ku # 1308 / diptych # 155 / kitchen sink # 32 ~ back home and the sink is calling my name

dune ~ Stone harbor, NJ • click to embiggen
night ~ Stone harbor, NJ • click to embiggen
leaf and fly ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen

Back home from the Jersey Shore for a short stay. Thursday, it's off to Philadelphia for a hockey tournament and from there it's back to Rist Camp for our annual 5 week sojourn. So, instead of unpacking we're washing stuff and repacking it.

While at the Jersey Shore, I am usually out and abound late in the day when the heat has reached (for me) a tolerable temperature (playing golf is the only exception to the rule). Around the six o'clock hour the beach is practically deserted, usually the light is getting interesting, and the time is right for making beach pictures. Hence the dune picture in this entry.

Maybe next year I'll get up early and explore / picture the early morning light. I'm certain that that light will be interesting and the beach quite deserted as well. Although, getting up early after a party each night (the clan doesn't know when to call it quits) might be a bit of stretch. Then again, next year Hugo and I will getting our own little cottage so that we will be able to take breaks away from the maddening crowd.

diptych # 154 ~ sometime the water is blue, sometime it's green

pool - blue / green ~ Stone Harbor, NJ • click to embiggen

It's somewhat mystifying that there so many pools right next to the ocean.

tourist picture / squares² # 10 / diptych # 152 ~ a tough pill to swallow for some photographers

Kingston Brewing Company truck ~ Kingston, Ontario / Canada • click to embiggen
The Breakers / Vanderbilt mansion ~ Newport, RI. • click to embiggen
dirty window with shadow ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen

I was recently richly rewarded when reading an article, Canon 5Ds Review Through Print Performance, on The Luminous Landscape. The title of the article was the reason I read it. Imagine, testing a camera through print performance - what a concept (duh) - as opposed to the lab testing of various technical properties of a sensor.

What I meant when I wrote that I was richly rewarded is that - nevertheless, despite the title - I was expecting to read a lot of techno gobbled gook and in that respect I was indeed richly rewarded inasmuch as my expectations were fully met, if not totally exceeded. Although, in truth, I didn't actually read the gobbledy gook so much as skip over it.

All of that written, I was rather amused when I scrolled down to what might be labeled the "conclusion" part of the article. SPOILER ALERT - After writing /explaining about all of his various print making and testing gobbledy gook minutiae, the author concludes that the Canon 5D came out on top the the test (comparison against earlier Canon cameras) in terms of ultimate resolution. He deduced that, for his professional use (read the article), the better resolution made upgrading sensible and justifiable.

However, here's the part I found amusing:

Not one of the half dozen non photographers I showed the prints to mentioned detail in the images. When asked for differences, most popular was spotting the slightly different view, next up was that the brickwork was ‘a bit redder’ in one print. Most common observation – that the council should do something more about the landlords who dump stuff from student housing when clearing houses at the end of the academic year. Even when I pointed to detail in the biggest prints, several people 'couldn’t see the difference’. One even said they liked the 1Ds print the best (I’m told the look on my face was worth seeing…)

Yes, it really is about the content of the picture to most people. This backs up my own (and gallery owners I’ve spoken to) experience that people who buy prints don’t carry a magnifying glass with them – they look at what the picture is about and what it means to them. It’s a bit of a tough pill to swallow for some photographers...

So, hmmmm, here's the deal. Is there any picture maker out there who still doesn't understand that, for the picture viewing / buying public, it's a picture's referent coupled with, at least at some level, meaning which connects the viewer / purchaser with a picture?

The answer, of course, is yes. For them, the pursuit of technical "perfection" is what it's all about. Unlike Jeff Wall, for whom the subject matter is "just the door that opens the way to the picture", the pixel-peeping resolution fetishists believe that technical matter(s) is/are the door that opens the door to making the picture. And, unfortunately, many of them, in pursuit and application of things technical at the moment of making a picture, lose sight of the art of seeing, which is the truest manner of making pictures which approach real "perfection".

tourist picture / diptych # 151 / kitchen sink # 31 ~ various things observed and then recorded without getting ethically, morally, personally or politically involved

late evening / Lake Champlain ~ Port Kent CC / Port Kent, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
displays / red and green ~ Kingston - Ontario, Canada / New York, NY • click to embiggen
sink sunlight ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenA couple thoughts /notions worth considering ....

