# 5920-22 / landscape ~ the observing mind v. the thinking mind

January 31, 2022

IN MY LAST ENTRY I USED THE PHRASE, THE “challenge” of documenting the form. I employed the scare quotes to imply that my use of the word challenge should considered with a high degree of skepticism or doubt. That’s cuz seeing and picturing form is, for me, about as challenging as falling off a log inasmuch as seeing form is how I see.

I could not turn off seeing form even if I wanted to do so. Even though, at times, it seems like a curse, I realize that if I were to turn it off, I would not have had a career as a commercial photographer along with sub-careers in graphic design, art direction and as a creative director. Throw in to the mix my pursuit of fine art picture making and I can write that I would not have known what to do with my life.

In any event, back to picture making, re: the word challenge. I live in a forest preserve / state park to which thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of landscape / natural world picture makers flock like bees to honey, flies to sh*t, or any other metaphor one might like to use. Add Fall foliage to the landscape and the influx of picture makers takes on the aspect of a Pavlovian stampede. Be that as it may, you can bet your bottom dollar that saturation-slider-to-the-max, rule of thirds and other bogus advice about picture making is the order of the day.*

I mention the following cuz I find myself with a real picture making challenge when I come upon a wide-open landscape. The challenge? It’s as if my form-seeing visual apparatus has, just like Elvis, left the building. I don’t see it and I don’t feel it. It is, to put it mildly, very disconcerting. It is almost as if I am afraid to make a picture for fear that it will…pause for a gasp and shutter…look like a picture made by the stampeding masses.

I would consider counseling to get over my fear except for the fact that, if I get over my fear, I would probably start making pictures that look like, well, I don’t want them to look like. I have given thought to bringing along a flask of bourbon or scotch to drink in order to overcome my inhibitions, but the outcome would probably be no better than the counseling outcome and that would just be a waste of some good bourbon or scotch.

But seriously folks, the root picture making problem for me in such circumstances-to include making a picture of a referent I actually care about-is that, if I don’t see “it“ then I can’t feel “it”, and then I have to think about “it”. And, inasmuch as I have studiously, throughout my entire picture making life, avoided thinking about anything when making a picture, the very thought of thinking would just about end it for me.

In a nutshell, what I am writing about here is the difference between the observing mind-which just watches and is simply aware-and the thinking mind which judges, analyzes, reasons, and attempts to make sense out of things. And, my thinking mind tells me that, in pursuit of working in a visual medium, it makes sense to be an observer rather than a thinker.

*I have no problem with this kind of picture making. It’s just not my thing. If it floats your boat, have at it.

PS I have managed over the years to make some pictures of the landscape which avoid the genre’s typical cliches. So far, it has not killed me.

# 5917-19 / kitchen life • little things ~ it is not what you see, it is how you see it

January 30, 2022

“Why do most great pictures look uncontrived? …if the goal of art is to be reached: only pictures that look as if they had been easily made can convincingly suggest that beauty is commonplace.” – Robert Adams

“The everyday, or the commonplace, is the most basic and the richest artistic category. Although it seems familiar, it is always surprising and new. But at the same time, there is an openness that permits people to recognize what is there in the picture, because they have already seen something like it somewhere. So the everyday is a space in which meanings accumulate, but it's the pictorial realization that carries the meanings into the realm of the pleasurable.” Jeff Wall

I have always thought that the best pictures are those that look like the picture maker saw something and then made a picture of what he/she saw with the intent of showing us what he/she saw. No flashy technique or slathering of art sauce in either the the making of or the post processing thereof cuz the picture maker is confident enough, re: his/her vision, to leave well enough alone. Consequently, I am very comfortable with Adams’ proscription other than…

….his idea that “beauty is commonplace”.

My feelings about the commonplace is much more aligned with Jeff Wall’s idea that; a) the commonplace, is the most basic and the richest artistic category, and b) it's the pictorial realization that carries the meanings into the realm of the pleasurable.

