When To Stop

I admit it. I am a perfectionist. This can be a problem. If I may quote Brooks Jensen from his recent interview with Ibarionex Perello on The Candid Frame, “The practical consequence of perfection is procrastination”. If one is constantly and persistently trying to improve a print, as Brooks put it, “the work simply won’t get done”.

I can vouch for that. It can take me several weeks to take an image from RAW format to a completed print. However, I do have a ‘day job’ as well as kids. My photography time is therefore somewhat limited and so maybe it turns out that I am not quite as pathologic a perfectionist as was being described in the interview. But, trust me, it is a problem. And this year I have decided to solve it! I thought it might be useful (or at least therapeutic for me) to describe how to properly diagnose and cure this photographic malady.

How can this diagnosis be made? How can you tell if you might be a fellow sufferer? Based on my personal experience, I can offer the following. When you find that you have a large stack of ‘test prints’, both as small working prints and in final size, that’s a clue. When the changes made between print ‘versions’ tend to end up being so minor that when you ask your spouse (or insert ‘significant other’) which version they like best they tell you they see no real difference, that’s a clue. When you find yourself thinking that the reason your spouse can’t tell the difference between versions is that they have an unrefined eye, yup, that’s a clue as well. And when you start asking your kids the same question because you think their vision is probably better than your spouse’s, that, too, is a warning sign.

The cure can be difficult, but I am willing to relate what I am trying, and which seems to be an effective remedy. First, I made a photographic New Year’s resolution. I have decided to complete a defined, discreet project over the course of the year. I have given myself a well-defined goal and deadline. To meet these goals, I need to have 30-40 completed prints by the end of the year. I currently have five images printed and completed, so I am right on schedule. I know that I have to complete 3-4 images a month.

Perhaps more importantly, I am learning when to stop trying to further refine an image. I am not saying that you shouldn’t ask anyone for their opinion, but when your spouse tells you that they don’t see a big difference between images, they’re probably telling you the truth. And, by the way, your 12 year old kid’s vision is probably not that much better than your spouses and it is certainly not more refined.

A strategy to limit image modifications needs to be devised, particularly if, like me, you have ‘gone digital’ and it has become all too easy to continue making minor ‘tweaks’. My strategy is as follows. After I have gotten the image where I want it and have gone through four or five small test prints and one or two full size prints, I look at the differences between the current and the last two versions. At this stage, I think one knows, in their heart of hearts, if the changes being made are minor and if a viewer is going to be able to recognize them. When that stage is reached, I then compile a list of all the further minor changes that I might consider making and give myself one final opportunity to apply them in one last Photoshop session before making a final print. Then, the moment of truth. I force myself to make an irrevocable and final choice between the last two versions….no going back and making further adjustments. It’s either one version or the other. Period.

It is definitely working. I do see myself becoming more productive.

Are Abstracts Too Personal?

It has been said that if one wants to be successful at selling their photographs they shouldn’t be making abstract images. Abstracts don’t fly off the shelves, at least that’s what I’ve been told.

I make abstract images because I enjoy it. I like looking for lines, shapes and patterns in places where most non-photographers wouldn’t. I find it very satisfying to find something that looks like it might be interesting when isolated from its surroundings and then going on to compose an image and tweak the camera position until it seems to come together in the viewfinder. With a click, it’s then frozen forever.

But do these images interest others? Sure, an abstract with saturated colors and distinct angles are going to grab one’s attention, but what about the more subtle ones with gentle changes in tonality and less dramatic shapes? I find them personally satisfying, but I’m not at all sure that they have broad appeal.

Images have to stand by themselves. In the end, the viewer sees the image in isolation. They don’t care if you had to stand knee deep in mud for hours to get the shot or if it was a two second chance grab that happened to work out unexpectedly well. So with some of the more subtle abstracts, I am uncertain if the image itself stands alone or if the appeal remains a personal one, with the photographer being the only one able to fully appreciate the image because he/she was the one experiencing the making of the photograph.

