#6804-07 / landscape • around the house • sink ~ document as form

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

There are no heroics in [his] images, but rather a poetics of the ordinary and the everyday and a refusal to create an effect for its own sake, echoing Walker Evans’s desire to reveal the “deep beauty of things as they are.” His approach can be tied to a long American tradition of elevating the simple and the commonplace, in form as well as content, to a certain poetry and a way of life, from Ralph Waldo Emerson writing that “I embrace the common, I explore and sit at the feet of familiar, the low,” to Walt Whitman championing “a transparent, plate-glassy style, artless”, characterized by “clearness, simplicity, no twisted or foggy sentences.” Despite its historic context, this enthusiasm for the vernacular, when expressed through photography, has been unsettling for some observers, and continues to this day.” ~ from Stephen Shore: Solving Pictures by Quintin Bajac

AS I BEGIN TO EMBARK UPON A PATH OF intense self-promotion, with the objective of creating recognition / awareness of my photography in the gallery / exhibition world, I am directed toward the necessity of writing an Artist Statement, one that could be universally applied to any work that I have created; i.e., to each and every one of my 20 individual bodies of work. It might be said that that task is fraught with complications given the diverse variety of referent matter depicted in my various bodies of work. However, I think not cuz, regardless of the depicted referent, all of my photographs are unified under the aegis of my singular vision, the identifiable manner–if one can see / grasp it–in which I see and photograph life and the real world––hence, the discursive promiscuity nomenclature that I ascribe to my cumulative body of work.

That written, an Artist Statement most often addresses two objectives, aka: the how and the why. The how is the easy part––at least for me cuz it will essentially be a derivation / variation on the quote included above; simply written, I make photographs of the quotidian world without effects or “twisted or foggy sentences.” The why part is, however, a different kettle of fish ….

…. that’s cuz, in large part, I am not attracted to a particular referent material of any particular kind, as in, being drawn to––per the medium’s directive to photograph the singular “thing” that interests you––the landscape (natural world or man-made), people, still life, nudes, events / human activities, et al. For example, I will never write the sentence, “I am attracted to the dirty dishes in my sink,” cuz, the fact of the matter (pun) is that I am not attracted to the stuff in my sink other than for it potential to be made into a photograph. So, that all-purpose answer to the why question has exited stage right, aka: out the window.

It is also fair to write that I do not photograph to espouse any “deep” meaning, re: my referents or my personal “beliefs” or involvement is a cause or ideology; my intent is to make photographs that instigate feeling / emotions, not thoughts, to wit, visual interest, not intellectual interest. So, an appeal to the Academic Lunatic Fringe is most certainly not in my future inasmuch as they probably consider me to be a picture-making simpleton.

What I can state could be a variation on the idea that I am attracted to “the common and that I do “explore and sit at the feet of familiar, the low,” but that still begs the question of why I do so ….

It is my belief that to address that question I need to. A) embrace the Shakespeare-ian concept that “what’s past is prologue” inasmuch as I am coming to the the conclusion that my “baked in” picture making proclivities are a direct result of my past young-life experiences of sitting next to the window on the passenger-side, back seat of my parent’s car, staring out that window at the everyday, real world landscape as it scrolled past my eyes like an old-timey newsreel––especially so during those long-which I thought of as boring-1950's drives on the 2-lane roads through small towns and the rural country side on the way to the Adirondacks*––made an indelible imprint on my visual perception of how I see the real world ….

…. and, B) I can also state that I take great pleasure / satisfaction in making photographs that express the idea that a beautiful or, at the very least, a visually interesting object––aka: a photographic print––can be created from the from the most likely considered un-beautiful, un-visually interesting referents.

All of the above written, be forewarned that I will be continuing to write quite a bit more about the creating recognition / awareness of my photography endeavor I am pursuing.

*not to mention the fact that I now am a longtime resident of the Adirondacks

# 6705-08 / flora • around the house ~ it's a modern life

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

THERE ARE DAYS WHEN I STRUGGLE TO COME up with photography related topics to write about. In large part. that’s cuz during the course of my blogging–decades–I have covered a lot of ground and I try not to repeat topics too frequently and I strive to stay on topic, i.e. the medium of photography and its apparatus.