In my pursuit of making-the act of pictorial realization-objects, aka: photos in one form of print or another, that fall into the realm of the pleasurable, aka: interesting to look at / view, I am drawn to the commonplace for its wealth of picture making possibilities. I am drawn to it, not because the commonplace is intrinsically beautiful-quite the contrary, it is most often chaotic and unremarkable in and of itself-but rather for “challenge” of documenting the form, without any sublimation of the literal referent’s surface detail, that underlies the apparent chaos.

To be certain, I am not in the business of making pictures which suggest that beauty is commonplace. On the other hand, what my pictures might suggest (for those looking for suggestions) is that the fodder for making a beautiful object, a photo print in and of itself independent of what is litteraly depicted, is everywhere to be seen in the everyday / commonplace world around us.

# 5914-16 / around the house • landscape • places ~ craft vs technique...

January 26, 2022

all pictures made within the last 24 hours

1932 Olympic Arena* / ***Ice Rink*** ~ (embiggenable)

…OR IS IT CRAFT + TECHNIQUE?

My first thought is that the idea of craft-a skill of making things by hand-has little to do with the practice of making pictures. Exception - making prints by some archaic print making process. If one were to press the subject one could venture the opinion that one uses one’s hands in the making of prints. But, I would counter that with the fact that the use of hands in making pictures is limited that of pressing buttons or keys on a keyboard.

That written, the use of one’s hands/fingers on buttons or keyboards is guided by the use of one’s brain. In the best of cases, the use of one’s brain is engaged in the pursuit of employing the techniques needed to express one’s vision. Which, might lead one to be considered to be a very good technician (a person skilled in the technique of an art or craft) as opposed to a very good craftsperson, re: in the making of pictures.

In any event, I do not give a damn one way or the other, re: what label-craftsman or technician-is slapped on me and my picture making as long as the label includes the descriptor picture maker.

All of the above written, my hands and/or fingers are guided by my brain during the picture making process-most notably during image file processing-in pursuit of my desire / intent to create a printed pictures which are an accurate representation of whatever was in front of my eyes and my camera. A picture making pursuit most often labeled as straight photography.

That is why, on the last page of my photo books or at the end of an Artist Statement for an exhibit, I always include this disclaimer:

No filters or special effects were employed in the making of these pictures. All pictures were made with a (device name here). The resulting image files were processed in an image processing software for minor color balance, contrast, brightness, highlight and shadow adjustments / corrections. All adjustments / corrections were performed in order to insure that the finished prints are an accurate representation-as much as the tools of the medium allow-of that which was in front of my eyes and camera.

*the ‘32 ice rink is just down the hall from the ‘80 Olympic Arena, aka: the MIracle On Ice Arena.

# 5913 / around the house

January 25, 2022

# 5911-12 / around the house • kitchen life ~ it's not important for them to understand, it's only important for me to understand*

January 24, 2022

Every artist I suppose has a sense of what they think has been the importance of their work. But to ask them to define it is not really a fair question. My real answer would be, the answer is on the wall. ~ Paul Strand

I HAVE NEVER THOUGHT THAT MY PICTURES HAVE ANY IMPORTANCE. A statement to which many might respond, “That’s a good thing cuz your pictures are not important at all.”

Strand’s statement resonates with me. Although, perhaps not in the way Strand intended for this statement to be understood. Not knowing the context in which the statement was made, I am uncertain about his use of the word importance inasmuch as I am uncertain about the manner in which he meant it to be understood…did Strand mean his real answer be understood in the context of the academic art world? the photography world? the culture at large? historically? his reputation as an artist?

My (very educated) guess would be that his statement was instigated by a question about his pioneering activities, as evidenced by his pictures on the walls of many galleries and art institutions, in the movement to shift from the soft-focus Pictorialist aesthetic to the straight approach and graphic power of an emerging modernism. Considered in that context, his was work quite important.

