man & nature # 215 ~ kicking butt

Barn and weather front • click to embiggenLast evening on our way home - after winning yet another golf tournament - the wife and I encountered some interesting weather. The display was both awesome and rather eerie.

The front was fast moving so I didn't have the time to set up my tripod - for this picture, I used the car roof-rack rails as a brace for a 1/5 sec. exposure.

The spoils - a set of 4The wife and I were pleased as punch with our set of 4 Pilsner glasses that were the spoils of our golfing victory. This event did not use the handicap system so we had to win our flight (division) - the "mixed" flight, i.e., teams formed with men paired with woman (now there's a golfing handicap) - by posting the lowest raw score (without a handicap applied). We posted a -8, which matched our personal team best.

We're playing in another tournament on the same course this coming Thursday. We hope to come away with the plates that match the beer glasses.

all I know is what I saw

Working to extract a child from a wreck • click to embiggenAs I was finishing up a round of golf, just before 6PM, in Lake Placid last evening, a virtual parade of emergency vehicles - fire trucks, ambulance / rescue trucks, state police cars, volunteer rescue / firemen in their personal vehicles - rushed past the golf course on their way out of town. After finishing the round, I got in the car and headed in the same direction, which is the only way home. A few miles down the road I came upon this scene.

A local newspaper had this account on their website this AM:

LAKE PLACID - A head-on collision Friday evening sent five people to the hospital and closed state Route 86 between Lake Placid and River Road for two hours, according to Lake Placid Volunteer Fire Department members.

An Ashley's Carpet Cleaning van and a silver truck collided at about 5:40 p.m. at the corner of state Route 86 and River Road. Wilmington, Lake Placid, Saranac Lake and Keene volunteer fire departments, as well as state police, responded to the scene.

Two people were transported to Champlain Valley Physicians Hospital in Plattsburgh and three were transported to Adirondack Medical Center in Lake Placid. One victim, who was brought to CVPH, needed to be extricated from the vehicle by the Jaws of Life. The names and conditions of the victims were not available as of press time and state police had no further information.

My picture above depicts emergency personnel working at removing a victim - a child who appeared to be about 10 years old - from the wreckage.

As the article mentions, no details regarding the accident have been released. From all appearances, it seems that one vehicle or the other crossed over the centerline. As can be noticed in the picture, the red van did not appear to have braked - there are no skid marks of any kind in evidence. That said, no skid marks could be attributable to the fact that the road was damp from some rain that fell an hour or two prior to the accident.

man & nature # 214 ~ prints

Sundown from the Main Street bridge ~ Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggenDuring last week's visit with Aaron's workshop participants, one person in particular - who was familiar with my decay pictures from viewing them online here on The Landscapist - was kinda blown away when he viewed an actual print (24×24') of one of those pictures. I'm paraphrasing here but the reaction was along the lines of ...

Wow. The difference between seeing this picture online versus seeing it in print is amazing. I know that you are an advocate for making and viewing prints, and I agree, but this viewing experience really drives that point home in a very dramatic manner.

... or words to that effect. And that set my mind to wandering.

The one photo constant in my life was the C print - a negative-to-positive chromogenic print also known as a color coupler print. They were there when I started (back in 1967) and they were there until I dropped out of film-based picturing long about 2003. As far as I know, they are still there.

For almost all of that time, I made my own C prints - thousands of them, most of them for my commercial photography endeavors - during which time I became intimately familiar with and quite enamored of the look of C prints. The fact that C prints are made from color negatives, which have the most extended dynamic range capability of all color films and are very adept at reproducing subtle colors, gave the prints a beautiful appearance that was quite natural in look and feel.

C prints were, almost by default, the preferred media for those in the Fine Art scheme of things. A small number of Fine Art picture makers used Cibachrome prints, primarily for their archival qualities, but Cibachrome prints never had broad appeal due to the fact that the printing process (which used highly toxic / abrasive chemicals) was a positive-to-positive one - from one high contrast media (transparencies) to another very high contrast one (the cibachrome papers). Cibachrome prints were tack sharp and long-lived but also known for texture-less blacks, blown highlights, and colors that were, well, metallic chrome-like. All of which was exacerbated by an extremely high-gloss paper surface.

