# 5790-93 / still life • civilized ku • landscape • flora ~ fairy-tale pictures

October 17, 2021

YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF REALLY BAD ADVICE / IDEA, re: making pictures:

"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it...If we limit our vision to the real world, we will forever be fighting on the minus side of things, working only too make our photographs equal to what we see out there, but no better."

This quote comes from a well known natural world / landscape picture maker (now departed) who made pictures with heaping doses of art suace. That should come as no surprise given the impoverished sentiment expressed in his quote which might be summed up as "reality bites". A sentiment which drove him to make pictures, not in pursuit of illustrating and illuminating the true character of the natural world, but rather, that were caricatures-a comically or grotesquely exaggerated representation of (someone or something)-of that world.

That written, if one were to search in the right places, one could find many examples of good advice / ideas which stand in direct contradiction to the preceeding quote:

"Some people are still unaware that reality contains unparalleled beauties. The fantastic and unexpected, the ever-changing and renewing is nowhere so exemplified as in real life itself." - Berenice Abbott

"Photography makes one conscious of beauty everywhere, even in the simplest things, even in what is often considered commonplace or ugly. Yet nothing is really 'ordinary’, for every fragment of the world is crowned with wonder and mystery, and a great and surprising beauty." - Alvin Langdon Coburn

It should be obvious-to those who have followed this blog for any length of time-on which side of this dichotomy I come down on. However, for those who land on the same side as I do, there is another cautionary quote to consider:

"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people." ~ H.L. Mencken

I have uttered this quote-changing the word "intelligence" to the word "taste"-many times to explain the salivating admiration of the majority of the public for art-sauced pictures of the natural world. Mencken's quote is well worth heeding if one wishes to engage in the sale of pictures of the natural world cuz it's a fact that cheesey, over-wrought, art sauce laden pictures of the natural world are what sells.

# 5788-89 / civilized ku (landscape-ish)•people (me) ~ my lack of education hasn't hurt me none

October 15, 2021

fisheye selfie / Japan ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone — ***fisheye selfie*** / ***Japan*** ~ (embiggenable) • iPhone

CLIMBING INTO THE WAY-BACK MACHINE, THAT'S A picture of me, the year is 1968 / the location a camera shop in Japan, making a selfie with the use of a fisheye lens. Seems appropriate to post that picture as an intro to fulfilling my promise to tell the story of how I became a photo journalist within 6 months of picking up a camera for the very first time....

.... background: in 1966 I was drafted into the US Army* where, as luck and the spin of the wheel would have it, I was trained as a supply clerk. After training I was sent to Japan begin my tour of duty. However, upon my arrival in Japan, the Army noticed I had real-life experience with drafting, so, they ditched the supply clerk thing and made me a drafstman (making charts and graphs). I was assigned to a command headquarter where I toiled away making charts and graphs in air-conditioned comfort.

In any event, there I was, halfway around the planet, without a picture making device. But, lo and behold, I was in the land of big camera store in the sky, soooo, I purchased a camera-a Petri fixed-lens rangefinder-and began making, tourist wise, pictures. Soon after getting the camera, I discovered that the base rec center had a fully equipped (BW film and print, color slide processing) darkroom facility. Again, as luck (fate?) would have it, within a few weeks of getting a camera, I was processing film (spooling it on reels) and making prints, none of which seemed much like rocket science to me.

A few months later, I learned of a US Army photo contest. A contest which started at the local base level and progressed through several stages, ending at the final stage, the world wide level. A picture had to win (top 3) at each level to keep advancing in the contest. I entered 3 slides in 3 different catagories. All 3 took 1st place in each catagory and advanced to the Western Pacfic level of the contest where, again, they finished in the top 3-2 1sts, 1 HM-for each catagory and it was on to the All-Pacific / Asia level. 2 of the 3 pictures were awarded 2nd HM which was not enough to advance to the next level.

Needles to write, I was impressed with myself and, as I discovered, so was my company commander + base commander (a general) as well as the US Army Theater commanding general. The net result of that attention was a ceremony with the Theater commanding general (a 3-star) where I was awarded a certificate and a slew of US Saving Bonds. It should go without writing, but nevertheless, I was beginning to think this picture making thing was fun.

Fun aside, it was back to work as a drafstman until, a few weeks later, the base photographer was rotated back to the States and, as once again luck and the spin of the wheel would have it, the base Information Offce, just down the hall from my office, was left without a replacement. It took me all of a minute to raise my hand, metaphorically writing, and selflessly volunteer to fill the position.

It took the IO office hierarchy about 2 minutes, based upon my photo contest success, to say, "You're hired." (albeit in military speak). I was handed a 4x5 Speed Graphic (following in the footprints of Weegee) with a bunch of 4x5 film holders and put to work making pictures of army life / events, to include photo essays for the command newspaper, some of which were picked up by Stars and Stripes.**

And so it began, a career and a life in photography.

