civilized ku # 3541-43 (kitchen sink / people / still life) ~ any thing and every thing

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

AS OF TODAY, A ROUGH COUNT OF the number of pictures I have made over the last 16-17 years is 24,873. Of that number, approximately 15,542 are iPhone pictures (most made over the last 3 years), 7,831 were made with "real" cameras and 1,500 (a very conservative estimate) are Polaroid pictures.

While a relatively small number of those pictures have been culled from the herd and organized in separate body-of-work folders-see my WORK page on this site for examples of some, but not all categories-I am hopelessly deficient in my culling activities. And, to be honest, how I am going to be able to get this situation under some sort of control is beyond my reckoning at this point.

Most of my separate body of work categories-categories titled by theme or picture making intent-have been, or are able to be, edited down to a maximum of 60-80 pictures. Although, I do continue to make pictures for each of those bodies of work, so there is the need for constant updating. It could be written with reasonable assurance that most of the bodies of work on my WORK page could edited and updated with a significant number of new pictures, AKA; out with some of the old, in with some of the new.

That written, the real back breaker problem in editing my total body of work is creating and editing a single body of work titled DISCURSIVE PROMISCUITY. A title which, to be precise, quite accurately encompasses all of my picture making activity....

discursive ~ digressing from subject to subject.
promiscuity ~ 1. demonstrating or implying an undiscriminating or unselective approach,
2. consisting of a wide range of different things.

.... consequently, a body of work titled DISCURSIVE PROMISCUITY would, indeed, be a very large body of work. If I were to want to put the work in book form, it would probably, guess wise, have to be a 20 volume (minimum?) set with 50 pictures per book. And, I must admit, writing about doing it that way seems to make the getting there less intimidating.

If you might be wondering how a large collection of pictures of anything and everything might hang together as a cohesive body of work, that's the subject of my next entry.

the new snapshot # 255 / SX-70 # 9-10 ~ a full plate

Notre Dame football ~ my Saturday obsession (embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • SX-70 camera / Time Zero film

(embiggenable) • SX-70 camera / Time Zero film

I COULD SPEND THE NEXT MONTH POSTING Polaroids ... but I won't. Instead, I have added a REAL POLAROIDS gallery to my WORK page wherein I have uploaded some not previously posted Polaroids and will continue to upload more Polaroids as I edit my way through the thousands (literally) of Polaroids I have.

As a result of my recent dive into my vast Polaroid collection of prints, it has struck me as somewhat incredible that I never done a serious edit of those pictures. Consequently, in a significant omission to my POD photobooks library, there is not a single book-there probably should be at least 3-of Polaroid pictures. A fact which makes me feel somewhat akin to an idiot.

The scary / intimidating thing about this situation is that it's gonna take some serious time and effort to right that ship. Like I need that now what with an upcoming heart proceedure (ablation), the holiday season, Hugo's high school hockey season and, not to mention, my desire to keep the iPhone (smartphone) Photography Gallery project moving forward.

The first thought which comes to mind is .... anyone want to volunter for the presitgious position of intern?

SX-70 # 8 ~ wink, wink

Marlene’s coffin ~ (embiggenable) • SX-70 Polaroid camera / Time Zero film

I AM NOT A FAN OF HOW-I-MADE-THIS-PICTURE stories. My feeling on the topic can were summed up quite nicely by Bill Jay:

...photographers who carry 60 pounds of equipment up a hill to photograph a view are not suffering enough, although their whining causes enough suffering among their listeners. No, if they really expect us to respect their search for enlightenment and artistic expression, in [the] future they will drag the equipment up the hill by their genitals and take the view with a tripod leg stuck through their foot.

That written, and to be precise, what I don't want to hear are stories about the gear and technique of picture making. On the other hand, some pictures have interesting stories about the why and circumstances, re: the making of a picture. All of which is my lead-in to telling you a picture making story, re: the graveyard coffin picture in this entry ...

