BODIES OF WORK ~ PICTURE GALLERIES
- my new GALLERIES WEBSITE
ADK PLACES TO SIT / LIFE WITHOUT THE APA / RAIN / THE FORKS / EARLY WORK / TANGLES
BODIES OF WORK ~ BOOK LINKS
In Situ ~ la, la, how the life goes on • Life without the APA • Doors • Kitchen Sink • Rain • 2014 • Year in Review • Place To Sit • ART ~ conveys / transports / reflects • Decay & Disgust • Single Women • Picture Windows • Tangles ~ fields of visual energy (10 picture preview) • The Light + BW mini-gallery • Kitchen Life (gallery) • The Forks ~ there's no place like home (gallery)
Entries in kitchen life (52)
(someone else's) kitchen life # 88-89 / what is a photograph? # 19 ~ forgetting that you are a picture maker
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fe30e/fe30e835685d0bc6a381b350a7946dc8ec5c2d0b" alt="1044757-26932342-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26932342-thumbnail.jpg"
stuff on a kitchen table ~ Merchantville, NJ • click to embiggen
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/533f4/533f4c887b6d76c429b19f1679780911f107a827" alt="1044757-26928523-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26928523-thumbnail.jpg"
locked door with KEEP OUT sign ~ not place specific other than in my Head • click to embiggen
Continuing on with yesterdays entry, simple questions / even simpler answers, wherein I mentioned 3 questions as posited by Mike Johnston on TOP, my simple answer to the simple question of how does one look at a photograph? was simply, (for me) with eyes and mind wide open.
How does one keep the eyes and mind wide open when viewing a photograph? Again, a simple answer - forget the fact that one is a picture maker and everything about the tools of the craft.
Really. Banish all thoughts of things related to making pictures. I would even recommend banishing all thoughts about every photograph you have ever viewed as well as the history and traditions of the medium itself. In other words, you'd better free your mind instead ...
iMo, the only driving impulse one should adopt when viewing photographs (or any other form of art) is that of curiosity, aka: the desire to see and learn (why does the picture maker want me to see this picture?). Expect to be surprised and challenged by what a picture maker has put in front of you because a good picture should not only delight the eye but also engage the mind. Expectations about what you have been told is a good picture and thoughts, craft and academic wise, will only get in the way of if not completely block what could be a potentially new and unique picture viewing experience.
Interestingly enough, what I have described here is how most non-picture makers relate to photographs. First and foremost, they look at a picture to see what it depicts (the referent). In most cases, if they are not interested in the referent, then they are not interested in the picture no matter what its 'artistic' merits might be. If the referent captures their attention then it is possible that they might engage the picture to discover why, beyond the visually obvious, they like the picture. In fact, the picture might even engage their mental faculties in an effect to 'read' the meaning that might be found in the picture.
I would go so far as to postulate that a small subset (relatively) of the non-picture making picture viewers who go to photo galleries to look at photographs expect to have their mental faculties engaged when viewing photographs. They are seeking the complete package, picture viewing wise. That is to write that they are looking for not only illustration but also some form of illumination to spice things up.
iMo, the best pictures are all about life and seeing the world around us in new or unexpected ways. In other words, I am not interested in the mechanistic how of what a picture maker sees but rather what a picture maker has chosen for me to see and hopefully gain a bit of insight to my relationship to life and the world around me.
Or, as the Dos Equis Most Interesting Man in the World might say (if he were looking at pictures rather than drinking beer), "Stay curious, my friends" because as a poster somewhere on the interweb states ... The future belongs to the curious. The ones who are not afraid to try it, explore it, poke at it, question it and turn it inside out.kitchen life # 87 ~ smile questions / even simpler answers
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/84b64/84b64dc85758eba7d33db967fc5b4bb295d59892" alt="1044757-26930697-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26930697-thumbnail.jpg"
day old ravioli in pan ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
That written, and without any intention of denigrating the effort of those honest site authors / editors, there are times when it seems they are struggling for pertinent and involving content. At those times - which are fortunately infrequent - the content quality slips a bit. iMo, one such case is currently in progress on TOP (one of the most scrupulously honest photo sites on the interweb).
Over the past week, there have a series of questions (in separate entries) which, iMo, require little more than a one sentence answer. To wit: How does one look at a photograph?, What should a color photo look like?, and, What do you want a color photo to do?
Without trying to be read as glib / flippant, my one sentence answers would be: With my eyes and mind wide open, however the maker wants it to look like, and, engage the viewer.
The question which has generated the most response is # 2 wherein 111 picture makers wrote about how they wanted their pictures to look like. Of course, they used more than one sentence to convey their preferences. All of the verbiage about what should a color photo look like could have been reduced to my one sentence answer. Very little, if anything at all, was gained by knowing what each picture maker's specific individual look-like preferences were.