That written, I do have an interesting life and I could easily write about my sleep habits or all of the fascinating details of the recent decisions I made when purchasing a new car or all about the 3 turbo-powered performance cars I have or there is my golf game and how I have recently re-shafted my forged irons with senior shafts or explaining why I have 4 canoes–2 solo and 2 tandem–and the subtleties of the J-stroke or how about my whiskey collection of rare and very expensive bottled spirits and addressing the question of whether or not my bottle of Pappy Van Winkle 20 Year Old is worth the price or my other hobby of building very complex LEGO sets or … et al …. but, I won’t do it. So instead, it’s on with the show….

Re: “creamy” bokeh: bokeh is the quality and feel of the background/foreground blur and reflected points of light in the out-of-focus, aka: blurry, parts of an image. Bokeh is judged to be “good” when the background blur is soft and “creamy”–smooth, round circles of light and no hard edges–making the blur pleasing to the eye. Bokeh is judged to be “bad” when the circles of light have sharp, aka: well-defined, edges and, dependent upon lens diaphragm blades–rounded blades, good / straight blades, bad–a hexagonal shape.

So, back in the olden days when photographers used those antiquated things called cameras, if one were to be desiring smooth, round out-of-focus circles of light / “creamy” blur, both the number and the shape of a lenses’ diaphragm blades was an all important element in creating that desired result. Making pictures with a fast prime lens, with rounded / blade apertures, set to the lowest value, aka: wide ”open” was the way to go for creating “good” bokeh.

On the other hand, today, in the modern world, one need not be concerned with all that “real” camera crap. Enlightened shooters can just fire up their cell phone’s picture making module / capabilities, set it to the PORTRAIT mode and choose the amount of blur you desire and fire away. And, get this, if you don’t like the result you can increase or decrease the blur–from none at all to max out-of-focus–after the fact during the image processing stage. And, in my experience, there is nary a hard-edge circle to be found and the blur is “creamy” enough to please my eye and sensibilities..

Of course, when employing this technique, you risk incurring the ire of the “real” camera purists who will tell you in no uncertain terms that your blur is “fake”–nothing more than an amateurish, cheap trick / effect cuz, ya know, “real” men use use “real” cameras.

My advice, just smile and move on knowing that “real” people, who enjoy looking at pictures, rarely give a crap about how a picture is made. They just know a good picture when they see it.

# 6998-6700 / people • around the house ~ they say it's your bithday... well it's my birthday too, yeah

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

TOOK A FERRY RIDE YESTERDAY ACROSS THE 13TH LARGEST lake in the USofA–Lake Champlain-107 miles long, 14 miles at its widest–and purchased a new car. Didn’t mean to buy a new car, it was just kinda a spontaneous happenstance. In any event, all 3 of our cars are now sport-oriented–aka: so-called “drivers” vehicles–turbos.

Today is my birthday so this entry is on the brief side. I’ll be back in the more wordy mode in a few days.

# 6988-91 / kitchen life • flora ~ pictures, not words

All photos ~ (embiggenable)

I always thought good photos were like good jokes. If you have to explain it, it just isn’t that good.” ~ Anonymous

IF IT IS NOT OBVIOUS, LET ME NOTE THAT I RARELY caption or title my photographs, neither on this blog, in my photo books, nor in an exhibition. My primary reason for this omission was, coincidentally, explained in an essay by Lincoln Kirstein in the book Walker Evans ~ American Photographs–a reproduction, page by page / spread by spread–of Evans’ original book as published in 1938:

The scheme of picture titles [left] only the page numbers as minimal distraction to the images …. Without the title’s immediate juxtaposition to the images, the viewer was obliged to fashion his or her own synopsis of the pictures’ content and form. This was another Evans’ impulse to purge all editorial comment from his work. Even his perfunctory titles were bare notations of place and date.”