… subject matter is paramount to the experience of realist art forms, Mr Wall claims that, for him, it is "just the door that opens the way to the picture." He identifies Paul Cezanne as a good role model because he "detached himself from his subjects and just painted without getting ethically, morally, personally or politically involved. ~ commentary found on the web

While the picture-maker proves himself to be an artist by the selection of a subject particularly adapted to pictorial representation, by the thoroughness with which he grasps its salient characteristics, and by the vividness of his antecedent conception, he does so also by the reliance which he places on the methods of expression peculiar to his art. How few people realize that these are abstract and make their primary appeal to the eye ! Later, in the case of certain subjects, they may reach the intellect, but even then through the passage-way of the senses. In literature, on the contrary, the words travel direct to the intellect and may later arouse a brain impression as of a picture seen. But in the actual picture of painting or photography, it is the things seen which affect us, and the artist’s skill is shown in what he offers to our sight and ours in the receptivity of our vision. ~ Charles H. Caffin

tourist picture / diptych # 148 / ku # 1301 ~ Smuttynose, under, scallions

Smuttynose / Between The Buns restaurant ~ Potsdam, NY • click to embiggen
under bridge / under porch roof ~ Buffalo, NY / Thousand Islands, NY • click to embiggen
scallions / farmer's market ~ Keene Valley, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenJeff Wall has stated / written that ....

Maybe the "trivial" is just a failed version of the "everyday." The everyday, or the commonplace, is the most basic and the richest artistic category. Although it seems familiar, it is always surprising and new. But at the same time, there is an openness that permits people to recognize what is there in the picture, because they have already seen something like it somewhere. So the everyday is a space in which meanings accumulate, but it's the pictorial realization that carries the meanings into the realm of the pleasurable.

Wall's statement encapsulates / reiterates several of the points which I wrote about in the recent entry, arranging aggrangements. Especially so, re: ".... it's the pictorial realization that carries the meanings into the realm of the pleasurable..., and, "....the commonplace...is the most basic and the richest artistic category".

Those ideas coincide rather well with my thoughts, re: ".... a well executed arrangement of 'invisible' pictorial elements is often enough to elevate a picture of seemingly "nothing" into the realm of a very good picture".

I mention these ideas - commonplace / nothing and pictorial realization / pleasing arrangement - because, in my daily photo blog pursuing, there are 2 sites I visit regularly, one of which I visit everyday (More Original Refrigerator Art) the other (which shall remain nameless / link-less inasmuch as I have no desire to offend), much less frequently.

Even though both picture makers traffic in pictures of the commonplace, the reason for the disparity in visitation frequency is solely attributable to the fact that the former-mentioned picture maker is uncommonly adept at first rate pictorial realization / pleasing arrangement, the latter-mentioned picture maker, not so much.

IMO, the primary difference between the work of the 2 picture makers is that, one transports pictures of the commonplace into the realm of the pleasurable, while the other makes pictures of the commonplace which are distinctly, well .... commonplace or, in other words, ordinary. Although, while it should be noted that that result might just be the point of that work, it doesn't work for me.

civilized ku # 2925-27 / diptych # 147 ~ arranging arrangements

tools ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
arrangement / Courtyard by Marriot ~ Kingston, Ontario / Canada - • click to embiggen
pantry / The Breakers ~ Newport, RI. - • click to embiggen
Cacti ~ New York, NY. - • click to embiggen

IMO, after you cut through all the blather, re: how to make a good picture, it all comes down one simple fact (but not necessarily so simple to execute) ..... most "successful" pictures all have one thing in common. That one thing is a sophisticated arrangement of all of the elements contained within and up to the edges of the frame.

By elements, I mean not just the obvious visual depicted referent(s) but rather all of the bits and pieces of lines, shapes, form, colors, tonal values and the like. While these elements are visible, in a very real sense, when they all work together, they become invisible, acting like a subliminal language / message which draws a viewer into a picture.

In fact, in many cases, a well executed arrangement of "invisible" pictorial elements is often enough to elevate a picture of seemingly "nothing" into the realm of a very good picture. Match a well executed arrangement with a picture of "something" and you might have an extremely good picture indeed. However, it's also worth mentioning that, a picture without a well executed arrangement can be "saved by the depiction of an extraordinary referent.

IMO (again), there are no rules (other than a few simplistic ones which force all manner of referents into the same repetitive mold) for constructing sophisticated / visually pleasing arrangements. Or, for that matter, displeasing / discordant arrangements depending on the picture makers intent for the picture. The simple fact of the matter is that creating a good arrangement is a make-it-up-as-you-go endeavor, an act of on-the-spot improvisation. Or, as they say in the military, the field expediency method - there's the by-the-book way to do it (rules) and then there's figuring out how to get done under field conditions. That is, in the heat of battle.

And, in a sense, making pictures with sophisticated arrangements is a battle of sorts. A picture maker has to wrestle the visual / "invisible" elements found in the real world into a visual representation of that world with some form of a coherent / visually arresting arrangement. And - here's where I always get into trouble - some people are instinctually much better at this than others (those who struggle trying to make a picture by the book / rules).

