# 6166-70 / people . Common places ~ on the road agAin

July 21, 2022

FYI, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE MY LAPTOP WITH ME, I am creating this entry on my iPad using the Squarespace app. Trying to see if I can go all mobile device and be happy with the results. Even the images files were processed on the iPad (Snapseed).

Best as I can tell, the contrarian in me is instigating me to do this “experiment” just so I am able to demonstrate to the commontaria ignoramicus that it is possible-in fact, if you know what you are doing, deceptively easy-to make good photographs with the simple-ist of gear and processing tools.

Of course, the preceding statement is dependent upon one’s understanding of what constitutes a good photograph. An understanding of “good” which most of the ignoramicus class confuse with things like max DR, max resolution, max color depth, max sensor size, the best glass, et al, as opposed to the tool that produces the best picture making results - the tool that, as Sir Ansel opined, is 12 inches behind the camera. I.E., the brain (+soul/heart) in which resides a picture maker’s vision.

To be certain, I would never suggest that anyone should chuck all the fancy stuff out the car at at 100 mph. However, I might suggest to someone just starting down the picture making trail that, as a variation on the OCOY practice, he/she use a mobile phone based “camera” and a simple mobile device based processing app as their tools for a year cuz…

…if one can not make a good picture with those simple tools, all the of “best” gear and processing tools will not get ya there.

# 6163-65 / commmon place • common things • kitchen sink ~ commentoria ignoramicus

July 19, 2022

AS IS TO BE EXPECTED, RECENT TOP POSTS MENTIONING THE IPHONE, as a picture making device, has instigated the regular chorus of “(merely) adequate” / not adequate / deficient / note-taking only,” et al comments. iMo, these commentoria ignoramicus are completely unqualified to have an opinion worth considering-on the topic of iPhone picture making quality-inasmuch as it seems, by their own admission, that have not used the device enough to discover and understand its capabilities.

In fact, I believe that the real problem is that these know-nothings have little or no idea what makes a good photograph good. They are all hung-up on the technical aspects of photography that can be seen / deciphered on a photographic print, especially those prints made with the use of their beloved camera brand. That fact is what caused Magnum photographer Bruce Davidson to say”

“I am not interested in showing my work to photographers anymore, but to people outside the photoclique.”

At exhibitions of my work, I can recognize a know-nothing from a mile away. He/she will be adorned with an “impressive”-looking DSLR, often sporting a large lens. Or, alternately, he/she will be looking at my prints with their nose within 6 inches of the prints. If one or both of these markers is missing, the other give away comes when they approach me and the first thing out of the mouth is, “What camera do you use?”

When mounting a defense for his/her choice and use of a particular picture making device, it is most often suggested-you may have to read between the lines-that he/she is a “perfection-ist”. To which I would respond-but never have because I am such a sensitive and polite kinda guy-”No you’re not. What you are is constipated tight ass and you might be better qualified to pursue, as a hobby, certified chartered accountancy.”

Any doubts about how I feel on the subject?

# 6153 / commonplaces ~ the eye traffics in feelings

July 12, 2022

“Creativity is seeing what others see and thinking seeing what no one else has ever thought seen.” ~ Albert Einstein

IN MY LAST ENTRY I PRESENTED A QUOTE FROM MR. EINSTEIN which I adapted-striking out his words and inserting my own-to make his thought more applicable to the making of photographs. I did so cuz Einstein trafficked in thinking, albeit very imaginative thinking (according to him, imagination is more important than knowledge), whereas, according to Walker Evans…

“The eye traffics in feelings, not thoughts.” ~ Walker Evans

I believe, wholeheartedly, that thinking in situ while picturing is antithetical to the pursuit of creative picture making. Rather, relying upon an instinctive feeling-knowledge guided by experience and an understanding of how you see the world-about what to picture and how to picture it-is a much more productive manner in which to foster creative seeing.

And seeing is what picture making is all about cuz photography is a visual art form. iMo, the best photographs are those that excite the eye-the visual senses-not the intellect (aka: the feeling destroying search for meaning). Therefore, in the pursuit of making pictures which excite the eye (creative pictures), a picture maker’s focus should be, in fact, must be, be directed toward the seeing and feeling of the visual characteristics of what is in front of his/her eye and camera. Then intuitively sensing / feeling how those visual elements, when isolated (framing) and arranged (POV)-as determined by when they just feel “right” as seen on a picturing device’s viewing screen-will work when spread across the 2D field of a photographic print.

While the preceding paragraph might seem to be a bit on the heavy side, prescription wise, in fact, to the practiced and knowledgeable eye, the awareness and implementation of such prescription is nearly instantaneous and intuitive-no thinking required-at the moment of picture making.

