counter customizable free hit
About This Website

This blog is intended to showcase my pictures or those of other photographers who have moved beyond the pretty picture and for whom photography is more than entertainment - photography that aims at being true, not at being beautiful because what is true is most often beautiful..

>>>> Comments, commentary and lively discussions, re: my writings or any topic germane to the medium and its apparatus, are vigorously encouraged.

Search this site
Recent Topics
Journal Categories
Archives by Month
Subscribe
listed

Photography Directory by PhotoLinks

Powered by Squarespace
Login

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 onLife without the APADoorsKitchen SinkRain2014 • Year in ReviewPlace To SitART ~ conveys / transports / reflectsDecay & DisgustSingle WomenPicture WindowsTangles ~ fields of visual energy (10 picture preview) • The Light + BW mini-galleryKitchen Life (gallery) • The Forks ~ there's no place like home (gallery)


Entries in squares squared (14)

Monday
Feb082016

civilized ku # 3043 / squares² # 14 (civilized ku # 3044-47) ~ we're all investigators now

1044757-26844574-thumbnail.jpg
lying in bed on Saturday AM ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
1044757-26847017-thumbnail.jpg
recently seen ~ here and there • click to embiggen

It has been stated that we are all photographers now. That notions derives from the fact that, everyday, a zillion (or some other really big number) pictures are made albeit most of them are made using a "device" that is not a dedicated camera. And, the overwhelming bulk of those pictures are made with intent of being nothing more than a simple snapshot.

That written, what has become very obvious to me is that, if one is making pictures and aspiring to create something other than simple snapshots, it is no longer fashionable to be a picture maker, aka: a photographer. No, one must be an artist who uses photography to investigate some idea or another. Or, alternately, one must explore a concept and navigate the boundaries between one thing and another.

Just consider the following phrases which were excerpted from various artist statements (names redacted to protect the innocent):

...she observes and investigates her environment

...through photography, _______ investigates the boundaries of art and science

...explores the interface between art and science

...I investigate a zone bordered by aesthetics and ethics

...the subjects negotiate the shifting boundaries between mother and child

...uses photography to explore themes of memory, relationship, and identity

..._______ creates images that explore the skin as a document of human experience

These artspeak excerpts are drawn from the artist statements of those who reside in the BFA/MFA milieu. And it seems quite obvious to me that these "artists" must have spent a lot of their time while in academia investigating the zone wherein the shifting boundaries of language and bullshit intersect.

Quite possibly that investigative time was accompanied by additional time duct taped in a chair, asked to talk about their art making and, every time they used the word "photographer" or the phrase "I make pictures", they received an electrical shock to some very sensitive part of their body where it would really hurt the most.

So just remember, the next time you might be talking about your pictures with your friends and neighbors, don't ever use the word "photographer" or "picture". Keep only a few key words in mind and you'll be able to impress and perhaps confuse whomever it is with whom you are conversing. And, it will be conversing, not communicating because they won't know what the bloody hell you're talking about.

Friday
Jan222016

squares² # 13 ~ 24 hrs of discursive promiscuity

1044757-26809130-thumbnail.jpg
all around the house ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen

...I can't recreate my feelings about how I happened to do this or that, because a lot of my stuff was done without any motivation, more than just what I call having a good time fooling around. ~ Imogen Cunningham

Yep.

FYI, and, uncharacteristically, I was doing my fooling around with 4 different prime lenses - left>right, top>bottom ... 60mm Sigma f2.8 / Zuiko 25mm f1.8 / Zuiko 45mm f1.8 / Lumix 20mm f1.7
Wednesday
Dec022015

civilized ku # 3013 / diptych # 194 / squares² # 12 ~ "terrible crap"

1044757-26710157-thumbnail.jpg
urban flora ~Pittsburgh, PA • click to embiggen
1044757-26710161-thumbnail.jpg
urban flora ~Pittsburgh, PA • click to embiggen
1044757-26710169-thumbnail.jpg
urban flora ~Pittsburgh, PA • click to embiggen

I few entries back I wrote about my reading of a-person-not-a-dective-but-functioning-as-one novel and the protagonist's view on the affected art world (aka: the academic lunatic fringe). As I continue reading through the series of books featuring the same protagonist*, I have encountered a number of other of the protagonist's pronouncements on the subject of art, including this exchange with an artist ....

