ku # 674 ~ a few answers

Nature is chaotic in the Adirondack PARK, NY • click to embiggenOver the course of the past few entries, a number of questions have arisen that were not germane to the topic at hand. So, I'll make a stab at answer a couple of them.

Bill Gordon (no link provided) asked: ... you mentioned the mCamerabag...is that the name of the bag and if not what one did you decide on that would carry the camera and two lenses?

I went to B&H to purchase a smallish camera bag for my m4/3rds gear and came away with one that sorta fit the bill but was, in fact, really the best compromise available. I felt that is was still too big for my needs but it was quite a bit better than any camera bag that I currently owned.

Then a few days later, as I was walking through a Best Buy store (on my way out to my car), I came across a camera bag section that had a number of video / camcorder bags on display. It was there that I found a near-perfect m-style camera bag - the Lowepro Edit 140.

I say "near-perfect" because: 1) it has a rather gimpy strap, and 2) it has only one divider. However, with the addition of the strap and the velcro-secured / adjustable dividers from the "compromise" camera bag, it is now "perfect".

Anil Rao asked: ...Based on the frequency of your posts, you seem to be producing a whole lot of pictures, all which look really well made (at least when viewed on the computer screen). I was interested in knowing how many of these pictures do you end up printing.

I make a lot of prints. However, the overwhelming majority of them are stacked - with tissue paper interleaving - on a work table because I have yet to find a reasonably priced solution to the presentation problem. Most of my current printing is 24×24 prints. Presentation costs - mounting, matting, framing, glass, etc. - for that size print can be staggering. Especially so considering that a matted 24×24 print is closer to 36×36 in size.

Consequently, I have taken to simply putting unmounted prints on the wall, sans mat and frame, with clear pushpins. It's not very elegant, but it works and, most importantly, prints tacked to the wall is much better than prints in a pile.

ku # 673 ~ idiots, one and all - pt. II

Nature is chaotic ~ in the Adirondack PARK, NY • click to embiggenAnd, once again, I quote:

... Nature is chaotic. Nothing seems to happen with any order or reason. Most scenes are a jumble of elements, competing with each other for attention ...

OK then, I'll grant that the nature photography "expert" in question - the author must be an expert because he was also one of the authors of The Ultimate Guide to Digital Nature Photography - is engaged in "selling soap" and that creating a sense of chaos relative to the problem that his particular brand of soap solves is an honored tradition in the fine art of huckstering, but, come on .... everything in nature happens for a reason even if we humans don't understand or know what the reason is. And, just because we may not know / understand the process doesn't mean that there is not any order to the process.

Sure enough, the author of the preceding statement used the phrase, "seems to happen" as a qualifier of sorts, but, once again, come on .... we know that all that stuff happens for a reason and with some form of natural world order. Simply stated, there is no "seems" about it. If you think there is, then you're an uniformed / uneducated idiot.

So, it just seems to me that the statement is a very bogus starting point relative to looking at the natural world with the intent of picturing it. The statement is very akin to how centerfold / fashion picturing is undertaken. Forget the reality, make a fantasy. Forget the truth. Tell a lie. And then, when questioned about your motives / methods, pass it all off as a harmless "interpretation". After all, everyone knows that it is not real, right?

As for the bit in the statement about "scenes are a jumble of elements, competing with each other for attention" - elements of the natural world are not competing with anything for attention. They are just going about their business of surviving. Even granting that the statement's author meant that a lot of the various elements in a scene capture our attention, isn't that part nature's elemental character?

Why dismiss it? Why work to eliminate it your pictures? Isn't that missing the "point" - the idea that for us to survive, we must embrace, appreciate, and respect the natural world with all of its complexity and, to some extent, its mystery? As opposed to, as our master of the WOW! picture would have us do, embracing and appreciating just the parts that we "understand", aka - the parts that conform to a humankind sense of "order" and "reason". Or, in other words, all of the pretty parts and screw (consume and destroy) the rest.

ku # 672 ~ idiots, one and all

Nature is chaotic ~ in the Adirondack PARK, NY • click to embiggenAnd I quote:

Let's face it—Nature is chaotic. Nothing seems to happen with any order or reason. Most scenes are a jumble of elements, competing with each other for attention. The single greatest challenge for the nature photographer is finding a way to tame the chaos, and to impose a sense of order.

While paying a visit to an online nature photography site to see if the shit had hit the fan re: the exhibit Bird Watching - an exhibition of bird pictures by Paula McCartney, I came across the preceding statement. It was part of a teaser for an online nature photography workshop offered under the title of MAKING WOW! IMAGES -Six Steps to Taking Great Nature Photographs.

However, let me address first things first, the shit hitting the fan thing. A few years ago, I stirred up quite a dust up at the nature site when I began posting images in the fauna gallery of decayed flowers that were made on my flatbed scanner (so called, scanner photography). The fauna moderators / police went ballistic because they were judged to be a "slap in the face" to all of the hardworking fauna shooters who trek out into the field toting all kinds of specialized gear - reflectors, diffuser screens, wind screens, flash equipment, and so on.