Ice Abstract
Copyright Howard Grill

For example, last weekend I went out into freezing weather to make some images. It was so cold that I had to remain near the car and return to it every 20-30 minutes in order to warm up (OK, I know I am probably just a wimp compared to you folks from further north). During this excursion, I was drawn to some interesting patterns in the ice on a river and started making abstract images.

The ice abstracts are meaningful to me because of the personal experience I had of standing in the freezing cold to make them, as well as the experience of being at that particular location….but do they stand alone as images that will hold the interest of a viewer that has not been to the same site? I am not so sure.

Maybe my uncertainty is just related to the quality of these abstract images and my ‘fear’ that the only reason they appeal to me is because they remind me of the day I took them, as opposed to being interesting. On the other hand, perhaps this is one of the reasons why abstracts don’t sell; maybe they are just too personal.

When Size Matters

There are some images that seem to cry out to be displayed as a large sized print. Skyscrapers and mountains come to mind. However, it has also been said, and I am paraphrasing as I can’t seem to remember to whom the quote should be attributed, that “if you can’t take a great image at least print it big and maybe no one will notice”.

"Three Trees"
Copyright Howard Grill

Recently, I made an interesting discovery when I was working with this image. I wasn’t really sure how it would look as a print. Evaluating it on the computer monitor, as you are now, I thought it was, well, so-so. Certainly pleasant enough to look at, but really nothing special. I didn’t simply pass it by at the time because I had been considering including it in the project that came about from my New Year’s resolution (see Part 2 of my Jan 21st blog entry). For this reason, I decided to see what it would look like when printed at the same size as the other images in that group, which are matted to 22 x 28 inches.

Looking at the finished print, I was amazed. The image looked fantastic, but not simply because it was large. During my post-processing, I had selectively sharpened the tree in the foreground more than the others and that effect was not visible either at monitor viewing size or on the 8x10 inch test prints that I had been working with. But once printed large, the selective sharpening gave the image a marvelous three dimensional quality that could not otherwise be appreciated. Looking at the image (and I realize that you are stuck with the monitor view), it almost feels as if you could walk right into it.

My purpose is not to wax on about what a great image I can produce. On the contrary, as a small image I think it is fairly bland. I do, however, find it quite interesting that the photograph takes on a very different quality when printed large, and I don’t think that quality is merely related to the ‘wow’ effect of seeing a large print in the way that the opening quote suggests. Rather, the large size of the print was able to bring out an aspect of the image that could not be previously recognized or appreciated.

I am in no way suggesting that one should take mediocre images and blow them up as a method of improving them. On the other hand, it just might be that some images don’t reach their full potential until seen in a large format presentation.

What Is Real?

Visiting Antelope Canyon, which is located on land belonging to the Navajo Nation within Arizona, USA, is a deeply personal experience, even if you must work your way around the crowd. It is very easy to see why the Native Americans considered this a sacred location. About two years ago I attended a workshop at the canyon, which was given by Alain Briot and Uwe and Bettina Steinmueller.

The shapes and twists of the canyon walls are amazing. The colors are surreal, which leads to some problematic issues when portraying the canyon photographically. First, it would be useful to offer a brief explanation of how the colors arise. The walls of the canyon are made of sandstone. When the sun is high in the sky, one of the two canyon walls are illuminated by direct sunlight. Because of the composition of the sandstone, the wall shines brightly and reflects red light onto the opposing wall, causing it to appear an unbelievable fiery red/orange. The reflected light is very intense on the opposing wall because the canyon itself is very narrow; in many areas a person can touch both sides of the canyon with outstretched arms. However, this same proximity of the two walls causes the reflected light to be fairly focal so that only localized areas take on this fiery appearance.

What color, then, is the part of the wall not receiving reflected light? That is where the difficult issue starts. There are areas of the walls that are illuminated not by the sun nor by reflected light, but by the blue sky overhead. This blue light in conjunction with the sandstone produces an odd blue/purple color, and this is where our brains start to get in the way.

