civilized ku # 4067-68 ~ moon spottings

contrail / moon / sunset ~ Fort Covington, NY (click to embiggen)

moon / flock of birds ~ Westville, NY (click to embiggen)

As I have written previously, I only rarely submit pictures for consideration for juried exhibitions. And, in fact, the only juried exhibitions to which I have submitted pictures - over the last 2-3 years - are those offered by PhotoPlace Gallery in Middlebury, Vermont.

The reasons for that exclusivity are two fold; 1.the submission fee is reasonable - $30 for 5 picture submission, and, 2.for that fee, if one of your pictures is accepted, the gallery will print your picture for $35 - choice of high quality paper - and matte and frame and hang it for no cost. FYI, in the gallery world that is a rare offer.

All of that written, the reason for my only ocassional participation is that, when a request for theme-based submissions is announced, the name of the juror is included in the announcement. I immediately visit the juror's website in order to determine his/her picturing bias. If that bias is slanted toward (partially or completely) contrived picture making wherein software or hardware effects are on prominent display, I do not bother to submit any pictures. FYI, that seems to be the case more often than not.

That written, the next juried exhibition, Composed, features Sam Abell as the juror. Abell worked for National Geographic as a contract and staff photographer for thirty-three years so his picture criteria is no surprise:

As juror for this exhibit, what am I looking for in an image? In a word: everything. I want to see well designed photographs that have depth, strong structure, good light—and within them a spark of life.

What don’t I want to see? Images that are contrived, forced, synthetic or derivative. Images where software or hardware have made the picture.

I will be submitting pictures for consideration for this exhibition.

more artspeak blather ...

I aim to loosen the complexities of material encounter with intangible concepts.

civilized ku # 4063-66 (remains) ~ patinaed testaments

It should come as no surprise, at least not to me, after this past weekend's picturing spree - which included the not-what-they-used to-be pictures - that, after a search through my picture library, I have more than enough not-what-they-used to-be pictures to justify a new body of work. That written, while I believe the collection holds together, referent wise, I am bothered by the fact that there are, to my eye and sensibilities, two picturing M.O.s apparent in the work; 1. a structure pictured in its environment, and, 2. a structure pictured independent of its environment (see yesterday's entry).

iMo and to my eye and sensibilities, the first M.O. places the structure within the context of place whereas the second M.O., by means of emphasizing the divorced-from-environment-context relationships of color, shapes, and tones with the frame, is more graphical and, dare I write it, more Fine Art-ish.

At this time my intention is to be more accutely aware of picturing opportunities in order to add to the seen better days body of work. However, within that awareness I will be looking for referents which fall in the non-contextual and the contextual M.O.s with the intent of dividing the work into two separate - contextual / non-contextual - collections.

civilized ku # 4059-62 ~ not what it used to be

lucky13 ~ Saranac, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (click to embiggen)

blue chimney - Westville, NY (click to embiggen)

deer racks ~ Standish, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (click to embiggen)

oil tank ~ Standish, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (click to embiggen)

Drove over 468 miles this weekend - 3 trips back and forth, from home to Hugo's home rink and back. During those drives I stopped along the way enough times to make 20 pictures.

One referent I kept coming back to was that of things that are not what they used to be. That's a referent which is in great supply throughout the Adirondacks / northern NY. Although I suspect that this is not the only region in the good ole' US of A where that is the case.

Maybe there's new bod of work in it.

civilized ku # 4058 ~ a self portrait

the wife and I ~ Lake Placid, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (click to embiggen)

No Words. And there might not be many words for the next week or so as I work my way throught the 5 stages of grief (election results wise).

I skipped right over stages 1-3 - 1. Denial and isolation; 2. Anger; 3. Bargaining - inasmuch as I wasn't in denial because I recognized forces at work that were definitely working for the Trump bandwagon; and, why be angry regarding water on the bridge / over the dam; and who or what is there to bargain with?

