#6860-65 / landscape • common plaves-things • winter ~ pleasure and shame

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

CONFESSION TIME: I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY I HAVE CONTINUING DIFFICULTY coming to grips with the work of Christophe Jacrot as presented in his book WINTERLAND.

That written, I do believe that the source of my “difficulty” can be traced to my first viewing of the work inasmuch as, at that time, my eye and sensibilities apparatus sounded an alarm that sounded something like, “CAUTION: slick, sensationalized, ‘creative’ photography ahead, do not get suckered in!” or words to that effect. In any event, with due caution and with an open mind, I proceeded to venture into Jacrot’s WINTERLAND world …. and, several viewings and initial impressions later, I have come to several well-considered opinions ….

1.) the book would be better served by the title WINTER STORMLAND since the photos–with only a very few exceptions–tell the viewer very little about the season known as winter other than the obvious fact that there are a lot of snow storms and ….

2.) …. re: those storms–they are relentlessly hammered home to the viewer in dramatic, romanticized, “grand” landscape tableaux (natural and urban)–straight outa the Grand Landscape Handbook. iMo, Jacrot has his schtik and he’s sticking to it, come hell or high water snow. There is absolutely no sense of intimacy to be seen. To my eye and sensibilities, the visual chord Jacrot has struck is one long and somewhat annoying, low-level visual shriek.

3.) the visual structure as seen in Jacrot’s photos seems very formulaic–very much in the “keep it simple” mode. Once again, straight outa the Amateur Photographer’s Handbook. There is very little visual energy to seen.

4.) despite all of what I consider to be the work’s limitations (in a Fine Art sense), the book itself, with some very thorough editing–maybe down to 30 photos–could present a reasonable example of high-level Decorative Art.

5.) re: my “difficulty”–I am not a fan of photographic Decorative Art. However, that written, every once in a while, I have been seduced by some high-level–but not quite Fine Art–Decorative Art. On those occasions I have been, almost reflexively, struck with a feeling of betrayal to the cause. Apparently, I have yet to accept the fact, photography wise, that an occasional guilty pleasure is … well … kinda, sorta acceptable.

All of that written, I am not consigning the book to the rubbish bin. And, in fact, I appreciate the fact that the book has instigated a motivation for me to get out to make more winter photographs as well as to harvest, from my photo library, a collection of my winterland photos–a sampling of which appear in this entry.

–––––––––––––––––––––––

OFF TOPIC ADDENDUM: I have 2 hobbies–golf and building LEGO kits. Santa left me the LEGO Hemeji Castle kit under the Xmas tree this year. Note also the LEGO Xmas wreath and the LGO Statue of Liberty which are very recent builds.

# 6857-59 / common places-things • winter ~ quick note and a couple FYIs

GONNA HAVE TO LEARN HOW TO SEE in Polaroid again cuz Santa left a Polaroid NOW camera for me under the Xmas tree. The most difficult adjustment, re: making Polaroid pictures, to be made is getting use to the idea that it costs just north of $2.00US per press of the shutter release.

FYI #1, I have had a bit of a rethink, re: the Winterland book. Or maybe think of it as a refinement on my thoughts about the work–stay tuned for my next entry.

FYI #2, One of my photographs made the cut for inclusion in the PhotoPlace On The Street gallery exhibition. See all the selections HERE

PhotoPlace Gallery juried selection

# 6854-56 / travel / snow ~ I had both knees on the steering wheel

“The intellectual bar seems to be rising beyond the simplicity of well-seen images or, at least, the proverbial hand of funding that giveth and taketh away seems to have shifted its priorities in favor of strong intellectual foundations.” ~ written by an Academic Lunatic Fringe intellectual pinhead

“[in writing about photography] …. we tend to be interested only in intention, because it makes the enterprise feel more important.”~ John Szarkowski

“People say they need to express their emotions. I’m sick of that. Photography doesn’t teach you to express your emotions, it teaches you to see.” ~ Berenice Abbott

LIKE ABBOTT I AM SICK TO DEATH of the dreck served up by the ALF crowd. That written, although I am more than willing to accept the fact that the medium of photography contains a multitude of iterations / genres / applications, I do draw an exclusionary line, re: its suitability for “expressing” / conveying intellectual content–especially “deep”, personal, narcissistic, emotional and psychological conflicts, and social / cultural constructs. That written, what really gets my goat–but to be honest, I don’t actually have a goat–is when I see / hear crap such as “the simplicity of well-seen images” and the ridiculous idea that a “strong intellectual foundation” is an requisite for making good pictures….

…. MOVING ON:

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

rainbow@ 79 mph

WHILE XMAS SHOPPING WITH THE WIFE, I pointed to a photo book that appeared to be potentionally interesting. Lo and behold, it appeared under our Xmas tree. The book, WINTERLAND ~ THE COLORS OF SNOW, showcases photography by Christophe Jacrot.