There was quite a heated debate amongst myself, the moderators, and the site owner as to whether such images should be allowed to be posted. Long story, short - the pictures were allowed and in very short order the moderators and a few of the fauna "purists" headed for the hills and started their own site, where, I presume, no such grievous affronts to fauna picture making purity are allowed.

In any event, I have to think that if word of McCartney's pictures should come to the attention of the avian picturing purists - which is probably a long shot at best, because McCartney's pictures of artificial birds in natural environments are definitely part of the Art milieu which is a place not often frequented by avian picture makers - there will be a hew and cry along the lines of that in the fauna gallery. I am certain that part of that clamor will be about why-the-hell would anyone pay that kind of money for fake bird pictures?

All of which brings me to the dumb-ass statement about the "greatest single challenge" for the nature photographer - that of imposing order on the chaotic natural world.

As you can deduce from the sub-title - six steps to taking great nature photographs - the nature photography expert believes that there are 6 steps to taking (not making) great pictures. Great pictures are, of course, WOW! pictures. Right from the start, it is well worth noting that amongst those 6 key ingredients, there is not a single mention of the heart, soul, and mind of the picture maker.

But, what really got me going was the fact that, in the real world, even though the natural world is full of chaos, one should avoid picturing that chaos. Instead, one should impose a form of human "order" upon that natural world in order to make it more appealing - much easier, in a visual sense, to grasp and ultimately to consume.

And isn't that exactly what we're doing in and to the natural world - imposing a form of human "order" upon it in an attempt to make it easier to consume?

And, BTW & IMO, Paula McCartney's pictures are beautiful looks at the chaos of the natural world and pictures that call into consideration / contemplation humankind's relationship to it.

FYI - stay tuned, in the next entry I'll have more to say on the moronic idea that in the natural world "[N]othing seems to happen with any order or reason. Most scenes are a jumble of elements, competing with each other for attention."

ku # 669-71 / civilized ku # 379 ~ close, but not close enough

Goodnow Flow cabin ~ Newcomb, in the Adirondak PARK • click to embiggen
Goodnow Flow ~ Newcomb, in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenA few days I mentioned that the wife and I had checked out some vacation property about an hour from our home. One of those properties is located on Goodnow Flow in the town of Newcomb.

At first glance, the property seemed to be an attractive situation - a nicely wooded, one acre waterfront property. And, unlike many waterfront properties on a decent-size lake, the lake is owned by an association that has placed many desirable restrictions on the lake use - such as a 10hp maximum for powered boats (therefore no water skiing), no jet skis, and the like). But, the more we thought about it, the more it became clear that I am not an association-type guy.

FYI, in the Adirondacks, a "flow" is the name given to bodies of water - usuallly long and relatively narrow - that have been created by damming a river. The dams (with spillways) are normally around 100 years old - built long ago by lumbering companies to create winter impounds for harvested timber which would be released each Spring via the spillway to makes its way to a mill.

Much of this formerly privately held land has been acquired by NYS and added to the forever wild forest preserve. The dams have been maintained in order to preserve some wonderful wilderness waterways.

civilized ku # 371-78 / ku # 667-68 ~ that's the method

Pasture and distant / approaching snow flurries • click to embiggen
The Jay Range • click to embiggen
Cattle ranch landscape • click to embiggen
2 Corners • click to embiggen
Silo landscape in light snowfall • click to embiggen
Field / light snowfall • click to embiggenYesterday afternoon, in an attempt to prevent my head from exploding due to a where-the-hell's-the-snow variant of cabin fever, I took a short 4-5 mile meander up in the hills above our village.

The area is a little weird, Adirondack-wise, in as much as there is a decent size - albeit quite "compact" in width - fertile valley that winds its way between some mountain ranges. Consequently, there are quite a number of cattle / crop farms spread over the landscape. Overall, the landscape is quite lovely.

Indeed, it could be very accurately described as "picturesque" and very unique in the Adirondack landscape scheme of things. But, that said, I'd be very stunned if more than a few hundred of the 10 million+ annual visitors to the Adirondack Park ever see the place, even though the one-and-only highway into the Adirondacks in the NE corner of the Park passes within view of the fringes of the area.

I have only occasionally explored the area. Each time I do, I make a pledge to return more frequently but something else, picture making wise, always seems to demand my time and attention. And so it was that, yesterday, I made the same pledge. We'll just have to wait and see how that goes...