All of that said, I believe that comment regarding online viewing v. print viewing came in large part due to the fact that, independent of subject matter, a beautifully crafted print is, in an of itself, an object that can command its own attention.

Obvious examples of such are the BW prints of Ansel Adams, the dye-transfer prints of Eliot Porter, and the C prints of Joel Meyerowitz. It is very easy to get lost in just the very surface of such prints. I would have no argument whatsoever with someone who purchased one those prints to hang on their wall just to admire the print - and so that they could say,"isn't that beautiful" - meaning the print, not the picture.

That is not to say that I would do so - my preference is for beautiful prints with interesting pictures on their surface.

All of that said, I was wondering how many of you have ever seen a C print and I don't mean of the drugstore, 1-hr print variety (yes, those were C prints). What I mean is a C print that is produced to high standards and mostly likely viewed in gallery. Prints made by/for the likes of Joel Meyerowitz whose Cape Light prints are amongst the most beautiful prints of any kind that I have ever seen.

man & nature # 213 ~ the face of The Forks

The Hollywood Theatre ~ Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggenOn yesterday's entry, man & nature # 211, Matt Dallos commented:

A few weeks back I was up in the Adirondacks for a few days. In the process I ended up driving through Au Sable Forks. It was actually quite a jolting experience. I thought I had a good idea of what the town looked like from your photographs, but the actually place was much different than I had expected ... [T]oday's picture feels more like what I saw. But I didn't see much more than the few buildings you pass along the main road.

My first reaction to this comment is to express my disappointment that Matt was in town and didn't let me know or look me up. Damn. I always enjoy meeting the followers of The Landscapist. A few have even enjoyed the joys and comforts of an overnight stay in my house.

So, just in case any of you are in town or in the neighborhood, please feel free to get in touch and stop by. The more the merrier. Seriously.

That said, it's on to Matt's "jolting experience". I have only posted a relative handful of pictures of the village of Au Sable Forks. There is no particular reason for this "oversight" other than I really haven't taken seriously the idea of picturing the village other than on a very occasional basis.

That said, it is quite a coincidence that Matt should chime in about this at this time - over the past few months I have been contemplating a number of ideas regarding a picture project about the "Forks". Amongst many considerations, one factor that instigated this contemplation was the announcement that an organization from NYC had acquired / was acquiring the vacant Former Masonic Lodge building on Main Street for renovation and development as hub for Arts & Culture - the Tahawus Lodge Center.

Not that I am holding my breath waiting for this project to actually happen. In no way meant to denigrate the idea, it is worth noting that, barring an infusion of private money (lots of private money), this project could be years and years in the making. I have volunteered to help move things along, but ....

In the meantime, actually yesterday AM as I was making yesterday's entry I was struck with a flash of inspiration, I have proposed a mini arts & culture project to the owner of the local movie theatre on Main Street (right next to the Masonic Lodge).

It occurred to me as I was starring at the picture, Plant life at the Hollywood Theatre, that the "coming attractions" display windows on the theatre facade were empty - they have been empty ever since the theatre reopened after decades of vacancy. The new owners, a postal delivery person and his wife, put a lot of sweat equity and a relatively modest amount of money into fixing up the theatre. Nothing at all "fancy", just what has to be done to get the place open and showing movies - which, btw, are first-run movies at $5.00 a ticket.

Much remains to be done as time and money, mostly money, allow. The "coming attractions" display windows are on the list somewhere, but no where near the top. So, my proposal was simply this - I'll put in display boxes in return for using the "coming attractions" display windows to display my village (and surrounding area) pictures - 2 per window on a 2-3 week rotating basis.

The purpose behind this idea is to introduce the village to my work and to lay the groundwork for my picturing-making heart's ultimate goal - to picture every village resident, ala Richard Avedon style - which is to say; plain white bkgrnd, come-as-you-are, plain and simple style.

But I digress. I think that Matt's "jolting experience" regarding what I am reasonably certain was his surprise that the village of Au Sable Forks is not, by a long shot, a picturesque Adirondack tourist town (hey, we don't need no stinking Starbucks). The village, at least the most visual part on Main Street, has the look and feel of a slightly depressed and worn-down working class town - which, btw, it actually is/was.

