civilized ku # 2448 ~ let there be (balanced) light

Night fog ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenIMO, night picture making, under some circumstances, is one of the most difficult to proccess, color wise. Those such circumstances are when there are multiple artificial light sources, each with differing white balance points. Multiple color balances, if left uncorrected (individually), tend to result in a somewhat garish potpourri of disjointed colors in a print of the scene.

My solution to such cases, as in the picture with this entry, is to process the image as many times as there are different color balance sources, correcting each color source to a more correct color balance - in the Night fog picture, there were 3 predominant light sources so I processed the image 3x, one corrected file for each area of the scene dominated by a different light source. Then I merged the separate corrected areas of the picture into one composite file which resulted in a much more real representation of the scene.

Doing so is slightly time consuming but, IMO, the result is well worth the effort.

civilized ku # 2447 ~ crammed to the rafters (with complete disclosure)

Reading Terminal Market ~ Philadelphia, PA • click to embiggenWhile in Philadelphia over the holidays, we stayed in a hotel which was right next to the Reading Terminal Market, the former Reading Railroad terminal and company headquarters. The terminal is now a market with over 100 vendors. The place is huge and crammed to the rafters, so to write, with a seemingly endless array of food merchants - baked goods, meats, poultry, seafood, produce, flowers, ethnic foods, cookware and small eclectic restaurants - and about one zillion people.

We visited the market several times during our stay - why eat hotel food when the real thing is but a few steps away? During one visit I made a couple pictures and my first impression was to picture with a moderate wide angle lens (35mm equiv). However, upon further consideration I used a moderate telephoto lens (90mm equiv.) instead.

My reason for this choice was simple - even though the place was ginormous, what I saw and felt was a chaotic jumble of signs, vendor stalls, and people. It was an exquisite example of information overload. To my eye and sensibilities, a wide angle view just didn't convey the sense of the jammed together feel of the place. So, even though my moderate telephoto view does not convey the shear size of the place, IMO, it does convey the feeling of what I saw and experienced.

So, a moderate telephoto view was just what the eye doctor ordered because, IMO, picturing making is all about picturing what you see and feel, although ...

... in the interest of full disclosure, I have a confession to make ....

This picture is the only picture I ever have published here on The Landscapist which has been cropped, albeit a very miniscule amount. As can be seen in figure 1 below, I cropped, in the interest of better balance, to remove a small bit of the bottom of the image. While I pride myself on getting it "right" in-camera, I have no particular problem with cropping to improve an image. However, if that were the extent of my shenanigans, I wouldn't have mentioned it, but ....

.... that written, this picture is also the very first picture I have ever published here on The Landscapist (my life without the APA pictures excepted) which has been altered, relative to what my camera recorded, via Photoshop. The original image with the central man (facing the camera), figure 2 below, was made a fraction of a second after the image (not shown) I used to mask out the large foreground figure, who had entered the scene and visually dominated the right foreground. Evidence of that figure, just before he entered the scene, can be seen in the very lower right-hand corner of the final image.

Does this manipulation bother me? Sorta yes, sorta no. Sorta no - is the final picture an accurate representation of the look and feel of the scene? Yes, it is. Sorta yes - that written, no matter how you cut it, it's a manipulated picture.

In any event, let it never be said that I presented a picture as real when, in fact, it's only mostly real.

All of that written, now I can sleep sound as a baby - or is it the sleep of the damned? - tonight.

figure 1 • click to embiggen
figure 2 • click to embiggen

decay # 48 / civilized ku # 2446 ~ found / made

Rocks in outdoor sink ~ Phonicia, NY - in the Catskill Park • click to embiggen
Cornbread, orange peels, beet • click to embiggenWhile I was in Montreal, I came across the pictures of Claudio Napolitano. One of his pictures - # 13 in the linked portfolio - was in a gallery window and it most definitely caught my eye. Entering the gallery, # 2, 5 (kid with gas mask), and 9 were also on display. # 19, not on display, was listed as sold. FYI, most of the prints* were in the 36"×48" range (# 19 was 40"×80") with plexiglass adhered to the front of the print and mounted on aluminum (no frames). The price was $4,500 Canadian.

