man & nature # 107 ~ actually man's best friend & nature

Formerly frozen dog crap • click to embiggenAs long as we're considering dogs of one kind or another (see the following entry), this Things That Emerge From Under the Snow picture seemed rather appropriate.

Update on Friday, March 13, 2009 at 10:45AM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Jack Nelson asked: "Are you starting a "Little Murders" series?"

my response: Unlike the character of Alfred Chamberlain from Little Murders, I would not have to roam the streets and parks of NYC to find piles of dog crap. When the snow melts, one of the "Rites of Spring" that we have is to rake up the 10 zillions piles of "unprocessed (read conserved) dog shit" (as labeled by Mike Odonoghue that have been deposited in our back over the Winter by our 2 best friends.

But, the answer to your question is, "No."

civilized ku # 165 ~ hot dogging it

Hot dog and condiments • click to embiggenA recent article in PDN (Photo District News) featured an article (it's online but I can't link to it because PDN is a pay subscription site) titled, RAW FOOD PHOTOGRAPHY, which was based on this "news":

The stark lighting and graphic compositions in the redesigned Bon Appétit have won the magazine new fans but may alienate traditional readers.

Since food photography was a staple of my commercial photography life, I was interested in reading the article regarding the newest happening thing in the food picture biz.

It turns out that some in that world has eschewed the soft warm approach to making food pictures and have adopted an hot, hard, "edgy" look that is more typical of trendy fashion pictures. Magazine and agency art directors have shattered the mold even further by hiring non-food-specialist photographers whose pictures (of whatever) have an "edgy" look and asking them to bring that look to food pictures.

Both the style of picturing and the hiring of non-food-specialist photogs are radical changes in the food photo biz. In my heyday, a food client or art director wouldn't even look at your book (aka, portfolio) unless you were a food specialist, and, the soft look was absolutely de regueur. Taking it a step further, many clients/ADs wouldn't look at your book unless it was product specific - don't even think of showing pictures of red apples to a client/AD whose product is green apples.

The idea of specialization is still the prevalent paradigm in the higher reaches of the commercial/editorial photo markets and each specialization arena has its own picturing conventions and standards. The reason for this is quite simple - the time-honored idea of CYA (cover your ass). There is not an agency AD alive and employed who is willing to risk it all by hiring anyone less than an again-and-again proven specialist to create pictures for a client who is making a multi-million dollar media buy.

And magazine ADs, who are often willing to take controlled risks - like the new edgy food pix, don't have the time to deal with picturing screw ups - they have an absolute press deadline to meet. They still have to go with shooters whom they know can deliver the goods.

It's a business model that is, no matter the look of the pictures, a fairly conservative one. As a result, changes in picturing conventions and standards comes rather slowly. That's why I am always on the lookout for the next happening thing. I like change.

man & nature # 106 ~ meaning heaped upon meaning

No Littering and ice breakup • click to embiggenIt should come as no surprise that I am producing Things That Emerge From Under the Snow - the book. What the hell, I might even sign up for SoFoBoMo. Either way, the cover picture for the book is the one in today's entry - a picture that I took 2 weeks ago. It just seems entirely appropriate.

That said, I am disappointed in the lack of response to yesterday's question regarding the idea of seeing the Things That Emerge From Under the Snow pictures for what they really are. I was hoping for a discussion based upon your perceptions of what the pictures "really are about". It seemed to me that many of you would see them in variety of ways.

Steve Durbin took a crack at it and can't say that I disagree with his idea that for a number of reasons:

...a claim that these are primarily "nature pictures" won't find many adherents.

Of course, the case for seeing these pictures as nature pictures could certainly be bolstered by an Artist Statement that addresses the mixed nature of the pictures. And, in an effort to direct the viewer's attention to the nature picture qualities of the work, it is certainly my intent to do so in the book. At the very least, my intent is to encourage the viewer to entertain ideas - added meaning - beyond what most strikingly meets the eye which, without question, are the colorful human-discarded things.