FIRST IMPRESSION: It’s a large book– 9.75x12 inches, 207 pages, 120 photographs. The printing quality and paper quality are very good,, one might even write “excellent”. That written and writing in my graphic designer / photographer mode, the layout of the photographs is, to my eye and sensibilities, rather disconcerting inasmuch as I am not a fan of photos that bleed into the gutter on one side and off the page on the other while leaving a substantial white border top and bottom.

Most of the spreads display a photo on the right hand page while leaving the facing page blank. The remaining 27 spreads have photos on both pages although the left hand page photos are printed at varying smaller sizes than the pictures on the right hand page. Although, inexplicably / for no apparent reason I can discern, the smaller left page pictures are placed at varying, off-center positions on the page. While this might not be a problem for most, it drives my aesthetic sensibilities into a state of distraction.

OK, OK, you might be thinking that this ain’t no graphic arts / book designer blog, it’s a photo blog so how about the pictures? OK, I understand so I’ll continue albeit still in the FIRST IMPRESSION mode….

…. at first glance–admittedly a quick glance–I was struck by the sheer number of photographs and the thought arose that maybe there might just be too many photographs. However, leaving that issue aside for the moment, I was also rather unsure whether I was viewing wall-worthy fine art work or, instead, being visually seduced by some very well-crafted, eye-catching camera club work. On that note, I set the book aside but packed it for my trip to New Jersey.

SECOND IMPRESSION: In New Jersey after escaping from a family gathering, I returned to our hotel room, poured 2 fingers of Bob Dylan’s Heaven’s Door Straight Rye Whiskey and settled in to a comfortable chair (with good lighting) for a long, leisurely look at the book front to back….

…. by the time I was finished looking I had slipped in to a stream-of-consciousness kinda thinking …. way too many photographs, in need of a good edit, no consistency of vision–primarily re: image structure compromised, perspective-wise, by the use of multiple focal length lenses (a true gear-head approach), a significant number of rule-of-thirds compositions, he single handedly reduces the single, lonely person motif to a cliche–single structure in the middle of nowhere is a close second.

After a good night’s sleep, I revisited the book and came to the conclusion that, iMo, Jacrot is, essentially, a camera club style photographer whose work appeals to viewers who salivate at the sight of craggy spires, dramatic light and atmosphere. For my eye and sensibilities, not so much.

However, that written, I do believe that I could cull out from the book about 20 photographs that I could live with on my wall for an extended period of time. And, I would buy a Jacrot calendar cuz there are plenty of his photographs that I could live with for 30 days as long as I could turn the page to the next month /picture.

see his website HERE. https://christophejacrot.com/

# 6850-52 / kitchen life • landscape ~ something out of some thng

Season’s Greetings ~ all photos (embiggenable)

“Photography is simultaneously and instantaneously the recognition of a fact and the rigorous organization of visually perceived forms* that express and signify that fact.”
~ Henri Cartier-Bresson

* aka: “…. the pattern created by the pointer….” ~ John Szarkowsk

I AM ACTUALLY THINKING THAT I WANT TO write a book about composition expressly for the purpose of emphatically stating that, iMo, in the realm of photographic picture making, there is no such thing.

Much has been written, most of it worthy only of the trash bin, about “how to master composition” (or words to that effect), albeit never giving a thought to the fact that to compose something means, to form or make up a whole from parts (dic. def.). That activity, unless one is arranging objects for the purpose of making a still life or staged photograph, is not available to a photographer. Rather, the ability to arrange things to create a pleasing form is afforded primarily to those toiling in visual arts such as painting, illustration, and graphic design. Ya know … those who start with a blank canvas.

Photographers, on the other hand, start with the real world. Their so-called composition making choices are limited to the pointing–from a particular POV (an act of selection)–of a light-recording device in the direction of an arrangement of real world elements which the pointer perceives to be rich visual material for use in the creation of a pleasing / interesting visual pattern, especially so when isolated within the boundaries imposed by the pointer.

ASIDE another way of thinking of the difference: painters (and the like) can make something out of nothing whereas photographers can only make something out of some thing END ASIDE

Operating under the assumption that the preceding activity of pointing + perceiving has yielded up a satisfactory result–aka: a good picture–I would agree with Cartier-Bresson’s idea that the co-joined act was employed “simultaneously and instantaneously”. Or, in other words, a moment was experienced when the pointer made a decision that it had all come together–a decisive moment, if you will. It is my considered opinion that that moment arrived when the pointer recognized it in the fraction of a second when he/she saw / felt it-through the viewfinder, or on the focusing / viewing screen of their picture making device …. as opposed to mentally checking off items on a list of composition “rules” / guidelines.

