civilized ku # 453 ~ Spring runoff

Covered bridge over East Branch Au Sable River ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK - Jay, NY • click to embiggenAmongst other pictures, it seems that the past weekend was a stitched-pano picture time.

FYI, a 7-image PS stitch. Unlike the feels like Summer pano which was accomplished by auto stitch, this pano needed a bit of hand work to finish.

civilized ku # 452 ~ feels like Summer

Saranac River between Franklin Falls Pond and Union Falls Pond ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenYesterday, after 4 days of rain and cold damp weather, the sun came out and the temperature shot up into the 80s. So, Hugo and I spent most of the day in the Great Outdoors.

First, it was whacking our way through a couple buckets of balls at the driving range and then it was whacking our way through the thickets and tangles down a ravine to the Saranac River between Franklin Falls Pond and Union Falls Pond. It was fun and we both have the bushwhacking scrapes and gouges to prove it.

FYI, a 4 frame PS auto stitch made with the EP-1 & the Panasonic 20mm f1.7

ku # 704 ~ form the meaningless world into photographs ....

Spring ice and dormant flora • click to embiggenI came across an interesting article, The Unreasonable Apple (by Paul Graham) that is a must read for those who are interested in the medium of photography and all its possibilities.

The article starts with a simple premise:

... there remains a sizeable part of the art world that simply does not get photography. They get artists who use photography to illustrate their ideas, installations, performances and concepts .... [B]ut photography for and of itself -photographs taken from the world as it is– are misunderstood as a collection of random observations and lucky moments ..."

Graham goes on to define what he sees as "the problem" and asks an interesting and challenging question:

... whilst you can discuss what Jeff Wall did in an elaborately staged street tableaux, how do you explain what Garry Winogrand did on a real New York street when he ‘just’ took the picture? ... [A]nyone with an ounce of sensitivity knows (he) did something there, and something utterly remarkable at that, but... what? How do we articulate this uniquely photographic creative act, and express what it amounts to in terms such that the art world, highly attuned to synthetic creation - the making of something by the artist - can appreciate serious photography that engages with the world as it is?

The article, which is of the short and sweet variety - easy to read and refreshingly devoid of artspeak, makes a number of interesting points ...

... we need the smart, erudite and eloquent people in the art world, the clever curators and writers, those who do get it, to take the time to speak seriously about the nature of such photography, and articulate something of its dazzlingly unique qualities, to help the greater art world, and the public itself understand the nature of the creative act when you dance with life itself - when you form the meaningless world into photographs, then form those photographs into a meaningful world.

Now, not only have I've read lots and lots and lots of stuff about the medium of photography but I have also viewed lots and lots and lots of pictures and I must confess that I have read or seen very little that comes as close to expressing my concept of what the medium's all about than those bold and underlined words in the preceding quote ...

A creative act wherein you dance with life itself - wherein you form the meaningless world into photographs, then form those photographs into a meaningful world.

As always, comments and opinions are encouraged and appreciated.

ku # 703 ~ aromatography

Uprooted trees ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK • click to embiggen This picture would be a perfect candidate for Kodak's revolutionary new Aromatography (Neuro-Optic-Nasal-Sense Imaging).

ku # 702 ~ a pile of twigs

Lichen and bog detritus ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenI totally agree with John Szarkowski's idea that ...

"Photography is a system of visual editing. At bottom, it is a matter of surrounding with a frame a portion of one's cone of vision, while standing in the right place at the right time. Like chess, or writing, it is a matter of choosing from among given possibilities, but in the case of photography the number of possibilities is not finite but infinite."

Indeed, and without a doubt, "in the case of photography the number of possibilities is not finite but infinite". Unless, of course, you've got your head up your ass (creativity and imagination wise) and think that "a pile twigs is just, well, a pile a of twigs".

ku # 701 ~ wherein I put myself on a pedestal

Back road trees ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenOn yesterday's entry, ku # 498 ~ rain drops, "Tom Frost" (no link provided) made a request:

I'd be interested in comparisons you might make with the picture you posted here with Robert Glenn Ketchum's "Order from Chaos" series, or almost any of Eliot Porter's nature pictures, many of which were in the Sierra Club book "In Wilderness...." or the the "Intimate Landscapes" book.

