# 6534-36 / commpn places-things • folliage ~ some men follow their junk

all photos (embiggenable)

RECENTLY, OVER ON T.O.P. , THE TOPIC OF “the most interesting photographer in history” was raised. To define that phrase M. Johnston went on to write, “Interesting meaning fascinating or thought provoking, in any aspect—personal lives, significance, ideas and attitudes, accomplishments, whatever.” Stated that way, I had very little interest inasmuch as I have no curiosity, re:what someone who makes pictures has for breakfast or if that someone picks his/her nose or who might literally, run around in little circles from dawn to dusk. The only saving grace in that descriptor was the inclusion of “significance” and “ideas.”

Having written all that, I can state that the primary interest I have with any photographer is the pictures he/she make or have made. The only interest I might otherwise have, is bit of background on what drove him/her, if applicable, to pick up photography and, minus any art-speak, what he/she believes he/she is trying to accomplish with their work. However, that would only interest me if I found his/her photographs interesting.

So, in any event, I thought, just for giggles and grins, that I would enlighten my readers with my list of photographers who. iMo / to my eye and sensibilities, make interesting photographs…

  1. THE SIGNIFICANT: In a class by themselves, Shore, Eggleston, Meyerowitz, Adams (Robert), Frank. These guys radically changed the idea of what can be photographed and what constitutes a good photograph like no other photographer before them.

  2. THE QUIRKY: Joel-Peter Witkin, Diane Arbus, Martin Parr, Weegee, Paula Klaw.

  3. THE VENERATED: Evans, Stieglitz, Weston, Margaret Bourke White, Porter, Bresson.

  4. THE ONE AND ONLY: Maier

In my personal photobook library, re: Photographer Monographs, I have at least one-in some cases 2 or more-book of each of the above named “interesting photographers”. That written, I have many other monographs by photographers whose work I admire. However, they tend to fall in one or another of the 1-3 categories listed above and I felt that those listed are more than enough for anyone to figure out the kinds of photographs I find interesting.

Burtynsky is one of my favorites (embiggenable)

FYI, a photobook I would emphatically recommend is Photo-wisdom ~ Master Photographers on Their Art;

Through the extraordinary images and insights of 50 of the world's master photographers, Photo-wisdom explores the richness of contemporary photographic practice. Photo-wisdom features commentaries from original interviews with world-leading photographers alongside exquisite reproductions of key images chosen by the artists themselves.The result is an unprecedented collection of 200 images showcasing each master photographer's work and their unique voice. ~ from publisher’s description

Then there’s this review-written by a woman-a customer on a used book site:

“It's big, it's beautiful, it's full of photos... but is it really full of wisdom? And if not, do we care? ….there's a lot to learn and a lot to love even if you never read a word of the accompanying first-person essays (mostly taken from interviews). But I do love reading that some photographers rely on luck, some make elaborate plans, and some let their camera lead them around much as some men follow their dicks.”

Keep in mind that “contemporary photographic practice “ is c. 2010, when the book was published and also note that the 50 photographers presented range from award-winning photojournalists to celebrity shooters; from politicized environmentalists to elusive artists; from timeless veterans to new visionaries; and from great storytellers to the makers of lasting icons. iMo, the diversity of the practitioners is what makes the book especially interesting.

In any event, the book is highly recommended and it can be found on a variety of used book sites (including Amazon) for very reasonable prices. I purchased my copy in 2012 in an upscale, small storefront, used book store on 2nd Ave. in the East Village NYC. Over a couple decades I visited the store 2-3x a year. It had a photobook section of ever-changing titles in near like-new condition at quite reasonable prices. Not that I am counting, but it is possible that half or more of photobook collection came from this store. Unfortunately, it closed a bout 10 years ago.

FYI, it should be evident from my discursive promiscuity approach to picture making that I am a photographer who-according to the woman reviewer quoted above-falls into the picture-making group that lets their camera lead them around much as some men follow their dicks…guilty as charged.

