squares² # 4 ~ φῶς γραφή

civilized ku + ku together • click to embiggenI imagine most in the room know that the Greek words, φῶς γραφή (pronounced phos graphê), are the Greek root words for our word, photography - φῶς = "light, γραφή = drawing / writing (FYI, I studied Latin (4 years) and Ancient Greek (3 years) in high school). That is why, on occasion, photography is described as "drawing / writing with light".

Light is indeed that which we light writers (aka: photographers) know is indispensable to the making of our art/Art and we all know that trying to picture a black cat in a coal bin is difficult. However, without light, that task is absolutely impossible. Or, to state it another way, light sensitive material + no light = nothing, picture wise.

That written, some picture makers think making pictures is "all about the light". If it weren't for the fact the most picture makers who subscribe to that theory have turned golden / dramatic light into a picturing fetish, I would agree that, at times, a picture can be "about the light". However, for me, light is most often a facilitator in the making of a picture but not at all what the picture is about.

In any case, when I make pictures that are ostensibly "about the light" (although never wholly so) and the making of which are instigated by the qualities / characteristics of "the light", those pictures are invariably responses to a wide range of light quality / characteristics, not just a Pavlovian response to one particular kind of light.

It would be very safe to say that I am not a one-trick pony, or, as the wife's mother said, a "Johnny one note" when it comes to making pictures "about the light".

squares² # 3 ~ common beauty / beauty in common

squares² ~ all together, in my mind and eye • click to embiggenAs mentioned, I have ruminated for quite some time - measured in years, not months or days - my propensity for discursive promiscuity, picture making wise. Most of that time inside my head was spent thinking, not about my picturing MO, but rather what to do, presentation wise, with all of those discursive pictures. While I have half a dozen or so referent focused bodies of work, those bodies of work taken all together are minuscule, # of pictures wise, relative to the now 4,000+ and rising # of pictures which, IMO, fall into the discursive promiscuity picture making realm of things.

That written, the solution to my presentation quandary would seem to be at hand ...

While I have always recognized that the best of my discursive, but nevertheless vision unified, pictures would need to be printed and displayed in a presentationally cohesive manner, the exact manner of doing so has, until now, escaped me. However, having essentially boxed myself into a corner by writing and talking about the notion of unified vision as evidenced across a diverse body of pictures, I had to get down to brass tacks and cash the check my mouth was writing.

As a result of that effort, I have arrived at a plan of creating a series of square prints, each with 4 seemingly unrelated, referent wise, square pictures (all printed on a single sheet of paper), or, to put it another way - squares². Each squares² print will be created in 4 sizes - 24"×24" (edition of 20), 36"×36" (edition of 10), 48"×48" (edition of 4), and 60"×60" (edition of 1).

The initial plan is to create, over time, multiple 20 squares² picture collections. How many collections? Who knows. I have enough pictures to make 200 20 squares² picture collections but that's not gonna happen. However, the number 10 sounds like a nice round doable number.

I am actually rather excited about this project simply because it's all coming together / starting to make sense.

civilized ku # 2338 ~ another picture not about cats

Cats sleeping in window ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenThis picture, although it might appear to be about cats, is most definitely not about cats because I don't do cat pictures.

ku # 1177 ~ tiny ecosystem

Grass and ground hugging growth ~ Lake Placid, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen

squares² # 2 ~ common beauty / beauty in common

diversity, all linked together in my eye and mind • click to embiggenDuring my recent visit with the Curator at view, one of the points we discussed, re: my pictures, was the continuity in vision which is evident across my diverse (referent wise) bodies of work - a topic I recently addressed in the civilized ku # 2299-2305 / ku # 1160 / rain # 20-22 entry under the heading of "profligatographers":

Profligatographers, unlike many who make theme / referent related work, make unified bodies of work which are made coherent by their concentrated efforts on the simple act of seeing. Despite their seemingly promiscuous choice of picturing referents, a Profligatographer very often has a distinctive personal vision / manner of seeing which pulls everything together, body of work wise.

The Curator, after viewing all 5 of my folios, most definitely saw the overarching vision which I believe unifies all of my pictures. That is, with the possible exception of my single women pictures. She felt those pictures to be less controlled / structured than my other work, an assessment with which I agree.

My single women pictures are much more referent biased than most of my other pictures. In my other works, while the referents matter, there is much more visual evidence of the deliberative use of natural color, shapes, and space within the frame, all of which come together to create the design / form as viewed on the 2D surface of the print. And, IMO, it is the coming together of all of those elements which is the overarching visual bedrock of my vision, that is, a quality / characteristic which is most often described as "beautiful prints" (in and of themselves, independent of the referent).

That written, my pictures are more than just visual. Moving beyond the illustrative, my intent is to address / illuminate, picturing wise, what I consider to be the beauty to be found in the commonplace - those things which are looked at in the passing parade of everyday life but to which little attention is given. To bring attention to the fine details of everyday life as opposed to the grand spectacles thereof. That M.O. is, IMO, the other overarching implied bedrock of my vision.