As most people undoubtedly know, the brain and optic system has an uncanny way of neutralizing color casts. That is why we don’t ‘see’ a blue cast in the shade or a green cast on the white dress of a little girl romping in a field of green…..but that cast does appear in our photographs. Is the cast as seen in the photograph real? Sure. If we have the option, do we take it out in Photoshop? Unless looking for an unusual effect, I think most people would. Though the color cast is ‘real’, it is not something we normally see and because we ‘know,’ or think we know, what a girl running in a field or in the shade looks like, the cast becomes something we want to eliminate. However, at times, such as sunset, we welcome the color cast because it seems to enhance what we ‘want’ to see even though our brains don’t really view the surrounding landscape as glowing orange.

Back to the canyon. Our brains tend to neutralize the bizarre blue/purple cast on the walls that are illuminated by the sky and we, or at least I (that raises another issue of individualized color perception…but let’s put that off until another time), see the color as a bluish grey, not unlike the flagstone used in garden walkways. The instructors showed prints that had the shaded rocks portrayed as a deep blue/purple. After some discussion, I learned that what I had initially thought was marked manipulation was, in fact, an accurate portrayal of the way this rock appeared when taken with slide film such as Velvia, and that if one used a colorimeter to actually ‘measure’ the color it would fall into a wavelength that would appear similar to the slide . The final print matched the slide’s reality, which came close to what an objective measurement of color indicated was real.

Images Taken In Antelope Canyon
Copyright Howard Grill

So what should a print of Antelope Canyon look like? What our eyes see? What the colorimeter says is fact? What slide film suggests is reality and, if so, what type of film…high or low contrast, high or low saturation? Is adjusting the color of a digital image captured in RAW format to match what is real less valid than what our eyes perceive? I am not talking about ‘Real vs. Feel’ (see my post here ) but am speaking of perception vs. reality.

These images are my interpretation. There are certainly other different, yet equally valid, portrayals possible. Reality can be a thorny issue.

Overdone, But Still Fun

I enjoy photographing statues and monuments when I go into the city with a camera. I guess they are somewhat overdone since it is awfully easy to find plenty of statue images. I do think that many statue images seem dull and somewhat sterile appearing. But that might be because most of the ones we see are from travel guides, history texts, and the like. They are presented in what is essentially a documentary format, much like flowers in a field guide.

Images Taken In Downtown Pittsburgh

Copyright Howard Grill

Because there are so many 'field guide' type presentations, I view statue photographs as something that has a fair amount of potential for creativity. Now, I am not saying that I am a great connoisseur of these type of images, but I do know that if we pick statues that are interesting in appearance and shoot them from angles other than eye level they have a fair amount of potential.

As an aside, I see no reason why this blog should contain only my images, so I was going to try a little experimentation from time to time. If anyone that might be reading this entry has a particularly interesting or unique statue image please feel free to e-mail a copy to me at hgrill1@verizon.net. If some interesting images come in I can post the contributions on the blog along with the photographer's name and a copyright notice.

Photographers' Rights

There have been some extremely interesting posts and discussions going on over at Paul Butzi’s blog “Photo Musings” regarding certain ethical aspects of taking photographs. I think that reading them, or at least giving thought and consideration to the topic, is essential. The blog entries and comments can be seen here, here, and here.

The discussion revolves around whether it is acceptable to take photographs in the following types of situations:

i) when people don’t want you to photograph them,

ii) when you must trespass either overtly, or more subtly, by going onto clearly private land that is not so clearly marked as such, and

iii) when you are photographing private property from a public location and the owner specifically approaches and asks you not to do so.

First, let me state that I agree with Paul 99%. I personally feel that one should not photograph people who do not want to be photographed, that one should not trespass, that is to say violate the law, in order to photograph, and that one should not take photographs if there is a compelling reason not to, such as a home owner specifically requesting that you don’t.