If there is a point to be made in this telling, it is that, as hindsight would have it, I can write (without a doubt), that I owe my picture making success to the fact that I started making pictures without a single bit of instruction / training / education (not then, not ever). I just started making pictures without knowing the "rules" (ignorance is bliss) or, for that matter, what was considered to be a good picture. Rather, I just made pictures which were the result of how I see the world. An M.O. which has served me well both in my commercial and fine-art picture making endeavors.

* I had recently dropped out of college cuz I had no idea whatsoever, re: what I wanted to do for the rest of my life.

** Stars and Stripes is a daily American military newspaper reporting on matters concerning the members of the United States Armed Forces and their communities, with an emphasis on those serving outside the United States.

# 5783-87 / landscape (ku)•civilized ku ~ imitation is the sincerest form of missing imagination

October 12, 2021

Sunday afternoon on a porch ~ (embiggenable) iPhone — ***Sunday afternoon on a porch*** ~ (embiggenable) iPhone

along a country road ~ (embiggenable) iPhone — ***along a country road*** ~ (embiggenable) iPhone

THERE HAS LATELY BEEN SOME CHATTER AND NATTER, re: cliche, bouncing around on the interweb. Things like, what is a cliche?, how to avoid making cliche pictures, and the like. And, as is the usual case, the answer to such conversation provides a wealth of fodder for the idea of my Top insert number here Pieces of Photography Bad Advice and Sayings project. A prime example:

Photography is fundamentally a craft...[which] still requires learnin’.'Making pictures that look like' pictures that you admire is a landmark in that process for many, perhaps most, people. So I’d encourage newbies to make many such pictures and study them....Once you’re able to intentionally make that trite image of the Grand Canyon, the Eiffel Tower, or the Brooklyn Bridge you’ve achieved competence with the gadget. Now for the fun part.

To that nonsense I say, "Balderdash". The last thing one should do, for the purpose of making fine-art, learning to use a "gadget", or, finding one's vision, is to make "pictures that look like pictures that you admire". Rather, one might consider, as Brook Jensen suggested, to stop making pictures that "look like what you have been told is a good picture and start making pictures of what you see".

That written, re: "craft" - everyone who aspires to making good pictures, fine-art wise, needs to learn how to use a "gadget". iMo, the best manner in which to do so is to stand on the street in front of where you live-same spot again and again-and make pictures in the sun, in the rain, in the snow, in the fog, in the dark to include people walking, cars driving by, dogs chasing cats, garbage cans, discarded soda straws, or whatever else you might find / see in front of you.

And, most importantly, keep it simple...one camera, one lens, and adjust only fstop, shutter speed, focus, and ISO (as might be needed). DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, engage in any menu diving cuz the aforementioned gadget functions are all you need to "master" in order to start looking for one's own vision. iMo, menu diving is for "serious" amateurs who don't have, and quite probably will never have, their own unique vision.

In any event, the "learin'" process should only require a few weeks of one's time, 2-3 weeks at most. If it takes more than that amount of time, maybe consider selling your gadget and taking up The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

FYI, in my next entry I will address how, within 6 months of picking up a camera, I was making my living as a photo journalist. HINT It did not happen cuz I was making pictures that looked like what I was told was a good picture.

# 5780-82 / kitchen life•landscape (ku) ~ transmuting emperical data

October 7, 2021

IN A RECENT ENTRY IN WHICH I EXPRESSED THE IDEA OF writing a book, re: The Top insert # here Examples of Bad Photography Sayings / Advice, I used the phrase "purpose of making fine art" multiple times in order to clarify that my comments / options were directed to those seeking to make fine-art. In response to that usage, Markus Spring left a comment:

....This "purpose of making fine art" is definitely the most complex and difficult problem to tackle and it is much easier to define what it is not than to find a recipe how to do it.

His point is well taken. That is, if I understand the point to be what is fine art? A question which is a part of a subset to the seemingly never-ending or sufficiently answered question, what is art? Answers to those related questions span the gamut from lucid to lunatic, expressed with an economy of words or, conversely, verbose ramblings. In any event, whatever one's preference, answer wise, it is important to my book writing (still a possibility) that I introduce (in a preface) to my audience my particular art biases and beliefs, which, by association, imply what it is that I consider to be art / fine-art.

The preface would state something based upon the following:

My photography is an attempt to clarify life by illuminating reality, employing explicit description / factuality-without resorting to contrivance or glib formula-in the pursuit of creating a relationship between form and content that induces significant emotional sensations. That is, for my eye and sensibilities, in the making of a photograph I coopt the subjective possibilities of objective things as a metamorphistic device in which the mysteries in the visible can transmute emperical data in such a way that the unconscious seems to reveal itself through the real.

