FYI - a link

thanks to Michelle for a heads up regarding 3191, a year of mornings, a collaborative project/blog created by Stephanie and Mav who both like to get up early and also just happen to live 3,191 miles apart.

Bill Delanney/Nothing & Doug Stockdale/Bad Trip-Sad Trip

Bill Delanney wrote; About four years ago, after a long illness, I decided to simplfy my life. I stopped watching TV, movies, and the news. Photography was something that had interested me in the past and I thought it would be fun to do again. Found the simplist camera I could find, started reading about subjects that interested me. Making those changes has had a big impact on my personal life. My approach to what I make pictures of are only the things that interest me. I don't have to make a living selling pictures. I'm not looking for perfect.I don't see perfect. I've never seen perfect. I find as much intrique and discovery in normal everyday things much more than traveling to the Grand Canyon or looking at or for calender type pictures. I don't make a picture until I discover something out there that moves me inside. I have to feel something. Those are the subjects I'll stop,relax, sit with and then I either get a "feeling" or I don't. If something tells me to make a picture, I will. Sometimes, nothing happens and I just move on. It's almost a "spiritual" feeling. I can sense something, but I can't define it. I kinda just blend in-I don't try and evaluate or really think- it just happens. It seems I'll see something and feel a connection somehow. The beauty of the holga and the pinhole is I don't have to think about anything. Sometimes I click the shutter or open the pinhole and sometime I don't. It's hard to see sometimes, I can't go looking for it... It just finds me. I want my pictures to take me to another place. My pictures are my memories of that place.

Douglas Stockdale wrote; This project results from of a number of my personal experiences. My first experience was from my childhood riding with my father in Arizona, I had commented on the three white crosses that I saw at an road intersection that we had just passed. He told me that the crosses were for the three people who had been killed in accidents at that corner and that the state had put them there as a reminder to other drivers. That apparently left a strong memory.

Now many years later, I had, while traveling in some remote sections of the country, the sudden recognition again of the roadside memorials, but now they are very individualistic and unique. These are no longer nondescript white crosses but memorials, some very elaborate, some very plain, erected by those who are still here in memory of those who have left.

I have presented Bill & Doug together here for several reasons. First, lest anyone think I have gone off the deep-end regarding constucted pictures, I offer them as fine examples that found referents are still alive and kicking with considerable vigor. Second, both have projects/series that are little gems of focused vision.

Bill Delanney has several mini-series portfolios which are simple delights. The above pictures are from Pictures of Nothing. Also of special interest to me are Heavenly Food and a wonderful look at Barbershops. Bill's pictures are an excellent example of the power of simple observation coupled with focused concentration.

Doug Stockdale's project, Bad Trip-Sad Trip, also gives testament both to the power of simple observation and to the added kick of words. The fact that I read these words a few days after Mother's Day seemed to give them that much more impact.

Much thanks to Bill and Doug for their submissions to The Landscapist. It's a privilege to present their pictures and I would like to extend an invitation to both to participate in the Guest Photographers Forum on a continuing basis.

8x10 Provia ~ Doyle Thomas

click any photo to embiggen

While working in the pristine landscape the intent of these images is to remove the normal "rules of composition" and leave it to the viewer to find their own way around (hence the round aspect ratio (no pun intended).

Doyle also wrote; "I hope you can see your way to posting these as I would very much enjoy to read what more open minded people might think about them."

All right people, you read what Doyle called you. Now get on with it and tell him what you think.

I think that by ignoring 'the rules of cropping' he has altered considerably the way I perceive and relate to these pictures.

Sodium Vapor Night Life ~ Royce Howland

Sodium Vapor Night Life • click to embiggenRoyce Howland wrote; I've been a serious photographer, whatever that means, for a couple of years. Lately I'm trying to pull into my work a lot more of the non-technical side of the equation -- the art of it, encompassing whatever goes beyond the use of tools and mechanical execution. Technical mastery doesn't take that long, but all that lies beyond it will take the rest of my life, I guess.

Anyway, the discussion in the above thread prompted me to send this particular image. I called it "Sodium Vapor Night Life". Last December, a friend & I went up to Vermillion Lakes, near Banff, Alberta, for a bit of night shooting. A sunrise or sunset over Mt. Rundle and Vermillion Lakes is one of the iconic Banff area shots, and many days you can find a metric boatload of photographers lined up along various points on the shore, especially for sunsets. As soon as the "main event" is over, almost always everyone bails back to town for hot supper or whatever. My friend wanted something different and suggested that we shoot well after dark. We were the only ones out there, besides the night critters.