# 6533 / landscape ~ book 'em Danno

on the drive to breakfast ~ all photos (embiggenable)

new blurb book

DROVE 7 MILES UP THE ROAD FOR BREAKFAST late yesterday morning. Had a good breakfast and a very pleasant drive, but, moving on to the topic at hand….

….I have always thought the thing that separates the men from the boys, re: Photography Division, is addressing the criteria of those who make prints and those who don’t. FYI, what I mean by making prints is the act of turning what the picture making device records on a light sensitive surface into a actual tangible object (in whatever form). Ya know, like say, a thing that can be held in a hand, put on a wall, or, if you like, put on a coffee cup.

ASIDE to prevent anyone from slipping into a conniptive state of mind, let me emphasis that, if it lights your lamp to perform the act of recording something on a light sensitive surface without making the result into an actual object, there ain’t nothing wrong with that. It’s just that that doesn’t work for me inasmuch as it seems a bit like having a nice car and all you do is fire it up, then just sit in the driveway and go nowhere END ASIDE

Re: put on a wall - I have, on the walls of my house, 65 framed pieces which display 102 individual photographs (some framed pieces display multiple photographs). While there are few places I could cram a couple more pieces, I have found it more practical to make photo books and have them spread around the house rather than to put more prints on the wall.

In any event, a couple weeks ago I was overcome with desire to make a photo book. No particular reason, it’s simply that I just like seeing my pictures in print, and, I also like sharing my pictures with others. I find that photo books, especially dimensionally small versions, are an easily portable way to share / show my work to others.

That written, inasmuch as the book I wanted to make was not meant to be “serious statement” book, instead of turning to my go-to photo book maker, I chose to make the book using blurb. blurb offers a niffy 7x7 inch, softcover, 20 page (more can be added) book for $17USD. Having made several of these books, I can testify to their quality; excellent reproduction-true to my originals and very good quality paper. Consequently, while this photo book is not a statement piece-hardbound, premium paper, 6-color printing-I would not hesitate to show it to a gallery director as a very good example of my work.

I write this entry for a couple of reasons; to encourage the making of prints, especially books and to encourage my readers to visit blurb’s online bookstore….blurb’s bookstore is chock full of customer made books. The books are divided into categories, the most applicable ones for photo people are Photography or Portfolio.

Now here’s the reason for the bookstore recommendation; there is some damn good photography to be seen in those 2 categories, especially so in the Portfolio category. However, be forewarned, that category currently contains 141,753 books. My suggestion for wading through it is that you can kinda judge a book by its cover, which is how the books are displayed. Clicking on a book takes one to a page where the book is described and, in most cases, offers a multi-page preview of the book.

In the Portfolio section, I would recommend clicking on AAP Magazine (it comes up early) and in the Photography section look for DOCU (also comes up early). Both are very interesting and have a large number of editions and can be had for peanuts.

The reason for mentioning blurb’s book making capabilities is that maybe, just maybe, a few readers might make a book or two-tip: 30% off until Nov 9-and send a copy or a pdf to see. And maybe, just maybe, I could feature it on this blog.

# 6527-32 / common places • common things ~ I don't miss dust, scratches, or chemicals

all photos (embiggenable)

SO, IT APPEARS THAT M. JOHNSTON WILL BE writing about “film photography”, over time with multiple installments. As far as my visits to TOP go, it will just be more stuff that I barely glance at-way too much O(ff)T(opic) as it already is.

But, then again, I never really considered TOP to be a site about photography. That is, about the medium itself and its and apparatus (practices, conventions, aka: the functional processes by means of which a systematized activity is carried out ). And FYI, to be clear, I do not consider entries about gear-cameras, lenses, computers, and other hardware-to be about photography. That’s cuz I’m sorta like Paul Strand, who, when asked about the importance / significance of his work, answered:

“My real answer would be, the answer is on the wall.”

In other words, it is all about the photographs, aka: picture(s). It is not about how the picture was made or what gear was used to make it; that’s all just “serious” amateur hobbyist claptrap. And, to sound a bit snarky, photographs are in very short supply on TOP.

