# 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.

# 5692-93 / kitchen sink•flora ~ out with the old, in with the new

(embiggenable) • iPhone (11 Pro Max)

(embiggenable) • iPhone (12 Pro Max)

(embiggenable) • iPhone (12 Pro Max)

GOT A SURPRISING TEXT FROM THE WIFE which read "I need a new phone." It was only slightly more surprising than her text from 4 months ago ... "Let's get that new car you've been talking about." Both texts were a break with her long-held position on both items which is was to hold on to both then-owned items until they broke. So, being the dutiful husband that I am, her text wish was my command.

Off I went to the phone store. After obtaining the object of the wife's desire-an iPhone 12 Mini-I explored the possibility of my desire to acquire the new iPhone 12 Pro Max. That desire was driven solely by the introduction of a new/bigger sensor(s?) (physical size not more mp). An improvement that moves the iPhone camera module closer to being a "real" camera...or maybe even a "serious" camera.

In any event, the possiibility of acquiring the 12 Pro Max advanced into the category of actually acquiring the 12 Pro Max. As a result of my visit to the phone store, not only did the wife and I have our phone desires satiated, but so did my good friend, who accompanied me to the phone store.

While my friend did not seem to harbor any desire for a new phone, as I was faced with making a decsion, re: to trade in my 11 Pro Max or pay off the balance of payments on it and keep it, he piped up with the idea that he could pay off the balance and then he could could keep my "old" but, nevertheless, new-to-him phone. Sounded good to me, so....

....everybody seems to be-whatever their individual phone desires-iPhone happy.

# 5687-91 / constructed pictures ~ illustrations

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

(embiggenable)

BACK IN MY PICTURE MAKING WORKING LIFE, JUST FOR THE HELL OF IT, I created a portfolio of photo illustrations. Much to my surprise, clients liked the work and quite a few assignments followed.

Some times a picture maker just wants to have fun.

# 5682-86 / miscellania ~ an assortment of "serious" cameras

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) KODAK Tower / 8x10 view camera

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) iPhone

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) µ4/3

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) Nikon F3

a serious camera? ~ (embiggenable) Polaroid SX-70

IF YOU WANT TO GET ME ALL WORKED UP, just point me to a link on the interweb which contains the phrase "serious camera". Especially so if it is used in a sentence along the lines of the iPhone is not a serious camera".

That written, do not be misled into thinking that this entry is made in defense of the iPhone cuz it is not. Rather, it is about the rather dumb idea that there is such a thing as a "serious camera".

The idea of denigrating certain types of cameras (and the people who use them) got a significant boost with the introduction of the first KODAK. "Serious" picture makers of that era considered the KODAK to be nothing more than a "snap-er's" device which according to a "serious" camera maker's manual stated that "...the photographer whose knowledge has been confined to pressing the button can never hope to make good pictures."

Adding to that thought, Stiegltz opined, "... thanks to the efforts of these persons [the] hand camera and bad work become synonymous." FYI, the "these people" Stieglitz was referring to were "...every Tom, Dick and Harry...[who] without trouble, learn how to get something or other on a sensitive plate." Steichen, on the other had, referred to them as "ye jabbering button-pushers".

In my picture making career, I experienced the not-a-serious-camera prejudice back in the mid-60s when I was handed a Graflex Crown Graphic as the camera for use by a US Army photographer. This dispite the fact that I was stationed in Japan, a country awash in 35mm SLRs. But, of course, those were not "serious cameras". FYI, my ongoing whining and caterwauling eventually led to the acquisition of not 1, but 2, Nikon Fs for my picture making use.

In any event, dispite the fact that the It's-not-a-serious-camera BS willnever die and as you may have deduced, in my picture making world, there are no "serious cameras". There are only good pictures ("serious" pictures?), no matter the picture making device used to make them.

ADDENDUM OK,OK. I wrote that this entry was not conceived as a defense of the iPhone. I still stand by that statement but I would be remiss to not provide a link to the iPhone Photography Awards (2020). Lots of "serious" picture makers making "serious" pictures with a "serious" camera. Be sure to check out each category (at the bottom of the page).

# 5676-81 / an assortment ~ format and size

panoramic ~ (embiggenable) / µ4/3 / multiple blended images frames

blossom ~ (embiggenable) / scanner made

tangle ~ (embiggenable) / full frame•µ4/3

market stall ~ (embiggenable) / Polaroid Spectra

kitchen counter ~ (embiggenable) / fullframe•iPhone

(embiggenable) / full frame•µ4/3 horizontal

(embiggenable) / full frame•µ4/3 horizontal

THERE HAS BEEN A BIT OF DISCUSSION ON T.O.P., RE: format-primarily pano and square-and print size-too big? too small? Just right?.

re: format: Quite obviously I am primarily, but not exclusively, a square format picture maker when making "personal" / "fine art" work. Not cuz I think square is the perfect / ideal format ratio, but cuz, for my eye and sensibilities, I find it to be visually pleasing. Or, in other words, I just like the way my pictures look when printed square.

It should be noted that I do not "see" square. I "see" relaltionships of line, shape, tonal values (light) and color, aka: visual elements which makeup a picture's form. When my eye and sensibilities are pricked by a striking or artistic grouping, aka: tableux, I organize it within the boundary of a square frame. Added by the fact that I have been making pictures with devices that allow for square masking on the viewing screen.

That written, I firmly believe that, no matter the format imposed by any picture making device, I can successfully organize visual elements to work together well within the constraints of that format. I also believe that to be true of any picture maker who is sensitive to "seeing" (and "feeling") interesting / visually appealing form. Consequently, I appreciate pictures, presented in any format, that exhibit interesting form.

All of that written, re: print size: since my eye and sensibilities are attuned to form, the perfect print size for me is one that, relative to the space in which it is exhibited, allows me to see the entire visual field of the print. That is to write, a space that "pushes" me neither too close to nor too far from a print so that I cannot see (and feel) its form. To wit, really big prints need realy big exhibition space. Small prints not so much.

That written, small prints (relative to exhibit space / viewing distance) do encourage a sense of intimacy and preciousness in the viewing thereof. Conversely, big prints better convey a sense of grandeur and visual impact. A skilled picture maker who knows what he is trying to say / convey with his/her pictures will choose his/her print size wisely.

FYI, my ideal image size for my pictures is in the 10x10 - 24x24 inch size printed on 12x12 - 34x34 inch paper or mounted on 12x12 - 34x34 inch matte board.

# 5671-75 / diptychs•triptychs ~ at times 2 can be better than 1

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • m4/3

(embiggenable) • Polaroid SX-70 / m4/3

THERE WAS A TIME IN MY PICTURE MAKING LIFE when I was given to making diptychs and the occasional triptych. That written, over time I made quite a number of both and, stupid me, I never organized them into a single folder / body of work.

One thing I did do, re: diptychs, was to create and organize an exhibit, Photographs in Conversation. In order to create the diptychs, I contacted a few picture makers (from my blog followers) from around the world and invited them to participate in the project.

That participation consisted of my sending one of my pictures-different pictures for each participant-and asking them to send back one of their pictures which created a "conversation" with my picture. Each participant was also requested to send me one of their pictures to which I would respond with a "conversation" appropriate picture. A good time was had by all.

I still continue to made diptychs/triptychs. The iPhone-made diptychs in this entry are recent examples. Some of the other examples date back 25 years or more. That written, it's time to get my act together and organize and edit the existing diptcyh/triptych work.