That written, the idea that the answer is on the wall resonates with me in the context of my being asked, “What are your pictures about?” Which, btw, I consider to be fair question. My true answer to that question should be, “The answer is on the wall.” However, I just can not go there cuz to do so I am certain that I would be perceived as an arrogant butthead. So, my response is to mutter a few words about content + form and then talk about the weather.

*an adaptation of a Gen. George Patton quote from the movie, Patton. Patton was a forcefull speaker and given to uttering some outlandish and vulgar words. When told by an aid that “Sometimes the men don’t know when you’re acting.” Patton response was, “it’s not important for them to know. It’s only important for me to know.”

# 5909-10 / kitchen life • photos by others ~ hot time in the old town (house) tonight

January 21, 2022

THERE ARE THOSE WHO BELIEVE A PICTURE CAN TELL A STORY. I am not one of those people.

Case in point, the picture of Hugo on his butt during a hockey game. The caption, aka: words, tell us that it is Hugo Hobson, that he is scoring his team’s 2ng goal of the game, and he did so Tuesday in Lake Placid. Without words, all of that information is unknowable just by viewing the picture.

Case in point #2, the picture of stuff on my kitchen island counter with sink counter and window in the background. About the only thing one might deduce from the picture is that I must read some blogs, that the corkscrew implies that I might drink wine, and that light is streaming in the window. What a viewer would never know without words is that I am having coffee and light breakfast fare, waiting for the kitchen to warm up from the fire I have just started (in the fireplace).

I have started a fire cuz it’’s -11F outside and we have been without a furnace for two-and-a-half weeks. A viewer would also not know that I am awaiting the arrival of the heat pump distributor to inspect the installation of our whole-house cooling and heating heat system, and then fire the sucker up so we get some heat.

One other unknowables without words is that the, at times, the wife gets gently annoyed by the fact that I refuse to discard dead flowers-or let her discard them-cuz I like the way they look and I just might make a picture of them.

# 5906-08 / around the house • kitchen sink • landscape ~ as easy as waking up and falling out of bed

January 19, 2022

CREATIVITY and IMAGINATION ARE 2 WORDS /CONCEPTS WHICH ARE bandied about in discussions of the making of pictures. They are often used interchangeably, as in “use your imagination more” and/or “try to be more creative”. Hell, I can not count the times I have heard, re: my pictures, “your choice of subject matter is very creative” or “I would never have imagined that as a subject for picture making”.

Not that I don’t appreciate the comments-cuz I do-but those comments leave me ever so slightly perplexed cuz I do not associate the idea of creativity or imagination with the act of my picture making. Written sImply, when I make a picture I am just picturing what I see and do so in the manner in which I see. Saying that I am being creative or using my imagination while making pictures is like saying that I am being creative and using my imagination when I put put one foot in front of the other while walking down the street.

As a result of how I make pictures, specifically pictures that are intended to be art, I believe that there are 3 very suspicious / questionable bits of picture making-in the pursuit of finding your vision-advice: 1.) find a subject / referent you are very interested in / passionate about and make lots of pictures thereof, and, 2.) be as creative / imaginative as you can be, and, 3.) don’t be afraid to break the rules.

Re: questionable advice #1: following this dictate the chances are very good that, unless you are passionate about a very obscure and/or little known object of affection, you’ll be making pictures of a subject a lot other picture makers are picturing. Re: #2: creativity and imagination pursued for their own sake will head you straight down the road of cliche picture making. Re: #3: forget breaking the rules and concentrate on making your own rules.

iMo, the only advice worth a damn-employed in finding your own unique artistic vision-is to make lots and lots of pictures of any thing and every thing (no thinking allowed) that catches your eye and and pricks your sensibilities, using a single camera, one lens (or 2, a semi-wide and semi tele). Make small (cheap) prints and look at them. Following this activity for, say, 1/2 a year, I would be surprised if ,when you lay out the pictures, you don’t find some that; 1) capture the look and feel of what you saw, and, 2) stick together as a unified body of pictures.

The purpose of this activity is to discover and, hopefully, begin to understand how you actually see the world. That is, not in a “creative” or “imaginative” sense, but, rather, how you literally see the world using your visual apparatus / senses, just like you do when you open your eyes in the morning.

