# 5720-25 / flora•around the house ~ inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation, and fantasy

(embiggenable) • µ4/3

(embiggenable) • µ4/3

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

PICTURE MAKING WISE, I AM, WITHOUT A DOUBT, A DEVOTEE OF facts clearly described...

"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. A photograph must be responsible to both." ~ Garry Winogrand

...but, nevertheless, I believe that a clearly described fact, as described by a photograph, can, in the best of cases, introduce a fair amount of mystery. Even if the intial mystery is simply incited by nothing more than a feeling of, "it is a mystery to me why the picture maker made this photograph." However, once a viewer gets beyond that "mystery" (if she/he can), there remains the idea that...

"Photographs, which cannot themselves explain anything, are inexhaustible invitations to deduction, speculation, and fantasy... The very muteness of what is, hypothetically, comprehensible in photographs is what constitutes their attraction and provocativeness. ~ Susan Sontag

All of that written and getting back to "facts clearly described", I have always believed that the medium of photography and its apparatus are inexorably and intrintically linked to the real. That idea fits nicely into my concept of the real - I see it, therfore, it is. However, when I make a picture of "it", followed by the making of print of "it", then viewing that "it" in a photograph of "it", I sense a change going on. A change something along the lines of...

"Instead of just recording reality, photographs have become the norm for the way things appear to us, thereby changing the very idea of reality and of realism. ~ Susan Sontag

In any event, I do not want to go too far down this rabbit hole. So, just let me write that, to a certain extent, it is all a mystery to me.

# 5703-06 / around the house (sunlight)•civilized ku ~ that doesn't make me a shallow person, does it?

(embiggenable) • µ4/3

(embiggenable) • µ4/3

(embiggenable) • µ4/3

THERE CAME A TIME-ABOUT 12 YEARS PAST-THAT I purchased a "normal" lens-50mm equivalent-for my µ4/3 cameras. At that time, I had begun to desire soft backgrounds / foregrounds (aka: narrow DOF), relative to my point of focus, as opposed to the rather everything-in-focus characteristic of semi-wide>wide angle lenses when paired with a small(ish) sensor.

Truth be written, I never really committed to making pictures with that lens (25mm f1.8 M.Zuiko). It seemed that my picture making vision is inexorably linked to semi-wide lenses such as my much used 17mm f1.8 Zuiko (34mm equivalent). Although, I have comfortably transitioned to the 24mm equivalent lens of the iPhone.

In any event, over the past few days I have been making pictures with the 25mm Zuiko lens, a few of which are presented in this entry. It seems that my narrow DOF inclination has returned to the fore. An emergent condition that I would primarily attribute to my use of the Portrait feature of the iPhone. A feature which works really well 95% of the time, and, has the added bonus of being able to adjust the DOF (albeit background only) during the post-picture-making processing.

I am not certain where this is headed, picture making wise other than to write that I will be taking a µ4/3 body, with the 25mm M.Zuiko afixed, along with me when I leave the house. Even gonna give it a try with my idea of picturing old / "traditional" gas stations.

(embiggenable) • iPhone / narrow DOF simulated in processing (not the Portrait feature)

# 5698-5700 / around the house ~ a love story

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

MY INTENTION IN YESTERDAY'S ENTRY WAS TO include a link to a book which, iMo, is one the best ever photo books about light. However, in the search for a link to a site where the book could be purchased, I discovered a big surprise.

The book, Office Romance by Kathy Ryan (the director of photography at the New York Times Magazine)-see some pictures here-is apparently out of print. Or, as indicated by the publisher-Aperture-out of stock. I searched a bit more looking for book sellers who might have it in stock. That search returned just 2 available books.

The big surprise...1 book was available for $1,060USD, the other for $2,000USD. FYI, I paid, 5-6 years ago, retail-$29.25USD-for my copy of the book.

I purchased the book (published 2014)-a little gem at 5.5x8 inches with 140 photographs-in large part because all of the pictures were made with Ryan's iPhone. At the time of that purchase, I was just beginning to explore the capabilities of my iPhone's camera module and I was eager to see some iPhone images on paper and...

...I was also intriqued by the fact that all of the pictures were made in a single place-not unlike my around the house pictures-the New York Times Building in Times Square, New York. The building's architect / designer, Renzo Piano, wrote the book's Introduction and one of his comments...

"I really appreciate how these photographs contribute to the story of the New York Times Building. And I'm happy that it turns out to be a love story."

...which has caused me to reimagine my around the house pictures as my love story (of sorts) to the home in which I live. And, my recent book search tells me that I need to find a place in my home to keep and protect the ROI on my "investment".

