civilized ku # 5261 / diptych # 233 (the new snapshot) ~ photographs in conversation

Wildwood boardwalk ~ Wildwood, NJ (embiggenable) • iPhone

chairs and water ~ Stone Harbor, NJ (embiggenable) • iPhone

diptychcahairswater is an addition to my photographs in conversation work. Click on conversations in the categories list below to see the rest of the pictures from the exhibition of the same name.

Whie this conversation is one in which I conversed with myself, the exhibition pictures were colaborations with other picture makers. That is, I sent pictures ( 1 each) to other collaborators who responded with a picture which created a conversation between the 2 pictures. It was a fun project. One which I would like to continue with again.

Anyone interested?

civilized ku # 5260 / the new snapshot # 241 ~ one of these things is not like the other

hockey rink bathroom ~ Canton, MA. (embiggenable) • iPhone

hockey rink bathroom (v. the new snapshot) ~ Canton, MA. (embiggenable) • iPhone

It was last Wednesday in my last entry that I promised a next day entry, re: why the 2 pictures in that entry incited different reactions from a viewer thereof. That promised entry didn't happen as the result of a 4 day hockey tournament trip to the Boston area. So here is the promised entry albeit 5 days late and a dollar short.

Re: the 2 picitres in this entry - I stand by my statement in the aforementioned entry. iMo, these 2 pictures incite a different reaction in the viewers thereof. My reason for that belief:

A viewer, when confronted by the top picture on a gallery wall (or, for that matter, on a wall in my home) would typically react to the picture by searching for the picture's meaning. After all, it must have meaning inasmuch as it's hanging on a gallery wall so it must be "serious" work / ART and all ART has meaning. Therefore, the picture must be taken seriously.

Whereas the the new snapshot version of the same referent, when viewed in a photo album or even on a wall in my home, would typically be perceived as a memento of a personal experience such as something seen on a trip or a wander around town. The viewer would have a "relaxed" approach to viewing the picture. After all, it's just a snaphot. There is no meaning to be deciphered inasmuch as it's just a picture of what is depicted.

So, my point is quite simple. A viewer in a gallery assumes that a picture was made for reasons beyond what it depicts. While he/she might have an interest in what is depicted, he/she is most likely looking to see something more than that - interesting / involving visual qualities and characteristics (indepent of the depicted referent) which, when seen in a picture, transport the picture into the realm of ART.

In the case of a snapshot, a viewer looks at the thing depicted and therein is their interest, or lack thereof, in the picture. The question, why did you take a picture of that?, might arise but rarely is there a conversation, re: the pictures's ART-istic merits.

Not wishing to make a promise I might not keep, I won't promise an entry tomorrow which explains why I am making the new snapshot pictures. It's my intention to do so but .....

civilized ku # 5259 / the new snapshot # 240 ~ the way I see it

COOL SCOOPS ~ Wildwood, South Jersey Shore (embiggenable) • iPhone

COOL SCOOPS / v. the new snapshot ~ Wildwood, South Jersey Shore (embiggenable) • iPhone

In case you're wondering, here's my rationale, re: the new snapshot v. my "serious" pictures. The rationale has everything to do with the manner in which I see. To a certain extent, the way I see the world around me but, most certainly, the way I see pictures (or Art in general).

On hindsight, I have come to realize that, since very early childhood, my visual apparatus coupled with my related mental visual sensitivities / perceptions have conspired to give me a hightened awareness to the relationships of shapes/forms, light/dark, lines/angles, colors, et al to one another - what I label as my eye and sensibilities. This visual awareness facility acted as a facilitator-in-hiding / hinden hand which guided my art creation endeavors (employed initially for my drawing and illustration activities). That same unrecognized facility stayed with me well into my involvement with the medium of photography.

Over a protracted period of picture making time-approx. 15 years- I began to realize that my eye and sensibilities are/were pricked, not by the referents I pictured but rather by how I perceived that the realtionships of the aforementioned visual characteristics-as found in a given scene-might look when isolated by the frame I might impose around them in my picture making. Short version - I was much more interested in how the thing, aka: referent, looked when photographed as opposed to the thing itself.

As that realization came into focus, I also began to understand why it was that I liked certain pictures made by other picture makers and, by association, those pictures made by me. I liked those pictures because my eye and sensibilities were pricked, not by what was pictured but by how it was pictured. FYI, how it was pictured does not mean special equipment or effects, but rather a picture makers's ability to create an image which causes my eye (guided by my sensibilities) to dance across the surface of the 2-dimensional plane of the surface of a print. In other words, a print must have visual energy, independent of its depicted referent, to get my eye and sensibilities in gear.

All of that written, my pictures are the result of my seemingly preternatural facility to see and identify incidents of visual energy in the world around me. In turn, I picture what I see. Then I make a print of what I saw so that others might be able to see what I see.

FYI, the 2 pictures in this entry are an example of how 2 pictures of the same referent can incite very different reactions and perceptions from a viewer. More on that idea tomorrow.

the new snapshot # 237 ~ cool(ish) evening breezes

embiggenable • iPhone

embiggenable • iPhone

embiggenable • iPhone

At the Jersey Shore, family-my wife's 6 brothers/sisters, their spouses and kids-stuff happens, for me, at sundown or later. The reason for that is that my body, when exposed to heat and very high humidity, stops sweating and retains water which causes me to swell up kinda like the Pillsbury Dough Boy (slight exaggeration).

Consequently, I spend most of the day in our house (rental) in the air conditioning. I do venture out for short periods of time-making pictures being the primary motivator-but never to the beach. During the week I do make one obligatory late afternoon beach appearance where the clan spends the day.