However, I myself would insert a caveat regarding number iii. What if the photograph is something newsworthy and might be important for generations to come? While I certainly would not want anyone to violate the law to obtain the image, situation iii is not violating the law per se. It becomes a tough issue. Would I do it? No. Should it never be done? I am not so sure that is the case either. It is a very fine line. Certainly I would personally disagree, for example, with paparazzi type harassment, which if done from afar and when the subject is in public does not violate the law. But, to take the absurd, should an image of someone robbing a bank not be taken because the perpetrator doesn’t want his picture taken? Should, for example, photographers not have pushed to take images in the aftermath of 9/11, when they were initially told they could not?

On the other hand, as Paul pointed out, stretching photographic freedoms can also get very out of hand such as in this case, where it was deemed legal to take pictures ‘up women’s skirts’ without their knowledge if they are in a public place. It seems like common sense went out the window. So, I think that if one walks the edges of some of the moral issues involving photographing when there is no law being broken, things can get a bit dicey and difficult to cover with one sweeping declaration.

I had already been thinking about these issues because …….a funny thing happened to me on the way downtown. Several months back I was on an urban photography outing and had seen an interesting looking restaurant storefront situated on the ground floor of a large downtown ‘skyscraper’. The external walls of the restaurant were public and on street level. The restaurant was actually closed at the time, since it was only 9 am on a Sunday . There was nobody visible inside. I took a picture. As I was looking for other compositions, the building security guard came running out, having seen me from the building lobby, to tell me that I was not allowed to take pictures of any part of the building.

This was clearly preposterous, as I was standing on public property taking a picture of an openly visible storefront with no one in it. He was looking pretty serious about it though. Having already taken the shot and not wanting to have the rest of the outing ruined, I calmly left after telling him that he was wrong, though he pretty much stopped listening to me when it was apparent that I was going to do as he said. Now, images weren’t confiscated, the police weren’t called, nor was I threatened with bodily harm (though I don’t know what the guard would have done had I not complied) but nonetheless I did feel as if my rights were violated, albeit in a minor fashion. I think a situation such as this is, in some way, different from taking a photograph of a farmhouse from the road and having the owner come out and ask for you not to take pictures (which, again, I would comply with, though apparently not legally bound to do so). Interestingly, several minutes prior to the guard having seen me, a city police officer had walked right by me without saying so much as a word.

This led me to wonder exactly what my rights as a photographer are. I think it is important to understand them before deciding what moral limits I should impose that might go above and beyond the legal ones. They are spelled out clearly here, by following the page's link to a downloadable pdf file. I should mention that the specific description of the rights in the pdf is based on US law only. Well worth a look, as is Paul’s blog which is one of my favorites and listed in the blog sidebar.

The Abstract: Does Location Matter ?

While a good deal of my photography is nature related, I have recently started to venture into the city in search of interesting abstract and landscape images. I have not been doing ‘street photography’ per se, nor have I been seeking ‘the decisive moment’. At this point in my urban outings I am still too uncomfortable to try to slip in a hidden candid shot or ask people if I can photograph them. What I have been doing is more along the lines of just looking for that nice coalescence of lines and shapes that seem to call for an image to be made.

Oregon Dunes
Copyright Howard Grill

United Steelworkers Building
Downtown Pittsburgh
Copyright Howard Grill

What really intrigues me is how absolutely similar looking for the abstract seems to be in both settings. It doesn’t really seem to matter whether I am in Downtown Pittsburgh or the middle of nowhere. In either location I find that I am using the same mindset and looking for the same components with which to construct an image. I am not sure if others feel this way, but urban and nature abstracts, as well as landscapes, seem like two sides of the same coin to me, being far more similar than they are different.

A Beautiful Quote About Creativity

In my January 15^th entry, I mentioned Jeff Curto’s History of Photography podcast . This is one of several excellent podcasts that I listen to regularly, and I was planning to mention the others intermittently over the next several weeks. However, yesterday I listened to one that really struck me, so I feel compelled to write about it now.