Back in the early 80s, I lost a very good friend, Marlene, to cancer. Marlene was an artist-a 1-woman show at MOMA-of some national acclaim. I met her when I was converting a 6 story industrial building into Rochester, NY's first legal residential loft building. Marlene was one of the very first to sign a lease.

SIDEBAR: Over the course of a few years, we became good friends. Inasmuch as the building was somewhat of an experiment to see if it was a viable concept (for Rochester), the residents-as each floor was completed, it was fully leased-essentially created an interesting community comprised primarily of artists. Photograpers (4), illustrators, painters, writers, sculptors, craft artists and the like. END OF SIDEBAR

3 weeks before Marlene's death-she was in Manhattan at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center-the word went out that, if you wanted to say "goodbye", now was the time. I called Marlene to say I was coming down from Rochester for a visit and she asked me to give a friend-she deemed it important to mention that her friend, Donna, was not an "artist" friend-a ride down. No problem and together we drove to NYC on a Friday evening.

Donna and I got up early on Saturday morning and went to the hospital well before visiting hours, went to Marlene's room just as she was waking. Not knowing what to expect, we were quite surprised to find Marlene in a very sound state of mind and body. Mentally sharp and physically looking like she had always looked. We gave her a sponge bath, she ate breakfast and we settled in to what was to be a very remarkable day.

With her non-artist friend in a chair at the foot of Marlene's bed and me sitting bedside, Marlene began to pour out her life story to me. The story began with her proclaiming that she thought of me as her "platonic lover". Surprise does not come close to describe what I felt, at that moment, to hear that from Marlene on her death bed. However, that was only one of many surprises to follow.

I can not begin to go into detail about everything that transpired that day. But to mention a few notable highlights ... we heard about Marlene's childhood and her relationships (not the best) with her parents and a sibling, all of whom were now gone-she had absolutely no family connections left in her life. Then there was the bad marriage which led into some interesting anecdotes about what I would call her somewhat freaky pyschic-light abilities. Then came another stunner ...

ANOTHER ASIDE: On Friday evening Donna and I had had a very pleasant drive to NYC. We discovered we had much in common ... she was a high school teacher who had taught and knew well my then-wife's 2 trouble making brothers. We shared a passion for a particular author and we both had, at the top of our favorite movie list, the same film. Donna and I discovered our connections, to include Marlene (but without complete disclosure from Donna), during the car ride and a halfway stop for dinner in a nice French restaurant. END OF ASIDE

... while Marlene did not dwell much on her bout with cancer, it was at this point in our conversation-during all of which Donna was a rather quiet observer-that she mentioned that her "non-artist" friend Donna was, in fact, her cancer friend. Having already survived her first bout with breast cancer, Donna was a guide, a cancer sister, for Marlene during her breast cancer treatment. A fact that Donna had never shared with me during our prior evening ride. And, in a turnabout, Marlene was a guide cancer sister for Donna during her second bout with breast cancer.

I was stunned and, to be honest, very impressed with the stoicism and, dare I write bravery / fortitude with which Donna sat silently by in support of her cancer sister. I mean, holy s++t, Donna was, literally and figuratively, staring in the face of what could possibly be in her future.

As the day continued, a parade of wellwishers came and went. However, as Marlene and I continued our rather emotionally intense, wide ranging life stories conversation-it was a conversation inasmuch as I was relating some of my own experiences-the wellwishers tended to become a rather passive audience to the day long conversation. The conversation had become a main-act show for the assembled "audience". Marlene and I were barely aware of the "audience" for extended periods of time. We were sorta in our own little "bubble".

The day was one of the most memoralble days of my life. It was intensely emotional and very deeply connective on a human-to-human level. I learned, from someone on her death bed, about things deeply personal in her life and, by inferrence, things in my life. It would be accurate to write that the day was intense, emotion laden, life affirming (yet so close to death) and wierd.

In any event, after visiting hours were over, it was just the 3 of us again. Marlene had dinner. We gave her another sponge bath, said our goodbyes and off we went.

2-3 weeks later Marlene was dead. There was no funeral service other than a grave-side memorial event. A grave site donated by one of her cancer doctors on his family plot.