When asked, after making an insightful comment on a woman's painting, if he is a "Member of the club" ....

"Hell, woman, I even know the trick words that mean absolutely nothing. Like dynamic symmetry."

"Tonal integrity?" (she responded)

"Sure. Structural perceptions. Compositionally iconoclastic."

She laughed aloud ... "It's such terrible crap, isn't it? The language of gallery people and critics, and insecure painters ...."

After this exchange the artist asked the protagonist what "his words" on the subject of good art might be. His response ....

"Does a painting always look the same or will it change according to the light and how I happen to feel? And after it has been hung for a month, will it disappear so completely that the only time I might notice it would be if it fell off the wall?"

That exchange comes very close to my feelings and thoughts as applied to art in general and photography in particular.

While the surface of a photographic print doesn't change with the light that falls upon it (although the perception of color may) as can the textured surface of a painting, a good photograph (like any good art) has the ability to re-engage a viewer, over time and with repeated viewing, with different perceptions - the prick of one's eye and sensibilities - of a picture based upon the different feelings and emotions the viewer brings to the viewing thereof over time.

IMO, all art is personal - as made by the maker and as seen by the viewer - and breaking down its individual components via the discussion of "terrible crap", iMo, sucks the life out of a piece of art.

Think of it this way .... I've seen some visually amazing and engaging pieces of Lego constructions. Some on a massive scale and complexity. While I wouldn't label them exactly as Fine Art - although some might - nevertheless, they are the result of some individual's very creative thought and execution.

Be that as it may, their artistic genius is in the sum of their parts - quite literally, thousands of parts. The genius is not to be found in the parts themselves. Looking at the individual parts does little to enhance the viewing experience. In fact, by directing one's attention to the individual parts (dissecting it), one stands a good chance of missing the "Big Picture".

iMo, the "Big Picture" is all about how a picture pricks the eye and sensibilities of a viewer well beyond the initial viewing. The whys (often quite arcane / tedious) and the hows (often quite speculative) of it - things so precious the academic lunatic fringe and their cohorts - are, for the most parts, sidebars which, as afterthoughts, may provide the viewer with some understanding of how the how and why of a picture may affect one's feelings about and perceptions of that picture.

However, I never read or think about the hows and the whys until well after a picture or body of work has pricked my eye and sensibilities. Because, iMo, it's all about the picture, in and of itself.

*Travis McGee, the fictional character featured in 21 crime fiction books written - 1964-1980 - by John D. MacDonald. Travis McGee, the character and the novels, have the prototype for many fictional crime fighting characters. On that subject it is worth noting that, with the rerelease of his novels, all of the books have an introduction by Lee Child (nom de plume of Jim Grant), the creator of the character Jack Reacher, a-person-not-a-dective-but-functioning-as-one, and that series of books (20 and counting).
Monday
Nov302015

civilized ku # 3011 / squares² # 11 ~ urban flora continued

1044757-26706416-thumbnail.jpg
Urban flora ~ Pittsburgh, PA • click to embiggen
1044757-26706420-thumbnail.jpg
Urban flora ~ Pittsburgh, PA • click to embiggen

As mentioned in my final Pittsburgh entry, I was heading out with my eye and sensibilities attuned to urban flora. So I did and within a 1 hour walk around the Lawrenceville neighborhood - law school girl lives there - I had pictured enough urban flora to start a pretty nice body of work. During my walk I made 18 pictures which, together with the 6 I made the previous day, gives me a solid start on an urban flora body of work.

While my intention was to start a Pittsburgh based urban flora project, I won't be back in Pittsburgh until next June (law school girl's graduation). Consequently, I am encouraged to continue my urban flora picture making quest whenever I find myself in an urban area or any place where I might find unfettered growth of chaotic scrub.