I am talking about Ibarionex Perello's The Candid Frame. First, a bit about the podcast. In each episode, Ibarionex has an in depth interview with a photographer, some well known and others less so, but always one with something interesting to say or a viewpoint worth listening to and considering. I have listened to each installment and each has been saved. Not a one has ended up in the recycle bin. They are discussions that can be listened to again and again.

So what has motivated me to write about The Candid Frame right now? In the last installment, Ibarionex interviews Brooks Jensen (whose podcast I also plan to write about in coming weeks), the editor of LensWork magazine. During the discussion they talk about the ability of creative photography to, as Ibarionex puts it, “show me the world in a way I hadn’t seen it before”. Brooks goes on to mention that once people have seen, say, Ansel Adams’ prints of Yosemite, the majority of images that are taken of Yosemite tend to be repetitions of what has already been done.…that, in effect, Ansel has taught us what images of Yosemite should look like and we willfully comply. Ibarionex responds by saying that one of the reasons that he enjoys teaching photography to kids is that they frequently come up with incredibly creative images because “they’re not burdened with what’s come before”. Whoa! That really struck me. I was in the car driving but I still had to rewind the MP3 player to listen to that segment again. Creative because “they aren’t burdened with what’s come before”. Burdened.

I found this an interesting insight into the creative process and an absolutely marvelous way of expressing it. Knowledge as a detriment. That might be true only for the creative process. We try to teach kids ‘how to do things right’ and perhaps ultimately end up putting them into a funnel where they are constricted by rules, possibilities are lost, and end results are all similar. Of course, we need to do that for certain things, some of the basic school subjects come to mind, but perhaps we shouldn’t be doing that for creative endeavors.

During a lecture on creativity that Jeff Curto podcasted (is that really a word?) last year, he mentioned a study that reinforces what Ibarionex suggested. I would link to the podcast, but can’t recall which specific episode it was. He talked about an experiment in which a small dark circle was drawn on a piece of paper and shown to adults, who were asked what it was. They invariably responded that it was either a circle or a dot. However, when children were shown the same picture their responses were much more creative and entertaining. The dark circle might be ‘the sun’s evil twin’ or ‘a telephone pole as seen by a bird’. They simply hadn’t yet “learned” that it was merely a dot.

The Candid Frame podcast did invariably return to the possibility that not knowing what had come before could be, as Brooks put it, a “double edged sword”, as one must know photographic history in order not to reinvent the wheel. However, double edged or not, there is a lot here, I believe, to think about. Sometimes, if I am going someplace to photograph, I purposefully try not to look at work that has been done there before. Perhaps I should do that more frequently. In addition, I know that sometimes I get my best images by throwing away the “rules” and giving myself the freedom to experiment and fail…..or succeed.

At any rate, The Candid Frame, check it out. I guarantee that you won’t be disappointed. There are already 24 archived episodes that you need to catch up on!

Tomorrow, back to discussing some images…….

Huntington Witherill

Huntington Witherill is a photographer whose work I find extraordinarily rich and diverse. While his images are often landscapes, he also has several projects, such as ‘Hand Of Man’ and ‘Virtual Reality’, that are not related to nature photography. Among these projects is Chariots of Desire, a series of black and white abstract vintage car images that are every bit as compelling as his high key sand dune photos, for which he is perhaps better known. His style emphasizes the abstract organization of lines, tones, and shapes, even though the image itself may not necessarily present itself as an abstraction. He notes in a LensWork interview that his style is related to his training in graphic design. He goes on to say that “I like to look at the world in terms of negative and positive space, different planes of focus, gesture of line, that sort of thing”.

I am also intrigued that he speaks of his near-sightedness as playing a role in his style. During the interview he notes, when talking about his poor vision, that “I’ve turned this into an advantage. It’s helpful for me to be able to look at things as big blobs of shape without a lot of detail in them. It helps distill planes of focus and different shapes of positive and negative space, so that I can more easily arrange them within the frame. It’s a process of distillation that happens physically for me because of my eyesight. I often don’t see all the details that other people do”.