As for a "recipe" for the making of fine-art, Photography Division, iMo, fine-art is defined by the pursuit of character, not caricature; form, rather than adventurous novelty, and, aiding and abetting the collision of the world, the self, and art in the making of photographs. Or, something like that.

# 5779 / (in and) around the house ~ I am a formalist, always have been

October 5, 2021

IN THE CHAPTER, Color Photographic Formalism, FROM HER BOOK the new color photography, Sally Eauclaire pretty much nailed my picture making M.O.:

...the most resourceful photographic formalists regard the complexion of the given environment as potentially articulate aesthetic material. They consider the subject and its visual essence as indivisible….these formalists perceive real objects and intervening spaces as inter-animating segments of a total visual presentation....Each photograph represents a delicately adjusted equilibrium in which a section of the world is coopted for its visual possibilities, yet delineated with the utmost specificity. The resulting image exists simultaneously as a continuous visual plane on which every space and object are interlocking pieces of a carefully constructed jigsaw puzzle and a window through which the viewer can discern navigable space and and recognizable subject matter...The most sophisticated practitioners do not work with glib formulas, but combine various tactics in response to the particular demands of each image-making situation. Most formalists now embrace complicated arrangements wherein balance is more intuitively attained and strategy less obviously revealed.

In the same chapter, Eauclaire also wrote about the then-c.1980-issue evident / prevalent as expressed by viewers and critics of what she labeled as the new color photography:

Those receptive to the subtle, sequenced impact of a multilayered image are far outnumbered by the audience who believes a good photograph must be instantly accessible. When the subject seems missing altogether, the photographer may be accused of pulling the wool over the eyes of critics, curators, and the public.

All of the above written, I present these excerpts as part of my research for background, re: a potential book-Top insert # here Worst Sayings / Pieces of Photographic Advice., aka: "glib formulas". Thing is, if I am to do a book, it will be my intent to try to not only disabuse readers of the need for "rules" but also to give them, when they are standing naked and alone (rules wise), some ideas about picture making based solely upon the "strategy" of just seeing.

# 5776-78 / landscape (ku)•still life (flora) ~ representative of autumn color

October 5, 2021

CAN A PHOTOGRAPH BE CONSIDERED AS A METAPHOR? - the dictionary defines, in part, a metaphor as a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else. If so, consider this:

We believe that we know something about the things themselves when we speak of trees, colors, snow, and flowers; and yet we possess nothing but metaphors for things — metaphors which correspond in no way to the original entities. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

# 5774-75 / kitchen sink•kitchen life ~ don't follow leaders, watch the parkin' meters

October 1, 2021

OVER ON T.O.P. MICHAEL JOHNSTON HAS SETOUT TO DIVIDE HIS writing time-roughly equally-between his blog and an attempt to write a book. I wish him luck (seriously) but I am not sure that idea is going to work inasmuch as I believe that writing a book and writing for a blog are activities that each demand 100% dedication in order to be successful in either activity.

In any event, I mention the above cuz I have given thought over the years-instigated by the wife's sugestion to do so-to writing a book about photography. However, the unanswered question over that time has always been about the problem of selecting a specific photography topic to write about....topics such as how to..., art theory, history of the medium, my life experiences in making pictures, to name a few.

That written, one topic that has risen to top of the topics heap is the idea of The Top 10 Worst Pieces of Picture Making Advice. That's a likeable idea cuz one could have some fun with it. And, it is quite possible that a book on that topic has never before been written.

As an example, one such piece of bad advice that has recently been on my mind is the oft espoused adage, re: when starting out making pictures or looking for "inspiration", choose a referent that you care about and start making pictures thereof. To which I respond, "Hogwash", inasmuch as that advice is, for the purpose of making fine art, useless. Unless, of course, one desires to be little more than a documentarian. That is, making pictures wherein the pictured referent is the most important thing.

One problem with the aforementioned bad advice, iMo, is that-let me repeat, contrary to the purpose of making fine art-referent-biased pictures tend to lapse into cliche, referent or technique wise, and/or the application of art sauce in order to appeal the unwashed masses (fine art appreciation wise). Or, in other words, for the purpose of making fine art, the emphasis should not be on what you see, but rather on how you see it, aka: recognizing and utilizing one's own, unique vision.

Those 2 preceeding paragraphs written, I believe that I could expand them into a short, succinct essay, accompanied by picture examples which illustrate the point that most notablbe fine art picture makers have realized that they do not need to make pictures of what they care about in order to make visual art. Pictures that are to be appreciated primarily or solely for their imaginative, aesthetic, or thought provoking content.

The challenge for me is to determine if I could do that with 10-20 other pieces of a bad picture making advice.