# 6132-35 / in situ (street photography) ~ an instant of life captured for eternity

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

“‘A photograph can be an instant of life captured for eternity that will never cease looking back at you.” ~ Brigitte Bardot

AS MENTIONED IN MY ENTRY, STREET PHOTOGRAPHY ~ a first world problem, my intention was to make a photo book-the same pictures in color and monochrome in separate groupings-to investigate the differing viewing and appreciation experience (if any) between color and monochrome versions of the same pictures.

Initially, my thought was to limit the number of pictures to 10. That was, in part, cuz, not being a street photographer, I thought that coming up with 10 good street pictures might be a stretch. As it turns out, much to my surprise, I came up 30 very good-(iMo) picture possibilities, So, my now second first-world problem is editing down the choices to 10 just pictures.

After several go-arounds I narrowed it down to 15 strong pictures. So I thought, 15 it is until…I started designing the book-each spread with a picture on one page, location caption on the facing page-at which point I realized I was creating a 66(ish) page book. While the number of pages, per se, is not an issue, the cost of such a photo book with the design and production values I want-premium paper, lay-flat pages, 6C printing-would be in the $100USD + range. Once again, the cost is not an issue for me….except….

…what I hoped to create was a book in the $30USD range in order that some of you, the blog followers, might be interested in acquiring the book. Not because I am a brilliant picture maker but, rather, to partake in the investigation, re: color v monochrome of the same pictures, of whether there is a difference in the viewing and appreciation experience.

If there is an interest, I will edit the pictures down 8 or so and make a soft-cover book with 4C instead of 6C printing. The book would be available direct from the POD printer, Blurb. If anyone is interested just hit the LIKE button. FYI, I am not looking for big numbers. 5-6 would be enough for me to make the effort. And, BTW, I would be selling the book at cost.

# 6123-31 / common places (civilized ku) ~ thinkin' 'bout the good ol' days

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

WOKE THIS MORNING TO A GREY DAY. IN AN EFFORT TO brighten up the day, I decided to get out and about, use the sky as a blank slate and make some pictures. Throw in some neutral grey road surfaces and, iMo, you have got the stage set for pictures in which colors come to the fore.

In a perfect picture making world, I would have grabbed my dad’s Kodak Brownie Hawkeye camera out of the closet, went down to the drugstore, bought a roll of color negative film, then taken a stroll around the neighborhood looking for something to prick my eye and sensibilities. Instead, I picked up my iPhone and headed out with FRANK BREUER on my mind.

6118-22 / civilized ku (urban landsape) ~ drinking in Brooklyn

drive-by picture / Manhattan ~ (embiggenable)

Gowanus Canal / Brooklyn, NY ~ (embiggenable)

Brooklyn Street / Brooklyn, NY ~ (embiggenable)

((embiggenable)

SPENT SATURDAY IN BROOKLYN ATTENDING A KINDERSCHULE graduation event followed by a private party. There was quite a sunset. The party was at a bar / restaurant called Pig Beach-BBQ pork their speciality.. Kinda thought that was a strange place to have a Jewish / Socialist party.

Pig Beach-no beach, just a name-is in Brooklyn along the Gowanus canal. The canal is one the most contaminated sites in the US of A. It is currently undergoing a clean up that will take 10 years. So, even if there had been a beach, there would be no swimming.

# 6114-17 / street photography ~ a first-world problem

Binghamton, NY ~ (embiggenable)

NYC, NY ~ (embiggenable)

(l>r / t>b) Pittsburgh, PA / Florence, Italy / Paris, France / BInghamton, NY~ (embiggenable)

(l>r / t>b) Pittsburgh, PA / Florence, Italy / Paris, France / BInghamton, NY~ (embiggenable)

OVER THE YEARS I HAVE NEVER BROUGHT MY picture making attention to the street photography genre. However, on those occasions when I am in an urban environment, my eye and sensibilities are sometimes pricked by what seems to me to be a street photography moment. Consequently, I have made a few pictures which would be labeled as street photography pictures.

Of course, since all of my image files are created as RGB files-cuz I see the world in color that is how I picture it-when it comes to processing the street pictures, I get a bit befuddled, re: should these pictures be printed as BW or should they be printed as Color?