But, on the other hand, if Main Street is the "face" of the village, the true character of the place isn't visible unless one sees the small residential areas off of Main Street. There you will find well cared for working family homes and yards, many of which have been recently renovated by the "landed gentry" (not) like the wife and me. Children play, adults power-walk (some just stroll), people sit on front porches and say, "hello", it's quite quiet and very very safe.

In an attempt to help others who may venture into our village from suffering the same fate as Matt, I will actually attempt to tag all of my previously posted pictures of The Forks with the tag "the forks" so that they can viewed as a "collection" of sorts. Hopefully this critical mass of Forks pictures will better prepare those who come to town to know what to expect.

man & nature # 212 ~ chasing the light (or maybe not)

Driveway to Asgaard Farm ~ Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggenLast evening I was unrestrained by normal household / family patterns which dictate that the dinner hour is 7PM give or take a bit. The wife and our young adults were on a day trip to Montreal for the purpose of visiting McGill University as a possibility for coma-girl's semester "abroad" - even though Montreal is only an hour away, they speak french and it is a "foreign" country (yah, so many Canadians don't ya know).

So, I ate an early dinner and managed to get out of the house at a time (and on a day) when the evening light was on display in a picture-perfect manner. Within a very short time and within a very short distance from the house I was presented with quite a number of great picturing possibilities - or so I believe. I'll let you be the judge of that.

This picture is the second of seven - the first being Plant life at the Hollywood Theatre in the following entry. More to come.

man & nature # 211 ~ back to pictures

Plant life at the Hollywood Theatre ~ Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggenWhen last we spoke photography-wise, the topic was manipulation. My primary point regarding the idea of picture manipulation was that manipulation is perhaps easier to see / recognize than it is to categorize / define.

IMO, much of the attempt to categorize / define what constitutes manipulation focuses on the usual suspects of doing so - cloning (in or out), staging, over-the-top contrast / color / saturation, etc. - rather than on what I believe really matters; intent, presentation and, to a lesser extent, effect.

That said, while it can be assumed that picture makers come to their own personal picture making with some form of intent, it should also be assumed that, good or bad intentions aside, the picture maker can't always control or predict the effect on the viewer that their intentions may invoke.

As an example, my personal prejudices dictate that when I see a typical drama-queen landscape picture I react with a yawn and a shrug. Over-the-top landscape pictures usually have on me what I assume to be the opposite effect of the picture makers intent - which I assume is to produce a reaction of wow and awe.

All of that said, I am always somewhat amazed at the near pavlovian (and, IMO, intellectually lazy) response of so many picture makers whenever the subject of manipulation comes up. Like little puppies who roll over and assume the genitals-up posture of submission, they mouth some variation of the standard line, "just taking a picture is a form of manipulation" which basically a subset of the notion that "all art is a form of manipulation".

Case in point, the Spanish culture minister declared in a recent article regarding Robert Capa's famous Falling Soldier, “Art is always manipulation, from the moment you point a camera in one direction and not another.”

Now, it is true that picture making involves the art of selection as one of its defining characteristics. Where you point your camera and what you decide to include or not include within the edges of the frame is, indeed, part and parcel of the process of selection and therefore an important tool for implementing and reinforcing the picture makers intent but ...

IMO, doing so (pointing a camera) is not a de facto act of manipulation.

There are plenty of pictures that depict the natural beauty to be found in our nation's parks. Almost none, at least amongst those that we see as prints or in print, depict the often negative - litter, congestion, tacky concessions, and the like - presence of humankind. Here in the Adirondacks, tourism pictures are always metaphorically speaking "clean as a whistle" - the sun always shines, everybody's happy, and everything is just hunky-dory.

The picture makers have decided to engage in the act of selection by pointing their cameras in one direction,the one that depicts only beauty, and not in another, the one that depicts a different reality.