All of the above written, the question remains, is it possible to learn how to point and perceive simultaneously and instantaneously? That is, to recognize a fact and the form to express that fact simultaneously and instantaneously? …. all in the cause of creating a pleasing / interesting/ compelling composition pattern / structure across the flat surface of a print.

I have doubts about that but let me quote Edward Weston on the matter of composition:

“Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”

…. to which I would add, Some people see better (different?) than others.

# 6847-49 / sink • single women • travel ~ of / from

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

“One might compare the art of photography to act of pointing … The talented practitioner of the new discipline would perform with a special grace …. thus endowing the act not merely with intelligence, but with that quality of formal rigor that identifies a work of art, so that we would be uncertain, when remembering the adventure of the tour, how much our pleasure and sense of enlightenment had come from the things pointed to and how much from the pattern created by the pointer.” ~ John Szarkowski

“Photographers have to impose order, bring structure to what they photograph …. A photograph without structure is like a sentence without grammar.” ~ Stephen Shore

I AM TEMPTED TO ADD THIS ENTRY TO MY “STUPID” series of entries but, in fact, the ideas–expressed by Mike Johnston in a recent post–critiqued here–are not stupid, per se. Rather, they fall under the moniker of the “miss-guided eye of the beholder” or other words to that effect ….

…. in an entry about a photograph by Ricardo Silva Cordiero, a photograph that Johnston quite obviously very much liked, Johnston went on a word spree in an attempt to express his viewing experience. In doing so, he made, iMo and to my eye and sensibilities, 2 “mistakes”–both of which fall under the colossal mistake of trying to describe a photograph with words which is, iMo, a fools errand;

1) his first read–his words–was “what was going on with the guy in the middle?” Why, you might wonder, is this a mistake? Well, OK, perhaps calling it a mistake is not exactly correct, but, here’s my point; that reaction is exactly the one you would expect from viewers–most likely the majority thereof–whose primarily concern is to ascertain what a photograph is of, aka: its literally depicted referent.

As a result of that first read, he felt compelled to “parse”–again, his words– or “resolve” the issue of what was going on with the guy”. All of which leads more senseless words about literal details that lead him to conclude that the guy is a delivery guy of one sort or another. Whew (said while swiping the sweat from my brow), thank goodness that’s resolved.

2) After his herculean parsing effort–he even goes to some effort to determine what the name on “the guy(‘s)” delivery bag means–he then turns his attention to the structure of the photograph. An endeavor wherein he indulges in a spectacular display of self-contradiction:

“….. dissecting compositional elements isn't normally necessary, and has a faint air of dull plodding about it. But this one's particularly nice, so here are a few things to notice.”

After making this statement , he goes on to create a veritable laundry list–dare I write, ”a faint air of dull plodding” –a litany of obvious, literal visual elements as seen in the photograph. Gee, thanks for pointing out the obvious cuz I never would have noticed that stuff without your help. Again, what one would expect from a viewer whose primarily concern is to ascertain what a photograph is of, aka: its literally depicted referent.

FULL STOP let me be perfectly clear about the preceding commentary; I am not, sarcasm aside, ripping on Mike Johnston. Rather, I am using his commentary on a photograph to illustrate the difference between photographers who make pictures of things–aka: decorative art–from those who make pictures from things–aka: fine art END FULL STOP

To my point, consider this (bold emphasis added):

“These were also usually pictures made of, rather than from something, to use a distinction I like to make. That is, if you're curious what a particular High Street looked like in 1936, a photograph of it is perfect, the more documentary the better …. If OTOH you were looking for an expressive, wall-worthy artwork then both you and the photographer will have been working to a different set of expectations, and the fact that it was made in (from / out of) that particular High Street is probably irrelevant.” ~ Mike Chisholm from his blog: IDIOTIC HAT (highly recommended)

RE: my take on the photograph in question….

My initial reaction–I do not “read” photographs–to encountering this photo was the sensation of experiencing a sharp poke to my visual senses‘s funny bone; a pleasurable tingle to my optic nerve, if you will… YIKES!…a sensation that signaled the onset of an eyes-born St. Vitus Dance–originating from the centrally located dark form and then skittering all across the flat field of the image, pin-balling off its hard edges and dancing amongst the cacophony of lines, shapes, form, and tone that inhabit the space…YEE-HAW, ride ‘em cowboy!…I really do enjoy it when my eyes dance.