The hide-bound photo traditionalist in me says that all street photography picture should be-or is it “must” be?-BW pictures. On the other hand, the thoroughly modern picture maker in my head says, “Not so , grandpa.” So I guess what I will have to do-or so the voice in my head is telling me-is pick 10 or so of my better so-called street pictures, process them to BW (aka: monochrome), and print both versions in a single book and let the viewers decide.

That written, the BW and Color pictures would not be printed side-by-side. Rather, the Color work would be presented as a single grouping as would the BW work. That is cuz, one thing I truly believe is that each grouping would most definitely create a decidedly different viewing and perception experiences.

Or not. Maybe it just might be six of one, half a dozen of the other.

# 6112-13 / kitchen life • common places ~ malarkey on a shingle

finished (L.) / original (R.) ~ (embiggenable)

(embiggenable) ~ full frame / Portrait mode

RE: THE DEATH OF THE SMALL SENSOR CAMERA. I am not one to profess that I know what the future will bring. However, I will not let that stop me from offering a few thoughts on the speculative idea that small sensor cameras are on the way out.

First, let’s define “small”….best I can tell, it the current camera market, it seems that “small” is any sensor smaller than a full-frame-24mmx36mm-sensor. And, for some reason, camera makers seem to have decided that, surprise, surprise, bigger is better. If I put on my cynical hat, I would write that they think that the more money they can charge for a camera+lenses the better.

That written, the idea that small-sensor cameras are in a death spiral is based on the notion that, a huge majority of avid amateur picture makers will all want a full-frame sensor camera. A notion that I believe to be nonsense. cuz…

a) most full-frame cameras+lens are very expensive but, even if the prices drop over time…

b) …most picture makers, even avid amateurs, do not want to lug around large, heavy gear.

c) most avid amateurs who use “small”-format sensor cameras have an investment in lenses for their systems. Moving to full-frame sensor cameras means the significant added expense of acquiring new lens.

d) in addition to the expense of full-frame sensor cameras+lenses, there is, for many, the added expense of upgrading the computer in order to handle and store the larger file sizes, and, perhaps most significantly……

e) not all picture makers, including most avid amateurs, have the desire or the need to engage in the “my dick is bigger than your dick” competition.

All of that written, let me add my ultimate reason for why I do not give a damn about any sensor size. Simply out, I do not care one iota how or what gear was used to make a picture. I only care about the picture itself. And, great pictures can be made with just about any camera / picture making device you would care to mention.

FYI, the diptych in this entry offers a peek at the man behind the curtain. That is, the work I often put into the processing of my pictures. In the case of this picture, I probably-I did not keep track-employed more than 20 separate processing steps-most local as opposed to global-to achieve the final result.

# 6109-11 / people • common places • the new snapshot ~ I don't understand

the daughter (r.) and her cousin, both scheduled to be married next Spring ~ (embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

WENT TO AN EXHIBITION OPENING (at an university gallery)-PAINTINGS, solo artist-THIS FRIDAY PAST. I was quite disappointed by what I saw even though, after seeing the work online, I was expecting a different reaction.

The work is described as “realist”-not photo-realism-in style. The subject matter was a large local family on their farm. Portraits of family members working on the farm as well as landscape scenes of the farm and its buildings. A review of the work focused on the artist’s ability to capture quality of “the light” as encountered in situ. View the work here.

As I understand it-as told to me by a member of the farm family who is marrying our daughter (as seen above making a selfie)-the artist works from photos. I found that interesting-but not unusual-inasmuch as my ultimate feeling, re; the work, is that the exact same images would have made a much better impression, to my eye and sensibilities, if they were presented as photographs instead of paintings - a take that stands in contrast to the oft-stated notion of, “That photograph looks like a painting.”

FYI, one of the primary issues I had with the exhibition was that, surprisingly, the galley lighting was not daylight balanced (5400K). Rather, it appeared to be closer to tungsten (3200K) which caused the colors of the paintings to have a warm, yellow-ish tint / cast that was quite unlike the more more neutral / “clean” look of the work as seen online.

I asked the artist about this fact and he said that he thought that the lightning enhanced the look of his work. A response which befuddled me no small amount inasmuch as it seems inconceivable to me that an artist who takes care in the selection the color to apply to his/her paintings wouldn’t seem to care about how they look on a gallery wall. That notion stands in direct opposition to how I process my work for printing in that, a hallmark of my prints, is very clean color which is intended to convey to a viewer, as accurately as the medium allows, how the world looked at the moment when I made any given picture.