All of the above written, for me and as it applies my picture making, creativity springs from my understanding of how I see the world (literally, my vision) and how that vision directs my picture making (figurative) vision. That knowledge-and my trust, re: what pricks my eye and sensibilities, thereof-frees me from having to think about what to picture-the world is my oyster-and how to picture it-quite simply, as I see it. Consequently, I am able, picture making wise, to free associate (an aid in gaining access to the unconscious processes of creativity) in response to what I see.

# 6146-47 / common places • kitchen sink ~ there is plenty left to do

July 9, 2022

***camera module output*** ~ (embiggenable)

I AM FOLLOWING, WITH MORE THAN A MODICUM OF INTEREST, Mike Johnston’s new-found embrace of the “modern miracle” known as the iPhone camera module. After years of expressing his thoughts-based upon the use of vastly outdated iPhone camera modules-re: iPhone / smartphone picture making capabilities, he has now arrived in the future with his acquisition of a new iPhone 13 Pro. Whereupon he is now waxing, if not poetically, wondrously about the the iPhone’s capabilities, most notably the Night Mode, declaring it to be…gasp….superior in that regard to a “real” camera. In addition to Mike’s enthusiastic response to the iPhone’s picture making capabilities, the TOP comment-ariat are chiming in with endorsements as well.

All well and good, but only up to a point. That point being the application of George Eastman’s early marketing slogan of, “You push the button, we do the rest” wherein it is being suggested that after you push the “button” on an iPhone, the camera module’s AI does the rest. To which I respond, “Bull shit.”

To be perfectly clear, I have been an iPhone picture maker, almost exclusively, for the past 3+ years and I would be amongst the last to deny that the iPhone picture making AI handles a remarkable number of “difficult” picture making scenarios very well. However…

iMo, based upon my expansive use of the iPhone camera module, I can write that the picture making AI has one significant flaw-at least for those seeking to capture a realistic rendition of the light found in wide range of picturing situations-that being that the AI software developers seem to think that all the world’s a kodachrome-like sunny day complete with nice bright colors. A “flaw” that I am quite certain makes the average non-”enthusiast” picture maker very happy. Me, not to so much.

That written, the iPhone picture making AI does not always get it perfectly right. Close, maybe, but not perfect. I find that, to get the results I am am seeking, I do as much processing work-corrections and adjustments-on an iPhone picture file as I have done in the past on a “real” camera picture file. Although, it can be written that much of that works is less “extreme” on iPhone files than on “real” camera files. In that regard, and Mike has it right, go can go very “deep” in making adjustments / corrections with iPhone files, even with jpegs. The files are remarkably rich in information.

The diptych in this entry is a good example of my point. The file from the iPhone displays a result typical of that made on an overcast day-with any picture making device-wherein a prominent referent in the pictutre is in the shaded area of the scene. It takes more than a simple adjustment of the color balance slider to balance the color balance for the both the shaded area and the non-shaded area in the scene. (FYI, I got the color balance “right” by making color adjustments in LAB color space. I never touched the color balance adjustment slider.) In addition, global and selective area contrast and brightness adjustments were made. And, is almost always the case with iPhone files, a bit of color saturation adjustments were applied, both globally and on selective colors.

All of the above written, I just wanted to bring a bit of reality to the wonders of the iPhone picture making capabilities. Those capabilities are impressive but no one should think that the end of image file processing days are over. After you push the “button” there is plenty of the rest for you do.

# 6144 / the new snapshot ~ wherein I go all gearhead

June 30, 2022

THERE ARE QUITE A FEW THINGS I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. Picture making wise, I simply do not understand the obsessive fascination with gear. Or, worse yet, the idea that creativity in picture making is dependent on technique + gear. FYI, I will have more to write, re: creativity, coming up.

That written, for the purpose of this entry my lack of understanding is tied to things automotive. Specifically, why would anyone drive a boring-to-drive car? That is, a thing that is more like an appliance than a machine that gives fun and pleasure to the act of getting from point A to point B.

My wife and I have 3 cars, all of which are considered to be so-called driver's cars. That is, a car that has responsive steering feel, linear brake feel, a natural sense of balance to its handling, a well resolved, well damped ride, it must sound good, it must have good clean throttle response, a decent gear change and seats whose springing is in sync with that of the chassis. Throw in above-average horsepower + torque with a slightly aggressive horsepower-to-weight ratio and you have a recipe for a very satisfying driving experience. Especially so here where we live with its abundance of 2-lane, over hill and dale, twisty bits.

The Abarth pictured above has all the ingredients of a pocket-rocket and more. It is a full-blooded descendant of Abarth / Italian racing machismo. 130mph+ top end, lowered, track inspired suspension, unassisted rack and pinion steering, tuned, free-flow exhaust (sweet Italian-bred howl), brembo brakes. Even the wife loves it. She calls it “very mechanical”. Hell, even Michael Schumacher-7x Formula One Champion-has one as his daily driver.

So, for me, it is, go fast, be safe, and have fun. BTW, part of the fun is bringing my good friend along and taking him right up to the edge of peeing his pants.

