# 6041-43 / around the house•kitchen sink ~ the small and the unexpected

April 15, 2022

“If photography is about anything it is the deep surprise of living in the ordinary world. By virtue of walking through the fields and streets of this planet, focusing on the small and the unexpected, conferring attention on the helter-skelter juxtapositions of time and space, the photographer reminds us that the actual world is full of surprise, which is precisely that most people, imprisoned in habit and devoted to the familiar, tend to forget.“ ~ John Rosenthal

# 5998-6002 / around the house•(civilized) landscape ~ going fishing

April 4, 2022

OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS I HAVE BEEN THINKING THAT I want to explore the possibility of a new way of picture making. Specifically, to create a new, themed body of work that is different from those bodies of work that have emerged from my discursively promiscuous manner of making pictures.

The big question, re: that desire, is, different in what way? Other than the fact that I would like to create pictures that represent something about the place where I live-in the Adirondack Forest Preserve, aka the Adirondack Park-is a new approach about subject matter? technique? a combination of subject matter and technique together? In any case, in thinking about this, I find that I keep bumping with into the walls of the box into which I have locked myself, picture making wise.

Re: the problem with subject matter - simply written, in my pursuit of making pictures, fine-art wise, I have rarely focused on specific referents. That written, my eye and sensibilities have been pricked by repetitive references-my kitchen sink as one example (of many)-but, not because I seek out those specific referents. Rather, what pricks my eye and sensibilities are sections of the real world which evidence potential as photographs which create interesting visual form.

Consequently, I have a problem with pursuing a specific referent cuz of my fear that placing my emphasis on chasing a specific referent will lead to the loss of my feel for seeing and picturing form.

Re: technique - I have no interest in making any kind of pictures other than straight pictures. I would rather poke my eyes out with a sharp stick than to add any thing to my pictures that I consider to be effects or cheap tricks. However, that written…the medium of photography and its apparatus does have a handful of native picture making mechanics with which I have always had an interest.

There is one mechanics in particular that I have tinkered with over the years-that of Depth-Of-Field, aka DOF. My “tinkering” has run the gamut of trying to achieve, in some cases, maximum DOF, or, in other cases, minimal DOF. It all depended-and still does-on what i was intending to achieve, picture making wise.

Virtually all of my discursive promiscuity pictures depend upon maximum DOF to elucidate the form I create. I want the lines, shapes, tones, colors, texture, et al in my pictures to be clearly delineated across the 2D plain of my pictures. However, it has come to my attention in experimenting with the iPhone full-frame format-using the Portrait Mode-that a bit of limited DOF can still accomplish my picture making intentions, form wise.

Literal referent wise, I have always liked limited DOF for its ability to lend a bit of “mystery” to a picture. And, I will readily admit, the contrarian in me wise, that I like it even more considering the current picture making obsession with sharpness and definition to the eye-searing max.

In any event, wherever all of this picture making casting about might end up, I think it will include a bit of limited DOF. And, thank you, thank you to the iPhone for giving me the capability of fine tuning the apparent DOF after the picture making fact.

# 5991-94 / life without color ~ it's a whole other thing

March 30, 2022

YESTERDAY, AS I WAS PERUSING A BOOK OF PICTURES MADE BY John Szarkowski-aptly titled, John Szarkowski ~ Photographs-I was struck by the manner in which Szarkowski’s pictures exhibited a rather exqisuite sense of form. A quality which I have rarely felt when viewing bw pictures.

However, that written, I must admit that I have had Szarkowski’s book for 10 years or more, viewed it a number of times since acquiring it and, truth be told, I was not very aware of the sense of form that seems so obvious to me now. I attribute that fact to the other fact, re: Szarkowski’s pictures, which is that I have always liked them cuz they are “quiet”, exquisitely rendered observations of ordinary life. Which is another way of writing that I was seduced and side-tracked by the referents in his pictures.

Shame on me.

