civilized ku # 2299-2305 / ku # 1160 / rain # 20-22 ~ let me see it

The pool ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggen
Barn / Chateaugay Windpark ~ Franklin County, NY • click to embiggen
Grasses ~ Lyon Mt., NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
Rain ~ Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggen
Corn / Chateaugay Windpark ~ Franklin County, NY • click to embiggen
Front porch ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggen
Rain / Palmer and N. Main ~ Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggen
Lake Flower ~ Saranac Lake, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
Rental Center ~ Saranac Lake, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenIn last Friday's it's time for next IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (a PDF, best viewed/read at 100-125%) entry, I mentioned that I am seeking submissions for consideration, re: for publication as feature articles for my picture magazine endeavor. So, in this entry I will clarify, in a very general manner, what kind of pictures I am interested in reviewing and, perchance, publishing.

First and foremost, I am interested in pictures which are part of a coherent body of work - any body of work, no matter the theme or referents. People, places (natural or man-made), things or any combination thereof are all open to consideration.

While special consideration will be given to work which starts with seeing (as opposed to concept), pictures in a body of work may be of the found (observations of the real) or made (still life, tableau vivant, etc.) variety. However, technique and/or technical considerations which place a picture at a remove from the medium's intrinsic relationship with the real will be given short shrift.

That said written, and to borrow from David Hurn - in an interview / conversation with Bill Jay from the book On Being a Photographer - what interests me most, picture/work for publication wise, are pictures which display beauty while "revealing a sensation of strangeness, not predictability, a kind of shock non-recognition inside the familiar. The opposite of cliches; pictures which have a quality beyond the visually obvious. But even if it is difficult to define, beauty still lurks behind the scenes".

I am also very interested in pictures made by Profligatographers, a word coined by the guy at More Original Refrigerator Art to describe himself. A word which, IMO, is a perfect descriptor for the profligate and discursive picture makers who, primarily as a result of the digital picture making 'revolution', are making more pictures than they know what to do with. For them, after purchasing a digital picture making device, it's like having free film and processing for life which enables them to make what was formerly considered to be the work of a lifetime in as little as the course of a year, more or less.

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.

IMO, Profligatography - hey, if there are Profligatographers, there must also be Profligatography, right? - is a little understood and appreciated result of the so-called digital 'revolution'. Without going all flapdoodle-and-green-paint on the subject (like stating that I wish to formulate and disseminate didactic conjectural theory espousing a neophutos-like toxonomy of the new symbolic order), it is the pictorial and scio-cultural results and implications of Profligatography which I wish to explore and exhibit in my picture magazine publication.

As mentioned, the submission line is open. Act now. Don't delay. Be the first in your neighborhood to be considered for publication in On Seeing. And please, spread the word - tell all your friends and neighbors that they too can get in on the fun.

Please send a few samples, 72dpi x 800pixels (longest dimension), to: Picture Submission

FYI, I consider myself to be a Profligatographer of the first order. The pictures in this entry are just a few of the 50+ pictures (finished "keepers") I have made in just the past 2 weeks. And, in case you're wondering, I believe the pictures to be part of a body of work which is unified by a common vision and, therefore, typical of a body of work which might be submitted for consideration.

civilized ku # 2298 ~ it's time for next

Clothesline ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggenWhen asked if he pays much attention to what is happening in contemporary art, Robert Adams replied:

No. I suppose because of my commitment to subject matter, because of my lack of interest in process, and because of my conviction that useful pictures don't start from ideas. They start from seeing.

After years of struggling with the idea of making idea/concept-based pictures - pictures the likes of which dominate the contemporary photography art scene, especially the institutional art scene - I have arrived at a point where Adam's statement comes remarkably close to my conclusion / feelings on the matter of idea/concept-based pictures. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed The Landscapist over the years, inasmuch as I have frequently stated that I picture what I see.

While Adams did not parse his use of the word "ideas" - and this is where my caveat, re: his statement, originates - many of my pictures are made based upon an idea/concept. However, that said written, I do believe that had Adam parsed the word, his use of the word would, in fact, be similar (if not identical) to mine.