I am also quite certain that, if I take the time to peruse my picture library, there will be a fair number of preexisting urban flora pictures to add to the collection. Some of those will most likely have been made during past trips to Pittsburgh because, apparently, when in Pittsburgh, I can't avoid seeing and picturing urban flora.
Tuesday
Jul282015

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

1044757-26422786-thumbnail.jpg
Kingston Brewing Company truck ~ Kingston, Ontario / Canada • click to embiggen
1044757-26422794-thumbnail.jpg
The Breakers / Vanderbilt mansion ~ Newport, RI. • click to embiggen
1044757-26422799-thumbnail.jpg
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".
Thursday
Jul162015

tourist picture (single woman?) / squares² # 9 ~ a poem of sorts

1044757-26398912-thumbnail.jpg
the wife, going with the flow ~ Bog River Flow / Hitchens Pond - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
1044757-26398909-thumbnail.jpg
on the Flow ~ Bog River Flow / Hitchens Pond - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen

going with the flow

sitting, watching
listening
thought full / thoughtless
quiet contemplation

the eagle the osprey
dual / duel
startled
spruce grouse
erupt
into cacophonist flight

bass fighting
hook
line
and sinker

black fly, deer fly, mosquito
harass
disappear on the breeze
bad memories
best forgotten

hoot of the owl
cry of the loon
fish jump
coyotes howl at the moon
cries and whispers
haunt our dreams

on water’s edge

mated dragon flies
flit and careen
a procreative dance
finch
dart, chirp, scold
on a wing and a prayer

barefoot
pine needle carpet
on loamy soil
dodging the hard fact
of roots
weightless drifting with
life jacket floats

cool mist
on morning water
smudgy campfire smoke
coffee aroma
pancakes with blueberries
sausage and syrup

on Bog River Flow
Monday
May182015

civilized ku # 2892-98 ~ ceramics, cairnines, and the chicken anomaly

1044757-26237655-thumbnail.jpg
ceramic tile mural ~ North Creek, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
1044757-26237659-thumbnail.jpg
mural detail ~ North Creek, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
1044757-26237679-thumbnail.jpg
cairnines ~ Minerva / Olmstedville, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen
1044757-26237672-thumbnail.jpg
which came first - the chicken or the rock? ~ Olmstedville, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen

On Saturday past, the wife and I went on a drive to the east-central Adirondacks to retrieve one of our canoes which had undergone a small repair. Or so we had been led to believe. As it turned out, the repair had not yet been done so in about a weeks time a return trip is called for.

However, inasmuch was we had timed the trip in order to have dinner at a truly excellent restaurant in nearby (to the canoe place) North Creek (pop. 616), the trip was not a waste of time - as if driving through the Adirondacks on a beautiful day is ever a waste of time. In any event, there was a "bonus" aspect to the trip - the "discovery" of two unique projects. One, community-based, the other, the work of an individual.

The community-based project, The North Creek Mosaic Mural Project, is a large (figuratively and literally) endeavor which is being undertaken by 100s of volunteers who take part in the assembly of the ceramic tiles under the supervision of local artist, Kate Hartley. Assembly started in 2012 and continues with the start of the third panel. There is a fourth panel along the wall, which I assume will be muralized over time.

This project is a "discovery" only in the sense that the wife and I had not paid much attention to it (as it incrementally evolved to its present state) over the years during our frequent-ish visits to North Creek. I think that was due to the facts that; 1.) we had always viewed it from across the street which led us (or at least, me) to, 2.) think of it as a painted mural. If it had "only" been a painted mural, it would have been interesting enough but, as a mosaic mural - made of thousands of pieces of ceramic - of fairly gigantic proportions, it's genuinely awe inspiring.

