# 6890-91 / sports ~ OT - slip sliding away

all photos~ (embiggenable)

IT SEEMED APPROPRIATE AS I SAT WATCHING THE WINTER OLYMPIC opening ceremonies, that I could make a blog entry about my winter sport endeavors. Specifically, to name just one, my multi-year participation in a NE Regional luge league / competition held for a few years in Lake Placid on the Olympic / World Cup sliding track. The results of that endeavor–2 silver medals in 2 season ending tournaments–can be viewed above.

I took to the sport like a duck to water, or as the wife opined, a crazy man on a sled. One could also state, with a high degree of accuracy, that I became addicted to the adrenaline rush that hurdling down an ice covered track, feet first, on your back at 50 MPH+ induces. Gravity and lateral G-forces tend to do that to ones senses.

The league used a start gate just a bit below the women’s Olympic start so participants did not reach the 80-90MPH speeds of the real crazies. The written, I was very proficient on the sled; during a World Cup luge event in Lake Placid, I made a segment for my PBS tv program–I was the producer, writer, and on-air host–Adirondack Outdoors on luge competition during which, between a break in the competition, we duct taped a video camera to my thigh and recorded my run down the track. While in the media truck checking out the video, I became aware of someone looking over my shoulder at the screen. When the footage ended, that person put a hand on my shoulder and said, “Nice run.”–turned out that person was the Olympic USA Luge Team coach.

As an aside to the above, it also occurred to me, as I sat on the couch watching the Olympics all snug and warm, while the outside temp was hovering around -10ºF, that I could also throw in a mention of one of my other winter outdoor passions; 4-5 day, sub-zero backpacking trips into the Adirondack High Peaks. The lowest temp my hiking friend and I encountered while sleeping in a tent was -28ºF.

footnote: I dearly miss both of these activities but, as I am about to enter my 80th year on the planet, they ain’t in my game plan any longer.

above treeline ~ whiteout @ 5,000 ft.

#6881-85 / around the house • common things • landscape ~ let us now praise artlessness

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

THERE WAS A TIME WHEN I ACTUALLY CONSIDERED converting all of my photographs into the snapshot look. That idea sprang from my thoughts, re: the pomposity of many practitioners / critics / academics toiling under the banner of “fine art” photography–sorta my gut reaction to blurt out, “Get over it. They’re just f–––ing pictures.” Needless to write, I got over the impulse but, when rooting around in my image files–10K +– while prepping materials for my gallery presentation, a snapshot related thought re-emerged from the past re: longevity.

Estimating that there are approximately 200-300 really good fine art “keepers” in my library of the hang-them-on-a-wall quality, I was given to wondering how many of them would be around, say, 5-10 years after my departure from the planet.

While I have had some modest success selling my work–prints and POD photo books–those photographs might have a longer longevity life span than my keeper image files which might not be so lucky. One exception are the significant number of POD photo books I have created inasmuch as they are easier objects to hang on to. That written, perhaps it’s time to write an end-of-life directive stating what I would like to be preserved / passed on to family.

Be all of that as it may, the snapshot thought that recently occurred to me was about a very large Tupperware-like storage container sitting in our attic that contains 300+ (or more, who’s counting) Polaroid family-oriented snapshots that have survived for close to 60 years. I have very little doubt that they will continue to survive for a very long time, perhaps even multi-generation wise. Those photographs–unlike my most fine art work–are apt to be cherished memento.

That written, I truly believe that the best photographs ever made are those made by the “nameless picture makers” cuz, when you come right down to it, they are just f…king pictures .….