But I digress; if M. Johnston is serious about reaching the “youngsters” who are messing around with making images on film, he’s not gonna make it unless he stops writing and starts talking. Ya know, Vlogging, cuz the photo pipsqueaks out there, according to those in the know, do not read anymore.

That written, I also question the idea of how much-aside from nostalgia-is there out there to be written about the making of photographs with the use of film. I ask that question even though I come from over 40 years of making photographs (with the use of film) and making color and BW prints (in the wet darkroom). And, it’s also worth noting that, to this very day, I continue to believe that the pinnacle of color print making is a C print made from an 8x10 color negative; I made plenty of those and I can identify such a print from a mile away.

And while I’m at it, let me pick another nit; I do not believe that there is such a thing as “film photography”. That’s cuz, in my mind and to my way of thinking, there is only photography, aka: the act of making a photograph. Simply put for simple minds, one may make a photograph using any kind of equipment or light sensitive receptor but the end result is still, simply stated, a photograph….like, ya know, I do not make iPhone photographs; I do make photographs using an iPhone but, that written, the result is a photograph.

All of that written, I wish M. Johnston well in his “film photography” blogging endeavor.

BONUS PICTURE FROM LAST EVENING

(enbiggenable)

My iPhone was turned off, sitting on the arm of my Westport Adirondack chair; I picked it up, hit the Camera Control button, which instantly turned on the camera app, and the I hit the button again-click (shutter release noise)…. and there you have it. Maybe 3 seconds from start to finish. Amazing. Apple got that control right.

FYI, no flash, just my porch light.

# 6523-26 / landscape • autumn ~ change is a-comin'

all photos (embiggenable)

JUST SOME PICTURES FROM my neighborhood. Stick season is coming and some white stuff has been comin’ and goin’ at higher elevations. Gotta get my winter backpacking gear together cuz I promised myself that I would- while I still can-spend a few days and nights in the back country this winter.

# 6520-22 / common places/things • autumn ~ take some Extra Strength Tylenol and call me in the morning

all photos (embiggenable)

A COMMENT FROM DENNIS ON my last entry:

“…what set you off this time? Just because it worked for you don't mean jack for anyone else. Falling Water is lovely but falling down…”

Cannot imagine what, in my last entry, caused Dennis to experience a “migraine inducing eyeroll”. That written, let me pass on my condolence. Hope you feel better. In any event, I thought I should respond to his “riptose” on 2 counts; re: Fallingwater (1 word, not 2), and, re: “don’t mean jack for anyone else”.

re: Fallingwater - fun fact, Fallingwater is not falling down. Nor was it in eminent danger of falling down. In 1995 it was determined that the concrete cantilevered balconies were insufficiently reinforced. What a surprise (sarcasm alert). Who could have guessed that a structure-an untested, never-before attempted, never-imagined construction technique, using materials available at that time-built 60 years prior might just need a bit of additional reinforcement? In any event, in 2002 additional reinforcement was installed leaving Fallingwater's interior and exterior appearance unchanged and the original construction engineering intact.

re: “don’t mean jack for anyone else” - I have no idea if the topics and/or ideas and opinions expressed on this blog have any meaning, applicability, or value to anyone else (other than M). And, I most emphatically make it known that, with my liberal and continued use of the acronym, “iMo”-note that M is both bold and italicized-I am not writing ex cathedra. So, Dennis, please accept my thanks for pointing out the obvious.

And, speaking of the obvious, I would never suggest that what works for me would necessarily work for anyone else cuz, ya know, statistically, half the population is below average.

# 6514-19 / common places • common things ~ free your mind instead

all photos (embiggenable)

“When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school, it’s a wonder I can think at all. And though my lack of education hasn’t hurt me none, I can read the writing on the wall.” ~ Paul Simon from the song Kodachrome

THIS SONG LYRIC HAS ALWAYS STUCK WITH me when I think about the idea of going to school-college / university level-for the purpose of learning about how to make good pictures. An idea that, iMo. I believe to be the complete antithesis of how to achieve the goal of making good pictures. That’s cuz, hold onto your hats, I am certain, beyond any doubt, that, in fact, making good pictures cannot be taught. FULL STOP.