In any event, I got to wonderin’ if some of my pictures, made with much awareness of color as an element of the form that I seek to create, could “work” in bw. So, I set about selecting a few pictures and converted them to bw. I even made a couple of large-ish prints-16”x16” / 16”x21”-in order to see how they looked off-screen.

When all was said and done, my conclusion was that some of my pictures “work,” as bw pictures some don’t. I also came to the conclusion that in some pictures, inasmuch as most bw pictures are “abstract” pictures, form is sometimes very apparent due to the fact that a viewer is not”distracted” by color. Lines, shapes, tones and the like seem to assume a very definitive and obvious visual identity as such.

The unexpected result of this monkeyin’ around is that one can, with the use of a high quality inkjet printer with multiple black inks, make some damn nice bw prints. So, I will be making some bw prints for display on the walls of my house. A practice that I have not engaged in for many decades.

In any event, the idea of comparing a color original to its “converted” bw cousin is a fools errand. Each manner of expression has its own visual signature which incites in a viewer a different visual experience.

FYI, re: Szarkowski’s pictures, his images meet my expectations, re: for considering a picture to be a very good picture (dare I write, a Fine Art picture):

“…an 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 manner.” ~ Sally Eauclaire

Or, as I have often written, a picture which illustrates and illuminates.

# 5986 / kitchen sink (book) ~ look, really look, and you shall see

March 22, 2022

YET ANOTHER PHOTO BOOK, the kitchen sink ~ a rich life of its own, HEADED TO THE PRINTING PRESS. And I must admit that when I began the edit to narrow the pictures down to the top 20, I was a bit intimidated inasmuch as there were over 160 pictures in the kitchen sink folder.

However, after viewing all 160 of the pictures as a group in Adobe Bridge, I was able to surprising easily cull out 50 pictures in my first cut. Then I opened those pictures and arranged them in neat rows on my monitor where, once again viewing them all together, it was rather easy to identify the 20 (actually 22) finalists.

All of that decided, I came to the artist statement challenge, about which Thomas Rink had a few thoughts (thank you Thomas):

…I think these pictures do not need an essay at all to go with them - they speak well for themselves. Absolutely no need to rationalize (or justify) why you made them! There is a high risk that an essay will appear contrived, which would rather take away from the series instead of adding to it….

I tend to agree with Rink’s idea to the extent that I have been considering (for a couple years) of simply using a quote from Paul Strand as a stand-in artist statement:

“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.”

So, you can read my adaptation of Strand’s position, re: the artist statement, above. Although, in the case of a photo book, I may amend it to read, the answer is on the pages of the book

# 5978-80 / still life (kitchen sink • kitchen life • decay & disgust) ~ what's in a name?

March 8, 2022

(embiggenable) - a *straight* photograph of a segment of the real world.

IT HAS BEEN A WHILE-A COUPLE YEARS?-SINCE I HAVE MADE a decay & disgust picture. I attribute that situation to the fact that the wife has been exceedingly diligent in making sure there is a deficit of decaying referents for my picture making fodder. However, since she is over 2,000 miles distant, suffice it to write that when the cat’s away the mice will play. In any event, I have a few thoughts about the picture label still life.

The decay & disgust and kitchen sink pictures were made 2 hours apart. Judging from my experience in the photo world, both pictures would be considered to be still life pictures. That is so even though the making of those 2 pictures could not be more different. To wit, call me a dyed-in-the-wool traditionalist cuz, iMo, the decay & disgust picture is the only of the 2 that is worthy to be called a still life picture and that is due to the fact of the difference in their making.

I’m guessing that 40-50% of my commercial picture making was comprised of still life photography. That is, pictures that were made with total control, much like a painter, over the creation of the image. Starting with a blank canvas-some sort of background-and, piece by piece, add elements to create a pleasing arrangement and then add lighting to taste. There were times when this process happened over a couple of days-involving a couple people-cuz props had be acquired, a set constructed and lighting tests run.

