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 from January 1, 2012 - January 31, 2012

Tuesday
Jan312012

civilized ku # 2063-65 ~ out and about - reading / looking suggestions

Chimney ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen1044757-16344992-thumbnail.jpg
5 MPH ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
1044757-16345013-thumbnail.jpg
Yellow house ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
The lousy winter weather continues - light snow last night and today and, true to form, rain in the forecast for tonight and tomorrow.

If the crappy weather is keeping you indoors, might I suggest the following:

Reading - Joerg Colberg is writing some interesting pieces on photography. You can find 3 such articles here, here, and here. Plenty of food for thought.

Looking - Juha Haataja continues making some very interesting pictures on his evening walks. The pictures are interesting enough that, if doesn't he make a book of some of them, I'm flying to Finland and stealing his hard drive so I can make a book for him (and me). Good stuff.

Monday
Jan302012

civilized ku # 2062 ~ this winter sucks

Backyard light ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenThis winter has been terrible, assuming, of course, that winter is for snow and winter outdoor activities.

Here we are at the end of January and there is no snow of any consequence on the ground. Since Thanksgiving, the cycle has been a little snowfall, followed by rain, followed by freezing temperatures. Repeat the cycle every fives days or so and what you have is patchy crusty crap all over the place.

So far, this winter sucks.

Friday
Jan272012

civilized ku # 2061 ~ going for the trifecta

Lamp light ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenIn yesterday's entry, I stated that, in my first entry re: "...larger format captures always look better..." (civilized ku # 2059), I was not attempting to address / rebut all of the author's loopy assertations. While that statement remains true, there was a 3rd comment by the author which really dove me very high up the wall of picture making proscription lunacy ...

... to wit, in addressing his idea of "the unseen" he stated:

I would make an argument that from photojournalism to landscape photography to portraits to commercial to architecture to sports to wildlife and all other kinds of photography, a key element of many of the best images in the world is that they depict something that was previously unseen, and they surprise the viewer by showing something the viewer never thought he or she would ever be able to see. It can be an amazing event or very unusual natural light or a lens and an angle that allows to see things in a different way, or freezing the action, or taking a 365 day exposure, or a view through a microscope at extreme magnification, or having a very unusual subject agree to be photographed, or finding a new animal species, or taking a picture from an amazing vantage point such as the earth from the moon or something inside the human body, or some other element that immediately screams: This was unseen until right now.

Ignoring the fact that many of the author's techniques for displaying "the unseen" (which must be either "amazing" or "unusual", or, better yet, both "amazing" and "unusual" - like say, as the author suggests, "a naked picture of Queen Elizabeth" would do quite nicely) are little more than cheap and easy visual tricks, the really annoying thing for me is his assertion that some element in a picture must "immediately scream" for attention. Well, stuff my ears and cover my eyes with a bale of Dixie cotton, I don't know whether to cry or wind my watch.

IMO, that suggestion is nothing less than what's wrong with most avid/serious amateur picture makers' approach to picture making/viewing and, I might suggest, what's wrong with our culture as a whole. That is, the never-ending quest for the next BIG THING, the next BIG THRILL, the next BIG BLOCKBUSTER, at al, ad nauseum. Just rock me, baby.

Subtlety and the quiet appreciation of, well, quiet is disappearing fast over the horizon like the next BIG HIGH-SPEED BULLET TRAIN. Thoughtful, insightful, time-intensive contemplation of just about everything has been jettisoned for the ease and convenience of easy to consume pretty pictures, bullet-points, sound-bites, catch-phrases and instant and overwhelming gratification.

Why spend (waste?) time contemplating a single picture when you can sit in front of monitor, like a monkey hyped-up on Mountain Dew, flickr-ing through hundreds of hyped-up pictures an hour on the hunt for a picture thrill-a-minute? Just keep moving right along, there's nothing to see here.

None of the preceding is to say that there is no wheat amongst chaff because there is. However, finding it is starting to become a lot like looking for a needle in a haystack.