Now, I'm not suggesting that tourism promotion groups should be in the business of addressing rural poverty, environmental pollution, or even rainy days but what I am suggesting is that those "glossy" pictures - even though they may be made to the strictest standards of straight photography - are fine examples of pictures that are made to be manipulative. Even though the pictures may be absolutely true the reality they depict, they are made with the intent to invoke an effect upon the viewer that creates and reinforces an agenda / image that is less than true.

That said, IMO, as a genre tourism pictures are pictures that have been made with the intent to manipulate the viewers understanding and perceptions in a manner that is only partly true. Even if the pictures would be considered as straight photography, they are manipulated both by the makers intent and the context within which they are presented.

That said, the notion that all acts of selection are manipulative is, IMO, rather specious.

The act of selection is, in other words, an act of drawing attention to something. IMO, it is possible to draw attention to something without "taking a position", pro or con, regarding it; to picture the thing as an observer / reporter rather than as a propagandist.

Think of it this way - most of my pictures are quite simply about what I see. Sure enough, I tend to picture things that I see that I find interesting. Things that I find interesting for one reason or another, or, most often for many reasons or some others. I am, in fact, drawing attention (by pointing my camera in one direction or another) to those things that I find interesting.

However, I picture and present my pictures in a very straight and straightforward manner because my desire (intent) is merely to "report" what I see and present it as it is in order to let the viewer come to their own understandings, conclusions, and appreciations (or lack thereof) about what I find interesting.

That said, and as many of you know, my stated intent is to draw attention to what I consider to be the everyday / mundane / commonplace beauty that I believe is to be found all around us. However, in doing so it is also my intent to do so by utilizing and honoring the medium's inherent characteristic as a cohort with the real.

I use me and my picturing as an example but I am certain that there are many, many others who take a similar approach to making pictures - tell it like it is and let the chips fall where they may. And, I think it's time for those picture makers to stand up and be counted for, not only their own work, but also for the inherent integrity of the medium itself when it is employed as a cohort with the real.

man & nature # 210 ~ the last word on the Paul Lester Affair

A humid Summer morning on the Au Sable • click to embiggenA fair number of Paul Lester friends and apologists have come to the fore to excoriate me for labeling his "opinion" and "doubts" - that healthcare expeditions are fictitious until "proven" otherwise - as ignorant and that he was acting ignorantly in denying their existence because all evidence that he had seen/read was merely "hearsay".

It has also been suggested that I used a racial epitaph - to call a spade, a spade - in calling ignorance, ignorance. Give me a break .... long before ignorant and hateful people misappropriated the phrase, it simply meant To speak plainly - to describe something as it really is. That is exactly how I used it and how I meant it. To suggest otherwise is entirely unwarranted and utterly without merit of any kind.

Several followers of The Landscapist have indicated that they will no longer do so. Hey, FYI, people come and people go. And it's worth noting that, with one notable exception, those who have stated that they are moving on have contributed absolutely nothing to the proceedings here - you won't be missed.

It has been suggested that I would never talk face-to-face with Paul Lester in the manner in which I have addressed him "from hundreds of miles away". FYI, try me.

It has also been inferred that I do not walk-the-walk as stated in my stand up and be counted entry. FYI, I did not include the notion of suffering-fools-(or foolish behavior)-gladly amongst my many virtues.

The list and the beat goes on and on.

What I find very interesting in all of this is that not a single Lester apologist has addressed his "hearsay" statement regarding healthcare expeditions. You might remember that topic - you know, the one that started this ruckus.

The "opinion" that ranks right up there with those regarding "death panels", and Obama - the Socialist Nazi foreigner, euthanizing the elderly and infirm, and all the rest of the ignorant stuff that is polluting the discussion on healthcare in this here US of A.

Now here's the thing, some have stated that Paul Lester is a nice guy but, if one hoists this notion up Lester's own petard, those statements are nothing but hearsay. After all, I have not seen Paul Lester with my own eyes. I have not personally witnessed that he is a nice guy. Hey, for all I know, there is no Paul Lester and this whole thing is waste of time.

All I know about Paul Lester is contained in the ridiculous comments he left on this blog regarding healthcare expeditions. That and the fact that he implied, inferred, or suggested on his blog that my "personal belief" that healthcare expeditions exist was, well, ignorant.

