# 5532 / kitchen sink ~ damn it, here we go again

(embiggenable) • iPhone

UNLIKE THE GOOD OL' DAYS IN THE DIGITAL CAMERA WORLD, wherein the upgrade treadmill eventually reached a point of enough-is-enough, a place where one could jump off the treadmill and be very satisfied with the picture making device one had in his/her hand, the treadmill is still moving at top speed in the smartphone picture making device world.

Hence, the new iPhone 12 PRO MAX.

In the "real" camera world, I am quite happy with my 6-7 year old, 16mp camera. Although, when compared to the results I obtain from an iPhone and its hardworking AI, not so much. True be told, I am absolutely stupified by the fact that "real" camera makers seem to be totally oblivious to the picture making AI world. I mean, what the f**k are the waiting for?

In any event, here I sit staring down the barrel of the iPhone 12 PRO MAX get-it-now gun.

The primary reason for that impulse is that a 47% larger sensor (with larger pixels) is a significant improvement. It is also possile that the new Night Mode-applied across more lenses-is also a big improvement. However, the other brand new-perhaps very significant-feature is the Apple ProRAW tool ... (from the Apple site) ProRAW gives you all the standard RAW information, along with the Apple image pipeline data. So you can get a head start on editing, with noise reduction and multiframe exposure adjustments already in place — and have more time to tweak color and white balance.

And here's the thing, Apple image pipeline data is not a preset. It is the AI data specific to that image. They have given a picture maker the ability to customize / override or whatever it is the Apple techs think a picture should look like. I find that very interesting and, maybe, even a little bit brave.

In any event, I will be acquiring an iPhone 12 PRO MAX soon. And, what I am hoping for is that the upgrade might just be good enough to let me get off the treadmill (at least for a while).

#5529-31 / kitchen life A/B•around the house ~ looking for new faces

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

I NEVER DID FOLLOW UP ON MY DESIRE TO concentrate on making BW pictures while I was at Rist Camp. It is my belief / rationalization that the reason for that is actually rather simple inasmuch as I do not intuitively see in BW.

That written, I am not brain-dead, re: recognizing a decent BW picture making scene when I come upon one, but the idea of traipsing about the landscape concentrating upon finding such an opportunity, just ain't my thing. Seems more like work than pleasure to me.

On a completely different topic, I have begun a concentrated effort to break out of my daily / regular photo blog / site routine. That is, to find some "new faces", picture making wise, cuz my current rota of sites, which a few exceptions, seems to be slip-sliding away into gear or non-photo topics.

One new face I have found is LAURE LAFARGE. I like her work. The only issue is that her last entry was well over a year ago. Her instagram page seems to be equally inactive..

# 5526-28 / around the house•OoC Context•week of ... ~ imagine it

(embiggenable) • iPhone

Out of Context / in context ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

Out of Context progress ~ (embiggenable) iPhone

last week at Rist Camp ~ (embiggenable)• iPhone

IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN (Ecclesiastes 1:9) AND REPEATEDLY SAID that there is no new thing under the sun. There are many who would beg to differ but, using the broadest definitions possible, re: "new" and "thing", the idea is, iMo, a reasonably sound generalized concept.

However, what about the notion of there is no new thing under the sun, re: the medium of photography and its apparatus? If I were asked that question, my answer would be, "when it comes to making pictures, there is no new thing under the sun."

In the most generalized sense, no matter the device you may using today to make pictures, since the dawn of photography, pictures were always made using a picture making device of one kind or another. And, no matter the software you may use to process those picures, the capabilities thereof mimic traditional processes dating back, again, to the dawn of photography.

Do the current picture making devices and picture processing software make it (potenially) easier and quicker to make and process pictures? Do they make it (potenially) easier and quicker to create manipulated pictures? Do they make it easier and quicker to make techically good pictures? Yes, yes and yes. But, in fact, there is little-if any thing-that a skilled craftsperson of 150 years ago could not have accomplished, albeit requiring much more time and effort.

All that written, my question is, why all the nattering and caterwauling, re: the end of photography as we know it?

My answer: Fear. Those who have distinguished their work from that of others based on their technical mastery of the medium and its apparatus, realize that that ain't gonna cut it anymore. Whether they like it or not, the democratization of the medium and its apparatus has drawn attention to the most important tool in the tool box and it's not a device or a bit of software. It is not a tool that can be purchased, online or in a big box camera store. Arguably, it most likely can not be taught or learned in a workshop.

It is, in fact, the tool that Einstein said was more important than knowledge...imagination.

iMo, imagination, which is linked to creativity, is the timeless-no new thing-tool which separates the very good from the merely average.