I have always believed that, cuz the medium of photography is a visual art, words are not necessary. Some even believe that, if words are necessary, a photograph is a failure. That is a bit extreme but I believe a photograph should stand on its own visual merits. In addition, for what it’s worth, I also believe that “cutesy” captions / titles should be eradicated from the face of the earth.

All of the above written, my photo books and exhibition photographs are nevertheless always accompanied by an artist statement. The statements are written as a rather short and sweet synopsis of my picture making intent. Consider the artist statement for my An Adirondack Survey work:

My photographs are visual analogues for the quality of my life, a private view of subject matter found in the commonplace realities of the Adirondacks. An Adirondack Survey, created as an engagement of personal vision rather than as a topographic documentary, illustrates my intent to animate, elucidate, and reveal a sense of beautiful strangeness. That is, not predictability (the opposite of cliche), but rather a kind of shock non-recognition hidden in plain sight within the quotidian landscape of the Adirondacks.

In a very real sense, this statement, with a substitution of the title of any of my bodies of work in place of “An Adirondack Survey”, could be used as the artist statement for any of my bodies of work. I believe that to be true inasmuch as none of my bodies of work, with the exception of my Life Without the APA work, were undertaken to infer / connote any particular social / cultural commentary or intellectual concept; they exist as a simple visual statement from which a viewer may experience any reaction that suits their fancy.

That written, far be it from me to suggest with words what a viewer should experience when viewing my photographs.

# 6979-87 / common places • common things • people ~ 2 fer 1

cover photo -The World At My Feet ~ all photos (embiggenable)

11 YEARS AGO I MADE POD PHOTO book titled The World At My Feet. In hindsight that title was a bit of a misnomer inasmuch as, while my picture making gaze was cast downward, neither my feet nor the ground / floor were integral to the photographs (with 2 exceptions). Retrospect suggests that a more appropriate title should been something like Looking Down, or, Eye Contact Down, or, Downward Gaze.

In any event, during the 11 years since the making of that photo book, I have made hundreds of downward gazing photographs, to include the 5 in this entry which were made over the last 2 days. And then there is the Eyes Downcast gallery on my work which, FYI, has not been updated for a few years. Update coming soon.

To be certain, I have never considered the photographs resulting from my downward gaze M.O. to be a body of work. However, I do believe that now is the time to round up the best of the bunch and make another photo book.

BONUS CONTENT:

all photos (embiggenable)

A TRIP TO NYC IS IN MY VERY NEAR future for the sole purpose of seeing the North American premiere of Constellation, the most comprehensive presentation–454 prints–of work by Diane Arbus. I must admit that I feel that viewing 454 prints replete with Diane Arbus subject content is an intimidating proposition. It might just require a 2-day viewing experience; day 1–a comprehensive walk-through to get a grasp of the scope and tenor of the collection, and, day 2–spend time engaging with some of the more captivating photographs. In any event, it should very interesting.

FYI, over the years I have made a few–very few–Arbus-like photographs. Strangely enough, most are of children. While my photos do not have the Arbus strange weirdness vibe, they are a bit on the quirky side.

# 6948-50 / around the house • kitchen life-sink • common places-things ~ a string of pearls

all photos (embiggenable)

Photography takes an instant out of time, altering life by holding it still.” ~ Dorothea Lange

Taking pictures is savoring life intensely every hundredth of a second.” ~ Marc Riboud

We are making photographs to understand what our lives mean to us.” ~ Ralph Hattersley

Your photography is a record of your living, for anyone who really sees.” ~ Paul Strand

BEGINNING WITH THE VERY FIRST PHOTOGRAPH I ever made, I can truthfully write that I never made a photograph–personal as opposed to commercial–that was driven by the desire to convey a meaning. Over time, as I advanced in my pursuit of so-called Fine Art Photography, I pursued my picture making with the belief that photography is a visual art and therefore my picture making objective objective was/is to make photographs that are “interesting”–in some manner or another–to look at / view. Photographs that exhibit what something looks like when photographed in a manner in which I see it.

To be certain, an interesting photograph that incites an emotional reaction / feeling might also, concomitantly, incite word-thoughts which can be expressed verbally. That written, it is a commonly held belief that any emotional and/or word-thought reactions to a photograph are primarily influenced by what the viewer brings to the table– as Sontag wrote … inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation, and fantasy”.

