urban ku dip/triptychs

Busy scenes
Massive solids
Times Square, NYCI was doing some file housekeeping and I came across some pictures that seemed like they belonged together, some obviously so, others subtlety so. In any event, I would be interested to read what you think about them.

Of late, you may have noticed that I have been drawing upon the tidbits of Brooks Jensen as fodder for discussion. There are a number of reasons for this, not the least of which is that I/we have run through quite a plethora of topics over the last year or so - At vs. art, fine Art vs. decorative art, meaning, truth, studium and punctum, referent and connoted, pretty vs. beautiful, modernism / postmodernism, the work of other photographers, the price of tea in China, etc. The well has by no means run dry, but I am 'coasting' a bit now that the holidays are upon us.

I am also trying to focus much more intently on my Art. Not only the new Decay work, but also editing over 700 of my ku pictures - urban and natural world - down to a strong, focused collection of about 100 pictures. The editing is very difficult - to mix a metaphor, it is a back-breaking mental exercise.

Nevertheless, it's on with the show (and another Brooks Jensen tidbit).

"If your work gains attention because of your extraordinary craft and technique, your fame will be fleeting. Pretty soon, everyone will be able to easily do work that is just as good as your masterpiece of craftsmanship from today. When that happens, your work will have to stand on the merit of its artistic content alone. When 'everyone can do it' is when the artist's role is clearest."

IMO, there is a whole lot of "everyone can do it" photography out there. This phenomenon became especially pervasive with advent of digital capture and 'processing'. Now, just about everyone (with at least half a brain) can make ultra 'clean', ultra dynamic range, ultra sharp, ultra whatever pictures. 'Craftsmanship' is everywhere apparent. The 'artist's role' is not so prevelant.

Which brings to mind yet another Jensen tidbit - "For the first several years one struggles with the technical challenges ... [B]ut, eventually every photographer who sticks with it long enough arrives at a technical plateau where production of a technically good photograph is relatively easy. it is here that real photography starts and most photographers quit."

urban ku # 143 ~ Black Brook

Black Brook • click to embiggenI live in the Town of Black Brook. This is Black Brook as is goes by the bowling alley and around the corner into the Au Sable river.

This section of Black Brook is just around the corner from my house - a wildness close to home. I mention this as a reminder - the Wildness Gallery is kind of just sitting there.

I also post this picture as an example of Brook Jensen's tidbit (from LensWork #50, Things I've Learned About Photography) - "What one photographs says as much about an internal and personal process as it does about an external bit of subject matter ..." - a notion that I've always felt to be true long before I read it by Jensen.

This idea, at it's simplest, goes a long ways in explaining why many take extreme umbrage when their pictures are called trite sentimental dreck or ubiquitous romanticist schlock by those who might be bold enough to venture such an opinion in public. (When I am confronted by such an opinion about my pictures, I just consider the person who uttered it to be a blithering idiot and just let it go at that.)

But, nevertheless, If you're picturing and it's not about an 'internal and personal process', what's the point?

urban ku # 142 ~ it's back ... again

Last evening snowfall • click to embiggenSo, yesterday we made of list of picture types some of us would most like not to see. Of special note was the list of Paul Maxim which was essentially a list of all of my recent picture entries here on The Landscapist.

That said, let's consider the opposite - picture types you would like to see. Well, not exactly what you would like to see, more like what you are going to see.

It seems that it's the season for exhibitions and periodical articles regarding the works of 'emerging' or 'new' photographers. Amongst others, MoMA has the New Photography 2007 exhibit and American Photo has an article, Emerging Artists 2007.

The NY Times panned the MoMA show. As for the American Photo piece, IMO, there are some interesting works in the collection. I especially like the pictures of Amy Stein. Her Domesticated series, wherein she explores mankind's relationship with the natural world and its "wild" creatures, is especially good. Her Stranded series about motorists encountered on the sides of roads ain't bad either.

One notable thing about the 15 photographers in Emerging Artists 2007 is that at least 3 of them, including Amy Stein, are staging 'events' and photographing them. This picturing MO is a relatively recent thing in photography (Art-wise) and a number of photographers and/or Artists who use photography are using this technique as their primary means of expression.

It's kind of an 'in thing'.

Speaking of which, our own Aaron Hobson (a chip off my old block) has been selected (1 0f 12) to paricipate in The Center for Fine Art Photography (at the Museum of Contempory Art in Boulder, Colorado) 2008 Portfolio Show, which is another look at some of the stuff you might be seeing more of, like it or not.