Of all the world’s photographers, the lowliest and least honored is the simple householder who desires only to “have a camera around the house” and to “get a picture of Dolores in her graduation gown.” He lugs his primitive equipment with him on vacation trips, picnics, and family outings of all sorts. His knowledge of photography is about that of your average chipmunk. He often has trouble loading his camera, even after owning it for twenty years. Emulsion speeds, f-stops, meter readings, shutter speeds have absolutely no meaning to him, except as a language he hears spoken when, by mistake, he wanders into a real camera store to buy film instead of his usual drugstore. His product is almost always people- or possession-oriented. It rarely occurs to such a photographer to take a picture of something, say a Venetian fountain, without a loved one standing directly in front of it and smiling into the lens. What artistic results he obtains are almost inevitably accidental and totally without self-consciousness. Perhaps because of his very artlessness, and his very numbers, the nameless picture maker may in the end be the truest and most valuable recorder of our times. He never edits; he never editorializes; he just snaps away and sends the film off to be developed, all the while innocently freezing forever the plain people of his time in all their lumpishness, their humanity, and their universality. ~ Jean Shepherd

# 6878-80 / sink • winter • polaroid ~ getting back in the saddle

al photos ~ (embiggenable)

HAVE NOT POSTED IN A WHILE CUZ I have been very focused upon prepping my folio + book presentation to a gallery. Then there was also the engulf half the USofA snowmageddon storm–we got 18” in 24 hrs, seen much worse but the media played it up biggly–together with 10 days of below 0ºF temps.

BTW, most of the falling snow was, rare for these parts, champagne powder–a term for exceptionally light, dry, and fluffy snow with a very low water content (around 6%), making it airy and soft, creating very fine crystals. The 18” of snow was practically weightless which meant virtually no downed trees / limbs or power lines which, in turn, meant few power outages. And, I would assume, very few snow shoveling heart attacks.

In any event, the presentation work is nearly completed so, round about this coming Tuesday things should be back to “normal”, or, whatever passes for normal these days.

6874-77 / common places-things • winter ~ a return to yester-year?

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

OVER THE PAST 5 YEARS (OR MORE) WHILE ACCESSING ONLINE sites such as Facebook, Instagram, et al, and clicking on photo-related posts, I have noticed an increasing number of ads popping up that feature so labeled film-like apps–i.e. apps that give your digital files a film-like look. One can only assume that this flood of film-like apps is in response to a demand for such a thing.

That written the first thought that springs my mind is simply, define the nomenclature, film-like. Trying to do so seems like a bit of a conundrum inasmuch as back in the color film analog days there were a myriad of film stocks each with their own look. First and foremost there was the very different look of an image made with color negative film vs with color transparency film. Add to that distinction the fact that, even within individual film maker’s line up, there could be considerable variations in looks. Taking that into account, many film-like apps offer film-look variations based on popular film stocks …. which brings to my mind 2nd thought ….

…. let us consider, as just one example, Kodak’s Kodacolor color negative film–how many of today’s picture makers have even the faintest clue as to how a C print made from Kodacolor–or any other color negative film–looks? My answer to that question would be, precious few. For the most part, one would have to be an avid visitor to art institutions–museums–which present exhibitions of past masters works to see what a photographic print made with color negative film looks like. Or ….

…. that written, it is possible today to make an image with color negative film, have the negative scanned and then make an inkjet print from it which will display a made-with-film look. To be certain, that is an picture making M.O. that is being pursued by a fair number of serious amateur –and I might, younger–photographers. And, iMo, that pursuit is the only way to create an authentic film-look cuz, duh, the image is made with film. All the film-like apps are, for all intents and purposes, little more than special effect art sauce.

All of the above written, this subject (the film-like look) rose to the fore in my picture making brain as a result of a photo printing binge I am on–22x22”paper (see trim line on in 24”paper) with17x17” image–for presentation to a gallery, consisting of 4 images from 4 different bodies of work. What caught my attention as I was/am making these prints is how film-like looking the printed images are.

To be certain, this not a surprise inasmuch as, since my adoption of digital photography, I have pursued the idea of making my photographs look like they were made with film …. which is to state, to emulate the, dare I write, “soft” / “creamy” look of film-based images as opposed to the, re: to my eye and sensibilities, harsh / garish look of digital-based images. Let me explain ….

…. first, my qualifications: I, personally, with my own 2 hands have made approximately 1,000 color prints–from color negative film– which is to write that I am intimately familiar with the look thereof. So much so that I can spot a print made from film from a mile away, or, at least so from a proper viewing distance on a gallery wall. That written, what is it that I like about the look of a film-based print that I try to emulate in my prints?