For me, this is not a recent conclusion; back in the early-ish day of my commercial photography career, a professor-the same one who brought John Pfahl to my studio for a visit- from RIT’s School of American Crafts / College of Art & Design would bring students from RIT’s School of Photographic Arts and Sciences to my studio on day trips. During those visits I considered it my civic duty to inform those students that, within 5 years of graduation, only 7% of grads would be making a living making photographs. And, to understand that, after learning how to operate a camera, their way around a darkroom (no computers in the photo world at that time), and how not to kill themselves setting up high-powered strobe banks, they would be better served, financially and aesthetically, to get out of school, get a job in some facet of the photography industry, buy ton of film, make a zillion pictures, and, consequently, learn how they see the world.

I am certain that those students were very impressed with my work and studio: nationally-known client work on the walls and in my portfolio. I am also certain that they most likely were more than a little perplexed by the fact, which I drove home quite emphatically, that I had not spent a day, not an hour, not a minute learning anything about photography in a school, workshop, or any other learning institution. Don’t know if anyone ever heeded my advice. But, the simple fact was/is that I figured it all out on my own initiative.

FYI, the only thing I learned from someone else was how to spool 35mm film onto a processing reel; that took all of 5 minutes although it did require quite a bit of practice to consistently get it right.

That written, I did read nearly anything I could get my hands on, photography wise. Primarily, that included popular photo magazines which, sooner than later, I moved away from to read mags that featured photographs, not gear. One notable exception to the magazine focus was a subscription to the Time Life Library of Photography. I ended the subscription after receiving 4 books: The Camera, The Print, Light and Film, and Color. The books were hardbound, beautifully printed, and fairly informative, and, mercifully free from any advice from “experts”.

All of that written, Paul Simon sings that his lack of education didn’t hurt him none. I would suggest that a lack of education ain’t hurt a lot of folks none (to include myself). Like, say, as a notable example, Frank Lloyd Wright: with just a little bit of civil engineering education-no degree-under his belt, he went on to be declared by the American Institute of Architects as "the greatest American architect of all time". In 2000, one of his projects, Fallingwater (I’ve visited many times), was named "The Building of the 20th century" in a "Top-Ten" poll taken by members attending the AIA annual convention in Philadelphia.

In any event, I ain’t agin readin’, writin’ and ‘rithmatic, per se, as long as that educatin’ teaches one how to think. Ya know, so’s yinz can read the writtin’ on the wall.

# 6509-13 / autumn • common places-things ~ the riffraff are ruining the clubhouse

all photos (embiggenable)

PEAK AUTUMNAL COLOR IS NOW PAST PEAK and, cuz it has been very windy, falling fast. Which is not to write that the trees are bare but that now there are leaves on the ground to complete the picture.

Writing of pictures, the top picture and the Halloween diorama in this entry were made with the new iPhone 16 PRO MAX. And, no, I am not gonna write a review other than to write that the camera module in the 16 is a significant improvement in a significant number of ways over previous versions, and, the Camera Control Button is pure technical genius.ASIDE if you want to read a really good / interesting review, read this. END ASIDE

If you are not inclined to read the linked review-it’s long and detailed-here is an excerpt that should be read by the oh-no-the-sky-is-falling (re: cameras, Photography Division) crowd:

If you want a quick verdict: the iPhone 16 Pro is a tremendous camera because between Camera Control, Zero Shutter Lag and its advanced Photographic Styles, it will capture more moments than any iPhone ever did by a huge margin…

That being said, there’s a larger feeling I am left with after reviewing this device in my hands.….in my day, a camera was a thing you took photos on. Not a computer brain’s eyes to the world. Perhaps I am feeling this is a big change because possibly, this is the close to the last of its kind or the link in evolution: an iPhone that has long since redefined what a phone is, but is about to redefine what a camera is, and what photography means.

This iPhone is a camera.….Apple adding the a new control - a button, a dial - to iPhone isn’t a move it does casually. It’s an admission of a fundamental change…that iPhones are far less phones today, and far more cameras.