If a viewer of my work were to spectulate that my photographs left them with the meaning that beautiful / interesting form can be found in the most mundane of things, I would respond by stating that I am happy you feel that way.

All the above written, I can write that, re: my eye and sensibilities, I am comfortable with the fact that I know the answer to the question, What is a photograph? However, the question to which I do not have the definitive answer is, Why do I make photographs?

That is not to write that I have never thought about the why of it. In fact, I think about it every time I have to write an artist statement to accompany an exhibit or a photo book. Inevitably, such statements will refer to my attraction to the form I see in the quotidian world; a statement which is true as far as it goes and is almost always appropriate. Nevertheless ….

…. at this point in my life, let’s refer to it as late in life, with multiple thousands of photographs in my photo library, I am wrestling with the idea of; a) what do I do with all the photographs, posterity wise? and b) why have I made so many photographs?

Inasmuch as I have made photos nearly everyday over the last 25 years, it is no surprise that I make a lot of photographs. While some might think this activity is some sort of obsessive behavior, I attribute it to the fact that my eye and sensibilities are very sensitive to / aware of the seemingly everywhere form I see that can be photographically extracted from the everyday world. Inasmuch as I live my life with eyes wide open–literally + figuratively–it is almost like a sensory overload. The potential for picture making is nearly inexhaustible so I make a lot of photographs.

WARNING: Psychological mumbo-jumbo to follow.

Let me try to string together the quotes at the top of this entry…

Inasmuch as Photography takes an instant out of time, altering life by holding it still, it stands to reason that Taking pictures is savoring life intensely every hundredth of a second. Ya know, kinda like Evans’ delights of seeing; the defining of observation full and felt.

That written, I must confess that, when making a photograph, I can not write that I am savoring life at the picture-making moment inasmuch as I have never been able to stare at a blade of grass and see the secrets of the universe. That’s cuz, in part, time marches on. Fortunately, one of photography’s magic tricks is that it can “stop” time and with the production of a print that depicts that stoppage, the maker of the photograph–and possibly other viewers–can, indeed, savor the moment over and over.

Does anyone make photographs to understand what our lives mean to us? In all probability, some do–or try to–but, I do not. Nevertheless, it is quite possible that, buried deep in my subconscious, I am making photographs to understand / reassure myself that I am still alive. Not that I am clinging to life by a thread by any measure but, it’s a thought, albeit an unconscious one.

As for Strand’s notion that Your photography is a record of your living, for anyone who really sees, I suppose that, at least in my case, that’s true if he meant the word “living” to be a question of what gives a life a sense purpose, significance, and value; in pursuing knowledge, creating art, or experiencing profound moments of awe and connection.

Which is not to write that making photographs is my raison d'être but it is difficult to imagine what my life would be without it.

# 6920-22/ landscape • around the house • common places-things ~ a bug-ike immersion in the quotidian world

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

WHILE READING AN ESSAY IN THE BOOK, FRED HERZOG • MODERN COLOR, I came across an interesting concept:

In 1962m Manny Farber (film critic) distinguished between what he called “termite art” and “white elephant art.”. Termite artists get on with their art with little regard for posterity or critical affirmation. They are “ornery, wasteful, stubbornly self-involved, doing go for-broke-art and not caring what becomes of it.” They have a “bug-like immersion in a small area without point or aim, and, overall, concentrating on nailing down one moment without glamorizing it, but forgetting this accomplishment as soon as it has been passed: the feeling that all is expendable, that it can be chopped up and flung down in a different arrangement without ruin.” On the other hand, “white elephant art” is made in the self-conscious pursuit of transcendent greatness and in the channels where greatness is conventionally noticed. The white elephant artist is likely to “pin the viewer to the wall and slug him with wet towels of artiness and significance.” We need not choose between these two. Great work can be made by either, and history suggests that this is perhaps more true of photography than any other medium.

After reading this, I believe that I am a termite artist and, btw, the wife thinks that I am ornery.