Thursday
Jan262012

civilized ku # 2060 ~ just thinking out loud

Utensil drawer ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenMy thanks to Eric Jeschke for directing me/us to Brooks Jensen's response to one of the blog entries which I referenced in yesterday's entry. In my entry I was not attempting to, as Jensen does (very well, I might add) in his response, address every of the author's points even though many of them are just as loopy as his "large format captures always look better" pronouncement.

That said, the author did touch upon a topic regarding which I have given some thought of late. In the author's words, that topic is "hyper-realism", an effect created by (according to the author) the hi-definition characteristics of large format equipment - especially so with his beloved medium format digital equipment. I won't go into his flapdoodle and green paint iteration of the importance (in his photography) of this concept. I'll leave that reading and weeping exercise to you.

However, I do agree with the author regarding the digital capture domain's ability - with super high pixel count / no anti-alias filter sensors, or, with extreme attention to sharpening techniques - to make hyper-sharp pictures. Pictures which are, to paraphrase the Tryell Corporation's tagline for their Nexus-6 line of replicants, "More Real than Real". IMO, so "more real" as to be, to my eye and sensibilities, quite visually annoying.

To my eye and sensibilities, the visual affect of the super-high resolution/sharpness pictures so beloved by the S-HR/S crowd comes across as nothing more than a cheap visual effect in support of nothing (meaning-wise) other than ultra-sharpness/resolution for ultra-sharpness/resolution's sake. I truly don't get the point.

I have been pondering the idea of "hyper-realism", albeit not under that nomenclature, because there's rumored to be a new 16mp (with a weaker anti-alias filter than current models) Olympus camera just around the corner (Feb. 8, intro), perhaps the long-rumored "pro" µ4/3 model. A camera which promises more resolution / and native file sharpness than the current µ4/3 Oly cameras. I am certain there will be other improvements as well - better high ISO and dynamic range performance, faster AF, and (if rumors are correct) a built-in EVF (based on the idea that Oly's teaser hints around the notion that the new camera is a nod to their classic OM SLR camera series, just as the the digital PEN line is a nod to their classic PenF cameras).

To be certain, the new camera will not make files which qualify as "hyper-real". My pondering centers around leaving well enough alone. I have no issue with the output of my current µ4/3 cameras - in part, I chose the 4/3 format precisely because it doesn't produce hyper-real files. With my level of file processing / printing craft, I am able to create files and prints which, at my standard print size of 24×24 inches, easily display and convey all I am trying to say with my pictures.

So, the ultimate question is, why bother with an "upgrade"? I don't need no stinkin' hyper-realism.

Wednesday
Jan252012

civilized ku # 2059 ~ reading / being drawn into a picture, or, what I dislike about "serious" amateur photographers

Reflection / dish rack ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack PARK • click to embiggenOne sure sign of my returning health is my returning desire to start writing words like "moron", "idiot", "dumbass", and the like. That desire, even as my actual puking recedes into memory, is fueled by my having read, on a couple different sites, a couple recent blog entries that make me want to puke, figuratively speaking.

Both articles, despite their at-first-glance topical differences, are essentially about grinding the same old photography ax(iom) - how and with what gear/technique a picture is made really matters. One entry states quite emphatically that "...[T]he bottom line is that Medium Format Images are superior to smaller format images regardless of the size of the print or the image on the screen ... larger format captures always look better...".

The other entry states that, for the author, some pictures "... make enormous demands on resolution, and doesn't work for me unless, no matter how big the print is, examining it at reading distance reveals a wealth of detail with convincing description of the subject matter. A print that looks OK at 'normal viewing distance' but falls apart if you move closer to view it at reading distance doesn't cut it."

Relative to the statement "larger format captures always look better", IMO, that is a grossly misleading notion. Yes, a "larger" format, film or digital, does have some undeniable technical advantages but to state unequivocally that bigger "always looks better" is to deny or be grossly ignorant of what can be accomplished, relative to "smaller" formats, with the skillful use of the tools of the medium. Even with web viewing, it should be quite obvious to anyone without a preconceived bias that there are many picture makers out there who are making very finely technically crafted pictures independent of format.

Would those pictures "stand up" to direct side-by-side, same subject / same time comparisons? I suspect most would compare quite nicely but, yes or no, who the f**k cares? That's quite simply not what making pictures is about. All that matters / the only thing that matters, despite the author's contention that Everything Matters, is that the picture maker be able to adequately represent and communicate his/her picturing intent. Period. End of discussion.