…all of this happened in, seemingly, a fraction of a second after which my verbal brain kicked into focus and I recognized what it was a photo of– a street scene replete with everyday, albeit nothing special, human activity. Although, damn, that guy in the center of the photo is staring (menacingly?) right at me…a literal visual element that creates a figurative hook that draws the viewer into the photo. And, if ya wanna get all art-speaky about the photo, I am reasonably certain that an academic could write a zillion-teen words–employing that visual hook as a metaphor–on the medium’s relationship between seer and seen.

All of that written and iMo, I believe the photograph is a very fine example of the street photography genre. One that earns a wall-worthy designation inasmuch as the photographer, with his selection of visual elements–aka: the elements of art–extracted from the quotidian world, he has imbued the photograph with a quality of rigor–its imposed order–that identifies it as a work of art, transcending its pedestrian application as mere documentation.

# 6844-46 / in situ • travel ~ a day at the sea shore

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

AS YOU MIGHT KNOW BY NOW, MARTIN PARR shuffled off this mortal coil a few days ago. So, somewhat naturally, I pulled out my copy of The Last Resort book. Thought it was a good time for a refresh but, as it turned out, I didn’t need one inasmuch as I discovered that I practically knew all of the photos by heart. It would seem that they have etched a permanent home in my visual thinking brain.

That written, when I thought it might interesting to ask the wife to view the book and select which picture she might–if I held a gun to her head–like to have hanging on a wall in our house, I was rather surprised to discover that she had never previously looked at the book. Surprised cuz it–the book–has been hanging around the house for maybe 20 years or so.

In any event, on a fairly regular basis, I do ask her to view many of my photo books cuz I am always interested in a lay-person’s reaction / opinion to “fine-art” photography. She’s as lay as it gets–she’s neither an artist nor a photo maker of any kind and it surprises many people that an artist (me) and a lawyer (her) have manged to live together for 30 years without something going haywire–probably something about opposites attract thrown into the mix.

That written, she has spent many an hour at my side on gallery crawls and listening to me jabber on about things photography / art so she’s not exactly clueless about the subject. And, to be fair, I do value her input. Whatever the case, she did agree to take a look at the book ….

…. she was about 4 pictures into the book when she exclaimed, with an ear-to-ear grin on her face that “OMG, these pictures are awesome” and that was the first of a seemingly never ending flow of pure delight and amazement. Her connection to the pictures can certainly be attributed to the fact that they “spoke” to her about her summers on the seaside at Stone Harbor, NJ. However, I would be remiss not to mention that she also noted her keen appreciation for Parr’s stunning use of color. All in all, she truly loved the work, looked through the book 3x end-to-end and declared it to be the best photo book she has ever seen.

My take away from the experience is that Parr hit pay dirt inasmuch as he seems to have garnered appeal from an audience that is not part of the dedicated fine art photography crowd. For certain, in the case of the wife, while she “gets” work from Shore, Meyerowitz, Eggleston and host of other greats, her sheer delight and appreciation for The Last Resort is off the charts. And, it is my firm belief that, while she has not yet picked a photo that she would hang in our house, it wouldn’t surprise me if she said “All of them.”

And, FYI, I’m with her in that, iMo, Parr’s book is photography at its best.

# 6838-43 / in situ • common places • common things ~

all photos ~ (embigenable)

AS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY I OCCASIONALLY SUBMIT photos to the PhotoPlace Gallery for a themed call for entry. Occasionally I get a photo accepted for exhibition, occasionally I do not (my batting average is about .500). The latest call is for “images that reflect the beauty, humor, tension, and humanity found in everyday moments. Whether shot in a bustling city, a small-town fair, or a quiet rural intersection, we’re looking for photographs that tell stories of people, places, and the pulse of the street.” Displayed above are my submissions for this call for entry.

While I submit photos only on occasion, I do visit the site frequently to peruse their library of photo selections for various themed exhibitions. I do so cuz, for a number of years, the gallery has requested that photo submit-ers include their website address in case viewers wish to see more of their work. I find that feature to be a valuable addition to the site.

ALERT pay attention cuz here’s where I fulfill my last entry promise to provide you with a source for finding some damn good straight photography END ALERT

For each exhibition the selected juror–they select a solo juror for each exhibition from a wide pool of persons in the photo world–chooses 35 photos for exhibition in the gallery–in Middlebury, VT.–and online plus 40 more photos for an additional online exhibition. That allows a viewer to view 75 curated photos. And I repeat, curated photos; photos that have survived some sort of judgement and been determined to be suitable to be presented for viewer consideration.

The reason I find this to be a valuable source for discovering some interesting photography practitioners and their work is that most of the calls for submissions are calls for very specific, succinctly themed subject matter that tends to encourage submissions that are created in the straight photography vernacular. It’s rare that I do not find a couple “keepers”–I copy and past the site links in a folder so I can check in on them now and again–in each and every exhibit.

Give it a try and let me know what you think. Ya know, actually leave a comment.