civilized ku # 5076 / the new snapshot # 29 / ~ and a picture processed on my iPhone

picture made with 1 of my µ4/3 cameras, processed as perm y norm

made with iPhone, processed with Snapseed app

Made with iPhone, processed with Wood Camera app

A few days ago John Linn had a comment and a question:

I have not always had good luck developing the photos on the iPhone or my iPad Air 2 regardless of app that I use and the tools available (which are many). It seems the Apple iPhone/iPad screens make everything look nice. When I import and check the photos on my iMac with its calibrated screen they always need some tweaking. What is your experience?

my response: When I upload a picture made with my normal procedures - µ4/3 camera / RAW Converter / Photoshop - I save that file using the Photoshop Save for Web (convert to sRGB/ Standard Internet RGB preview) feature which, theoretically, produces a file that looks good across a wide array of internet viewing devices. My files, when saved in such a manner, look different on my iPhone, iPad than they do on my calibrated monitor.

That written, since my monitor is calibrated for my printing workflow, it should come as no surprise that saved-for-internet files and files processed and saved for my printing workflow would be different in appearance. So, to my knowledge, I would expect that a picture made and processed on a iPhone or any other portable device would, when exported to a calibrated desktop monitor, look different from what it does on a iPhone screen.

When I export a iPhone made and processed picture to my desktop computer / monitor for the intent of printing that picture, I do indeed fine tune it for that purpose. Case in point, I just made a book of my trip to Chaffey's Lock / Ottawa for which all the pictue files were fine tuned for that purpose. The book looks great.

FYI, iMo (and I am not an "expert" on the subject), one of the best photo editing apps for processing straight iPhone pictures - that is, a picture to which no special effects are apllied - is Snapseed (see the Snapseed processed picture above). It has many capabilities, including CURVES, that most would find meet their processing / editing needs. If you want effects, it has a good array of those as well.

the new snapshot # 23-28 /civilized ku # 5075 ~ shafted

Pursuant to yesterday's questions ...

Am I an iPhone convert? Could I downsize my picture making gear to just an iPhone? Should I use just an iPhone?

... the answers are; yes, no, no.

My conversion is complete. Without a doubt I can write that an iPhone 6S Plus is, under many picture making circumstances, a very good picture making device for the types of pictures I tend to make. In fact, in some cases, it is just as good as my "real" m4/3 cameras, although, it yields a slightly smaller file size. And, inasmuch as I intend to now use it on a much more frequent basis, primarily for my the new snapshot work, I am moving up to an iPhone 7 Plus.

Could I use an iPhone for all of my picture making? No. The iPhone creates only JPEG files which are much less malleable than the RAW files I need to realize most of my "regular" picture making vision. That written, it is worth noting that using the HDR setting when using the iPhone does produce JPEG image files which are HDR-look free, yet does yield increased shadow and highlight detail. Nevertheless, I will continue to use my m4/3 cameras for virtually all of my "serious" work.

Regarding my the new snapshot work, the iPhone is the perfect "snapshot" camera. And, in addition, I am very enamored of the ability to process, in a manner of minutes, my snapshots - using the Snapseed and Wood Camera apps - to a finished state, all accomplished on the iPhone. A finished state which yields beautiful printed pictures. Not to mention the fact that, within approximately 5 minutes, a picture can be made, processed and on my Instagram page

.

FYI ...

iPhone picture processed to my normal presentation

civilized ku # 5073 / the new snapshot # 20-21 ~ the visual dance of a thousand meanings

trimmings ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK(embiggenable)

Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (embiggenable)

Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (embiggenable)

I can honestly write that, after 51 years of picture making, I am able to finally define what I consider to be a good picture; pictures both of my making and those made by others.

At the top of the list of the characteristics of those pictures I consider to be good is my preference to for straight pictures. That is, pictures which depict the world "as it is". iMo, the characteristic inherent in the medium and its apparatus (aka: conventions, visual language, et al) which separates it from other visual arts is its inexorable relationship to and as a cohort of the real.

Next up, and of equal importance to the preceeding, is the print itself. Inasmuch as the print is a separate thing apart from the referent it depicts, the print must be a beautiful (wide ranging and diverse meaning) object in and of itself. In other words, I may care about what is depicted but I care more about how it is depicted and presented.

Re: a beautiful object. I am not necessarily writing about the technical / aesthetic qualities of the object itself. While a finely crafted print is most certainly a desireable quality, the beauty I am interested in is how the picture maker has framed his/her referent and arranged the elements therein as depicted across the 2-dimensional surface of the print. And, does that arrangement have visual "energy" which gives my eye the encouragement to dance about the surface of the print?

Or, much more simply written, does the print look good to my eye and sensibilities? If I put a print on my wall, will it engage me and hold its visual value over time by allowing and encouraging a dance, albeit with different steps, with each viewing?

Re: meaning. I used to believe that meaning(s) which might be found in a picture was an important and very desireable attribute. However, over time I have come to believe that, at best, meaning is an illusive and ill-defined commodity. Sure, sure, dependent upon a viewer's knowledge and life experience, all sorts of meaning could be gleened from a picture. Where one viewer sees / feels joy, another may see / feel sadness. Where one viewer sees structured beauty and another may see only randomness and chaos.

