# 5884-87 / around the house•kitchen sink ~ symmetry

July 16, 2021

summer time and living is easy ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone — ***summer time and living is easy*** ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

THERE ARE TIMES WHEN I CAN SIT IN FRONT OF my desktop monitor and stare for quite a significant length of time. That tends to happen when the monitor screen looks as it does today-as seen in the picture below.

Part of the reason of why I stare at the screen is cuz, after a short period-a few days-during which I have made a significant number of pictures-I am contemplating which picture (or pictures) to use in a blog entry. That written, I have come to realize that I am also using the monitor screen as a contact sheet of sorts. That is, as I stare at the screen a picture-or a part of a picture-will catch my attention. I click on it, enlarge it and then stare at it. If it hits me in the eye like a big pizza pie, I make a mental note of it and send it back into the pack.

While this exercise helps me pick pictures for blog use, it also has an interesting (to me) side effect. When purusing my "big" contact sheet-my library (currently 12,861 pictures) of finished pictures-it is remarkable how many of the pictures I have made mental notes of emerge from the pack once again.

There is, quite obviously, no science involved in this exercise. However, what it does indicate to me is that, inasmuch as my picture making is driven by a visceral reaction to what I see, when I am looking at my "contact" sheet-either a jumbled collection on my monitor or in my library-I respond to pictures which cause me to have a visceral reaction to what I see in the finished picture. In both cases-the making of pictures and the viewing thereof-since there is little or no thinking involved,it seems to be a fine example of the adage, "Stupid is as stupid does."

a section of what’s on my monitor screen ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone — ***a section of what’s on my monitor screen*** ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

# 5879-81 / civilized ku•kitchen sink•around the house ~ inside and out / a sense of discovery

July 12, 2021

I AM NATURALLY WARY / SKEPTICAL OF HYPERBOLE AND EXAGERATION, re: overstated claims and/or declaration. So, when I came across an NY Times article titled, Who Needs The Grand Canyon? with the subhead, How to find a sense of awe and discover a miraculous world right outside your door, my hyperbole warning buzzer started to sing.

That written, you can imagine my surprise when, after a few moments of thought, I realized that the title and subhead could easily be the title and subhead for most of my work. 'Cept I would have to inset the words "and inside" before "your door".

The article in question was basically a plug for getting to know your neighborhood. That is, from your home, a short walk or a short drive+a walk at your destination-what the Times calls a microadventure-might just open one up to an undiscovered / experienced sense of "awe". Or, at the very least, a pleasant surprise. Coincidentally, that advice pretty well sums up how I make, location wise, most of my pictures...this entry's pictures, a case in point.

Re: concept / intention wise, I could write that, when I am out-and-about or alternatively, in-and-about, my visual apparatus is atuned to challenge of seeing the "awesome" / "miraculous" in the guotidian world around me. ASIDE> However, I feel that those two words / discriptors are a bit of an overreach. END OF ASIDE Rarely, do I seek out the grand and glorious cuz, if you can not make a grand and glorious picture of the actual (conventional) so called grand and glorious, you might try mastering the art of simultaneously walking and chewing gum.

PS I am taking to the vertical rectangle aspect ratio like the proverbial duck to water. That written, I have not abandoned the square.

# 5846-48 / kitchen sink ~ do you see what I see?

June 23, 2021

I BELIEVE IT IS SAFE TO WRITE THAT AN overwhelming number of picture makers, aka: photographers, make pictures of things. That is, pictures in which the obvious, depicted referent-people, places, things, et al-is what their pictures are "about". And, more often than not, the referents are something that they care about, which is exactly what the conventional picture making advice / wisdom states one should do. You know, find something you are passionate about and make pictures thereof...like flowers? make pictures of flowers. Like puppies? Make pictures of puppies. Etc. etc. etc.

FYI, right from the get-go let me write that the above is most definitely not a criticism of that practice. That practice is what it is and people are having fun and enjoying thenselves in pursuit thereof. Many are also very fine practioners of the craft of making pictures. And, without a doubt, some of those crafty practioners are fully capable of making pictures which some would call art. I would put my name on the rank-and-file list of those who would label some crafty work as art. However...

...I would rarely label it as fine art.

My reason for that stance is really very simple. I, along with a host of others, believe that fine art is not about things but, rather, about an idea, or, if you will, a concept.

The dictionary defines of the word concept as "something conceived in the mind" and "an abstract or generic idea". And, to flesh it out a bit more, a synonym for the word concept is the word thought. From which I would suggest that a concept / idea is not a palpable thing. Rather, it is mental image of something seen or known or imagined, or to something assumed or vaguely sensed. In other words a concept / mental image is incapable of being felt by touch, aka: impalpable.

Therein is the challenge for the picture maker who strives / wishes to create fine art. That is, to make pictures that are about something that indicates, or at the very least, hints at something beyond that which is visually tangible.

That's a neat trick for those who can do so inasmuch as they are attempting to do so working with a medium and its apparatus which is intrinsically / inherently cojoined with the real, tangible world. It is kinda like trying to pictue a ghost. And....

.... that's not the only challenge. Assuming one is successful in conveying a concept to one degree or another, I would think that one would hope to find an audience who "gets it". That is, an audience which is capable of seeing what the picture maker sees. That is, capable of seeing beyond the obvious.

IMo, that is where the medium and its apparatus' unique characteristic (amongst the visual arts) of creating very accurate, detailed representations of the real, is, in a sense, its own worse enemy. That's cuz so many people out there are incapable of getting beyond the literal, visually obvious referent as seen in a photographic print.

You know what I mean. That is why most viewers think my kitchen sink pictures are about my kitchen sink.