I'm not surprised Aaron is doing so well. All you have to do is read what Italy's leading daily newspaper, La Repubblica, had to say about his pictures -

"It's a different way, harsh and merciless, to narrate America. Aaron Hobson's shots do not admit replies. The idea of linking this Country with happyness and great opportunities clashes with reality. And you can live in a metropolis or in the suburbs, or even worse, in some desolate land. Colors, dark tones and subject are all together the result of a complete story. The "strip" of images that we present in this gallery are a small masterpiece of technique and visual writing as are the other works of this artist as well, who is one of the best talents in America. Not to miss his website."

I guess we'll be seeing more of his stuff as well.

urban ku # 141 ~ let's make a list

Fagots in a field • click to embiggenJust a quick follow-up to yesterday's entry. This from Brooks Jensen of LensWork -

"We are fast approaching critical mass on photographs of nudes on a sand dune, sand dunes with no nudes, Yosemite, weathered barns, the church at Toas, New Mexico, lacy waterfalls, fields of cut hay in the afternoon sun, abandoned houses, crashing waves, sunsets in color, and reflected peaks in a mountain lake."

Please take moment and add another item to the list, a picture type that, rather than see another of the same ilk, you would instead choose to go blind.

Update on Thursday, November 29, 2007 at 12:07PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Paul Maxim wrote; "While I believe the quote from Brooks Jensen is probably accurate (I personally have been unable to find it's source), it is inconsistent with Jensen's general philosophy ... my guess is that it's out of context somehow."

my response: The quote is from LensWork #50 - the 10th Anniversary Issue, in which Jensen puts forth Things I've Learned About Photography - ... 131 tidbits I've learned about photography from my experience. They are personal, experiential, and may not be true for everyone ... even if they are not true for all, perhaps they may stimulate thought. In itself, this must be of some small value."

Paul also wrote; "... No one (not me, not Mark, not Brooks Jensen) has the right to say or even suggest what others should or should not photograph ... Mark, in my opinion, should come down off of his mountaintop and "allow" for a little diversity."

my response: First, let me thank Paul for his sincere apology for his attack on my pictures (in his post on urban ku #141). It takes a real man to admit when he is wrong. Thanks, Paul.

Removing tongue from cheek, I would like to address Paul's 'mountaintop / diversity' comment - not to discourage such opinions or comments because, in truth and fact, many of my ex cathedra pronouncements are intended to elicit just such opposing POVs.

Why? Because, as Jensen states, an open discourse "may stimulate thought" and that "must be of some small value" (although, I would eliminate the word "small" from that statement).

It has never been my intention here (or anywhere else) to (as many might say) inflict my idea of what is good photography on the masses. It has, however, been my intention to grab some them by the collar and shake them around a bit in order to get them out of the pretty-picture, camera-club, by-the-numbers scheme of things.

As my About This Website blurb states, "This blog is intended to showcase the landscape photography of photographers who have moved beyond the pretty picture and for whom photography is more than entertainment ... " which could simply mean that if you are a photographer who makes pictures that are in the pretty-picture, camera-club, by-the-numbers scheme of things, and are happy as a clam doing so, this site may not be to your liking. In fact, it will probably piss you off.

It is also worth stating that my idea of what is good photography in no way limits 'diversity', photography-wise. In fact, IMO, if one can get beyond the pretty-picture, camera-club, by-the-numbers scheme of things, much greater diversity will result.

Just as Jensen stated, my Things I've Learned About Photography are tidbits I've learned about photography from my experience. They are personal, experiential, and may not be true for everyone ... even if they are not true for all, perhaps they may stimulate thought. In itself, this must be of some small value.

'nough said.

urban ku # 139/140 ~ yellow leaves - 2 views

Be prepared for quirky happenstance • click to embiggenOver on photostream (on auspiciousdragon.net), Colin Jago brings up the idea of what I choose to photograph and why.

In the very short piece, Colin states that "...there are subjects we don’t (tend to…) photograph and, at the opposite extreme, there are subjects that we photograph so much that we (tend to…) seek out the oddest, and most untypical, aspects to record - which we then present as, somehow, the norm."

What do you think about this statement?

urban ku # 138 ~ same-o-same-o?

Nearby graveyard • click to embiggenYesterday, in a rare expression of photographic simpatico, Paul Maxim wrote; "I love the image of the old cemetery. Unlike much of your work, it contains no chaos and no complexity. It's a simple and thought provoking image ... A question, though: Do you consider this photograph to be "outside" of your normal style?"