After the crowd dispersed, and as I, my then wife and Donna were walking away, I turned to make a picture of the site. And, as serendipity, and perhaps intuited by a bit of rubbed-off (from Marlene) psychic ability, would have it, I pushed the shutter just as a beam of sunlight struck Marlene's coffin. One shot. No redos to get it "right".

Was it a wink from the beyond grave or just a coincidence? I can't help but wonder every time I look at this picture.

SX 70 # 1-7 ~ life squared (literally)

sunflower

the Cinemascapist, my son, as a kid

kitchen sink

Puxsutawney Phil and me

teen magazine assignment

broken fence

assignment - Pittsburgh: A Day in the Life

all pictures ~ SX 70 Polaroid camera / Time Zero fIlm (embiggenable)

A QUESTION, BY JONATHON WEBER, HAS BEEN ASKED:

I have always wondered how you became a devotee of the square format...

my response: I never really pondered on that idea but, question asked, my first thought was that I adopted the square format almost immediately after I moved, c. 2002, to the digital picture making side of things. Prior to that date, my personal "art" picture making was created with view cameras which have a 4:5 (8:10) crop ratio which, while it ain't square, it's pretty damn close. So, it's safe to write that my personal picture making vision was somewhat attenuated, re; the 35mm format (2:3).

That written, as my thinking on the subject grinded on, it occurred to me that, duh, I had been making zillions of square pictures for decades, starting, c. 1974, with my first purchase of an SX-70 Polaroid camera. FYI, I acquired and still possess 5 SX-70 cameras. And, yes, at times, I used those camera to make "art", as well as commercial assignments-a lot of editorial / magazine- pictures. SX-70 made pictures were quite in vogue at that time.

ASIDE All of the above written, I have always had a knack for so-called "composition". That is, arranging lines, shapes, colors, tonal values, et al on the flat 2D field (surface) of a print, no matter the given dimensional format of any camera. Although, to be accurate, in my professional / commercial career, a large portion of my work, no matter the camera format used, was created to fit the 8.5x11 inch format of the printed page. END OF ASIDE

Truth be told, my square format SX-70 picture making was performed with what might be called an "intuitive" compositional sensitivity. That is, I didn't think about it, I pretty much just did what felt "right". It wasn't until my digital picture making began that I thought seriously about the square format. That is to write, that I consciously and with forethought adopted the format.

I did so because the square format fits the way I see, vision wise - literally and figuratively .... when I see a referent which pricks my eye and sensibilities, it has done so in the center of my vision, what I see with my eyes. Consequently, when I picture what I see, I tend to place that referent-which might be simple or complex-in the center of my picture's arrangement of visual properties.

To my eye and sensibilities, that center placement is an exercise in visual emphasis. And, by such placement in a square format, other visual "distractions" are limited, relative to a rectangular format. And, just in case you haven't noticed, I alway create a blurred and darkened vignette in the corner of my pictures which puts even more emphasis on the center of the picture.

It should also be noted, re: the vignette, that blurring and darkening of the corners mimics the way human vision works ... the human visual apparatus creates maximum definition in the center of one's vision and those areas of vision which fall along the periphery / edges of human vision lack defintion. And, for better or for worse, I am very conscious of the difference between the center and the edges of my vision.

To sum it all up, I became a "devotee" of the square format when I thoughtfully and deliberately adopted the format-as opposed to having to work with it by limitations imposed by equipment (SX-70 cameras)-in the early 2000s, c.2002. I stick with it because it fits the way I see, both literally and figuratively.

civilized ku # 3538-40 ~ up theirs

(embiggenable) • iPhone - read it and weep

(embiggenable) • iPhone - read it and weep

(embiggenable) • iPhone - read it and weep

MORE GOOBLYGOOK, RE: SMARTPHONE PICtURE MAKING:

I use my 4 year old iPhone as a convenience scanner, but rarely for anything that meets the stricter definition of a photograph....smaller companies .... small companies [ed: camera companies] who care intensely about the pursuit of beautiful images .... care more than ever about the importance of artistic photography (which mostly takes place with non-phone cameras)

Ok. I get it. The gearheads and "perfection" crowd loves their stuff but why do they always have to include a slam, re: aimed at anyone who does it in a way that is differnet from their methodology ... "the stricter definition of a photograph", whatever the hell that means. I mean, seriously, my strict definition of a photograph is simply a picture made by a picture making device. End of "definition".