After spending some time viewing the prints, my initial caught-my-eye impression started to fade. The work just seemed contrived, ala Gregory Crewdson, and rather too "slick". I had expected to like the pictures but, in fact, they left me kinda cold. Eye catching, yes, in a weird kinda way, but, beyond the weirdness, they didn't strike much of an emotional / intellectual chord with me.

Consequently, upon returning home and reading (online) his bio and Artist Statement, I discovered that Napolitano is a highly regarded advertising picture maker. At that point, my feelings about the "slick" feel of the work and the contrived look of the children started to make sense. Obviously, Napolitano has brought all of his advertising picture making virtuoso to his Fine Art picture making. To my eye and sensibilities, that picturing M.O. was the reason for my ultimately rather cool, but not dismissive, reaction to the work.

All of which got me to thinking about made pictures, as opposed to found pictures. Part of where those ruminations led was to my experience with John Pfahl (pictures here), a Fine Art picture maker of some renown.

Back in the early 80s while he was teaching at RIT, Pfahl visited my studio at the behest of a friend (who also taught at RIT). The purpose of his visit was a meet and greet and for him to have an opportunity to view my personal / non-commercial pictures. Long story short, he was impressed with my personal work but he was utterly perplexed with the fact that I was a commercial / advertising picture maker and a Fine Art picture maker. That was due to the fact that, at that time, the two disciplines rarely, if ever, met within the same picture maker - advertising was advertising, Fine Art was Fine Art, and that was the way it was. Period.

That written, fast forward to today's Fine Art World, Photography Division, there are quite a few advertising picture makers who are also making Fine Art pictures. For better or for worse, that's the way it currently is. And, for the most part, those picture making practitioners are making made pictures. That is to write, pictures which are heavy on the concept side, not so much on the reality side.

In any event, I have no prejudice**, re: made pictures or, for that matter, advertising picture makers who make Fine Art pictures (I am one, after all). However, that written, my made picture preference runs toward those pictures which exhibit at least a modicum of found picture visual quality. Like, say, Jeff Wall's pictures as opposed to those of Gregory Crewdson - both make made pictures but Wall eschews the theatrical flourish production values employed by Crewdson.

All of that written, one of the many much-to-my-liking attributes of the previously mentioned Photo - wisdom. Master Photographers on Their Art book is that the book showcases mainly, but not exclusively, the work of those picture makers who make found pictures or pictures which look as though they might be of the found variety.

One of the notable exceptions to the found / found-like work is the pictures of Loretta Lux, whose work I find to be fascinating on so many levels ...

.... which brings me back to where this entry began, the work of Claudio Napolitano. Even though his pictures of children are of a type - children, distorted - which could be categorized with those of Loretta Lux, I just can't seem to warm up to them. The pictures are just too advertising slick in their visual appearance, whereas, I find Lux's pictures to be far more biased toward the world of Fine Art and, therefore, much more pleasing to my eye and sensibilities.

In summation, and relative to all of the aforewritten, I close with a quote from Joel Meyerowitz:

A lot of people put their intellectual concerns first with photography, but I think it is a discipline that is at first a visceral one. The primary aspect of this whole engagement with, and through, photography is to try to understand what your instincts are. Don't go counter to that, learn what the feeling is ... [I]f you keep following your every instinct - you want to get closer, kneel down, or jump up two steps - then just do it. The results will describe to you who you are. The visceral and the intuitive side will combine to show your intellect as a photographer. (emphasis mine)

*FYI, most of the prints were in the 36"×48" range (# 19 was 40"×80") with plexiglass adhered to the front of the print and mounted on aluminum (no frames). The price was $4,500 Canadian.