Weather conditions were bad, but we know that "bad weather makes good photographs" so we pressed on. This photograph was like nothing I expected when setting out. Speaking as a technical critic, it has some flaws. And of course it's not really grand, iconic, or "pretty". But it hit me in a good way, as serendipity sometimes does. Instead of a classic view of the mountain with rich, sunset-lit clouds, a rising full moon reflected in the water, etc., we have murky tones, hazy clouds, and weird artificial colors from the street lights of Banff. During the day, looking in this direction you wouldn't really know all of that developed area is over there, since it is masked behind the trees. Part of the constellation Orion is visible above Mt. Rundle, but the stars can't compete with the town lights on this night.

Antonio Pires

click to embiggenDear Mark Hobson
 
My name is António Pires and I am living in Lisbon, Portugal.
 
I wouldn't show the attached photo to anyone, had I not seen your civilized ku # 13, of March 27. May be the subject isn't "noble" enough, or academic enough. But if the subject is good enough for a photographer to post an image of it, well, why not me? Thanks for helping me have one less prejudice.
 
I am not a photographer, I just take photos. When I looked at the scene, the composition was pleasant and so I took the photo. And that illustrates my way: I don't make images, I rather try to find nice, good, pleasant, images in the environment. So to speak, the images are already there, what I have to do is to find them.
 
Regards
 
AP

I really appreciate little email missives like this one from Antonio. The reasons for that are numerous but this email brings to mind a bit from Robert Adams' essay Making Art New;

"Why are important areas of life geting past us? Why, for example, do we have so few pictures of family life in America? ... The only thing that denies us these pictures is a lack of commitment to go out and get them - to be absurd... to be unable to explain, to endure our friends' pity ... to do it. 'Most expressive discoveries are made in old familiar subject matter," the art historian A. Hyatt Mayor wrote. "The really original artist does not try to find a substitute for boy meets girl, but creates an illusion that no boy ever met a girl before." Photography is by nature on intimate terms with old familiar subject matter; all that remains is for us to create new illusions in the service of truth."

The essay is from Adams' book, Beauty in Photography published by Aperture. The book is a short and sweet little read of 8 essays. It should be on your list of must-reads and it is available from my Shameless Commerce Division by clicking on the Photography Books link in the Nav column and then clicking through to Overstock.com.

Thanks Antonio. It's great to know that I connected with you in some way.

FYI - Cinemascapes

Resurrection of a Corporate Christ • click to embiggenIt looks like Aaron Hobson has found a groove. His recently launched portfolio site is devoted to his Cinemascapes which owe much to Jeff Wall, Cindy Sherman, Nuri Bilge Ceylan and, I suspect, his love of 'Indi' film-noire by Qienten Tarantino, et al.

In Resurection of a Corporate Christ, based on the assumption that he might be hungry after a few days in a tomb, Aaron has taken CC a McDonald's meal. FYI, Aaron, ala Cindy Sherman, appears in all his Cinemascapes.

Aaron has my attention. I hope he pursues this groove to full maturity.

civilized ku # 13 - the morning-after hangover

A Space in NYC • click on photo to embiggen it One of the most profound impressions that I took away from the Wall exhibition was a haunting comment uttered by my good friend Robert (I don't think he owns a camera). Interestingly, the comment was not about the Wall exhibition.

He, Aaron and I spent over 3 hours perusing the 41 Wall photographs. The photographs were very engaging and engrossing. They engendered much discussion, rumination and postulation - my apologies to Robert and Aaron for discussing, ruminating and postulating my way through the last quarter of the exhibition with a lovely and engaging lady from Dublin, Ireland (the wife isn't reading this, is she?).

After the Wall thing, we drifted down to the permanent photography exhibition space where there was an extensive exhibition of photography from masters past and present. Assuming one has paid attention to the history of the medium and its movements and periods, it was more of a nostalgic trip down memory lane, with a few surprises thrown in, than anything else.

It was the end of this exhbit, which we breezed through in relatively short order, that Robert stated simply that "sometimes there's just too much." Now, there certainly was an element of how-much-fried-chicken-can-you-eat? to his utterance, but his point was that a certain numbness can set in in the face of so much'good' photography. This from a guy who does own a computer but, other than an ocassional visit to this blog and few photo exhibits now and again, he spends about as much time on the web looking for photography blogs/websites as I do skinning ardvarks.