To be clear, I am not exactly certain that I know what kind of comparison Mr. "Frost" is looking for but, nevertheless, I'll give it a go.

I am not intimately familiar with RGK's work although I do have a more than just a passing fancy awareness of it, the Order from Chaos pictures in particular. I don't own any of his books nor have I seen any of his prints. Although, I do know that his Order from Chaos prints were Cibachromes that, by his intent, exhibited saturated color so extreme that one reviewer stated that "they verge on artifice".

The work of EP - in the form of his book, In Wildness Is the Preservation of the World - has been on my bookshelf almost from the day it was published back in 1967. I have seen a number of Porter's prints (at the George Eastman House in Rochester, NY). And it is worth noting that his dye transfer prints exhibited, by his intent, color much more in keeping with the true as found in the natural world.

It comes as no surprise to me that TF asked for a comparison between my picture and those of both Ketchum and Porter. Assuming that one casts Porter as "The Master", both Ketchum and I would be cast as "Disciples" - Ketchum readily admits that his visits and correspondence with Porter were a great influence on his interests in color and the natural world. I would, if pressed on the matter (such as "TF" has done), admit to Porter's influence upon my picturing making inasmuch as, when I first viewed his book, I saw it not so much as an "inspiration" as I did as an "affirmation" of something I already knew about color and the natural world.

However, that said, I believe that, while my pictures, Ep's pictures, and RGK's pictures exhibit many similarities on a visual level, if they were to be displayed (intermingled) together, there would be no difficulty in discerning the authorship of the individual pictures. That's because even though we all have pictured the same (or very similar) referent, our intent and vision have differed to a remarkable degree. And those differences are obvious to a remarkably noticeable extent in our pictures.

Simply stated - perhaps too simply stated, I would suggest that Porter was more the scientific observer (trained/educated as such) who had an affinity for the natural world (and its preservation) than he was the artist who had an affinity for that same world. Ketchum, on the other hand, was most definitely an artist (trained/educated as such) who, while he did have an affinity for the natural world, was more concerned with using that world during his Order from Chaos period to make statements about art than he was with issues of "preservation of the world".

It must be stated, relative to the preceding paragraph, that, indeed, Porter was an artist and that Ketchum eventually became quite involved, picture making wise, with "the preservation of the world". But, the fact is that he just wasn't that into it during his Order from Chaos period which, I might add, he lost interest in when he recognized that he was headed toward an artistic dead end - statements about art wise.

Where do I fit in to this mix? Well, I'm a bit of Porter and a bit of Ketchum and a whole lot of Me.

Like Porter, I am a picture maker who has always have had an affinity for the natural world and its attendant issues of preservation so I tend to make prints that are as close to the real as the medium allows. Unlike Porter, I am truly interested in art issues, ideas, and notions.

Like Ketchum, I am interested in making art and statements about art, Photography Division, so, again like Ketchum in his Order from Chaos period, I make pictures that exhibit more than a bit of an "anti-landscape" aesthetic (AKA, "snapshot" aesthetic), or, as I like to call it - an anti-pretty picture aesthetic. Unlike Ketchum (in his Order from Chaos period), I am not headed toward a deadend, because, like Porter, my first interest is the natural world itself (and our relationship to it).

Like both Porter and Ketchum, I am interested in exploring notions of seeing, perception, understanding, truth, and the real. Unlike them, I do come at it in my own unique way.

What I find most interesting about the comparison, now that I have been requested to think about it, is all three of us have made interesting pictures of essentially the same referent that, despite their similarities, are, in fact, markedly different.

ku # 700 ~ my kind of place

Back road bog ~ in the NE Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenIf it were possible I would build my "dream house" in an Adirondack bog.