Question # 2 also asked viewers to, in essence, critique - relative to their color characteristics - a specific set of pictures. And, surprise surprise, color wise (and dynamic range wise), some viewers liked them, some did not. Once again, very little, if anything at all, was gained by knowing the like / not like opinions of the commenters.
All of that written, it must be stated that Mike Johnston (TOP owner / editor / author) wrote that, indeed, he was "curious as to how close these 14 pictures come to your own ideal, and, if they don't come close, how they differ from what you like or expect to see." His interest was in the comments was to help educate himself, re: his dilemma of " What I don't know, exactly, is what a color photo should look like... circa 2016." In either case, he has done a yeoman's work of generating a conversation which has engaged his audience.
However, the idea that there is an answer to the question, "what exactly should a color photo look like ... circa 2016" is a rather specious notion because, quite simply put, a color photo circa 2016 can (and should) look like any way the maker wants it to look like. Quite literally any way inasmuch as, circa 2016, a picture maker has at hand - via PS or any other photo software - virtually unlimited options for how a photo can look.
And, the only one who needs to like what the pictures look like is the picture maker him/herself. Unless, of course, one is making pictures, for whatever reason, to suit the taste of a specific audience or client. In that case, the picture(s) must look exactly like the audience / client wants it to look like.
Stay tuned. Tomorrow's entry will delve into the question of how does one look at a photograph?kitchen life # 86 and some objects up close~ hidden in plain sight
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3c0c4/3c0c4aa7ea7feb3bd6afcdf44552020473d4ea2b" alt="1044757-26917235-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26917235-thumbnail.jpg"
red cabbage ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b0a31/b0a311e43decc01d3615421ffe7ebd23a070c8e3" alt="1044757-26917395-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26917395-thumbnail.jpg"
some objects up close ~ • click to embiggen
Inasmuch as the hallmarks of my picture making are: 1) discursive, and, 2) promiscuous, with only a few exceptions I do not make pictures which ascribe to only a specific theme. Rather, over time, I have recognized that I have quite a number of pictures which could be organized into distinctly separate bodies of work.
However, once I have recognized a specific theme, I will continue to keep my eye attuned to making pictures which contribute to that particular thematic body of work. Nevertheless, I find it nearly impossible to choose just one body of work and concentrate my picturing to that single theme. I just can't do it because I see pictures everywhere without regard to specific referents.
That written, I am very pleased that I receive notices from a couple different sources of thematic exhibitions to which I can submit pictures. While I have had reasonable success in having pictures accepted into various exhibits, for me the real payoff is being pushed into looking at my picture library with thematic organization in mind.
I would highly recommend getting on email lists for exhibition opportunities even if you have no intent on submitting pictures for consideration. If nothing else, you might discover 'hidden' bodies of work which are, in fact, 'hidden' in plain sight.
FYI, you can read about the # 1 less than shining moment of my commercial picturing career in my Featured Comment on TOP.kitchen life # 81-83 ~ good read / great pictures
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/edead/edead49df777d5f48f9f1b1c7d406914bb49a2eb" alt="1044757-26838800-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26838800-thumbnail.jpg"
asparagus, rubber bands, noodles ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a0fbf/a0fbf1bc6abfb0a7b6177d92ce8c7be891edef89" alt="1044757-26838804-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26838804-thumbnail.jpg"
a second look ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
The major new survey of contemporary photography considers the work of 80–100 photographers through eleven thematic chapters on subjects such as street photography, portraiture, landscape photography and documentary. It traces the development of photography as an art form in each of these genres individually and also looks at the ties and links between them. What is revealed is a complex story with numerous tangents. Mark Durden's narrative, combined with rich illustrative content and an easily accessible design, guides a clear path through this story, showcasing the work of great individual photographers while also being able to place this into the larger narrative of the medium's development.
Writing a book about contemporary photography is a bit of a thankless task since the moment it’s published, there already is something else that is not included in the book. But completeness cannot be the goal of such books. Inevitably, something will be missing, for whatever reason. There will probably also be categories, resulting in debates whether artist XYZ should not have in fact been placed elsewhere, or whether some category might be missing.
The task thus is to present photography in such a way that any reader will be able to move forward after having engaged with the book. S/he might disagree with some of the choices, but s/he will know why, and – crucially – s/he will have a much easier time engaging with the medium on her or his own. Photography Today succeeds brilliantly doing just that.
In any event, this book is highly recommended for anyone who has a more than a casual relationship with picture making / the medium and its apparatus. I picked my copy up during my recent visit to Montreal. The book can be had in the $40-50.00USD range. A veritable bargain when judged against the $59.00USD cost of the lens shade for my recently acquired 12mm Zuiko lens.
