#6709-13 / people • flora • common places-things ~ at times a few words never hurt

view from 1st hole tee on the Mountain Course - all photos (embigenable)

the 3 of us

My photographs are visual analogues for the quality of my life, a private view of subject matter found in the commonplace reality of the Adirondacks.

THE OPENING LINE IN MY ARTIST STATEMENT FOR MY Adirondack Survey body of work could, with a slight modification, be used for just about all of my various bodies of work – substitute “in my life long walk about the planet” in place of “in the commonplace reality of the Adirondacks” and there you have it, a one size fits all statement that is applicable to just about every photograph I have ever made (commercial work excepted).

I mention this pursuant to my last entry wherein I reiterated my promise to not turn this blog into some kind of written personal diary. But, truth be told, my photography is in fact a visual personal diary of sorts. That’s cuz I do not make pictures of things, I make pictures of life in all its forms and locations. Hence my propensity for discursive promiscuity.

Despite that propensity, I have numerous individual bodies of work which fall under the headings of “traditional” photo genres–people, places, things, street, landscape, still life, et al– but, that written, I rarely make a photo with a genre-driven idea in mind. Virtually all of my individual assemblies of genre-related photos were organized together well after the fact of their making.

In any event, on occasion I do post photos that do seem to call for a caption / description of sorts. Say, like .… those in this entry ….

a.) I do not write about my golf game but I do post photos of my golf experiences, most often in the form of a landscape photo. However, yesterday, I played golf with my son and grandson on our home course–the Lake Placid Resort Course (45 holes, 2 18s and 1 9 hole par 3 course)–where we are privileged to play for free. That written, the real “story” here is that I am so lucky, fortunate, and graced with the opportunity to play with my multi-generation progeny on a regular basis–although grandson is only home from college for the summer. And, FYI, independent of that story is the fact–which may be understood by just looking at the pictures–is that, no matter how well–or not–one is playing, the old saying of “Golf is a good walk spoiled” does not apply on this course. It is always a grand and glorious good walk.

b.) Bet ya didn’t know that the Adirondack chair most often seen in photos are a later day version of the original Adirondack chair, aka: the Westport Adirondack chair. That chair design was the very first Adirondack chair which dates back 1903 and the Adirondack village of Westport. iMo, and to my eye and sensibilities, that chair is the most simple and elegant chair, of any kind, ever designed. That’s why we have 3 of them on our front porch. And, BTW, our cat also likes them.

# 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.

# 6916-19 / kitchen sink • around the house • common things ~ responsibilities

all photos (embiggenable)

Anything and all things are photographable. A photograph can only look like how the camera saw what was photographed. Or, how the camera saw the piece of time and space is responsible for how the photograph looks. Therefore, a photograph can look any way. Or, there's no way a photograph has to look (beyond being an illusion of a literal description). Or, there are no external or abstract or preconceived rules of design that can apply to still photographs. 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 as it is. A photograph must be responsible to both.” ~ Garry Winogrand

I AM CURRENTLY PUTTING A PHOTO-BOOK together with the title, describing it as it is ~ there’s no way a photograph has to look. The book will contain 40 photographs of a wide range of referent material, more commonly known as my discursive promiscuity work.

If the book comes together as I believe it will, I will also make a handful of zines––of the same work––that I will offer for sale here on the blog. The zines will be much less expensive to produce than a hardbound book and can therefore be sold at a very reasonable price.

BTW, this project is also causing me to think that it is well past time for a total rebuild of the work displayed on my homepage and how it is presented.

# 6910-15 / around the house • kitchen sink • flora • fauna • landscape ~ same as it ever was

all photos ~ (embgiggenable)

If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up.” - Richard Avedon

SINCE MY RETURN FROM NEW MEXICO / DENVER, 20 days ago, it was until 3 days ago that I made my first photograph here at home. Oddly enough, it wasn’t until I made the photograph in this entry that I realized that so much time had passed since my last picture making. That realization made it plain that I had, in fact, been feeling “it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence.” That written, it should be noted that all of those 17 photograph-making-less days were spent doing something related to photography––i.e. processing my travel photographs.

Over past 2 days I have made a couple more photographs and begun to realize what it was that caused the back-to-home photo making lull; apparently, or so it seems, while in New Mexico, my picture making sensitivity intuitively(?) transitioned to the landscape mode. A mode in which shapes, texture, color, line, and tone found in the natural world are very different from the same values in a more urban / domesticated / man-made environment.

I can not write that I was consciously aware of that change but I was most certainly aware of the fact that reverting to the “rules of composition” was not going to be productive in the cause of avoiding making touristy / calendar pictures. It was that thought that got me off on the right foot when, from the get-go, I decided to make photographs from the passenger seat of our rental car.

# 6974-76 / kitchen sink • flora • landscape ~ they're not as sharp as they think they are

all photos (embiggenable)

I’m always amused by the idea that certain people have about technique, which translate into an immoderate taste for the sharpness of the image. It is a passion for detail, for perfection, or do they hope to get closer to reality with this trompe I’oeil? They are, by the way, as far away from the real issues as other generations of photographers were when they obscured their subject in soft-focus effects.” ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson

REGULAR FOLLOWERS OF THIS BLOG HAVE PROBABLY noticed there have been more entries posted than is usual. That is most likely do to my new proclivity for using quotes to introduce one topic or another. FYI, as mentioned previously, I have collected quite a number of quotes from the interweb and from photo book––monographs––intros / prefaces / reviews. They act as a kinda instigator for entry topics, so much so that rarely have words poured from my penny pencil with such feverish fluidity.