The picture in question is the left most one in today's entry. Paul's question is a good and timely one for me - I had been thinking of whether or not to post this triptych here on The Landscapist precisely because it is a bit of a departure from my 'standard'. My 'standard' ku, that is.

For the record, I don't think it/they differ so much in 'vision' as it/they do in technique. My standard ku is a (primarily) wide-angle lens, a 11-22mm f2.8/3.5 Zuiko, driven oeuvre. These pictures were made using a telephoto, a 50-200mm f2.8/3.5 Zuiko (for the techno-curious of you, those lenses on a 4/3rds camera are 22-44mm and 100-400mm 35mm equivalents). As such, there is a very narrow DOF evident in the pictures - something that is not so noticeable, even when it does exist, in most of my standard ku.

And exist it does. Just check out ku # 493-95. Pictures that were made on the same day as today's post. Two of the three ku # 493-95 pictures were made with the 50-200mm lens and have a very similar DOF to the graveyard pictures. It's just not as noticeable because the objects of my gaze, in and of themselves, are full of chaos and complexity.

I think that what prompted Paul to ask the question is the same thing that prompted me to question whether to post them here or not - the object(s) of my gaze itself - the tombstones. In and of themselves, they contain little or 'no chaos and no complexity'. Unlike my predilection for natural world complexity and chaos, the are simple manmade forms. The fact that they are so monochromatic and grey also helps differentiate them from my standard ku as well.

Utlimately though, I think that my standard ku vision remains wholely intact - an intimate glimpse at the everyday world that surrounds us.

At least that's how I see it. I would, however, be very interested to read differing opinions.

urban ku # 137 ~ a pre-hanging event

Nature's bounty • click to embiggenI went out today to try and shoot a turkey but had no luck so I shot this deer instead. Turkeys are not considered to be amongst nature's brightest but they do prove to be, at least during hunting season, very elusive game.

Turkeys, unlike deer, are blessed with very keen eyesight which is certainly partly responsible for their ability to remain unshot. It is also totally responsible for the adage amongst hunters that goes something like, "When a deer sees a camouflaged hunter, it sees a stump. When a turkey sees a camouflaged hunter, it sees a stump with a rifle."

Of course, the shoot/shot I am referring to is of the picturing variety. Not that that should be construed as any kind of anti-hunting sentiment because I don't have any problem with hunting within the rules.

In any event, even if I did have a problem with it, the hunting harvest is pretty hard to ignore in my little part of the planet. Our local 'dive' bar, 20 Main - a place where you will see some skanky people and may be served a skunky beer - sponsors a deer-hunting contest. I don't know all the conditions for victory but one of them involves weight. I know this because right there on Main Street, right next to the front door of the place, is a hanging weigh-scale and, at any given hour of the day or night during the season, the latest kill is on prominent display.

It adds are real touch of reality and class to a trip to the bank, the theater, the hardware, the grocery, the tanning salon, and Sandy's Hair Hut. I am not aware of anyone caring all that much about the display. It's just a part of life 'round these here parts.

Update on Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 07:09PM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Don wrote; "You have captured the perfect picture of stereo typing of us north country folks. A dead buck in the back of a 4WD pick-up of a volunteer firemen with two Jeff Gordon stickers and one sticker permit to hunt terrorists...........it says it all."

my response - need I write any more about 'truth' in photography?

FYI check out James Robinson's post-hanging event in the Wildness Close to Home gallery

urban ku # 136 ~ it's back

Winter delights • click to embiggenMy two favorite winter pastimes are back. One is winter itself.

The other is luge.

If I could, I would be sliding everyday. As it is, I am limited this winter to sliding every Saturday evening and, as far as I know there will be no competitions. This means that I will not be able to improve upon my back-to-back silver medals from two prior season ending regional competitions. Guess I'll have to be satisfied with the adrenalin rush and shaving a couple thousandths of a second off of my run times every week.

These pictures are from earlier today. Yesterday and today was the FLI World Cup Luge season opener - the top luge sliders in the world, men, women and doubles, compete in this World Cup event. Only the top luge sliders in the world are in this event.

Coasting to a stop • click to embiggenThe winner of the men's event, Italy's Armin Zoggeler, is pictured (on the left) coasting to a stop on the uphill straight after crossing the finish line. It takes quite a stretch for gravity to slow these guys down from speeds of up to 85 mph. Zoggeler set a new track record while recording his 37th WC victory.

Hugo was fascinated by the whole deal. He's ready to start "when I get a little bigger" and he set a goal of 'going fast like a motorcycle". That will be no problem at all.