In any event, enjoy the pictures and, of course, comments are always welcome. Especially so, in light of this:

If a more or less random snapshot is like an infinitely fine scale that has been scratched from the surface of reality with the tip of a finger, then in comparision the photoseries or photomontage lets us experience the extended massiveness of reality, its authentic meaning. We build systematically. We must also photograph systematically. Sequence and long-term photographic observation--that is the method. - Segei Tretyakov - in 1931

civilized ku # 365-67 ~ pure, unadulterated populist bullshit

Snowy scene ~ Newcomb, in the Adirondack PARK• click to embiggen
Snowmobiles ~ Long Lake, in the Adirondack PARK• click to embiggenIn my recent entry, what the world needs now is NOT love, sweet love, a comment was left that suggested:

Most people don't want a big costly controlling government ... [I]t's about taking back our country and economy ... Live free or die. (emphasis mine)

Other than pointing out the fact that the comment is little more than a pavlovian-like spewing of FOX Network simpleminded sloganeering, I don't have that much to say about it except to state that I hadn't noticed that our country had been taken away. I get up every morning and go about my business in pretty much the same way that I always have for the past 6 decades or so. I feel absolutely no need to die, because I have been living free all these long years.

However, that stated, let me tell you about a little experience, including a missed picture making opportunity, I had this past weekend - the wife and I went a few miles south into the Adirondack Park - remember, we live in a park (and, in general, why is it that the further south you go, the dumber it seems to become?) - to get the lay of the land in search of some vacation property.

Long story short, we ended up spending the night in Long Lake, which is a nice little village in the north central region of the Park. Over the past decade, the town has had a problem with its water supply and it appeared, correctly so, that the only solution to the issue was to obtain its water from a nearby source which was located on state land.

Unfortunately, this use was not allowed by the "Forever Wild" amendment to the NYS Constitution, Article VII, Section 7 which was unanimously ratified on Thursday, September 13, 1894, by all 112 delegates to the NYS Constitutional Convention. In the fall of that same year, the voters of the state approved the addition to the Constitution. In 1938 the clause was given its own article in the Constitution, Article XIV.

Now, for purposes of this discussion, it should be noted that the state lands "now owned or hereafter acquired, constituting the forest preserve as now fixed by law" were then and are now the state lands within the Adirondack Park, a park created by the state, i.e. - "fixed by law", in 1892.

So it was, as I was picturing the snowmobiles on Long Lake, I noticed - but did not picture - 2 nearby vehicles that had identical bumper stickers afixed that read:

The Adirondacks is not a park.
It's where I live and
It's where I work.

The bumper sticker emerged, as the result of populist anger, during the long course of the Long Lake water situation. Unfortunately, and not unlike most other recent populist sloganeering, it has a major flaw that any half wit, especially any half wit living in the Adirondack Park, should know - the Adirondacks is a park and has been for last 125 years or so. If you live here, you live in a park. If you work here, you work in a park.

It really is that simple.

Of course, the populists believe (and have done so even before the Park's founding) that their right to do anything they want has been taken away by "downstate" elite and effete residents and their elected officials. Those evil doers who, in the name of "taking our country away", want to drive out the locals so that they can vacation in peace and quiet in their own private park.

What the populists fail, or more likely, refuse to recognize is the fact that Article XIV required the approval (by vote) of all of "the people" of NYS in order for it to be enacted into law. And "the people" did so and have continued to do so again and again by defeating (at the ballot box) repeated attempts to weaken or change the "Forever Wild" protections afforded state lands within the Adirondack Park.

"The people" also continue to approve (at the ballot box) the money to acquire more land from within the Park boundaries (the Blue Line)- from private hands when it becomes available. Land that is added to those with "Forever Wild" protection. "The people" and their duly elected officials, acting in their capacity as caretakers and owners, recognize both the value and the responsibilities inherent in having such a unique and treasured natural asset.

So, once again, the "populists" have got it wrong. No one is "taking their country away". If they abide by the rules, they can live free and not have to die to do so.

It is also very worth noting that the Long Lake / Raquette Water District was allowed - by an vote/approval by 73% of "the people" of NYS to amend Article XIV - to have access to that 1 acre of State Forest Preserve Land which solved their water problem.

So there, not all of us nazi•socialist-tree•hugging-commie•pinko•facist-bastards are trying to "take the country away".

Update on Wednesday, January 27, 2010 at 08:25AM by gravitas et nugalis

Regarding the picture posted with this entry, Featured Comment: Matt Kuchta asked: "The selective use of focus: how much of it is in-camera/in-computer?"

my response: Matt, it's all in-camera - f2.8 @ 150mm (35mm equiv.) focal length gets it done every time.

civilized ku # 300 ~ baby, it's still cold outside

Clouds over Lake Champlain • click to embiggenDuring the winter months there is often a cloud bank that sits above Lake Champlain and winter it is.

While we received exactly 0 inches of snow from the storm that buried much of the Mid-Atlantic region, we do have cold - daytime highs in the single digits and even colder nights. Add a little wind and we're dealing with feels-like-0F temperatures.

ku # 665 ~ it's back (finally)

Snow • click to embiggenAfter a rather unusually warm - or more accurately, not really cold - November / early December, this AM brought snow, a blizzard, snowplows, school closings / delayed openings, canceled events, the wife taking the AWD vehicle to work, and so on. In other words, the whole 9 yards of normal winter stuff.