After dinner, the clan assembles-utilizing bicycles-at one of the family houses (all rentals) for hanging out + libations. The kids are free to do whatever as long as-as my dad used to say-it doesn't involve police or pregnancy.

ku # 2001 / diptych # 231 / the new snapshot (polaroid) # 233-35 ~ out and about

Lake Champlain / Au Sable Point ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

booths / Port Henry Diner ~ Port Henry, NY - (embiggenable) • iPhone

Champy ~ Port Henry, NY - (embiggenable) • iPhone

diner ~ Port Henry, NY - (embiggenable) • iPhone

booth~ Port Henry, NY - (embiggenable) • iPhone

booth~ Port Henry, NY - (embiggenable) • iPhone

Over on TOP, a bit of advice was suggested by Kenneth Tanaka:

If I could offer any bit of advice to Mark it would be to drop the 'iPhone Made' distinction .... Just take the photos and merge them into the crowd according to the moments or concepts that propelled them.

When I print my pictures-for gallery display, photo books or just for my walls-iPhone pictures and "real" camera pictures are not identified by picture making device of origin. In those cases, a picture is just a picture.

However, when it comes to my website / blog, I do distinguish the picture making device of origin for one primary reason. That is, I have become an iPhone picture making capability enthusiast /advocate to the point that I conduct occasional iPhone technique-to include on phone processing-workshops. I do so for just the pure enjoyment I get from passing on my experience to others who are able to benefit from it.

When I advertise workshop dates, I direct those who are interested to my website / blog in order that they might view the iPhone (or similar device) picture making capability. In this case the iPhone Made nomenclature serves a meaningful function.

FYI, All pictures in this entry were made with the iPhone. With exception of the Lake Champlain picture, all pictures were processed on the iPhone using Snapseed. After Snapseed processing, the Polariod pictures were created using the Instant app.

The Lake Champlain picture, because I consider it to be a "serious" picture, was Snapseed processed on the iPhone for only highlight capture and a very small amount of shadow lightening. The file was subsequently downloaded from my iCloud storage and the remainder of the processing was performed using PS and my "standard" "serious" picture processing workflow.

civilized ku # 5248 / diptych # 230 ~ by another other name

on Main Street  ~ Saratoga Springs, NY - (embiggenable) • iPhone

the "toy"  ~ Lake Placid, NY - (embiggenable) • iPhone

Went to Saratoga Springs yesterday to buy a new toy. Mission accomplished. Drove it home.

The "toy" is a 500C Abarth Turbo Cabrio. That means it has an Abarth tuned turbo 1.4L motor, manual transmission, Abarth tuned sport suspension / discs / calibers / wheels and tires, a sweet rorty exhaust note - all wrapped together under a powered fold-back soft top roof. Leather seats (heated) and lots of other accessories / electronics adorn the interior. All-in-all a finely tuned pocket rocket that's flat out fun, fun, fun.

BTW, some might call it a Fiat-although, the name does not appear anywhere on the car-but they do so with the risk of being stung by my pet scorpion.

FYI ~ adirondack snapshot project

embiggenable

Work on my Adirondack Snapshots project is at approximately the halfway point. To date I have completed 6 volumes (33 pictures in each) with accompanying 6x6 prints.

Last week I attended a small gathering at an arts organization at which Summer season planned events were introduced. Just for the hell of it I brought one of my Adirondack Snapshot volumes with the accompanying prints to the event. The intent was to show it to a few people in order to get some feedback. As it turned out, the interest and comments were overwhelmingly postive. In fact, it not be an exaggeration to write that most were absolutely mesmerized the pictures, the presentation and the concept.

Consequently, there will soon be an exhibition-a work-in-progress event-in the organization's gallery. Date to be determined.

the new snapshot # 227-32 ~ categorization conundrum

embiggenable ~ iPhone

embiggenable ~ iPhone

embiggenable ~ iPhone

embiggenable ~ iPhone

Spent most of Father's Day in and around Saranac Lake with the wife, the son and his the wife and the grandson. Started with a short hike to a secluded water-front local hangout followed by music-featuring the daughter's paramour-at the Waterhole (local bar hangout) and then a nice dinner at the Fiddlehead Bistro. Nice day.

Re: the new snapshot work - as my infatuation with the iPhone camera module continues, I am trying to consciously identify-as I am making a picture-whether a picture is a snapshot opportunity or a "serious" picture opportunity. FYI, a snapshot opportunity = use the iPhone. A "serious" picture opportunity = use a "real" camera. This categorization challenge is confounded by the fact that an iPhone's file IQ is (in most cases) capable of producing a quality "serious" picture and a "real" camera's file can always be presented as a snapshot.

Prior to making a picture I can ask myself, "Why am I making this picture." If the answer is that I wish to "merely" document what I am seeing (the referent), it's a snapshot. If the answer is that I see something which goes beyond the literal idea-something that pricks my eye and sensibilities-of a referent, then it's a "serious" picture making event. However, here's the thing ...

I don't like to think when I am making a picture.

Picture making for me, in most cases, is an spontaneous / intuitive / reactive activity. Spontaneous because I rarely go out and about in search of a predetermined picture making opportunity. Intuitive because, seemingly due to part of my preternatural constitution, I recognize a "serious" picture making opportunity when I see one. Reactive because when I see a "serious" picture making opportunity-something which pricks my eye and sensibilities-I just do it.

Given those 3 picture making M.O.s, I don't want thinking to get in the way of / interfere with my immediate and thoughtless reaction to that which pricks my eye and senibilities.