Given the fact that the artist was lauded by his ability to capture the quality “the light”, I thought that the gallery lighting worked in significant opposition to that characteristic of the work. So much so, that it spoiled the entire viewing experience for me.

# 6106-08 / roadside attractions • the new snapshot ~ a question

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

There is nothing as mysterious as a fact clearly described. I like to think of photographing as a two way act of respect. Respect for the medium, by letting it do what it does best, describe. And respect for the subject, by describing it as it is.” ~ Garry Winogrand

IN A NUTSHELL, WINOGRAND’S QUOTE IS A PRETTY EXCELLENT, SIMPLY-STATED description of straight photography.

I have always subscribed to making straight pictures and consider myself, re; my landscape photography, to be a New Topographic photographer, a moniker which emerged from the exhibition (the 2nd most—cited photography exhibition in history), New Topographics: Photographs of a Man-Altered Landscape-at the George Eastman House in 1975. That exhibition introduced landscape pictures-primarily of the American West-that were stripped of any artistic frills and reduced to an essentially topographic state, conveying substantial amounts of visual information but eschewing entirely the aspects of beauty, emotion and opinion. Pictures that exhibited a cool detachmrnt / unsentimental manner of picture making.

To this day, the influence of that exhibition and the picture making M.O. that it spawned still commands a formitable following in the straight photography world. And, it is rather ironic that the pictures in the exhibition, which critics / academics described as having “an alleged absence of style”, became the forerunners of an actual style that has been called “…Arguably the last traditionally photographic style”.

FYI, 10 photographer’s prints-10 prints from each-were presented in the exhibit. The photographers were: Robert Adams, Lewis Baltz, Bernd and Hilla Becher, Joe Deal, Frank Gohlke, Nicholas Nixon, John Schott, Stephen Shore, and Henry Wessel. With the exception of Stephen Shore, all the photographers worked in BW.

In any event, I mentioned all of the above cuz I have given some thought to the question, has straight photography, in particular the New Topographics genre, reached a dead end? Or, perhaps, is it just aimlessly driving around in circles in a cul-de-sac? Which is not to write that there is not some very good work being created. However, it does seem that it has fallen out of favor in the Fine Art gallery world.

Perhaps a related question-how long is it possible maintain a cool unsentimental detachment?-is also appropriate.

Any thoughts?

# 6110-15 / roadside attractions • kitchen life • around the house ~ deceptivity

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

Why do most great pictures look uncontrived? Why do photographers bother with the deception, especially since it so often requires the hardest work of all? The answer is, I think, that the deception is necessary if the goal of art is to be reached: only pictures that look as if they had been easily made can convincingly suggest that beauty is commonplace.” ~ Robert Adams

I HAVE USED THE ABOVE ROBERT ADAMS QUOTE PREVIOUSLY. It presents an idea with which I totally agree -that is, only pictures that look as if they had been easily made can convincingly suggest that beauty is commonplace. That written, I also agree with the notion that most great pictures look uncontrived.

Re: deception - I am currently wrestling with the idea of whether or not to apply classic, retro, drugstore-style borders on my roadside attraction pictures. And, to be honest, there are times when I believe I should apply those borders on all of my pictures. The purpose of such an application is my idea of a pure deception. That is, I am trying to" “deceive” the viewers of my pictures that they were easily made cuz, you know, quite obviously, they are “just” snapshots.

Why do I engage in this “deception”? That’s cuz most people believe that snapshots are made quite “casually”. That is, without much thought of artistic intentions. And therein is the “hook”. The hook being that which gets a viewer of my “snapshots” to stop and consider- a heightened level of curiosty?-why these “snapshots” are hanging on a gallery wall.

WIthout any pretense of disingenuous humility, I know that I am a damn good picture maker. I also know that my pictures of the commonplace world, when displayed on gallery walls, can and do capture a viewer’s attention and interest, with or without a snapshot border. However, it is becoming increasingly important to me to emphasize the idea that beauty is commonplace. Or, to be more precise, that a beautiful, or at least interesting, object can be made from the awareful observation of the commonplace.

I will admit that I may be deceiving myself with my deceptive snapshot deceptions, I do think that that device can and often does incite in a viewer of my “snapshots” the curiosity to investigate what is going on in and with my pictures that may not be obvious at first glance.