# 5905 / the new snapshot • people • discursive promiscuity ~ sticking together

January 15, 2022

***the authentic red couch*** / ***Andy and me*** ~ (embiggenable)

ON THE LAST ENTRY THOMAS RINK LEFT A COMMENT which read, in part:

I think the hard part is not to decide which pictures are strong-like you said, one knows that while making the picture-but to decide which pictures to incorporate into a body of work…And these decisions are a time consuming process which cannot be sped up imho. One just has to live with the series of pictures for a while and hopefully decisions will reveal themselves.

I agree with Thomas for the most part but with one minor quibble / caveat. He writes that the editing process “cannot be sped up”. While that statement is true enough, I would write that speed has its place in editing pictures.

In my case, in a folder (on my computer) I assemble a number of pictures-35-40-which are suitable for inclusion in a given body of work. Then I view them in ADOBE BRIDGE as a group, a step which very quickly reveals a few pictures that do not quite cut the mustard. The next step is to open the remaining pictures and stack then one behind the other on my screen and, with my cursor hovering over the red X button the picture window, I click through them in fairly rapid fashion looking for quick first impressions which reveal the strongest evidence of being true to my vision.

iMo, the thing that makes this speed reading work is that there is very little, if any, thought involved in the process. Exactly, re: little thought wise, in the same manner I use when making my pictures. Quid est demonstratum, it’s about seeing, not thinking.

In any event, I did not invite you here today to write about editing pictures. I highlighted Thomas’ comment for the first sentence which stated, “to decide which pictures to incorporate into a body of work“…

Conventional photo wisdom dictates that a body of work should be unified by a repeating referent presented in a consistent picture making manner. In my particular case, such bodies of work are presented on my WORK page-picture windows, single women, decay, life without the APA, kitchen sink, et al. I have made photo books for all of my various bodies of work. Deciding which pictures -pre-final selection-to incorporate in each of these bodies of work, culling them from picture library, is a no-brainer.

However….

….then we come to my “real” true-to-my-vision body of work, discursive promiscuity. That is to write that I digress from subject to subject (discursive) in a very undiscriminating or unselective approach (promiscuity). The simple fact is that my personal (not commercial) picture making life has been spent looking at the any and all referents to be found in the world for their potential to be made into a picture. That is, as Garry Winogrand said:

“I photograph to find out what something will look like photographed.”

So, the question for me becomes, does a collection of pictures of wildly diverse referents qualify as a body of work. (if William Eggleston is an example, the answer is “yes”. Emphatically so). iMo-I and a number of gallery directors, who upon viewing my early ad hoc portfolios-comprised of a variety of referents (cuz I did not, at that time, have enough pictures of similar referents to create separate bodies of work) perceive that my pictures are unified by my attention to form and my singular manner of making pictures. That manner being; one format (square), one lens (or primarily so-mostly made with a moderate wide angle lens), clean “real-world” color and the ever-present black border and vignette. And, of course, my rejection of le grand geste, picture making wise, and my embrace of the commonplace.

The idea that my pictures of wildly divergent referents hold together as a body of work was emphatically reinforced over the past week when I was thinking about the topic of editing. That drove to pull out 3 of my photo books that were not thematic referent oriented; 2019 ~ the year in review, Marking Time ~ Coronavirus Comes to Town, and, appropriately enough, Discursive Promiscuity ~ One Year With the IPhone. Books that I had not picked up and viewed over the past year or so. And therein is a point in favor of Thomas’ idea of “live with the series of pictures for a while and hopefully decisions will reveal themselves.” …

…After not viewing these books and the pictures therein for a while, the decision to make these books revealed itself to be a very good decision. That’s cuz I was very impressed with how well the pictures in each book hung together as a very unified bodies of work.

FYI, the screenshot in this entry is the start of putting together and then editing a collection of pictures for Discursive Promiscuity ~ Volume II.