Hugo takes a break from finding TTEFUTS • click to embiggenBut, if I really wanted to throw another meaning into the mix, I could legitimately title the book, A Late Winter Walk With My Grandson - complete with a picture of him on the cover.

Point in fact, I will never be able to disassociate these pictures from the memory of the wonderful time we spent together discovering Things That Emerge From Under the Snow. My intent is to hint at this added meaning by dedicating the book to him and our walk together.

And therein is a big part of this entry - a return to my notion that pictures + words are more often than not much more powerful than just pictures alone.

This notion is anathema to the a-picture-must-stand-alone crowd. A crowd, regarding which I feel compelled to mention, that is much given to the idea of accompanying their pictures with some of the most tortured titles (aka, words) imaginable. One could do a book with all of the loopy and cliched titles but, suffice it to say, ther rarely, if ever, let a picture go untitled (tortured or not).

However, they really seem to draw a deep line in the sand when it comes to the Artist Statement. The 2 most mentioned rationales for this are; 1) a picture that needs words is a failure, and 2) I want to let the viewer figure it out.

Rationale #1 is entirely understandable and I would not disagree very strenuously ... however, there is a vast difference between a picture that needs words and one which has its potential for expanded meaning enhanced with the use of words. That is not to say that an Artist Statement should tell the viewer what to think - rationale #2 - but a good Artist Statement gives the ideas of context and author's intent (which often must be inferred from the author's stated philosophies about picturing, the subject, and, at times, life in general) a valued place in the sun.

Personally, I have never read an Artist Statement that detracts from the meaning - or possible meaning(s) - of a body of work.

That said, if I really wanted to throw a meaning monkey wrench into mix regarding the Things That Emerge From Under the Snow pictures, I could title the book, A Late Winter Walk With My Grandson And The Wife Leaves Us On Our Own Because It Wasn't "Spinning Her Buttons".

man & nature # 105 ~ kinda makes you wonder just a bit

Blue underwear • click to embiggen

man & nature # 104 ~ surprise, surprise

Pink ribbon and butts on dirty snow • click to embiggenOne of the things that have been numbered amongst photography's "assets" is the element of surprise / discovery. The ability of pictures to teach / reveal to the viewer and the maker something that they did not already know.

I have been on both sides of that coin many times. A case in point is this mini-body of work that is conceived and presented under the working title of Things That Emerge From Under the Snow.

While processing the images, it occurred to me - much more so than when I was out picturing - that not everything pictured had, in fact, emerged from under the snow. Some things were actually sitting on the snow and quite obviously had been recently "placed" there. There are even a couple pictures with no human-discarded things in evidence at all.

This was causing me a bit of working title apprehension until I realized, upon viewing the work in its entirety, that I had not been picturing what appears,
Emerging things • click to embiggen at first glance, to be the referent in these pictures - bits and pieces of human-discarded things (otherwise known as litter). Nope, not at all.

Without realizing it at the time, what I had been really picturing was bits and pieces of the natural world, all of which had emerged from under the snow. What I had done was to create a rather interesting series of nature pictures with bits and pieces of man's influence upon the natural world, quite literally, thrown into the picturing mix.

This realization sort of blew my mind. Again I emphasize, upon viewing the work in its entirety, it occurred to that if I were to remove the human-discarded things from the pictures, what I would be left with is a really interesting (IMO) series of nature pictures. Pictures that are true to my somewhat standard MO of picturing the world in all of its complex, chaotic, and messy glory.

However, I can't remove the human-discarded things from the pictures and, in fact, I have no desire to do so. That's because, again IMO, the pictures are much more complex and interesting - both visually and intellectually / emotionally, by their inclusion in the scenes. At least that's how I see it.

What all this reminds me of is this little bit of picturing wisdom:

To shoot poignant pictures we only need follow the path of our enthusiasm . I believe that this feeling is the universe's way of telling us that we are doing the right thing. The viewing public will always disagree over the intrinsic merits of a particular photograph(s), but no one can deny the enthusiasm that originally inspired us to capture and offer that image(s) to others. - Timothy Allen

Or, to put it another way - don't over think it. Just follow your muse because, if you don't get all wrapped up in that pre-visualization crap you never know exactly where it might lead.