His point was well taken and has stayed with me like an irritating bee in my bonnet. Upon some reflection I know why. The few surprises which I encountered on my photo trip down memory lane came from the work of a few modern 'masters' and virtually every one of those 'masters' was making not taking photographs. I was definitely captivated by much of the 'fictive' reality effect that the photographers were creating and presenting, much in the vein, albeit a minor one, being mined by Wall.

This has left me a bit shaken, photography-wise - Is it enough to 'just' be taking pictures rather than making pictures? I now have a firmer grip on the difference between an 'artist-who-uses-photography' and a 'photographer-who-is-an-artist'. I am beginning to feel that there are very few of one and too many of the other.

I am also beginning to understand the Art-Worldist notion that there actually is a modern-day 'photo ghetto' out there. One which consists primarily of the work of those who take rather than make pictures - and have no doubt about it, the 'ghetto' includes, in the opinion of the the Art-Worldists, some of the most recent Szarkowski-era'heavyweight' picture takers in the medium.

Perhaps this is the true import of Wall's methodology and his photography (which is almost an aside). Now that the world is awash with excellent picture takers, the time has come for picture makers to move to the fore.

Update on Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 05:15PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Ana wrote: "...One of the things that I've realized has been cooking in the back of my head this past semester has been developing a sense of my own agency as a photographer. This is very much a revelation for me, coming as I did from the nature photography genre, which generally speaking doesn't tend to have that sense of agency."

Update on Monday, March 26, 2007 at 02:52PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Tom Connor wrote: "This distinction between "making" & "taking" is useful to think about, but it can become confusing. Do you mean the photograph must be created from scratch, as a painter creates a painting from a bare canvas? Or that it must be generated from the needs/visions/obsessions of the photographer -- perhaps as they can be found in the world? Because, while the 1st is very much in favor with curators & art buyers right now (Crewsden, Wall et al) it can often, be empty & pedantic in my opinion(see my review of Wall's MOMA show here. Whereas work drawn from the rich serendipity of real life can often be deeply personal. I would hate to think that in order to "make", as opposed to "take" images, artists need to absent themselves from the endlesss, wondrous flow of life."

FYI ~ An Octopus and Some Beans

An Octopus and Some Beans. Jeff Wall, 1990 approx. 6×8' each

>Dateline 12:12 AM, NYC time: Right off the top, I have to state that the Jeff Wall exhibition at MOMA must be seen if you wish to have even the slightest understanding and appreciation of Jeff Wall's photography.

The large scale of the backlit photographs and their detail-laddened 'reality effect' are nearly overwhelming. To attempt to grasp the full import of these photographs from the viewing of small-scale printed reproductions is, well...like viewing a cinema epic such as Lawrence of Arabia on a small-screen bw television with crappy speakers. Sure, you'd certainly get the idea, but in a very 'small' way - a very pale imitation of the 'real' thing.

If you live on or are traveling to the East Coast, drive, walk, run, crawl if you must, to NYC and MOMA to see this exhibition. It is monumental and important. Much of what the Art Worldists say about it is true - "“Jeff Wall's vivid, lambent photographs hover between the observed and the imagined, between the commonplace and the surreal.-Newsday, or, "...Like a commercial light box, a Wall photograph grabs you with its glowing presence, but then, unlike an advertisement, it holds your gaze with the richness of its detail and the harmony of its arrangement. You could study it with the attention you devoted to a Flemish altarpiece in a church, and you could surrender yourself to its spell as if you were in a movie theater.”—The New York Times Magazine

It should also be noted that much of what the Art Worldists (and Wall, himself) have to say about it is arcane, obtuse, convolted self-referential crap. That's ok. Ignore it and go about the business of getting lost "in fully equipped all-terrain visual vehicles, intent on being intensely pleasurable while making a point or two about society, art, history, visual perception, the human animal or all of the above.”—The New York Times

See the MOMA online exhibition excerpt HERE.

PS; The exhibition will also be appearing at the Art Insitute of Chicago and San Francisco Museum of Modern Art later in the year.

Update on Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 05:39PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Kent Wiley wrote: "...It's about time someone, in all this brou ha ha about Wall, said the obvious: ignore the words and look at the pictures. How many phenomenal artists are there through the ages who were absolute p--cks, but we venerate the art they made nonetheless? J.W. may be another one."