PS I apologize for going all gearhead, albeit automotive style. It will be back to our regularly schedule programming tomorrow.

# 6123-31 / common places (civilized ku) ~ thinkin' 'bout the good ol' days

June 21, 2022

WOKE THIS MORNING TO A GREY DAY. IN AN EFFORT TO brighten up the day, I decided to get out and about, use the sky as a blank slate and make some pictures. Throw in some neutral grey road surfaces and, iMo, you have got the stage set for pictures in which colors come to the fore.

In a perfect picture making world, I would have grabbed my dad’s Kodak Brownie Hawkeye camera out of the closet, went down to the drugstore, bought a roll of color negative film, then taken a stroll around the neighborhood looking for something to prick my eye and sensibilities. Instead, I picked up my iPhone and headed out with FRANK BREUER on my mind.

# 6112-13 / kitchen life • common places ~ malarkey on a shingle

June 16, 2022

*finished (L.)* / ***original (R.)*** ~ (embiggenable)

(embiggenable) ~ full frame / Portrait mode

RE: THE DEATH OF THE SMALL SENSOR CAMERA. I am not one to profess that I know what the future will bring. However, I will not let that stop me from offering a few thoughts on the speculative idea that small sensor cameras are on the way out.

First, let’s define “small”….best I can tell, it the current camera market, it seems that “small” is any sensor smaller than a full-frame-24mmx36mm-sensor. And, for some reason, camera makers seem to have decided that, surprise, surprise, bigger is better. If I put on my cynical hat, I would write that they think that the more money they can charge for a camera+lenses the better.

That written, the idea that small-sensor cameras are in a death spiral is based on the notion that, a huge majority of avid amateur picture makers will all want a full-frame sensor camera. A notion that I believe to be nonsense. cuz…

a) most full-frame cameras+lens are very expensive but, even if the prices drop over time…

b) …most picture makers, even avid amateurs, do not want to lug around large, heavy gear.

c) most avid amateurs who use “small”-format sensor cameras have an investment in lenses for their systems. Moving to full-frame sensor cameras means the significant added expense of acquiring new lens.

d) in addition to the expense of full-frame sensor cameras+lenses, there is, for many, the added expense of upgrading the computer in order to handle and store the larger file sizes, and, perhaps most significantly……

e) not all picture makers, including most avid amateurs, have the desire or the need to engage in the “my dick is bigger than your dick” competition.

All of that written, let me add my ultimate reason for why I do not give a damn about any sensor size. Simply out, I do not care one iota how or what gear was used to make a picture. I only care about the picture itself. And, great pictures can be made with just about any camera / picture making device you would care to mention.

FYI, the diptych in this entry offers a peek at the man behind the curtain. That is, the work I often put into the processing of my pictures. In the case of this picture, I probably-I did not keep track-employed more than 20 separate processing steps-most local as opposed to global-to achieve the final result.

# 6106-08 / roadside attractions • the new snapshot ~ a question

June 10, 2022

“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.” ~ Garry Winogrand

IN A NUTSHELL, WINOGRAND’S QUOTE IS A PRETTY EXCELLENT, SIMPLY-STATED description of straight photography.

I have always subscribed to making straight pictures and consider myself, re; my landscape photography, to be a New Topographic photographer, a moniker which emerged from the exhibition (the 2nd most—cited photography exhibition in history), New Topographics: Photographs of a Man-Altered Landscape-at the George Eastman House in 1975. That exhibition introduced landscape pictures-primarily of the American West-that were stripped of any artistic frills and reduced to an essentially topographic state, conveying substantial amounts of visual information but eschewing entirely the aspects of beauty, emotion and opinion. Pictures that exhibited a cool detachmrnt / unsentimental manner of picture making.

To this day, the influence of that exhibition and the picture making M.O. that it spawned still commands a formitable following in the straight photography world. And, it is rather ironic that the pictures in the exhibition, which critics / academics described as having “an alleged absence of style”, became the forerunners of an actual style that has been called “…Arguably the last traditionally photographic style”.

FYI, 10 photographer’s prints-10 prints from each-were presented in the exhibit. The photographers were: Robert Adams, Lewis Baltz, Bernd and Hilla Becher, Joe Deal, Frank Gohlke, Nicholas Nixon, John Schott, Stephen Shore, and Henry Wessel. With the exception of Stephen Shore, all the photographers worked in BW.

In any event, I mentioned all of the above cuz I have given some thought to the question, has straight photography, in particular the New Topographics genre, reached a dead end? Or, perhaps, is it just aimlessly driving around in circles in a cul-de-sac? Which is not to write that there is not some very good work being created. However, it does seem that it has fallen out of favor in the Fine Art gallery world.

Perhaps a related question-how long is it possible maintain a cool unsentimental detachment?-is also appropriate.

Any thoughts?