Ahhh…so there is still hope for those of us with less than 20/20 vision!

I definitely recommend taking a look at Huntington’s work and reading his interview with Brooks Jensen of Lenswork, all of which can be seen on his website, which does not seem to allow linking to individual pages but is easy to navigate from the main page. I should also add that I own a copy of his book Orchestrating Icons and it is a magnificent monograph that I highly recommend.

One More Real vs. Feel

Not to belabor the point, but I wanted to post one more example of manipulating an image in order to allow it to better convey a mood. If you haven’t already, please take a moment to read yesterdays entry regarding this issue.

"Siren's Song"
Bandon Beach, Oregon
Real vs. Feel
Copyright Howard Grill

I took this particular image on the Oregon Coast workshop with Nancy Rotenberg that I mentioned in the January 18th post. The picture was taken at sunset, on a gorgeous beach, with a group of workshop participants who were really a pleasure to be with. Even if I wasn’t photographing, I would have wanted to stay on that beach just to take in the sea stacks, the breeze, and the sound of the waves. I wanted to convey both a sense of calm as well as the feeling that there was an almost magnetic attraction to the water, as if you just wanted to walk right out into the sea. The image was therefore named “Siren’s Song”.

In order to try and convey this, I needed to combine two exposures, one for the ocean/beach and one for the sky and then adjust the contrast and saturation to give it the appropriate ‘feel’. Once again, not a ‘real’ visual documentation, but one that, I think, better conveys what it felt like to be there.

Interestingly, most ‘non-photographers’ are unaware that there really is no such thing as a standardized ‘right out of the camera’ truth since the sensor data is not ‘in color’ and that while they might not be doing post processing ‘manipulation’ the camera itself IS. Likewise with the ‘truth’ of film and the use of high/low contrast and high/low saturation emulsions.

In closing, I don’t want to give the impression that a great number of my images are of this genre because, in fact, they are not. They tend to fall into the category of ‘real’ much more frequently than ‘feel’, but in certain situations I do think this type of manipulation can help an image to more successfully communicate what the photographer had intended.

Tomorrow, on to another topic.

The Real vs The Feel

There is an issue that has had me thinking lately, and it has to do with how we portray nature in our artwork. Actually, there are two parts to the issue.

Part 1:

In a way, this is the easy part, since it has certainly been discussed many times before. It concerns how we represent places in photographs. Do we try to portray things as they visually are, or do we try to represent how it felt to be at the particular location when we were photographing? My feeling is that if, when out photographing, my aim is to produce artwork and not a photojournalistic piece, than it is absolutely valid to enhance an image in order to convey the feeling I had in mind when taking the picture. Nobody ever complains if a painter makes a color more intense or different than it was in the actual scene. They know the painter is producing a piece of art and not a documentary.

I realize that others may differ in their opinion regarding this issue. Stephen Johnson, whose work I also deeply admire, comes to mind in this regard. For an interesting, and much more thorough discussion about this issue, I think the essay by Alain Briot entitled Just Say Yes is excellent.

The Real / The Feel
Images Copyright Howard Grill

I would like to offer an example. I have been visiting and photographing McConnell’s Mill State Park in Portersville, PA, for several years. During one visit, I noticed that the flow of water in the river was making some incredible patterns and spent some time photographing at various shutter speeds, thinking that one of the images would portray an abstract sense of movement. The day was clear, blue, and magnificent and I also wanted to convey that being there felt like standing inside a perfect painting. I even decided that the title of the image would be “Water Painting”. However, while the image as it appeared when ‘auto-corrected’ by Adobe Camera RAW (a facsimile of the right out of the camera concept) was nice enough, it simply didn’t say what I wanted it to. So I made some changes that clearly do not represent the way the river truly looked , but certainly did represent the way it felt to look AT the river.