Be that as it may, today’s topic was not instigated by the above HBC quote––I dug that out after I encountered the real instigator; today’s entry on T.O.P. in which M. Johnston made know his opinion, re: too much sharpness, resolution, micro contrast, et al known, i.e. he, like my own self, don’t like it at all.

Having written on the topic numerous times, I am disinclined to do so again. However, as an addendum to my previous thoughts on the subject, let me add this idea; the addiction to sharpness / resolution to-the-max is just one of many picture making afflictions embraced by those who are “as far away from the real issues” as possible. Just like the band Spinal Tap, who play their music with their amp volumes set to “11”, these dreck-conian picture makers have never seen a slider––hue & saturation, sharpness, vibrance, et al––that they don’t set to “11”. They often refer to that proclivity as “being creative”. Ha. Enough written on the topic.

FYI, one possible reason I have posted more often than usual is that the wife and I are headed to New Mexico tomorrow for some R’nR. Staying for a few days in a modest Pueblo-style, hot spring resort. Then on to Santa Fe for 2 days and a night for some luscious food and some culture. Followed by a visit to Denver to visit with some friends and family. That being so, I kinda think I’ve been cramming in a bunch of thoughts on some virtual paper before heading out.

In any event, I will post while I’m away although it might be more pictures than words.

BTW, writing about sharpness, the picture with the budding maple tree was made through a back porch screen. A “diffusion” filter, if you will. I didn’t have any other choice of making that picture from the same vantage point without involving a step ladder. iMo, it gets the point across quite effectively without any sharpness to-the-max.

# 6469-74 / rist camp • flora • folliage (autumn) common places-things ~ small is beautiful

all photos (embiggenable)

IN MY REGION OF THE ADIRONDACKS PEEK (pun) leaf peeper season is about a week away. While I am not immune to the sight of the forest swathed in a red / yellow rainbow of color, I am adverse to the making of pictures thereof. To wit, the making of “standard”, color saturated, landscape calendar art.

On the contrary, bogs and swamps are my favored autumnal picture making venues. That’s cuz the biodiversity found in these wetlands creates a much expanded color palette than is commonly found in the red and yellow dominated forest palette. Throw in a wide variety of shapes and textures and, to my eye and sensibilities, there are picture making opportunities aplenty.

Often times, on my way to a bog / swamp, along the roadside I encounter scenes of pre-peek color. That is, a bit of autumnal color mingled in a greater scene of late summer, green-dominated, color. To my eye and sensibilities, these scenes have a great degree of visual energy; ya know what I mean….the opportunity to make one of those exhausting-to-read (sarcasm alert) photographs wherein the eye tends to dance-instead of falling asleep-across the 2D surface of the print.

All of that written, I would encourage the pursuit of shunning the grand autumnal landscape scenes in order to find those much more intimate tableaux of autumnal splendor.

# 6838-45 / common places/things • flora ~ Spring has arrived

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

a garden figure made from old tools

….photographic images tend to subtract feeling from something we experience at first hand and the feelings they do arouse are, largely, not those we have in real life. Often something disturbs [ed. aka, pricks] us more in photographed form than it does when we actually experience it.” ~ Susan Sontag

Yep.

# 6864-67 / common things • still life ~ good is as good does

WITH ALL OF THE ATTENTION GIVEN TO COLOR PHOTOGRAPHY, most notably on TOP, I must admit to being rather flummoxed, aka: confounded, or, simply confused, re: the idea of what is color photography and/or who is a color photographer?

It would be simplistic to write that / everyone who makes photographs with a device or materials capable of rendering reasonably accurate colors of the real world-as seen by a healthy human eye-is; a) making color photographs, and, by reasonable extension, 2) a “color” photographer. However, it would seem that in some quarters, just making color photographs is not enough to qualify one as a “color” photographer.

Apparently there is some other criteria that must be meet in order to be consider as a color photographer”. And, therein is where my confusion resides.

iMo, making color photographs makes one a color photographer. To my way of thinking, it is as simple as that. However…..

….I believe it to be indisputable that there are good color photographs and…gasp…not-so-good color photographs. iMo, the difference between the two is very easy to identify. A good color photograph is, quite simply, first and foremost, a good photograph.

My definition-influenced by my bias(es)-of a good photograph is summarized by this Cartier-Bresson quote:

To me, photography is the simultaneous recognition in a fraction of a second the significance of an event, as well as the precise organization the forms that give that event its proper expression. And this organization, this precision, will always escape you, if you do not appreciate what a picture is, if you do not understand that the composition, the logic, the equilibrium of the surfaces and values are the only ways of giving meaning to all that is continuously appearing and vanishing before our very eyes.”

I would substitute the phrase moment in time for the word event (a moment in time could include an “event”). However, that written, to my eye and sensibilities, the overall form seen in a photograph derives from the organization of the visual elements-line, shape, space, color and value-as framed and presented in the photograph. That organization is, in essence, balancing act. All of the visual elements must conspire to create a congruous whole-congruity determined by what the photographer wishes to express.

And, when it comes to color, I think it important to understand that the colors as presented in a photograph are just one visual element of any number of other visual elements that might be found in a good photograph. In my experience, I have found that color photographs that are saturated with color-or color(s) that has been over saturated-for color’s sake tend to slide over into the category of kitsch and dreck.

ASIDE Nevertheless, kitsch and dreck rarely fail to elicit fawning praise from the unwashed masses. cuz, ya know, no one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public. END OF ASIDE

All of the above written, I would guess that therein could be found my definition of what constitutes a good color photograph and that a photographer who makes good color photographs is a good photographer. Although…

…I’ll stick with the idea that there is no such thing as a good color photographer, or for that matter, a good monochrome photographer. iMo, there are only good photographers as defined by their making of good photographs of any variety.