To my eye and sensibilities, taken together, my explicitly stated (the referent / the illustrated) way of seeing and my implied (the illuminated) meaning(s), create the overarching totality of my vision. And, I don't believe it takes a genius to understand and/or see, in all of my work, that the visual quality of my prints emphatically underscores the implied meaning(s) to be had / found therein ..... beautiful prints + common stuff = common beauty.

Or perhaps, on the other hand, some of you might think that I and my pictures are full of s**t. In any case, opinions of all kinds are encouraged and welcome.

ku # 1175 ~ boat+dog / flat out dumb luck

Dog on boat ~ Blue Mountain Lake, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenFor 6 days during our stay on Blue Mountain Lake, I attempted, unsuccessfully, to make a picture of this dog on a boat. The boat+dog went by our cottage 3-4 times a day on no particular schedule so it was impossible to predict their appearance and therefore be prepared to make a picture. Each time they appeared over the first 6 days, they were either too far out of camera range (for the lens mounted on the camera) or I didn't have a camera at hand and the few pictures I attempted just didn't have it.

However, on the very last morning of our stay, as I was out early picturing another great sunrise (taking advantage of the light, so to speak), the boat+dog came around the point positioned exactly the right distance for my camera/lens set up. Boat+dog appeared so suddenly and unexpectedly that I was fortunate the camera was set for the proper exposure, the light couldn't have been better and the dog was in the same position - although I never saw him in any other position or even move, for that matter - because I only got one shot at it. Literally, one single click of the shutter.

ku # 1173-74 / civilized ku # 2320-27 ~ an odd night out

Post, steps, flowers ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Camp Flat Rock wing ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Flat Rock bedrooms wing ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Lake Champlain shore ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
flat rock ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Interior ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Interior # 2 ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Pack basket ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Rocky point ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Vermont ~ Willsboro, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenYesterday evening, the wife and I went out for a $1,000.00USD-a-ticket political soiree. The event was for our good friend (the wife's ex law partner), US Congressman Bill Owens (a Democrat).

What made it an odd night out is twofold: 1) we don't ever have any $1,000 nights out, and, 2) the party was chock full (34-36 of 40) of top-1%-ers Republicans, a group we don't normally hangout with. Nevertheless, we sorta had to attend, so we sucked it up and went.

The party was held at Camp Flat Rock, a seasonal privately owned Adirondack Great Camp on the shore of Lake Champlain. The camp is listed on the National Registry of Historic Places and, even though privately owned, it is under the stewardship of the Adirondack Nature Conservancy to ensure that the land (40 acres) will not be developed in the future.

The soiree's host family (the camp owner) are dyed-in-the-wool, multi-generational Republicans - one of the family's patriarchs broke open a bottle of champagne on the occasion of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's death, apparently believing it was cause for celebration - and most of the other attendees, the wife and I excepted, were of the same political persuasion.

Why a Democrat political fundraiser attended by mostly Republicans, you might asked?

My guess is simple ... most of the attendees could be classified as "lost generation" Republicans. That is to say, Republicans who, although they be Conservatives (most might actually be Rockefeller Republicans*), are most definitely not beady-eyed zealots of the Tea Party / Republican far-far Right Wing political persuasion. I am fairly certain that most, if not all of them, are quite dismayed by the current state of their beloved political party.

As such, they appreciate Democrat Bill Owens and his true practical and bi-partisanship approach to governance - he voted with Republicans 35% of the time. He is an honest-to-god political moderate, dedicated to sensible political compromise in order to get things done and he has no stringent political ideology to which he must adhered at all costs.

It is extremely unfortunate that Bill is in such a minuscule minority in the US Congress. Our country needs many more like him on both sides of the aisle. Here's hoping he is re-elected simply because he's a good man and I don't want to be represented by his moronic Tea Party-backed opponent.

*a member of the Republican Party of the United States of America, who is fiscally conservative, but not Christian conservative, and politically ambiguous on social conservatism.

ku # 1172 ~ what the frick??

Sunrise ~ Blue Mountain Lake, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenOn the entry ku # 1168-71, Paul Maxim asked:

"Chasing the light" or "taking advantage of the light": What the frick is the difference??

IMO, the frickin' difference is: reflexively responding to a serendipitous encounter with the natural world vs. a fetishistic and obsessive-compulsive preoccupation, picture making wise, with picturing only the "right" landscape in the "right" light.

And, BTW, I didn't coin the phrase "chasing the light". It was coined, as an honorific self-aggrandizing title, by those who do, in fact, chase the light. I suspect they coined the phrase because they are very proud of the effort and work it takes to get it all so "right".

Whether one considers the nomenclature to be praise or demeaning, I am in basic agreement with the art critic, Sally Eauclaire, who so eloquently wrote:

... such photographers often choose such picturesque subject matter as prodigious crags, rippling sands, or flaming sunsets. Drawing upon the Hudson River School's legacy in painting, they burden it with ever coarser effects. Rather than humbly seek out the "spirit of fact", they assume the role of God's art director making His imminence unequivocal and protrusive.

To be certain, if "prodigious crags, rippling sands, or flaming sunsets" (et al) and "assuming the role of God's art director" float's one's picture making boat, then, by all means, have at it. It's big broad picture making world out there and somebody's got to do it.

For me, I'll just take it and make it as it comes.