Is this valid? I personally think it is, though not everyone will agree. However, I am equally troubled by Part Two below…

Part 2:

After reading Andy Frazer’s excellent December 19 blog post on New Year’s resolutions, I decided that it was time to edit down several years of taking pictures at McConnell’s Mill State Park to 30-40 images and, during the year, make large prints of them with the ultimate goal of having a local showing of some type.

Most of my images of the park fall into the “real” realm, but there are a few, like Water Painting, that fall into the “feel” realm. Individually the images can stand alone. But is it inconsistent to have both “real” and “feel” as part of the same project or display? Is consistency necessary for the images in a photo project to stand together cohesively, or can multiple approaches coexist without overpowering each other? It is something I have been thinking about.

Public Service Announcement

Somehow or other, I managed to not know about Alec Soth and his work until recently. If you haven’t seen his photographs, you should consider having a look.

Since discovering his rather unique style, I have been wanting to buy a copy of his monograph “Sleeping By The Mississippi”, which was published in 2004 by Steidl Publishing. Unfortunately, the book is no longer available from either Amazon or Magnum, the two sources he notes on his website. Searching for a copy at the usual locations such as Abe’s Books, e-Bay etc. is not for the faint of heart, as copies are priced at $300 and up. However, I am here to report that Tim Whelan, whose brick and mortar store is right down the block from The Maine Photographic Workshops, has copies available for 50 bucks. I received mine a few days ago and, at the time I made the purchase, I know he had others available.

Incidentally, Tim also intermittently has very interesting photo memorabilia for sale on e-Bay. For approximately $20 each I have purchased two mint condition posters, one from a John Sexton gallery show and the other from an Arnold Newman show,.....both autographed by the photographers.

So, where do you go if interested in Sleeping By The Mississippi? Right here, about halfway down the page. Enjoy!

Self Portrait

In yesterday’s blog entry I wrote about photographing rock surfaces in Oregon and wanted to take the opportunity to show one more image before changing the subject. During that weeklong workshop, one of our assignments was to take a self portrait. This particular assignment was made interesting by the caveat that we need not appear in our own self portrait.

Copyright Howard Grill
Shore Acres State Park, Oregon

This image, another of the photos that I took at “The Wall”, is the one I used for that assignment……and, yes, I do wear glasses.

I also wanted to mention that, in regards to the topic of photographing rocks, people might be interested at taking a look at the more recent work of Bill Atkinson, who published a book of interesting rock images.

The Wall

The wall…I am not talking Pink Floyd here. I am talking about rock, real rock. George Barr, in his blog entitled Behind The Lens, recently had a very interesting entry entitled Rock Details As Project, in which he discusses photographing rock surfaces as art. I commented on that post to say that I had attended a photography workshop at the Oregon Coast back in August and that during that trip we spent a day photographing in Shore Acres State Park. Within that park is an incredible rock seawall that contains a multitude of shapes and colors. During the workshop, we spent several hours photographing this particular wall. Apparently Minor White, I am told, ran workshops at that same location during which his students would spend the better part of a week photographing segments of just that one single seawall. Besides being a fascinating location to photograph (though I am not sure I would want to spend an entire week at that one location alone) it was an inspiring experience knowing who had photographed there in years gone by.

Copyright Howard Grill

Taken In Shore Acres State Park, Oregon

The two photos above were both taken at “The Wall”.

Though the primary purpose of this entry is to discuss rock photography, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that this particular workshop was given by Nancy Rotenberg, who is a truly inspirational teacher. Anyone considering a workshop would do well to consider hers, as the workshop that I attended was simply superb.

Attitude

When out photographing, one often hunts for that perfect juxtaposition of lines, shapes and graphic elements that combine to form a simple, almost abstract like, composition. Sometimes, I find these situations to be very elusive and can go out for hours without taking a single photograph. However, on those days, I suspect that the lack of success may be more related to the mental state that I happen to bring along with me as much as anything else. On other occasions it seems like interesting images and compositions just drop into my lap without any effort on my part, but, again, I think the mental state of the day is what makes things seem so easy.