Other than pure propaganda which is meant pluck at a single string, a good picture is more like a well struck chord which reverberates with musical complexity. And, iMo, that's the beauty of a good picture inasmuch as a good picture reverberates with multiple and even diverse meanings as the viewer chooses to comprehend them.

My phraseology used to describe a good picture has always been that a good picture is one which illustrates and illuminates. That is, good use of the medium's visual language which, in turn, leaves room for a viewer's internalized contemplation.

And that, in a nutshell, describes the pictues I try to make and those made by others that I appreciate.

the new snapshot # 19 / diptych # 219 ~ how to lose an ear

bike with lilacs ~ Brown University / Providence, RI (embiggenable)

hotel curtains ~ Warwick, RI / Ottawa, ONT CA (embiggenable)

In an entry on his site, Jörg M. Colberg wrote about photo competitions, awards and prizes:

So seriously, what do we need competitions, awards, or prizes for? ... I’m sure it’s nice to win something ... and as I said, for vegetables or show dogs, I get the idea. But for photographs?

Especially in this day and age where there are so many photographs around — so many of them genuinely good — what’s the point of (metaphorically speaking) putting a ribbon on a small number? ... What’s the value of competitions or awards if there are so many of them?

I basically agree with Colberg but would add (as I wrote previously) that the biggest problem with competitions, awards and prizes is that those pictures which are recognized / "winners" demonstrate nothing other than the bias of the judge(s) thereof. Kinda like a glorified "like" button on the internet.

While I dabble in juried photo competitions just for the pure hell of it, the only "competition" I care about is submitting a body-of-work portfolio to a gallery director / curator and "winning" the grand prize of an exhibition of my work. But of course, those "competitions" are subject to the exact same conditions as any photo competition. In this case, the bias of the gallery director / curator. What is gold to one gallery director / curator can be, and often is, garbage to another.

And, BTW, heaven help you if your ego is wrapped up in either exhibition seeking (or any other photo competitions) success or failure cuz you might end up cutting off an ear - hopefully yours, not a gallery director's.

the new snapshot # 16-18 ~ push the button and it does the rest

Hugo at Brown University facetiming his mom ~ Providence, RI (embiggenable)

hotel curtain ~ Warwich, RI (embiggenable)

only one way to go ~ Plattsburgh, NY (embiggenable)

re: the new snapshot, what I am thinking.

It all started as I was re-reading the essays in The Art of the American Snapshot. I have always been a fan of snapshots and over the years I have collected a few snapshots found in collectable shops and flea markets and re-reading the essays re-kindled my snapshot interests. The essays have made me re-think some of my ideas about fine art photography; especially the idea that snapshots come "...nearer to achieving the stature of true art than any of the inbred preciosities... created by fine art "masters" and "stars" of the medium.

I believe that one of my primary attractions to snapshots is that they are easily accessible due to the fact that most snapshots are made without any artistic pretensions - no heavy thinking required. Most snapshots are made as spontaneous reactions to the flow of people, places, things and events in the lives of the snapshooter. Despite the lack of artistic intentions, many of those snapshots which have survived over the years can resontate with a connection to human emotions, feelings and ideals that transcend the pictures' unpretentious and humble creation.

The essays made a very good case that snapshots are not only "honest, realistic, human and articulate" but that they represent the medium of photography at its finest and its most influential. iMo, collectively overtime, snapshots can tell us more about the lives of people and their times than almost any fine art picture made over the same time frame.

All of that written, it has ocurred to me that we may be in an era of promiscous and discursive snapshot making the likes of which cause to pale any preceeding snapshot era. While KODAK managed to place their snapshot cameras into the hands of as many people as possible, in today's digital times it seems like everyone has a "camera", aka: a cell phone. And, the overwhelming number of the pictures made with those devices are made without artistic pretentions. Indeed, the new snapshot.

FYI, people upload an average of 1.8 billion digital images every single day. That's 657 billion photos per year. Another way to think about it: Every two minutes, humans take more photos than ever existed in total 150 years ago.

Increasingly sprinkled amongst those pictures are those snapshots which have undergone the application of a photo-effect app. I can not write why people are applying effects to their snapshots but I can write that I am doing so in order to mimic the look of snapshots which have survived from an earlier era. An activity which could be labeled as an artist pretention.

Nevertheless, I am attempting to be both discursive and promiscuous in my snapshot making. I am, in fact, making pictures of many people, places, things and events that I would have passed over in my picture making past. And, all of my the new snapshot pictures are made with my cell phone. I "push the button" and let the phone device "do the rest".

And, make no mistake about it, I am trying to make art.

the new shnapshot # 13-15 ~ places to eat

got delicious ice cream here ~ Opinicon Resort • Chaffey Lock, Ont. CA

ate dinner here on the way home from Rhode Island ~ Glens Falls, NY

chip truck - got a hot dog here  ~ Chaffey Lock Rd.

Captions for my the new snapshot pictures are meant to mimic the traditional notes made on the back of snapshot pictures or in snapshot albums.

FYI, today is a recuperation day after my trip to Rhode Island. Tomorrow I will get around to writing about the new shapshot project.

the new snapshot # 7-12 ~ more just pictures

OK. I didn't have much hotel downtime to write about my the new snapshot. I did have some pictures pre-uploaded so I'll just post this entry and get to writing about it after my return home (after Hugo's tournament championship game).