Foggy morning wiith fence, wire and telephone pole • click to embiggenIn an email, Chuck Avery wrote; "That was an interesting exchange about a traditionalist versus activist photographic approach to the ecological questions in front of us. I don't think anybody is fooling themselves thinking that they are going to change the world. But if we can all do our small part to raise consciousness and awareness, then maybe we have done our job."

Exactly.

PS I'm posting this on Thursday evening because on Friday have to go see Tiger Woods.

Elk with rack in repose on a foggy morning • click to embiggenStephen Shore, in an interview on Conscientious, talks about how the expense of shooting with an 8×10 camera - currently about $22.00 per exposure for film, processing and a contact sheet - made him "... decide what I really wanted to photograph and how I wanted to structure the picture ... This was a powerful learning experience. I began to learn what I really wanted."

When asked about digital picturing, he said, "I see digital as a two-sided phenomenon. The fact that pictures are free can lead to greater spontaneity. As I watch people photograph (with film), I often see a hesitation, an inhibition, in their process. I don't see this as much with digital. There seems to be a greater freedom and lack of restraint ... The other side of this lack of restraint is greater indiscriminancy. Here's a tautology: as one considers one's pictures less, one produces fewer truly considered pictures."

So, I have a question for you (all of you - come on, chime in. Don't be shy). How 'considered' are your pictures? Do you shoot lots and then edit? or, Do you tend to 'get it right' with a minimum of fuss and fidget?

If you are a consider-er (and I assume everybody considers something), what you do you consider most? What to picture? How to picture?

I am curious about this because, I have always been one who 'considers'.

Chuck Avery sent pictures back in July and, as I mentioned, I totally overlooked them ( along with some others). So, better late than never is the order of the day.

Chuck and I share both a similar 'how we came to photography' stories and a similar approach to how we approach our subjects. Like me, Chuck started out in architecture but for one reason or another, became disillusioned with it and then, again like me, turned to photography. There are other interesting parallels in our lives but I won't get into that because it all starts to sound a bit 'creepy'.

Photography-wise, we tend to approach our subjects in as similar manner - he states on his website that, "...Instead of taking a dogmatic approach with this project by condemning urban sprawl, I would rather inspire awareness of the process and help to pose questions ..." I appreciate the fact that Chuck is picturing in a somewhat objective 'bear-witness' manner - using the medium's 'reality effect' to 'inspire awareness' about a subject to which he is drawn. He then has the artistic confidence to 'pose questions' about his subject rather than imposing answers - hopefully inciting discourse and thought. I also find his pictures to be visually stimulating. My eye enjoys working the visual landscapes that he presents - they have a quite and engaging visual beauty, albeit a 'horrifying' one, of which I never seem to tire.

Some might (correctly) pose that Chuck is doing nothing 'new', that his pictures are very 'derivative' of the New Topography school. While this certainly has an element of truth, what I most appreciate about his pictures is that they are linked to a sense of place - his place - and his concern for his place. His pictures do however transcend the merely 'local'. The 'connoted' subject they address is indeed a global one.

All in all, I find Chuck's pictures to be both illustrative and illuminating. Would that there were legions of Chuck Averys doing the 'same' thing (rather than the ubiquitous pretty landscape crap) The planet just might be a better place.

You can see more of Chuck Avery's pictures on his website. The pictures presented here are from his Landscapes of Progress gallery, but don't stop there, check out all of his galleries.

The Luigi Syndrome strikes again • click to embiggenThe dictionary defines 'syndrome' as a predictable, characteristic pattern of behavior, action, etc., that tends to occur under certain circumstances.

On road trips of late (the last year or so), I seem to be repeatedly encountering a very specific 'certain circumstance' - used Fiats on used car lots - that trigger an instantaneous Pavlovian 'predictable, characteristic pattern of behavior, which, for me, is to fall under the spell of the dreaded Luigi Syndrome. For me that is characterized by a lust for old Fiats. A lust akin to failing for a woman whom you know will break your heart, leave you high and dry and drain your bank account along the way. As Bob Dylan sings, "... some lazy slut has charmed away my brains ..." (Rollin' and Tumblin' ~ from the Modern Times CD).

So far, I have been able to resist the urge (with a great deal of 'help' from the long-suffering wife). But if this keeps up ...

FYI, we're back home, Maggie's going to classes and no one has a clue about what went wrong.

I'm back in Philadelphia again. Maggie is going to classes today and if all goes well, the wife and I are heading back home this evening. It seems that everything is returning to 'normal'.

I did some email folder cleanup on Saturday and discovered that I had completely missed a number of photo submissions going back as far as June. Don't know how I managed that but I will be posting some of those this week.

BTW, have I mentioned how much I dislike driving the Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway?

FYI #2, Tim Atherton, over on photo-muse has some great reading suggestions today. Check them out - and, btw, Tim's blog really is one of the best out there on the subject of photography, emphasis on "it's about the pictures, dummy" (past and present) - highly recommended.