*the word "apparatus" in this context should understood to mean "photo strategies", not gear / equipment.kitchen life # 80 / ku # 1374 ~ I'm a winner
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9c5ba/9c5ba64873382dab7d04f3268a2a965f08f34a93" alt="1044757-26831068-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26831068-thumbnail.jpg"
winter? ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/33665/3366596f124d14bd7198fb681dc6ee33710f19d9" alt="1044757-26831077-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26831077-thumbnail.jpg"
crumpled oatmeal packets ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0a2eb/0a2eb45101e3f70e6d578db1437ce858b2030479" alt="1044757-26831072-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26831072-thumbnail.jpg"
"test" picture made with new 12mm lens ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
I like winter, especially winter with a lot of snow. However, as the picture - ground cover / February, 2 - in this entry evidences, we have had very little snow. For some, this good news. For others - say, like, those who make a significant part of their income plowing snow or ski mountains - it's the best news possible. For me, it just flat out sucks.
The conditions are not great for Xcountry / Nordic skiing. There is little motivation to build a fire and sit by the fireplace with a warm drink (and the wife) while the weather outside is frightful or, iMo, delightful.
In any event, in anticipation of our upcoming 2-week trip to Ireland and Scotland, 1 week in each country, I have acquired a new lens - a 12mm f2 / Olympus Zuiko. While I have 4/3 lens (not a µ4/3 lens) - a Zuiko 11-22mm f2.8/3.5 - which I use with an adapter on my µ4/3 cameras, that lens is rather bulky when compared to the 12mm Zuiko lens. So, the purpose of the acquisition, other than pure gear lust, is primarily to be able to get all my gear - 3 µ4/3 bodies and 5 prime lenses - into a single relatively compact camera bag for the trip.
Truth be told, I have had my eye and wanter on this lens for quite some time. However, the miser in me was put off by its $799.00USD price tag. Occasionally the lens was on sale for $599.00USD, but even that price seemed kinda steep. So, with the upcoming trip on the near horizon, I checked on eBay and, lo and behold, there was 1 used 12mm Zuiko lens listed. The really good thing was that the lens was used for demo in a camera store.
Long story and the 4-day bid process made short, I "won" the lens for $420.00USD. It arrived this AM and upon inspection it can not be distinguished from new. Needless to write, I am, as they say, a happy camper.
FYI, the kitchen life picture in this entry was made with my 20mm f1.7 Lumix lens, not the new-to-me 12mm Zuiko which arrived an hour after the picture was made.civilized ku # 3039-41 / kitchen life # 79 / in situ - life goes on ~ little of this, a little of that
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/168ff/168ffc4d80044f53eabfea402bbd8a6ca62693a9" alt="1044757-26810908-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26810908-thumbnail.jpg"
alley with tire tracks and green dumpster ~ Downtown Montreal, QC., CA • click to embiggen
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/672c9/672c907eeb2ed3af3255edcf8a8494e413579c51" alt="1044757-26823986-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26823986-thumbnail.jpg"
stuff on Japanese tray ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/34d37/34d378bc60d85fb4194ca7f8d87a0483c5ef23a6" alt="1044757-26823993-thumbnail.jpg 1044757-26823993-thumbnail.jpg"
a fine particulate snowfall ~ vieux port / Old Montreal / Montreal, QC., CA. • click to embiggen
I also believe that I am where I want to be, title wise. As mentioned in yesterdays's entry, I wasn't exactly sure that the pictures fit into a convenient genre descriptor so I wasn't comfortable incorporating the word "street" or "people" photography in a title - by no means were all of the pictures made "on the street" and, while people are featured in every picture, the pictures are more than just about people.
So, my title has evolved to be IN SUTI ~ life goes on.
All of those issues solved, I'll move on to the next one ...
one of these things is not sorta like the other
... traditionally, most, but certainly not all, picturing in the decisive moment / street photography genre is made in B/W. While it's not exactly a comprehensive survey, nevertheless, a Google search using the phrase street photography and then clicking on Images for street photography will demonstrate my point.
However, on the image page you will find a sub-category link for color work which demonstrates that the B/W tradition is no longer sacrosanct. It's worth noting that the BW barrier in Fine Art photography was blown all to hell and back with Eggleston's 1976 MOMA exhibition.
It is also worth noting that prior to that paradigm shifting event, there were a few picture makers (very, very few) who worked in the street photography genre with the use of color film. Most notable was Saul Leiter whose 1950-60s NYC street photography work has only recently been accepted into the pantheon of all-time great street photography practitioners.
In any event, I have given some thought to converting my work to monochrome. Not very likely ... probably ... but I have thought about it.Mark Hobson - Physically, Emotionally and Intellectually Engaged Since 1947