# 5696-97 / around the house•kitchen sink ~ momentary beauty

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

LIGHT. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN A PICTURE CAN BE "about" light. After all, George Eastman said:

"Light makes photography. ... But above all, know light. Know it for all you are worth, and you will know the key to photography."

Without some form of light, making pictures is impossible, or, very difficult at best. However, to my eye and sensibilities, a picture which is all about light, that is, without a referent that adds rhythm and ryhme, is picture without compelling interest.

That written, I am a firm believer in the idea put forth by Brooks Jensen:

"There is no such thing as “good” or “bad” photographic light. There is just light."

Consequently, I am not a devotee of the concept of chasing the light. As long as there is some form of light that allows me to make a picture of what pricks my eye and sensibilities, that's fine by me. However, that written, there are times when light compliments-that is, it adds to the rhythm and rhyme-the structure of my picture because it is an integal part of what pricked my eye and sensibilities, that is fine by me as well.

(embiggenable) • iPhone

#5694-95 / around the house ~ all the world's a sunny day

(embiggenable) - iPhone 11 Pro Max

comparo ~ (embiggenable) - iPhone 12 Pro Max Night Mode

WITHOUT A DOUBT AND WITH ONLY A FEW pictures made with the iPhone 12 Pro Max, I can write that the new sensor(s?)-47% larger sensor and larger pixels (same 12mp) and the new OIS stabilizes the sensor, not the lens-on the 12 is a significant upgrade over the iPhone 11 Pro Max. The upgrade is most apparent with the Night Mode function. An improvement that is well worth the upgrade. However ....

....Apple seems to believe that, when making a picture in low-light, everyone wants night to look like day. See the above comparo diptych where the left-side image is how the Nighy Mode saw it and the right-side image is much closer, after my processing adjustments, to how the scene actually looked. While most users might be impressed-"Wow. That's amazing"-by the night-into-day look, I want my low-light pictures to look like they were made in low light.

That written, it is no big deal to adjust-for me, using Snapseed-an image to more accurately portray the low light look. After all, I adjust, to some degree, just about every image I make with just about every picture making device I use.

Another case in point with the iPhone, low contrast scenes require processing adjustment inasmuch as the HDR function with the iPhone wants every picture to be a "perfect" Ansel Adams like, 10-Zone white>black picture. Even so when there is no almost pure white highlight or deep black/dark shadow tones in the actual scene. Once again, it is no big deal to process the image to get it to be more true to the actual scene.

It is possible that Apple devlopers, re: the camera module, are required to listen to and sing, over and over again, the refrain from Paul Simon's Kodachrome song...

They give us those nice bright colors
They give us those greens of summer
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, oh yeah

Whatever the case, I like the fact that the iPhone camera module gives me a full-tonal range, AKA: "rich", image file-including a RAW file if I want one-which I can adjust / process to achieve a finished picture which closely resembles what my eye saw.

# 5665-69 / around the house•kitchen sink ~ looking forward to getting out of the house

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

AIN'T BEEN DOING MUCH THE PAST WEEK or so other than getting my 2nd Covid vaccine and following the sunlight around the house. Although with temperatures warming and having the 2nd shot, I hope to start getting out more and making some pictures away from the house.

That written, it ain't pretty out there inasmuch as we are close to entering the so-called mud season. Nevertheless, I'll give it a shot, or, maybe 20 shots (or more).

# 5655-60 / miscellania ~ through the looking glass

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

NOT MUCH OF ANY SIGNIFICANCE OCCURRED over the past 10 days (or so). Had an average snow fall, there was some stuff in the kitchen sink and I saw the hint of a rainbow through the windshield of our new car.

Some might think buying a new car is rather significant, but it was more of a deja vu event for us inasmuch as it was the 2nd new car for us over the last 2.5 months. In fact, the new car seemed less significant cuz, from a visual POV, it is the exact same car-make, model, color, etc.-as the car we purchased 2.5 months ago ( and traded in for the "new" car).

However, to be honest, the "new" car is not identical to the "old" car. The "new" car has a turbo engine / drive-train that the "old" car did not have, cuz it was not available at the time of our first "new" car purchase. In any event, the wife has made the sales manager at the car dealship agree to not sell me another new car for at least 6 months. I should be able to survive that embargo.

There was one other development recently wherein I was introduced to the concept that a picture maker could actually have a "favorite" viewfinder. Say what? Really?

When I tried to contemplate the possibility, my brain locked up and posted a warning about a possible meltdown. So, I put the idea out of my head and into my really-stupid-things-people-dream-up bin and went out for a drive in our "new" car - a much better way to spend some of my time.