ku # 563/64 ~ stutter-steps in time: the decisive moment - what moment was that?
Wednesday, March 25, 2009 at 08:43AM 
A tangle of bare branches • click to embiggenYou may have noticed that I have recently been playing with diptychs. This is nothing new for me - on and off, I have been "playing" with diptychs and triptychs for quite some time.
In the past, most of my whatever-tychs have been comprised of related but distinctly different pictures - more of a story / sequence about a place/thing. The related pictures might have been made over an extended period of time - up to an hour or more of an "in depth" exploration of a place/thing. IMO, the resultant whatever-tychs evidence a sense of "looking around" a place/thing.
The most recent diptychs differ from the previous efforts in that they are created from nearly identical pictures that have been made just seconds apart which, IMO, creates a sense of quick "glimpses" rather than "in depth" looking. And, in keeping with my snapshot aesthetic, creating / fostering the sense of seemingly quick, spontaneous, and thoughtless "glimpses" is what I am after.
However, I am also seeking to make pictures that deal with an expanded sense of time beyond that of a "normal" picture which, as we all know, "freezes" a given moment in time. In a real sense, a single picture stops time in its tracks, potentially preserving / isolating it for all time (one of the mediums inherent characteristics). My intent is quite simply to remind the viewer that time moves on.
That said, I am also screwing with the time-honored photographic notion of the decisive moment - a notion that has been alternately interpreted to mean 1) that moment when the essential activity/motion in a scene is "ideal" or 2) that moment when all of the elements in flux in a scene come together in a pleasing compositional arrangement.
Generally speaking, I subscribe to neither interpretation. For that matter, I do not particularly subscribe to the notion of the decisive moment at all. IMO, whatever you choose to picture, whenever you choose to picture, elevates that moment to a "decisive" moment. Hence, my anti-single-moment decisive moments - quite perplexing, right?.
In any event, this notion of anti-decisive-moment diptychs is a notion that's gaining a lot of traction with me at the moment (ha, ha, ha, get it?). IMO, it is another key element in my snapshot aesthetic whereby I have been attempting to create, in the minds of the viewers of my pictures, a sense of beauty-beauty-everywhere - all-you-have-to-do-is-just-look.
For the photographers in the viewing crowd, there is another message / meaning to be found in my pictures - if you can just get over the idea of the "perfect" picture (the "perfect" light, "perfect" composition, "perfect"/iconic subject matter, the "right" camera, the "right" lens, the "right" filter, et al), there are pictures to be found just about anywhere, at any time, at any place you happen to be.
As Minor White stated:
Vision without association - pristine vision.
And, while you're at it, consider this regarding "snapshots" from Duane Michals -
Because of my involvement with my photographs, it is difficult for me really to see them objectively. Talking about them is like talking about myself. The only real idea that I have about them is that they are essentially snapshots. For snapshots, I feel, often have an inherent simplicity and directness that I find beautiful. The roots of my photographs are in this tradition.
However, I think that the photographer must completely control his picture and bring to it all his personality, and in this area most photographs never transcend being just snapshots. When a great photographer does infuse the snapshot with his personality and vision, it can be transformed into something truly moving and beautiful.
FYI, I would be sorrily remiss if I did not give a tip of the hat regarding my notion of stutter-steps in time to Mary Dennis who, a few years ago, was herself briefly (to the best of my knowledge) playing with diptychs made with nearly identical pictures made only seconds apart. There is currently no evidence of that work on her website so I don't know whether or not she gave up the ghost with that stuff. If she has, more's the pity but, one way or the other, moment to moment, I'll carry on.
gravitas et nugalis
Featured Comment: Mary Dennis wrote: "The ghost is always lurking Mark. I think that time, its passage (in chunks big and small) and how it swallows everything is always present in my mind as I photograph. The diptych and triptych are a perfect format for illustrating that passage aren't they? I've always likened them to a sentence where a single photo feels more like a phrase or a dangling participle sometimes."
Reader Comments (5)
they almost look like sterographs
Rudy Vanderlans roadtrip book Supermarket has a great design that takes advantage of multiple images taken a few seconds apart. The effect is slightly disorienting, in a good way. As many of the images are taken out of a car window -- the technique and resulting design really work.
The ghost is always lurking Mark. I think that time, it's passage (in chunks big and small) and how it swallows everything is always present in my mind as I photograph. The diptych and triptych are a perfect format for illustrating that passage aren't they? I've always likened them to a sentence where a single photo feels more like a phrase or a dangling participle sometimes. I have been wanting to gather them up and get them on the website and I will eventually. As time allows. Thanks for the tip of the hat.
Hey Joe - thanks for the info on Vanderlans
For those of you interested, here's a link to some of his pictures
I'm just not buying this notion for static subjects. For movement, no problem. But that is in no way what I take away from these static diptychs. It is more a matter of saying the thing photographed is more than a single view, has many interpretations but the passage of time is completely absent: you can't photography entropy.