While the decay & disgust picture was put together in a hour or so, every item in the picture was chosen and arranged by me. Even the lighting was chosen by me inasmuch as all of my decay & disgust pictures are made in the same setting on cloudy days.

On the other hand, the kitchen sink picture-like all of my kitchen sink pictures-is a found picture. I had no hand in selecting the pictured items nor in their arrangement (really, I never touch a thing in the sink prior to picturing it. Really. Honest Injun.) And the lighting is the light that was falling on the scene at the time that I noticed the arrangement.

Consequently, I do not consider the kitchen sink to be a still life picture. To my way of thinking, it is, more accurately, a straight photograph of a segment of the real world.

# 5928-39 / kitchen sink • civilized ku ~ yakkity yak

February 10, 2022

HAVE NOT POSTED IN A WHILE FOR A COUPLE OF reasons. Even though I have been making quite a few pictures over the last week or so. I have not had any significant thoughts / ideas, re: the medium and its apparatus, during that time. Since I like to include something about the medium and its apparatus along with my pictures, I just have not had the inclination to post an entry.

One of the things that can incite me to post is convoluted / loopy posts found on the interweb. But even that fodder for posting an entry has gone dry inasmuch as there is a lot of sameo-sameo out there. I mean, how many times can one comment on the fact that a certain gearhead illustrates, on a daily basis, that picture makers who are obessed with gear are intrinsically incapable of making a picture worth viewing? And, who really gives a crap about ice dams on pool shed?

In all fairness, in my case, how many times can I write about how much I appreciate making (and viewing) straight pictures or the idea of form as expressed in my pictures? Hell, even I am getting tired of it - that is, tired of writing about it but not about making pictures wherein form is important?

# 5906-08 / around the house • kitchen sink • landscape ~ as easy as waking up and falling out of bed

January 19, 2022

CREATIVITY and IMAGINATION ARE 2 WORDS /CONCEPTS WHICH ARE bandied about in discussions of the making of pictures. They are often used interchangeably, as in “use your imagination more” and/or “try to be more creative”. Hell, I can not count the times I have heard, re: my pictures, “your choice of subject matter is very creative” or “I would never have imagined that as a subject for picture making”.

Not that I don’t appreciate the comments-cuz I do-but those comments leave me ever so slightly perplexed cuz I do not associate the idea of creativity or imagination with the act of my picture making. Written sImply, when I make a picture I am just picturing what I see and do so in the manner in which I see. Saying that I am being creative or using my imagination while making pictures is like saying that I am being creative and using my imagination when I put put one foot in front of the other while walking down the street.

As a result of how I make pictures, specifically pictures that are intended to be art, I believe that there are 3 very suspicious / questionable bits of picture making-in the pursuit of finding your vision-advice: 1.) find a subject / referent you are very interested in / passionate about and make lots of pictures thereof, and, 2.) be as creative / imaginative as you can be, and, 3.) don’t be afraid to break the rules.

Re: questionable advice #1: following this dictate the chances are very good that, unless you are passionate about a very obscure and/or little known object of affection, you’ll be making pictures of a subject a lot other picture makers are picturing. Re: #2: creativity and imagination pursued for their own sake will head you straight down the road of cliche picture making. Re: #3: forget breaking the rules and concentrate on making your own rules.

iMo, the only advice worth a damn-employed in finding your own unique artistic vision-is to make lots and lots of pictures of any thing and every thing (no thinking allowed) that catches your eye and and pricks your sensibilities, using a single camera, one lens (or 2, a semi-wide and semi tele). Make small (cheap) prints and look at them. Following this activity for, say, 1/2 a year, I would be surprised if ,when you lay out the pictures, you don’t find some that; 1) capture the look and feel of what you saw, and, 2) stick together as a unified body of pictures.

The purpose of this activity is to discover and, hopefully, begin to understand how you actually see the world. That is, not in a “creative” or “imaginative” sense, but, rather, how you literally see the world using your visual apparatus / senses, just like you do when you open your eyes in the morning.

# 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.