But many feel like something was lost….But as a photographer, remember that ‘camera’ might really mean something entirely different than what we are used to — phones once made phone calls. Today, cameras take photos. In the future? Perhaps this is much more a lens to see and process the world with. A camera, as it is defined in the 21st century.

My 2 cents: the problem that “serious” amateur picture makers, Photography Division, have with the iPhone camera is, iMo, the fact that the picture making riffraff, aka: non-serious prople, have gained access to the formerly exclusive clubhouse. That is, Apple-just like KODAK did with their you push the button, we do the rest-has put a camera in the hands of the average every-person that allows them to make “good”* pictures with relative ease; no special knowledge required….YIKES!!!!! Before you know it, they will be making good pictures of people, places, and events in their lives that mean something to them. Others-those with a vision to express-may also use the Apple picture making device to create Art (of one kind or another).

In either case, I simply do not see the problem cuz who gives a rat’s ass about what picture making device they use in their picture making endeavors?

*proper focus, exposure, color, and definition.

# 6504-08 / common places • common things ~ in the eye of the beholder

all photos (embiggenable)

I HAVE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED A VERMONT based gallery-PhotoPlace [GALLERY] (link)-that conducts, per their website, “monthly, juried photographic exhibitions to photographers worldwide, each with a new topic and internationally recognized juror”. Their current juried exhibition’s theme is The Poetry of the Ordinary; a theme that is right up my alley.

Over the years I have submitted photos for many of their monthly exhibitions and am pleased to report that on 12-15 occasions (I have not kept count) my work has been accepted for the gallery exhibitions. Considering that there are usually 3-4K worldwide submissions per exhibtion, that is a reasonable accomplishment. In any event, I will be submitting work for the current call for entries which states:

As photographers, we have developed skill in seeing beneath the surface of our subjects, and often find in them the beauty, poignancy, and poetry that exist in ordinary moments. For this exhibition, we seek the simple poetic elegance of the ordinary.

As I wrote, that statement seems to be right up my alley. However….depending upon the juror, he/she might have a very different understanding on the word “ordinary”. For instance, in the 3 example photos on call for entries page, is the spreader in the mist/fog ordinary, or, is the runner with the broom in the smoke(?) ordinary? ….

…..to my and sensibilities, I think not. Inasmuch as the runner himself and the spreader itself are rather ordinary, the circumstances in which they are pictured is seems to be very much out of the ordinary. Of course, what I think doesn’t matter but someone-the juror? the gallery director?-thinks otherwise. And that situation- a differing definitions of what constitutes the ordinary-makes me think my pictures of the ordinary might not be what fits the bill.

Then there is, for me, the idea of “seeing beneath the surface”-an adage / concept that has been bandied about the medium seemingly forever. And, it is a concept about which I am very uncertain, re: what the hell does that mean? I am fairly certain it does not mean that one should elevate / pick up one’s subject to see what’s underneath it. Nor do I believe that it implies that one is making pictures with an x-ray device.

Wise comments aside, the phrase when used as a proposition means: aspects of it-one’s nominal photographic subject-which are hidden or not obvious. That is a meaning which I can embrace-with caveats-cuz in my photographs I try to capture and express something about what I picture that is not obvious to the casual observer-the “hidden”, aka: unseen in situ, but can be made “obvious” in a photograph, aka: form.

The primary caveat I have about making a photograph that is about something hidden or not obvious is that, in my case, I am not photographing something, the referent, which I or most anyone would consider to be, in and of itself, beautiful, poignant, or poetic. Rather, my intent to is to make a object, i.e. a photograph, that, in and of itself, may be considered to beautiful, poignant, or poetic.

Consider the referent in the photos in this entry. No one I can think of believes that, as an example, my kitchen trash can, stove, and floor are beautiful, poignant, or poetic in and of themselves. However, I do believe-please forgive my self-aggrandizing opinion of my work-that the photograph thereof and the form it presents is a beautiful photograph, in and of itself. Or, at the very least, visually interesting. Of course, I am also comfortable with the fact that other viewers may not agree.

All of that written, I can only hope that the juror of the exhibition will agree that one of pictures fits the bill.