His CYA protestation (self-serving deniability at its finest) that his opinion regarding my actions was not an Ad Hominem attack aside, Paul Lester was suggesting nothing less than the fact that I was acting without knowledge of, information about, and awareness of healthcare expeditions - that I was spreading hearsay.

He was, quite simply, questioning my integrity. Of course he was only doing so because, being the reasonable man that he is, he was just trying to discover the truth.

But enough about Paul Lester, let's talk about me.

My reason(s) for the use of the words ignorant and ignorance to describe some of the ideas and actions that have been polluting our national discourse about healthcare is quite simple. I am horrified by the thought and the reality that the rest of the world - they are paying attention - sees / hears / and reads very little from those who believe and know that the words and actions (like holstered handguns and shoulder-slung assault weapons outside of townhall meetings) of a fringe element in our society are both ignorant and wrong.

IMO, it is well past the time for well-intentioned and informed people to speak out against this stupidity. To shout down those highly vocal and visible individuals (and organizations) who make us all seem like a country of ignorant idiots. It's time to drive them back into the dark shadows from whence they came.

It is time to stop tolerating those who advocate violence and spread lies and disinformation and do so behind the guise of "differing opinions" and their "right" to do so.

ku # 621 ~ a correction

2 months of rain will do this • click to embiggenYesterday's entry, in which I mentioned Jeff "Foliage" Folger article (in the current Yankee Magazine) and his thoughts on that slider for saturation all the way to the right, contained a error on my part - I left out the word "not" in this sentence -

Apparently, in making the cover picture selection, the photo editor and/or editor did follow that advice.

That omission obviously changes what I meant to be my point. I have since corrected that mistake to read:

Apparently, in making the cover picture selection, the photo editor and/or editor did NOT follow that advice.

That said, Jeff "Foliage" Folger stopped by and left, in part, this comment:

... Do you jump on all those hdr photos because they create images whose colors are all over the color wheel? or are they just art and in the beholders eye ... [I]f people like and enjoy the cover then all is good, if no one buys it because the photo is of poor quality then it is self correcting and they will learn ... [T]hank you for reading the article.. oh! did you like it? :-) Also you did review my photos to tell me they are too over the top?

Yes, I read the article and it certainly makes clear why Jeff's middle name is "Foliage" - it's a very appropriate moniker for someone who has made 50,000 or so pictures of autumn foliage over the past 5 years. Jeff also seems to take seriously his own advice re: "colors that Mother Nature just didn't create" - the pictures that accompanied the article (and others of Jeff's that I have found) seem to be quite restrained when it comes to the use of color. Jeff's foliage pictures are quite definitely pictures that are well placed in the natural-color side of things - very assuredly NOT over-the-top.

Re: HDR pictures - a precious few picture makers are using the HDR technique to make extended-range pictures that are quite natural looking. Most are making freakish unnatural looking pictures. These are not at all my cup of picture-making tea and they most definitely fall into my "jump on" category.

I do disagree with Jeff's assessment that "If people like and enjoy the cover then all is good ..." - Unfortunately, eco-porn and/or nature-porn is far from "self-correcting". Rather, it is at the forefront of creating and maintaining a false and misleading conceptualization of the natural world.

A conceptualization that generally operates well below the sensitivity threshold of conscious public awareness. Consequently, the vast majority of the public has come to accept, or at the very least prefer, pretty but not so true pictures of the natural world.

This pretty-but-not-so-true conceptualization of the natural world is so widely accepted that many a corporate advertisement that extols the company's environmental record or policies - usually by a company known to rape and pillage the environment as often as possible - use this "acceptance" to try and create a public image of environmental responsibility.

That said, and as an addendum to yesterday's entry, man & nature # 209 ~ sizzling hot, I would like to point out that, despite the use of an eco-porn cover picture, virtually all of the pictures used to illustrate a variety of articles inside of the magazine are quite natural in their use of color. There is no evidence of the over-the-top color, saturation, and contrast manipulation that is the defining characteristic of the cover picture.

FYI, for those wishing to see more of Jeff "Foliage" Folger's foliage pictures, you might start here.