It doesn't matter what device-a "real" camera (analog or digital), a toy camera (holga, et al), a smartphone, a pinhole camera made from a shoe box or whatever-it's all about the photograph, aka: the picture.

The more I run into this attitude, re: my stuff (gear and pictures) are better than your stuff ("mostly") because I use "good / better / best" stuff, the more I am encouraged / determined to launch my smartphone picture gallery. FYI, I have started to lay the groundwork for doing so and, as long as all the moving pieces come together, it's gonna happen.

Wish me luck.

civilized ku # 3537 ~ simple is as simple does, which is not so simple

kitchen stool ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

IN MY LAST ENTRY, IN A COMMENT BY JULIAN BEHRISCH ELCE, he wrote:

I wonder if the latest phone still represents simple or minimal equipment, or if it’s actually another form or format of advanced camera now.

my response: I believe, without a doubt, that Apple ( and other smartphone makers) knows its audience quite well. And, in the case of a device's picture making capabilities, they are aiming to make picture making as simple and, ITh(eir)O, "picture-perfect" as it can be. In essence, they seem to be walking in KODAK's footsteps, re: KODAK's first slogan, You push the button, we do the rest."

In my experience with the iPhone camera module (various editions), I find no evidence that Apple is trying to make an "advanced camera". That is, from the user POV. Of course, the camera module is, behind the scenes, a very advanced device inasmuch as its AI is working overtime-almost completely independent of user input-to get things "right". The only picture making control I am aware of is lens selection, turning HDR on or off and tapping the screen to select focus and adjust and lock the exposure.

ASIDE: of course there are a number of camera apps which can give a picture maker a great deal of control-almost "real" camera like-over the camera module, to include the ability to make RAW files. I have a couple of those apps but I rarely use them because I am committed to, with my use of the iPhone for picture making, picture making simplicity. If I want lots of control, I have 19 "real" cameras I can use.END OF ASIDE

All of that written, just because the picture making is "easy", the story, for me, doesn't end there, as I am certain it does for the majority of smartphone picture makers. That is, for me, just as I do after making pictures with a "real" camera, I process my image files. As near to "perfect" as the out-of-the-iPhone files might be, I always do some fine tuning and, on rare occasions, a lot of "fine" tuning on my files.

In most cases, I perform that tuning either on the phone or the iPad (I like the bigger screen), primarily with Snapseed or some other processing app. In some cases, I download a file from iCloud and do the tuning in Photoshop. And, FYI, all file prep (not tuning) for display on this blog are performed in Photoshop. BTW, the picture editing function in the new 11-series iPhones is now quite robust. Not Snapseed robust but good for a number of image adjustment needs.

IN CONCLUSION: Apple sees its picture making audience as easy-peasy snapshooters and has designed the iPhone camera module to appeal / service that market. Consequently, it is not an "advanced" camera in the sense of user control over the picture making process. That written, have no doubt about it, it is fully capable of producing "advanced" image files / pictures.

As mentioned, if one wants to have more picture making control when using the iPhone (or other smartphone), there are camera apps for that. I am somewhat surprised by the fact that Apple does not have an "advanced" camera app of their own making. Although, why bother when the overwhelming number of iPhone-using picture makers would have no interest in such an app, making the market for it so small that, for the Apple Behemoth, it would not worth the development time, effort and money investment.

civilized ku # 3536 (NIGHT MODE SAMPLE) / ku # 1451-52 ~ tricks of the trade

murkylight ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

murkylight ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

NIGHT MODE sample ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

BEEN USING THE iPHONE 11 PRO MAX for a month or so. No regrets, re: my decision to upgrade, but some of the changes to the picture making capabilities have required a bit of adjusting to, relative to my former iPhone X Max. Not a big deal.