While it is not accurate to write that I was depressed (#4 Depression), it's fair to write that I retreated to / withdrew into a quiet place (in my head) in order to get my bearings. A place in which I am still residing. Consequently, my head is not into pondering the how and why of picture making at this time.

Regarding stage #5 - Acceptance - it should be somewhat obvious to write that since I was never in denial, I had accepted the result as soon as it was determined that the Trump bandwagen was moving to the head of the parade.

Fortunately, I have a 3 day hockey weekend to look forward. I am certain that, at the end of that weekend activity, I will be in a tip-top frame of mind.

civilized ku # 4056 ~ listening and evolving

wine rack / morning sun ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (click to embiggen)

Many a "serious" picture maker - that is one who wishes to create a body of work with a unified theme and look - spends a significant amount of time pondering, fretting, agonizing and contemplating regarding what to picture and how to picture it. Or as Jörg M. Colberg wrote in a recent essay:

"As a photographer, you will probably have to address the problem ideas/intent vs. form/content simultaneously from both ends. This is difficult, because it’s much easier to have an idea and then produce something around it than to be able to have that idea evolve, based on what is coming out of the pictures."

While I certainly agree with Colberg regarding the necessity for a "serious" picture maker to to address the problem ideas/intent vs. form/content, I would disagree with his notion that it’s much easier to have an idea and then produce something around it than to be able to have that idea evolve, based on what is coming out of the pictures. To wit ...

A quick visit to my WORK page reveals that I have what I consider to be 18 differing bodies of work. That is, each body of work has its own unique-to-itself referent. The only traits they all have in common - PINHOLE excepted - are my adherence to straight picture making, the square format and my "standard" processing (vignette and black frame).

But, here's the thing about those separate bodies of work - not one of them began with a concept (idea/intent). The only concept involved was an intent to picture the quotidian nature of the world around me. That is to write, my picture making - any referent was fair game - was driven by attention to visual considerations. The bodies of work all began and evolved from listening to what was coming out of my pictures.

Over time, I identified, by looking at and listening to my pictures, referent material which pricked my eye and sensibilities. That is, a number of my pictures, which pictured very dfferent referents, suggested to me that pursuing, by intent, those varied referents could produce interesting but separate bodies of work. Or to state it another way, I did not intially intend to make a body of work which pictured, for example, decaying food or women in public or random arrangements of stuff in my kitchen sink.

Nor did I, at first, picture those varied referents in the exact manner (form) that has evolved - been refined - from those first picturing endeavors. Nor did I understand - as I do now - why it was that I was attracted to picturing (my intent) those specific referents.

In other words, I learned something about myself by listening to what was - and still is - coming out of my pictures. And, it is my belief that by listening and learning I have been able to make better pictures (re: content/form) which, by intent, express my ideas (concept) about those things which prick my eye and sensibilities.

civilized ku # 4055 / ku # 1392 ~ night and day / a horse lying down in the street

evening mirror lake ~ Lake Placid, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (click to embiggen)

next morning / Monument Falls ~ Wilmington, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (click to embiggen)

As anyone one who has followed my blog knows that I have often ragged on what I call the academic lunatic fringe. That would be the crowd who follows the dictum that concept is everything and the picture itself is, well, whatever. Most often the pictures which are the result of applying that idea are, at best, visually bland.

Recently I came across the following quote from the artist / critic Davis Salle which expresses my thoughts on the the subject quite well ...

...“A visit to any of today’s leading art schools would reveal one thing in common: The artist’s intent is given far greater importance than is his or her realization, than the work itself. Theory abounds, but concrete visual perception is at a low ebb. In my view, intentionality is not just overrated; it puts the cart so far out in front that the horse, sensing futility, gives up and lies down in the street.”

iMo, well written.

civilized ku # 4054 ~ multi tasking

red shed ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK (click to embiggen)

Busy framing 2 new prints - Life Without the APA series - for tomorrow evening's exhibit opening reception - that activity as well as packing for Hugo's first tourament of the hockey season.