Copyright Howard Grill
Taken in McConnell's Mill State Park
Portersville, PA

This picture was taken on one of those days when images seemed to be everywhere. I had actually walked by this location many times in the past without ever having noticed this composition. Perhaps a successful photographic outing is more dependant on the state of mind that we bring along with us rather than exactly where it is that we decide to go.

Changing Shape

It is easy to allow the shape and dimensions of an image to be dictated by the constraints of the particular photographic format that is being used. That is to say that many images are presented as squares (for 6x6), 3:2 rectangles (for 35mm) and so on. Sure, we crop a bit here and there, but most often still retain the same basic shape. Sometimes, however, an image seems to call for something totally different.

Copyright Howard Grill
Taken In Downtown Pittsburgh

This image was shot digitally in 35mm format, but a 3:2 ratio just didn’t seem to convey the feeling I was aiming for. A severe vertical crop seemed to come much closer to the mark. After allowing the image to dictate the crop, it was clearly no longer in a standard format but the shape seemed much better suited to the image.

I realize that one could view this image as merely a vertical panorama, but the process of working with it and ultimately settling on this presentation made me wonder about how using non-traditional shapes might make images more expressive. One sees, for example, portraits of people presented in an oblong shape, but not very many other types of images are done that way. What about a portrait of a tree presented in that fashion. What about circular or odd shaped images…how might the shape of an image be a useful adjunct to expression? It might be an interesting and perhaps useful exercise to look through some old images with that thought in mind.

The History Of Photography

Who was it that said something along the lines of "in order to know where you are going you need to know where you have been"? And so it is with photography. The history of the medium is fascinating and filled with major technological advances, drama, personal disputes, and changes in the way we view our world. All this within what is a relatively very short period of time. If we take photography seriously, I think it behooves us to know something of the medium's history.

There are certainly a number of excellent photographic history books available. However, I am going to make a non-text recommendation that I personally found to be an exceptionally enjoyable way to learn. Jeff Curto is a Professor of Photography at The College of DuPage in Glen Ellyn, Illinois, who podcasts the lectures from his History of Photography course. He is a compelling, entertaining, and engrossing teacher whose podcasts are truly a gift. They are exceptional and I recommend them highly.

The home page for these podcasts is here, and the series can be subscribed to through any podcast client, such as iTunes.

Motivation?

Motivate who? To do what? Photograph? Look at and think about images? Discover new photographers and their work? Share ideas and thoughts about photography?

In a word, yes to all the above. But let me back up a bit and explain. I have a passion for photography. I seem to be doing something photography related during just about all of my free time, that is to say when not at my ‘real’ job or taking care of three kids. I have a website here, where I display the work that I consider finished (is it ever really completed?), fully tweaked and printed large. But the majority of my images may never reach that state, as I just don’t have the available time. Nonetheless, those images mean something (at least to me) and I want to share them and have the opportunity to find out what they say to others. So, sharing those images is how the idea for Motivation first came to mind. However, while the idea for a blog was incubating, I have had the opportunity to read a good many photography blogs that have been inspirational….see my favorites on the sidebar….and have demonstrated just how multifaceted a blog can be.

Back to the title. It is my goal to have this blog motivate me to keep looking for those special locations and moments to capture by providing an outlet for sharing them. I hope that at the same time it might motivate others to get out there and shoot (images, that is). Got an interesting image? Let me know and if it seems to fit the tenor of the blog I would be glad to post the work of others and maybe even get some discussion going about it.

So, in short, here is what I think might be going on with this blog (subject to change, of course):

Image sharing
Discussions about images and their interpretation
Finding and pointing out other interesting photography, photographers, and their work
Discussions about technique, workflow etc
Perhaps the occasional off topic rant

I am always interested in other’s thoughts, and so, in an effort to make commenting easy, have turned off comment moderation and word verification. I plan to allow people to have their say within the bounds of decency and civility! If the site turns out to be a target for unrelenting spam I may well have to turn moderation and verification on in the future.

So, welcome, thanks for joining me, and let's see what happens with this experiment!