That written, it hasn't been until recently that I have started to test the new NIGHT MODE feature of the iPhone 11 PRO MAX and the first thing I can tell you is that, in the default mode, it tries to turn "night" (aka: dark) into day. It accomplishes that feat quite well. However, when I make a picture in relative darkness, I want it to represent the actual darkness.

The "work-around" I use to achieve that is to manually adjust the exposure and, in processing the picture, reduce the BRIGHTNESS, CONTRAST and then the EXPOSURE to achieve a realistic sense of the actual darkness of a scene. The result is an almost completely noise-free picture. However, there is a caveat ....

The NIGHT MODE does its magic by blending together separate files which are created with a 2-3 second "shutter" speed which, FYI, the image stabilzation handles remarkedly well as long as you aren't jumping around. Nevertheless, if the scene includes people, the command, "Hold still", needs to come into play.

Re: the ku pictures in this entry. The pictures were made very late on a very grey, rainy day (not using the NIGHT MODE). The light was muted and soft which created a scene with very low contrast. The iPhone, not unlike a "real" camera, creates an image file with a more dynamic range, aka: contrast, than the scene itself exhibits. Consequently, in processing the files, the contrast and brightness were reduced to achieve a look which came very close to matching the actual scene.

BTW, I would be very interested to know how many of my site visitors-currently 1,400mo unique visitors-are following this blog because of an interest in iPhone / cell phone picture making. A simple click on "LIKE" or a comment with the word "me" would do the trick. I would greatly appreciate the feedback on this topic.

polaroids / panoramics ~ I just wanna have fun

manipulated Polaroids / magazine assignments ~ (embiggenable)

Death In the ER ~ A Day in the Life of an Urban Hospital book (embiggenable) • Widelux 1500 (medium format)

THROUGHOUT MY PICTURE MAKING LIFE I have been somewhat of a contrarian. That is, the statement, "You can't do that.", has always been perceived, by me, as a challenge.

That attitude began-some might say, at birth-when, picture making wise, I first began my picture making journey in Japan, 1966. Looking back, I realize what good fortune it was to have spent my early picture making years being exposed (pun?) to a very "foreign" photo culture. Specifically, the Japanese had embraced the 35mm camera format long before the rest of the world, as I found out upon my return, 2 years later, to the good ol' USofA.

My don't-tell-me-I-can't-do-that attitude exhibited itself throughout my professional picture making life .... making manipulated Polaroid pictures for magazine restaurant reviews (monthly, for 5 years), making pictures for a record album cover with a Pentax 110 SLR, making pictures for a coffee table book-A Day in the Life of an Urban Hospital-with a rotating lens panoramic camera, making a 5-picture series for an exhibit in the showcase KODAK Gallery (Rockefeller Center in NYC) with 35mm color negative film-pictures which were printed at 4x6 feet, and, when I first moved to digital in my pro life, I was an very early user of the µ4/3 mirrorless format .... to name just a few "contrarian" picture making endeavors.

With that history, I would suggest that my embrace of iPhone picture making should come as no surprise.

However, truth be told, while the word contrarian could be used to describe many of my picture making activities, the primary motive driving that picture making would be described, more accurately, by the word fun. As in, I just wanted to have fun making pictures. And, I did and I still do.

To wit, where's the fun to be had by playing it safe, following convention, never taking a chance / going out on a limb, or, always playing by the rules?

To paraphrase a lyric from Ricky Nelson's song Garden Party-written after he was booed when, at a concert in Madison Square Garden, he went off script-aka: playing his oldies-and performed a Rolling Stone song....

Nelson - If you gotta play at garden parties, I wish you a lotta luck
But if memories were all I sang, I rather drive a truck.


Me - If you gotta play at making pictures, I wish you a lotta luck
But if "safe" pictures were all I made, I rather drive a truck.