I believe that to be so because Adams has stated many times the general principles which drive the making of his pictures. Those principles have to do with ((but not limited to) beauty, form, light, and seeing "the facts without blinking". To my way of thinking those driving principles are nothing if not ideas/concepts. Point in fact, Adams has written extensively (Beauty in Photography and Why People Photograph, to name just 2 of his books) about the medium, his ideas about it, and, ultimately, what is the driving force(s) / idea(s) in his picture making.

In any event, IMO, what Adams meant by his use of the word "ideas", and most certainly what I would mean, is to describe the picturing practice so prevalent in the academic world and with academic-trained practitioners - that of concept over referent. The referent being "merely" the means by which an academic art-world concept is addressed.

FYI, if the concept of idea-based art eludes you, think of Marcel Duchamp's Readymades, common manufactured objects which Duchamp selected on the basis of "visual indifference" and about which he stated "...it was always the idea that came first, not the visual example".

Why, you might ask, am I stating the obvious, re: my pictures? Well, the answer has to do with the future endeavors of The Landscapist, the person, not the blog....

I find myself with increasingly little to write about the medium of photography and its apparatus (aka: conventions, traditions, temporal socio-political affected meaning and understanding, etc.). After 6 years of almost daily posting, I have touched upon a very wide variety of topics. The archives are full of the stuff. However, in the short attention span, what's-happening-now world of the internet, all of that is just so much lost to history never to be (re)visited again. And, to be honest, it's that lost to history notion that has me thinking and planning for a new direction for my communication endeavors.

NO. I am not shutting down The Landscapist blog. However, how I use it will undergo a change, mostly likely in the more pictures / less writing direction. Much like one of my favorite sites, More Original Refrigerator Art, which I visit daily just to look at the pictures (if ever there were a picture maker whose pictures start from seeing, this guy is one of the poster boys - pun intended). Although ....

... as I have mentioned, I'm tired of web-based picture viewing wherein every picture is mashed up into a screen-o-tized version of the real thing. The real thing being a printed version of a picture. I most definitely prefer my pictures as objects - objects with surface and character unique to the substrate on which they are printed. Consequently ....

... please read this IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT (a PDF, best viewed/read at 100-125%)

More information to follow in the next entry.

Update on Sunday, August 12, 2012 at 12:46PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Svein-Frode wrote: "Certainly gonna miss the blog, but looking forward to the new mag..."

my response: To all concerned: the blog is not going away. While, eventually, it will undergo some changes, for the near term future - at least 2-3 months - nothing much will be different.

The magazine endeavor is in its early formative stage. Much remains to be resolved (its mission statement) and refined (the how to of production and reproduction - establishing a relationship and workflow system with a high-quality POD provider). In addition to those tasks, I want to have enough feature portfolios / work from others on hand to cover the first 4-6 issues.

So, rest assured that The Landscapist, as you know and love it, will continue in its present form for the foreseeable near term.

civilized ku # 2296-97 ~ going nowhere / in circles

Kids on boat ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggen

civilized ku # 2295 ~ one of these things is much like the other thing

Mirror image ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggenBy just keeping your eyes open you can see some rather unique things. Hint: cloud and topiary.

civilized ku # 2285-94 ~ downsized or outsized

Cottage window ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggenCottages ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggen
"A SHORE THING" ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggenOn the South Jersey barrier island of Stone Harbor there are three 1 block long very narrow streets with small cottages. Ocean, lake, river, forest, mountain locations or wherever they might be found, IMO and to my eye and sensibilities, these structures are the quintessential summer cottage.

When I think of summer vacation accommodations, this is what I want. These cottages are not at all like the house in which I live. And, for me, vacationing is suppose to be a different experience from that of my daily life - the bigger the difference, the better for me. Who the hell wants to stay in a vacation accommodation which closely resembles that in which they live?

In any event, the cottages pictured here (and many more) stand in direct contrast to the spread / plague of McMansions (and mini-McMansions) which are starting to dominate the landscape in Stone Harbor. Quite obviously, the cottage-sized structure is the polar opposite of the out-sized McMansion behemoths but that's not the only difference.

What really sets the cottages apart from the McMansions is character. Each and every cottage conveys a wealth of individual touches which manifest owner idiosyncrasy, which, when taken together with their human / diminutive scale conveys a sense of inviting warmth and intimacy. It makes me want to meet the residents of these cottages.