I am not so certain that the visual "language" needed to make a very good picture can be taught / learned, other than some simple phrases which can serve in a pinch. IMO and experience, either you have it or you don't.

Now, before you get your knickers in a twist, let me explain .... those who instinctually "have it" must learn to recognize "it" and foster / understand "it" - although not to the point of losing the "magic" of "it" - and just let it flow in the picture making moment. Those who don't instinctually "have it" can, through the study of "it", develop a certain sense of "it" and attempt use "it" in their picture making. However, their biggest obstacle in the implementation of using "it" is that they let too much thought / thinking get in the way of their picture making ... kind of like the game of golf wherein having too many swing thoughts during the course of swinging a club is the surest way to screw up your swing.

All of that written, I would suggest that "having it" helps immensely in the cause of good picture making. Although, that does not mean that "having it" means every picture made is a good / successful to their intent picture. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Nor does not "having it" mean that one is doomed to never make a good picture. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

IMO, it's just that those who "have it" have a better batting average than those who don't.

diptych # 146 /civilized ku # 2924 / tourist pictures ~ quirky-ness

upstairs porch light thing / day and night ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
Clare and Carl's Hot Dog Stand ~ Plattsburgh, NY • click to embiggen
Brawler's Back Alley Deli ~ Buffalo, NY • click to embiggen
Tickets ~ Plattsburgh, NY • click to embiggen

Some simple facts about the diptych and Clare and Carl's Hot Dog Stand pictures.

The upstairs porch thing was thrown together using a dress form found in a store in the Catskill Mountains and a flower light (meant to hang) purchased by the wife in Lake Placid. They just seem to be made to go together.

Clare and Carl's has been standing and slowly listing since the 50s. It is a noted and must visit hot dog stand in Plattsburgh, NY. Visitors come from near and far to sample their Michigan hot dogs, a very popular New York State North Country delight.

Strangely enough, I have never stopped at Clare and Carl's even though I have passed by it a zillion and a half times. In large part that is due to the fact that I am not a fan of boiled hot dogs. But, to be fair, the hot dog ingredient in a Michigan is just there as a substance on which to put the Michigan sauce. And it is the sauce, the raison d'etre of the Michigan experience, which separates a merely good from a truly excellent Michigan.

Although the origins of the Michigan are unknown, the first known advertisement for Michigans appeared in the Plattsburgh Daily Republican in the Friday, May 27, 1927 edition. That ad announced the opening of a Michigan Hot Dog Stand which was located between two dance halls. The establishment may or may not have been the same one which was mentioned in a later PDR article which read in part:

Garth C. Otis has leased the quarters in the Plattsburgh Theatre building formerly occupied as the Locomobile salesroom in which place he will conduct an eating place under the name of the Michigan Hot Dog and Sandwich Shop opening Saturday. Mexican chili con carne will be one of the specialties. Mr. Otis promises a first class place for those who desire short order lunches.

On a related note, early this Fall, I'll be visiting Rochester where I will picture (and eat) a Nick Tahou Garbage Plate, Rochester's version of a Michigan, albeit a Michigan on steroids.

diptych # 144 / civilized ku # 2922 / tourist polaroid / rain # 70 ~ an organizing principle

Yacht•Boat House / Episcopal Cathedral ~ 1000 Islands, NY / Buffalo, NY • click to embiggen
building mechanicals with flowers ~ Buffalo, NY • click to embiggen
polar bear / Kingston Brewing Co. ~ Kingston, Canada • click to embiggen
Canadian island ~ 1000 Islands, Canada • click to embiggen

I have figured out what to do / how to categorize those pictures which do not fall into any of my existing bodies of work. The answer is simple .... create another body of work labeled tourist pictures.

Despite the name, the pictures which will fall into that body of work will not necessarily be pictures made while on my various travels. The defining characteristic of tourist pictures will be those pictures made of people / places / things which are rather obvious referents which motivate most people to make pictures. That characteristic will stand in contrast to my other pictures which fall into one category or another of my existing bodies of work, virtually all of which are pictures of people / places / things which people see but most often overlook.

An obvious referent would be like the polar bear picture in this entry - if one is in the Kingston Brewing Co. pub, why wouldn't one make a picture of the polar bear? That picture stands in contrast to the building mechanicals with flowers picture wherein the question might be - why would one take a picture of that stuff*?

Just as my pictures of referents overlooked have a black border, the tourist pictures will all the presented as pseudo polaroids. And, just as my black border is a throwback to the days of analog printing to include film edges, the polaroid shtick is meant as a throwback to the days when a lot of tourist / casual pictures were made with polaroid cameras. In addition, the tourist pictures body of work will also allow me to create printed books with multiple pictures per page in order to present a look much like the family picture album of days gone by.

*ANSWER: It's not what you see, it's how you see it. And, I like making pictures of referents people see but most often overlook.