FYI, the mural depicts many of the recreational opportunities to be found in and around North Creek. The village is located on the Hudson River and is noted for its whitewater rafting. It is also the home of Gore Mountain Ski Resort (one of America's first). In addition, the village is the terminus of the Saratoga and North Creek Railroad which is a modern reincarnation of the original Ski Train which ran (1934-1940) from Grand Central Station in NYC to North Creek. The station is also notable for the fact that Teddy Roosevelt, after a legendary night run - on wagons and stagecoach - from the base of Mt. Marcy, learned of the death of President McKinley and of his own succession to the presidency of the United States.

The individual-based "project" is not really a project per se. As least it was not conceived as such. It began with a local artist, Jake Hitchcock, whose medium (to my knowledge) is rocks. Apparently, he likes to indulge in making mounds of stones, aka: cairn (from the Scottish/Gaelic word carn), commonly erected as a memorial or marker. Or, in this case, as what might be labeled installation art.

It seems that over time, Hitchcock's work of making traditional mounds of rocks, albeit "artistic" mounds of rock, evolved into making dogs constructed of rocks. Eventually, locals caught on to his cairnine (the wife's word) making proclivity and the requests for his talent grew. Consequently, there are quite a number of highly visible examples of his work dotting the landscape in and around his tiny home hamlet of Minerva, NY (immediately adjacent to North Creek).

The cairnines can seen in yards (like the one in the squared square picture which seems to "making water" in the garden), at the road-end of driveways, and even randomly scattered along the roadside (like the one on the rotting tree stump). The carnine on the dam once had a tail. Now that it's gone missing, it resembles, to my eye and sensibilities, a duck or species of waterfowl.

Which leads me directly to the hen/rooster anomaly. Was this non-carnine assemblage created by Jake Hitchcock or is the work of a rouge cairnist?

The other question I have, re: Jake Hitchcock's installation art, is whether, when I contact him, I want a cairnine or a flock of chickens for our front yard.
Thursday
Dec132012

squares² # 8 ~ common beauty / beauty in common

• click to embiggenRelative to the recent comment deletion dustup, there's a really good / pertinent read by Bill Jay (scroll down to Confessions of a Feisty Romantic: An open letter).

Bill Jay has been something akin to a role model for me, writing wise (FYI, so has Gore Vidal). Both individuals, in their writings, tended to be rather direct in a "no use prevaricating about the bush" kinda way. However, despite that shared M.O., one had the feeling that Jay delivered his sharp-edged criticisms with a bit more humor-esque warmth (relatively speaking) than did the more acerbic Mr. Vidal, who said of himself, "I’m exactly as I appear. There is no warm, lovable person inside. Beneath my cold exterior, once you break the ice, you find cold water".

In any event, in case you don't read the Jay essay, here are a few excerpts:

.... name-calling .... If a critic engages any issue with concrete, vivid and energetic prose then he/she will be always open to the same charge. I cannot see that any of us can enlarge the debate about meaningful issues, or attack any idea or ideology, or make a stand on any topic without explicitly or implicitly stating that those with whom we disagree are misguided, short-sighted, muddle-headed or corrupt! And, of course, we must accept that our opponents will make the same accusations against us. It is the clash of two flints which produces sparks. And it is the conflict of tough, sharp opinions which generate the light and heat necessary for catalytic changes in photographic direction. Like the flints, the critic's arguments should be brittle and delivered with directed force at each other from opposing directions.

.... the problem with photographic writing today: very few critics are willing to be targets for counter-attacks, so they duck and weave and dodge in a maddening effort to avoid any reader knowing where they stand on any issue. Why would they care whether or not they are "targets"? The reason, I am convinced, is that they do not understand or have not learned a simple fact of professional relationships: the person is not the issue.

.... I dislike "insults". These are words aimed at the individual by name, not at the group mind-set or the issue. There is a huge difference between: "I think your ideas are stupid" and "You are a stupid person".

And finally, a great little bit in which Bill Jay sums up, in his answer to a question, my approach to writing about things picture making wise:

.... Terry Barrett ... [I]n a chapter exhorting and guiding readers who want to write about photography...asks: "Have you refrained from being and sounding dogmatic about your views?"

I hope not, Terry.

Without reservation, I'll second that answer.