Imagine that.

# 5523-25 / around the house•kitchen sink•kitchen life ~ a little man

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

AT THE START OF MY BLOGGING DAYS, and continuing throughout, I always considered part of my blogging mandate-albeit self-imposed-to be to identify and present an exposé of fuzzy-headed notions, re; the medium of photography and its apparatus. Notions / ideas such as...

There are writers on the web who insist that your work will improve if you (doggedly) use one camera and one lens for an entire year but I don't think that's based on anything more than some people being really, really slow learners; or too lazy to try new stuff. I never thought about the damage caused by self-limiting your choices when making art....

So, mandate accepted, here I go again....if there is a "slow learner" at work here, it is the picture maker who issued forth this rather dubious stupid idea. That written, one should expect nothing less from this source inasmuch as this picture maker has not exhibited a single iota of the vision thing in his/her picture making. A situation which, again, should not be a surprise inasmuch as this picture maker is-WARNING: massive understatement-gear obsessed.

That written, here's the thing about the "1 camera / 1 lens" idea. The point of such an exercise-and I am not endorsing / refuting it, per se-is that, if one is looking to identify and refine one's vision, then one is best served by concentrating on: a.) what it is one is trying to accomplish with one's art making, and b) learning how to see rather than to just look. Arguably, one could accomplish both objectives without the use of a camera.

In actual pactice, most picture makers use a camera as part of their search for their vision. However, the idea of walking around with several camera bodies and a bevy of lenses, iMo, only complicates the matter at hand. In a very real sense, it puts the wagon in front of the horse inasmuch as, once one has decided what one is trying to accomplish with one's art (the "horse' that pulls the wagon), then that is the time to decide what kind of wagon is best suited for hitching to the horse.

And, here's a fact-ignore it at your peril-if one's intent is to make fine art in the photography world...consistancy of vision is paramount. You can take it to the bank that 99% of sucessful fine art photographers are practioners of and have mastered the 1-camera / 1 lens concept.

Their work exhibits, not only a consistent vision, but also a consistent technique. A single body of work does not exhibit the use of a wide angle lens in one picture and the use of a telephoto lens in another. One picture is not done in BW and another in screaming HDR color. And, in many cases, all of the pictures in a single body of work are presented in exactly the same print format (square, rectangle, horizontal, vertical, et al).

All of that written, here's my biggest irk....the idea that using 1 camera / 1 lens indicates that a picture maker is "too lazy to try new stuff." That idea implies that "new stuff" is only driven by "new technique", aka: the use of different gear. To which I write, "hogwash" cuz truly "new stuff" is not gear driven, it is driven by a picture maker's imagination.

Consider this from Robert Henri from his book, THE ART SPIRIT. iMo, the best book ever written for aspiring artists of any medium:

The technique of a little individuality will be a little technique, however scrupulously elaborated it may be. However long studied it will still be a little technique; the measure of the man. The greatness of art depends absolutely on the greatness of the artist's individuality and on the same source depends the power to acquire a technique sufficient for expression.

The man who is forever acquiring technique with the idea that sometime he may have something to express, will never have the technique of the thing he wishes to express.

Intellect should be used as a tool.

The technique learned without a purpose is a formula which when used, knocks the life out of any idea to which it is applied.

#5520-22 / out of context ~ lots of stuff / things

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

(embiggenable) • iPhone

THE WIFE SEEMS TO BELIEVE THAT "WE" have too much stuff sitting about in our house. And, I must admit, she has some evidence, but...our respective definitions of "stuff" are not quite precisely aligned.

To be precise, the wife's definition veers rather firmly in the direction of canidates-for-disposal "clutter". Whereas my defintion clings to the notion of semi-precious collectible-worthy objects. However, despite our somewhat conflicting ideas about the "stuff", we have both contributed our share of things to the accumulation of stuff.

FYI, almost all of the stuff, transitory (flora / fruit arrangements, et al) and perdurable, is small and placed about the place on flat surfaces of one kind or another. The lone exception is my life-size taxidermied, snarling coyote which greets-just inside of the front door-all the visitors to our house.

In any event, all of that written, I have begun a project, Out of Context, to create still life pictures of some of the stuff. My goal is to make a minimum of 12 > maximum of 20 pictures.

The pictures will be made with my iPhone using the Portrait mode with the 2x lens setting in order to create a very narrow DOF. For visual consistency, the set up will be in the exact same spot on my kitchen island counter in order to utilize the soft, directional light which comes in through the very large (approx. 5x4foot) kitchen window.

As a change of pace, I am looking forward to creating made pictures as opposed to found pictures.