On that note, I have a very loaded question for you - I have obviously given away the the game, but nevertheless I still wonder if any of you would have seen these pictures for what they really are?

civilized ku # 164 ~ in the sink

Pickled beet juice in the sink • click to embiggen

ku # 557 ~ and they taste good too

Where we get our beef • click to embiggenThis past weekend was delightful. On Saturday it was shirtsleeve weather and Hugo and I got out and about to do a picture project - Things That Emerge From Under the Snow.

The idea was inspired by Saturday's Coming to the surface picture which was made Saturday morning as a one-off picture. However, after processing it, I realized that with a spring-like melt going on there was probably a lot of stuff coming to the surface. So, off we went and in the span of about 2 hours we found a veritable gold mine of things that were coming to (or at) the surface.

It occurred to me as I was picturing away that I was accomplishing exactly what you are not suppose to do for the SoFoBoMo project - I was making enough pictures in an afternoon to make a photo book.

And here's the thing about that - it sure seemed on Saturday that picturing things that were coming to surface was going to be limited to an afternoon. The snow was disappearing fast and later that day, and all through the night, it rained steadily. By Sunday morning, virtually all the snow was gone except for those gargantuan piles of plowed snow.

The point of the matter is that given a little inspiration and a window of opportunity it really doesn't take very long - an afternoon will do - to create an interesting (IMO) mini-body of work that is photo book worthy. It made me think that it would fun to organize a SoFoBoDa project.

In any event, I am currently processing about 20-25 pictures of things coming to (or at) the surface. I start posting them tomorrow. That said, as I sit here at my computer we're getting about 5" of new snow ....

FYI, on Sunday we took Hugo up to the farm for a barnyard stroll and to pick up a 1/4 of a cow - a portion of which we had for Sunday dinner.

man & nature # 104 ~ spring revealed submersibles

Coming to the surface • click to embiggenYesterday's topic induced a fit (albeit a small fit) of gearheadedness in Mary Dennis. You remember Mary - she's the loopy guilt-ridden liberal - ;-) - who has taken the entire weight of the economic mess on her shoulders because she "likes her stuff". Well, this time around she can, at the very least, rationalize getting some more stuff under the heading of "economic stimulus".

It seems that Olympus' has

definitely got me thinking ... that nice little swivel LCD screen that I am personally very fond of ... it (the upcoming E-620) lets you choose a square (6:6) aspect ratio ...[I]s that a first for a DSLR?

Mary is no stranger to square and to answer her question - I do believe that the Olympus in-camera choice of multiple aspect ratios is not a first for dslrs in that the recently introduced Olympus E-30 has the same feature. I like the idea of in-camera square picturing if no other reason than I can pack considerably more image files on my memory card and on my various hard drives.

I have been pondering the purchase of an E-30 but the new E-620 throws a new consideration into the mix. Both use the same 12mp sensor and processing engine but the E-620 puts it in a smaller package at nearly half the price of the E-30. I also like the fact that there is a battery grip for the E-620 - with it the camera feels better in my hands, especially so with long/tele lenses.

IMO, the E-620 would my a great second / backup camera to my E-3 although ... if I really want to do it right, it may be time to dump the E-3 and replace it with an E-30. That way no matter which camera I bring to my eye, they will both have the same sensor and processing engine thus making the E-620 a truly interchangeable backup.

Ok. Enough with the gear-talk.

If you're looking for some entertaining reading, you might try this piece - “Truth is Beauty”, and Other Fairy Tales from The Landscapist's resident contrarian. It's a real hammer-and-tong broadside and Paul Maxim pulls no punches. Consider this:

This is bullshit! It’s a goddamned fairy tale! This is Rush Limbaugh style, cockamamie nonsense!

FYI, this is exactly the type of commentary/ feedback I look for regarding my entries. Especially so when it comes from someone who considers me to be "someone, whom we all know and love..."