Basically, it all comes down to list of “no”s:

• no maximized sharpness / resolution applied

• no maximized color saturation applied

• no extended dynamic range applied, i.e. greater than the range in the original scene

• no excessive contrast in the highlights and shadows

• no out-of-wack color balance

In processing my RAW images I; 1. often apply just the very lowest amount of Gaussian Blur 2. reduce the color Saturation, 3. adjust the overall dynamic range to that of the original scene–example: a grey/overcast day has a much lower dynamic range than a bright/sunny day, 4. individually select highlight and shadow detail and reduce contrast therein 5. achieve a clean / neutral / natural color balance.

The result of these procedures is to create, to my eye and sensibilities, an image with smoother transitions between colors and tones than is found in a “straight” digital image. More film like, if you will. And, I might point out, I don’t need no stinkin’ film-like filters.

# 6866-70 / common places • landscape • in situ • sink • winter ~ Qu'est-ce que "great"

all photos ~ (embiggenable)

alpenglow

neon glo

“Who are the great photographers–Famous / Leading / Ambitious, accomplished, rewarded–now?” ~ a question posed by Mike Johnston

JOHNSTON’S QUESTION IS ONE THAT HAS CROSSED MY mind a number of times over the past year or so. Although, to be more precise, I am not looking for a “great” photographer, per se (I’m not much for hero worship)–rather, what I am looking for is “great” photography, new or otherwise.

In either case, finding great stuff, photography wise–leaving aside the conundrum of what constitutes “great”–has become increasingly more difficult than it was in the past (pre-2000?) inasmuch, as Johnston mentions / laments, many of the guideposts–publications, influential art galleries (large and small), art institutions, et al–which directed our attention to great stuff have either disappeared or succumbed to the influence of the Academic Lunatic Fringe kind of flapdoodle. While there is quite a bit of very, very good stuff floating around in the cloud, identifying that stuff in tan ever-pulsing / shifting about mass is an exercise in the classic endeavor of finding the needle in a haystack.

That written, iMo, what I believe to be the overriding paradigm that formerly identified so many of the “greats”–pictures and picture makers–but no longer exists, is the simple fact that there is nothing new, photography wise, to get excited about …. ASIDE this idea should not–I repeat in all caps–SHOULD NOT be understood to mean that there is not very, very good / interesting photography being created today END ASIDE …. let me explain ….

I do not believe that it is any kind of a stretch to write that virtually all of the so-called greats–pictures and picture makers–of the last century emerged from medium-bending, picture making movements such as but not limited to; Steiglitz (et al)/Modernism, Eggleston (et al)/The New Color Photography, Robert Adams (et al)/the New Topographics. Operating within, and sometimes stretching, the aegis of those movements, theretofore unrecognized practitioners emerged to engage in a new way of seeing* which enabled them to create a new form–literally and figuratively–of work.

The cumulative result of those movements was that the medium of photography attained a maturation point which, amongst a number of other considerations**, it was established that any thing and every thing was/is fair game as a subject for picture making. Not to mention the fact that it could be pictured in whatever manner the picture maker felt was best for his/her intentions, “rules” be damned. Needless to write , new-ness was busting out all over the place like weeds in an untended garden … ya know, like, “Wait. You can make a picture of that? Who would have thought? What a great idea!”

So, what has all this led up to? iMo, the medium of photography has arrived at a point where nothing is truly new–ground-shaking, mind-bending, never-seen-before new …. ASIDE that idea does not mean that everything that can be photograph has been photographed inasmuch as there is always the vision and intention thing to consider END ASIDE …. and, that’s OK with me cuz I will never tire of viewing a well made, visually interesting / engaging photograph no matter who the maker is. That cuz I know how special / unique it is to create such a photograph:

“Photography is the easiest thing in the world if one is willing to accept pictures that are flaccid, limp, bland, banal, indiscriminately informative, and pointless. But if one insists in a photograph that is both complex and vigorous it is almost impossible.” ~ John Szarkowski

*honest to Pete, unaffected–as opposed to artificial, pretentious, and designed to impress–seeing

**nor the least of which was acceptance into the ranks of the Fine Art World

# 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.

# 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.