Relative to the "examining it (a picture) at reading distance" malarkey, IMO, examining a picture at reading distance is the absolute worst way in which to "read" a picture. A good picture is much more than the sum of its visual parts. It is all-of-a-piece.

A good pictures demands to be taken/viewed whole. Even though most pictures have a dominant visual referent, in a good picture that referent is always presented in relationship, within the frame, to other "parts" of the picture. That relationship has undoubtedly been created by the picture maker with the intent of seeing the referent in the strongest manner possible (Edward Weston: composition is the strongest way of seeing). Moving in to "reading distance" is the best way I can think of to disregard / ignore the picture maker's strongest way of seeing - what's the point of that?

Despite the author's somewhat idiotic disregard for judging a picture's success/failure goodness/badness at a "normal viewing distance", a picture's success or failure must be judged solely by its effect and affect at precisely that distance. Viewing a picture at an appropriate "normal" distance is the only way to see, in its illustrative and illuminative totality, what the picture maker saw, pictured, and intended to say. Period. End of discussion.

All of that said, therein is what I really dislike about "avid"/"serious" amateur photographers. They simply can't help themselves - every picture they see is most often a foil against which they can demonstrate (verbally) their "mastery" of the medium. Every picture could be made better with the use of better gear and/or technique ("I would have ..."). And, it seems readily apparent, every picture has an implanted and irresistible nose magnet which draws them in for a closer inspection.

They seem to be totally clueness as to why people may like a given picture. IMO&E, it's not because it's sharp and full of detail at reading distances. It's because the viewer has been drawn into a picture, not in a physical sense, but rather by the emotional and intellectual affect, together with its visual effect, a picture has upon their visual and aesthetic sensibilities.

In a gallery crowd, avid/serious photography practitioners can usually be spotted clustered together, in their little gear/technique-head ghettos, clucking and chortling like a flock of know-it-all hens pecking at barren ground. I always avoid them like the plague upon the medium they actually are.

There, I've said it. I'm starting to feel better already.

Tuesday
Jan242012

civilized ku # 2058 ~ old and new

Building backs / facades ~ Baltimore, MD • click to embiggen

Tuesday
Jan242012

civilized ku # 2057 / tuscany # 102 ~ late afternoon light

Off of Piazza Signorelli ~ Cortona / Tuscany, Italy • click to embiggenAs part of dealing with a 7 print sale (and office re-design commission), I have been revisiting my picture archives. In doing so, I have come across some unfinished business, re: picture processing.

As I slowly get back into my normal out-and-about routine, I'll be posting a few of these stragglers.

Monday
Jan232012

civilized ku # 2056 ~ saddled up and almost ready to ride

Flags ~ 5th Avenue - New York, New York • click to embiggenI'm out of the hospital - as of 4:30PM Sunday - and starting to feel somewhat human again. And, while in the future when I'm feeling feverish, achy, and vomiting I am apt to say I am coming down with bad case of Jimmi Nuffin, what I am currently calling the flu is now close to gone.

It was the flu, which seems to have been the cause of all the heart stuff, that was causing me to feel like crap. I couldn't eat. I couldn't sleep. The only thing I could do was sit around and puke. So consequently, I was somewhat dehydrated and weak as a church mouse. All of which, the doctors believe, was what caused the AFib episodes.

Re: the AFib episodes - I have lived quite comfortably and quite normally while in AFib (on meds). It causes me absolutely no physical discomfort and restricts my physical activity very little. The cardioversion procedure - shock the heart to stop it, re-shock it to restart it - is very low risk and, assuming your cardiologist is in the building, can take as little as a 2.5/3 hours, check in to check out. After the procedure, there is no recuperation or convalescence needed or required - either your heart is in sinus rhythm or it's not.

So, other than laying about, eating, taking my meds, and regaining the strength lost from a bad case of Jimmi Nuffin, it's pretty much back to life as usual.

All of that said, I want express my thanks for all of the well wishes and words of encouragement / support. I really do appreciate it.