sounds to me a lot like a fools errand.

In the case of TOP, while there is a reasonable amount of content, re: the medium and its apparatus, there is an ever-increasing amount of off-topic content that strays pretty far afield from that of photography. Add to that situation the fact that the blogging platform used by TOP is absolutely unsuited to the display of photographs and what you end up with is a very compromised photography experience. But…

…iMo, the real problem with TOP-for me-is the fact that the author’s first love is the act of writing, not the act of making of photographs. In a sense, he loves to”hear” himself write. Not to mean that he does not enjoy the making of photographs but, I suspect that, if he were to be required to choose between writing or picture making, all his photo gear would be listed for sale on ebay in a NY minute.

I also believe that the author is hindered from creating a more photography-centric blog by his self-professed doubts that; a.) is photography…ending? and, b.) everything to be written about photography has already been written. 2 ideas that I believe are; a.) ridiculous and, b.) even more ridiculous.

In any event, to certain extent, I believe that both authors are old coot hidebound and therefore rather unimaginative, re: how to carry on in the blogging sphere. In a very real sense, they are trapped in a blogging paradigm of their own makings. Nevertheless, it might be interesting to follow where this all ends up inasmuch as it can be amusing to watch a potential train wreck in the making.

BONUS CONTENT - Re: is photography…ending?

(embbigenable)

(embiggenable)

FIRDAY EVENING THE WIFE AND I WENT DOWN the driveway to a restaurant / tavern for dinner only to discover that it was OPEN MIKE NIGHT. Except , quite fortunately, the hitch was that is was open mike for musicians, not for any drunk wanting to sing.

As it turned out it was a lot of fun and very entertaining. The musicians performed individually, in pairs and, eventually all jamming together. As is often the case, I had my INSTAX printer with me so I commenced to making pictures (and prints). Primarily of the musicians but also of the audience.

Just for fun, I had a waitress hand the pictures out, as I made them, to the person pictured. The point was to create a sense of confusion about where the hell these pictures were coming from. Eventually the cat was out of the bag and, when, at the end of the night, the crowd was applauding the various musicians, one musician suggested a round of applause for the guy making the pictures. The crowd turned to me and gave gave a rousing all hail and hardy applause and a few tips of the hat.

I am certain they did that only cuz, ya know, photography is…ending.