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 on • Life without the APA • Doors • Kitchen Sink • Rain • 2014 • Year in Review • Place To Sit • ART ~ conveys / transports / reflects • Decay & Disgust • Single Women • Picture Windows • Tangles ~ fields of visual energy (10 picture preview) • The Light + BW mini-gallery • Kitchen Life (gallery) • The Forks ~ there's no place like home (gallery)
Entries from November 1, 2007 - November 30, 2007
FYI
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
There is some important info about me and The Landscapist in an update on urban ku # 141. You might want to check it out.
decay # 2
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
1 week old wishbone • click to embiggenOne of the primary stumbling blocks to my Decay series is going to be the problem of breaking the wife of her filthy habit of not being filthy. Or, to be more accurate, of her habit of not wanting to keep decaying matter around the house. Even though there are times when I want her to be a dirty girl, this not one of them.
Case in point, yesterday's pepper had to be rescued from the garbage bin which I had already placed at the curb for pickup. In the wife's defense, the pepper was put in the garbage by our cleaning lady who said that she didn't realize that it was an 'art project' - an excuse I'll accept once and only once.
But the cleaning lady is not who I am worried about, she's only on the case 1 day a week. The wife on the other hand is on the case 24/7 (except, of course, for that time when she is out of the house making a living in order to support me in the manner to which I am accustomed). It will be interesting to see where the line gets drawn.
On a different line of thought, as I work my way through the first few picturing sessions, a number of considerations about the series are coming to mind. One that I have thought long and hard about (approx. 3-4 minutes), is that of 'light'. My first thought was to haul out the studio lighting equipment - power packs, strobes, umbrellas, soft boxes, scrims, snoots, diffusers, reflectors, etc. But, the more I thought about it (another 3-4 minutes), the more I liked the idea that, by utilizing window light, the light would NOT be a constant.
I like the idea that the characteristics of the light will be a variable. Contrast and color will be the primary variables. The series may end up having a 'direct sunlight' sub-category
4 day old pepper #2 • click to embiggenas seen in the Pepper # 2 variation, which, by the way, is an HDR image - an HDR image that I worked on for quite a while so that it not look like and HDR image.
In any event, I'm not sure yet about the direct sunlight. Maybe yes, maybe no. The direct sunlight picture is very 'seductive' and, perhaps that why I might reject the idea. It's a bit too seductive - more like the advertising stuff I used to do. So. I'll let that particular wrestling match begin and determine over time whether it's a variable that works for or against the series as a whole.
FYI, I am also working on an Artist Statement for Decay. More on that later.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Category Category"
decay # 1 - you saw it here first
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
4 day old pepper • click to embiggen
detail of decay #1 click to embiggenEven though I have been trying, I can no longer ignore or resist the siren song of my studio still life past. While everyone else is out and about making staged event pictures, it seems that I must stay indoors and return to my studio days of making 'constructed' still life pictures.
Of course, during my studio still life 'salad days', I was asked to picture things that were burnished to within a inch of 'perfection', the object of the exercise being to create an all-consuming lust for all of those most desirable objects in the world. Not so, my Decay series.
I am not about to give up my ongoing ku pictures, but I will definitely be focused for a time on my decay series. As many here know, I am very enamored of decay. My initial interest seems to be with the decay of things we eat but that will by no means be the extent of my investigation of decay.
Metal decays. Albeit slower, plastic decays. Fibers decay. Road-kill decay. The list goes on and on. The visual constants will be my kitchen counter top and floor, the plate, and the light that comes through my kitchen window.
The technical constants will be digital capture, ISO 1600, a Zuiko 11-22mm lens, and really big prints.
Stay tuned. I hope I don't lose the room but it's something I just gotta do.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Category Category"
urban ku # 142 ~ it's back ... again
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
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
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
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.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Registered Commenter Registered Commenter"
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
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
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?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af5d0/af5d02e165c3ab18fee122daef291f9637f2f33a" alt="Date Date"
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.
Mark Hobson - Physically, Emotionally and Intellectually Engaged Since 1947