**That is, no prejudice with the exception of those pictures which are so concept driven that they become little more than visual and photo vernacular gibberish - those pictures most favored by the academic lunatic fringe.

diptych # 22 (rain # 56-57) ~ it's party time

Canal's Discount Liquor Mart ~ Cherry Hill, NJ • click to embiggen

diptych # 21 (civilized ku # 2445 / art reflects # 29) ~ back in the saddle .... again

Through the looking glass ~ Old Montreal / Montreal, Canada - • click to embiggenOk, I confess ... I was only in the saddle, posting wise, for 2 days and then I dismounted and went to Montreal for 3 days. However, I've climbed back into the saddle and I'm ready to ride once again.

civilized ku # 2444 ~ a mother lode of picture making delights

Reading material ~ Hotel room / Philadelphia, PA • click to embiggen
Photo - wisdom. the bookWhile I was in South Jersey over the Holidays and as luck would have it - although I didn't know it, luck wise, at the time - I came across a fantastic photo book, Photo - wisdom. Master Photographers on Their Art, at the local Barnes & Noble store.

The luck part was that there was just a single copy of the book and, as I later discovered, the book is rather hard to find. It was published in 2009 and is still in its first edition so copies are scarce. That written, FYI, I did find 2 online sources here (Daedalus Books) and here (MoMA Store). No guarantee they are in stock but, if it is, Daedalus Books lists it at $14.98, which is a steal when compared to full list price - $50.00 - at the Moma Store.

The book - 12.25×12.25 / 220 pages / very nice heavyweight paper - is a wonderful overview of the work of 50 contemporary picture makers from a wide spectrum of picture making persuasions. The pictures, beautifully printed and selected by the picture makers themselves, are accompanied by insightful and informative commentaries from original (for the book) interviews with each of the represented picture makers.

The book is, quite simply, an incredible peek inside the minds behind the art.

I had a few hours of unaccompanied down time while in our Philadelphia hotel room and was able to skim through the book. That written, I can write with assurance that I will be spending many hours working my way through this superb collection of work.

The book is truly amazing and is very highly recommended.

IMO, if you don't lay your hands on a copy of this book, you might consider poking your eyes out and never again making another picture. Seriously ... this book should make a better picture maker (and viewer) out of just about anyone. It's that good.

FYI, the link under the picture of the book goes to a good review of the book. Check it out.

civilized ku # 2438-43 ~ chrysaora fuscescens

Jellyfish / Pacific sea nettle ~ Aquarium / Camden, NJ • click to embiggenJellyfish / Pacific sea nettle ~ Aquarium / Camden, NJ • click to embiggenDuring the Holidays, when Hugo and I were purchasing tickets for the aquarium in Camden, NJ, there were a couple cost-extra options. The one option we purchased was for the 4D movie. The one option not listed, which I most definitely would have purchased, should have been for a hit of a psychedelic psychoactive drug of one form or another, which could have been called the Chrysaora Fuscescens Experience Ticket to Ride.

That written, just standing in front of the chrysaora fuscescens tank and watching these specimens glide about - slowly and quite gracefully - was quite a mind-warping trip in and of itself - even without a little helper like, say, psilocybin mushrooms (mother nature's idea of what a psychedelic compound should be).

Next time I'm in that neighborhood, I'm confiscating Hugo's iPod, downloading some Jimi Hendrix, Pink Floyd, Jefferson Airplane, and Grateful Dead tunes, putting on some headphones, and then stand in front of the chrysaora fuscescens tank feeling like I'm ten feet tall (just ask Alice, she knows what I mean).

Update on Thursday, January 3, 2013 at 01:20PM by gravitas et nugalis

HIPPIES - USE SIDE DOOR ~ Woodstock, NY - in the Catskill Park • click to embiggenNow that I think about it, perhaps it was our stop in Woodstock which put me in a psychedelic predisposition state of mind.

diptych # 20 (civilized ku # 2436-37) ~ sharks

Sharks ~ Aquarium / Camden, NJ • click to embiggenThe Holidays are over and I'm back in the saddle, blog wise. More tomorrow.