And meet a few, I did. As I walked the narrow streets making pictures, several residents (owners and renters) struck up conversations with me. A few were out walking on the street and a few came out of their respective cottages to inquire (in a very friendly manner) about my picturing activity. Most conversations were brief but friendly, a few others turned into longer conversations which were mainly about the cottages themselves.

One individual in particular was very interested in picture making to the point of accompanying me back to my rental to view all 5 of my folios (FYI, her favorites were, single woman and tangles, thickets, and twigs).

The character of the cottages and the friendly personal encounters stand in direct contrast with the cold, sterile, insular, faux grandeur of the McMansions and their occupants. The McMansions themselves have little visual warmth or appeal (to my eye and sensibilities), unless, of course, one is given over to the bigger-is-better syndrome (which, in demonstrable fact, many in the $$$$ class are). Their main feature is their size, which apparently is what the owners want to convey to the general rabble, as in a "my thing is bigger than your thing" and a "if you've got it, flaunt it" kinda manner.

Now, it's possible (but, IMO, not probable) that some of the McMansion occupants are warm and friendly people. However, not once in my picturing of their monstrosities (during this visit and visits past), have I ever encounter one of them. Even though these things have a number porches / decks, in all my years of visiting the shore, picturing or just walking about, I have never actually seen a person on one of them. It's as if they have constructed barriers / moats - both visual and emotional - around their compounds / castles in order insulate themselves from contact with 'commoners'.

At least, that's how it feels to my eye and sensibilities, but I'll let the pictures speak for themselves.

FYI, it's customary for summer homes to have names. For example, the bungalow next to our rental is named Second to Nun - it's on Second Street near an institution-sized nun's retirement residency. That said, the behemoth / obscenity pictured in this entry is named A Shore Thing, which to my way of thinking should be changed to read, A Bastardized & Pretentious Shore Thing,

civilized ku # 2282-84 ~ sitting on the dock on the bay

Mid-AM light ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggenBoat, bay, marshes, mainland ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggenLooking north, south and west from a dock/deck on the bay/coastal waters between the island and the mainland.

civilized ku # 2282-85 ~ cottages, bungalows, houses, and obscenities

The creep to obscenity ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggenOne of the many issues I have with the South Jersey Shore is ongoing destruction of what was once a rather quaint Summer community. As is the case in many parts of the Good Ol' US of A - where nothing exceeds like excess - the moneyed class is driving out the 'common' folks and destroying what was once a community with real character.

Not that vacationing in a place where renting a modest bungalow, which sets you back $3,000-4,000.00USD for a one week rental, is frequented by a whole lot of 'commoners'. But, that said written, the fact remains that the new McMansion summer homes are being built on lots which once housed 2 or 3 more modest structures. And, in the process, driving up real estate values into the stratosphere.

FYI, the little cottage (on a 35×40 foot lot) pictured in the upper left of the picture posted in this entry is currently for sale at $425,000USD. A typical 10,000 sq. ft. Stone Harbor McMansion - that's right, a 10,000 sq. ft. summer house - will set you back a cool $3.5-7,000,000USD.

Whatever the cost of these monstrosities, the thing that gets under my skin, in addition to their physical /social impact on the community and their sterile faux grandeur, is the insane level of energy consumption these obscenities represent. Anyone want to venture a guess, re: the energy required to air-condition one of those behemoths for a summer?

In any event, it is the wretched excesses of the South Jersey Shore which make feel like I am consorting with the enemy every time I visit the place.

Update on Wednesday, August 8, 2012 at 12:42PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Mary Dennis asked: "Why do you keep going there Mark?"

my response: 3 reasons - 1) it's a family - the wife's family, and I like them all - thing, 2) Hugo likes to have fun with his 'cousins', and 3) it gives me something to add to my curmudgeonly things-to-bitch-about list.

And, truth be told, if we visited the place in late autumn - after the crowds have left and the temperature isn't as hot and humid as Hell - I might actually enjoy the place. But that's not gonna happen because the Adirondacks is beyond category glorious in the autumn.

civilized ku # 2278-80 ~ big things on exhibit

Hugo and TRex ~ New York, NY • click to embiggenExhibits / Museum of Natural History ~ New York, NY • click to embiggenOn our way home from the South Jersey Shore, Hugo and I visited NYC for a day and a night. For me, it was a way to get back to civilization and wash the SJS out of my hair / system. For Hugo it was just a good time.