# 5747-49 / still life•sink•around the house ~ familiar things made new

April 29, 2021

THREE OF MY CARVED-IN-STONE, BEDROCK BELIEFS, re: the medium of photography and its apparatus:

"If a medium is representational by nature of the realistic image formed by a lens, I see no reason why we should stand on our heads to distort that function. On the contrary, we should take hold of that very quality, make use of it, and explore it to the fullest." ~ Berenice Abbott

"To me, photography is an art of observation. It's about finding something interesting in an ordinary place.... I've found it has little to do with the things you see and everything to do with the way you see them." ~ Elliott Erwitt

"The two most engaging powers of a photograph are to make new things familiar and familiar things new." ~ William Thackeray

I also have a "warning"-a reminder of sorts-belief that I keep tucked in my back pocket for use in those occasions when I might be tempted to partake in the never ending prattling and nattering-re: gear, technicals and technique...

"Of what use are lens and light
To those who lack mind and sight?"

...a quote often used in in the context of photography conversations. It is derived from an inscription-written in Old German-on a Brunswick Thaler (coin) in 1589- which reads: ""Torch and glasses will not help the old man who will not help and know himself."

In any event, if a picture maker has "mind and sight", there is no need to get involved with stuff that is best left to those who would not recognize a good picture-or what it takes to make one-even if they were to walk face-first into it on a wall.

# 5733-35 / kitchen sink•around the house•civilized ku ~ a truly fuzzy concept

April 20, 2021

NOT LONG AGO THERE WAS A SPATE OF JIBBER JABBER-minus the rapidity-about lenses...the "perfect" portrait lens, corner sharpness, Leica lenses vs every other lens maker in the known photo universe, the ever popular debate about the aesthetic quality of the blur produced in out-of-focus parts of an image (aka:bokeh), etc./etc....true gearhead / fan boy stuff. However there was one statement*-made by the Mother-Of-All-Gearheads-which caught my attention:

"...the powerful lure of Leica legend always makes me wonder if their lens will supply just that tiny bit more 'edge' or 'magic' that will elevate images and make each image sweeter." ~ he/she who shall remain nameless

To my way of picture making thinking, if a picture maker is wishing for a lens that gives his/her pictures a "bit more edge or magic"/ "sweatness", then, iMo (and experience), that picture maker must be making some pretty lame pictures. Or, as Sir Ansel was said to state:

"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept."

All of that written, that is not write that (portraiture as an example) there are lenses that might be better suited than other lenses for a given use. But even that idea is predicated upon the picture maker's picturing intent. As in, the intent to depict a subject as he/she really is or depict him/her in an idyllic representational manner.

In any event, if one is depending upon lens "magic" to make one's picture(s) "sweeter", iMo, one is relying on a "gimmick" rather than unique personal vision to float his/her boat.

*I use this example, not to denigrate the maker thereof, but rather as an excellent example of lens "magic" thinking.

# 5726-29 / kitchen sink•around the house ~ a little mystification as a relief

April 16, 2021

THE QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED BY MIKE JOHNSTON ON TOP, under the heading of The Way Photographs Should Look, "What way do you like a photograph to look?"

My answer is in 2 parts, albeit in 1 sentence. (1)Since there is no way photographs should look, (2)who gives a rat's ass how anyone but the picture maker cares about how his/her photographs look.

Although it is worth noting that many a viewer of photographs have expressed how he/she would like another picture maker's photographs to look. You know what I mean ... the ubiquitous statement, "I wish he/she _______ " (insert directive of your choice, as in, cropped the scene differently, added more/less saturation or more/less contrast, etc.).

If you really want to know how someone thinks a picture should look, ask him/her to show you some of their pictures. And, if he/she does so but also starts to explain with words how they think a picture should look, tell him/her to shut the f... up cuz his/her pictures should "say" all there is to "say" about the subject.

In the 3 picture panel below, aka: triptych, there are 2 pictures which reflect my straight approach to making picture and how I like them to look. The 3rd picture has a bit of art sauce applied, which is not normally my cup o' tea. However....

"We got tired of the sameness of the exquisiteness of the photograph . . . [referring to the exact rendition of detail which is all-revealing.] Why? Because the photograph told us everything about the facts of nature and left out the mystery. Now, however hard-headed a man may be, he cannot stand too many facts; it is easy to get a surfeit of realities, and he wants a little mystification as a relief..." ~ Henry Peach Robinson

# 5712-14 / kitchen sink•around the house ~ inside and out

April 9, 2021

EVEN THOUGH I HAVE BEEN OUT AND ABOUT picturing gas stations and getting used to carrying around an actual "real" camera, I have not neglected picture making with the iPhone camera module.

# 5696-97 / around the house•kitchen sink ~ momentary beauty

March 30, 2021

LIGHT. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN A PICTURE CAN BE "about" light. After all, George Eastman said:

"Light makes photography. ... But above all, know light. Know it for all you are worth, and you will know the key to photography."

Without some form of light, making pictures is impossible, or, very difficult at best. However, to my eye and sensibilities, a picture which is all about light, that is, without a referent that adds rhythm and ryhme, is picture without compelling interest.

That written, I am a firm believer in the idea put forth by Brooks Jensen:

"There is no such thing as “good” or “bad” photographic light. There is just light."

Consequently, I am not a devotee of the concept of chasing the light. As long as there is some form of light that allows me to make a picture of what pricks my eye and sensibilities, that's fine by me. However, that written, there are times when light compliments-that is, it adds to the rhythm and rhyme-the structure of my picture because it is an integal part of what pricked my eye and sensibilities, that is fine by me as well.