No, the blog is not dead! I haven’t posted in over a week because I have been away and didn’t think it prudent to broadcast that fact over the internet.
I have been off on a photographic journey to the
I will certainly post more images and thoughts from the trip, but for the moment, and until I unpack, I offer just an image or two:
'Balance'
In yesterdays post entitled "Placement In The Frame" , I discussed an image from the standpoint of the 'correct' placement of a single object in the frame as it relates to languauge. Kal commented that, based on that discussion, I should try placing the stalk of grass at the lower left instead of the lower right and see how that made the image 'feel'. DUH! Why didn't I think of that!!!
So I gave it a try based on the idea that, for people whose language reads left to right, it would be the most natural (unless one wants to generate a feeling of tension) to place a single object to the left, where the eye wants to naturally fall first. To my eye it makes a difference. I like it better. Instead of having the eye fall on blank white space first, it falls on the grass, whose bend then leads the viewer into the white space.
In a prior post entitled "Linguistics And Emotion", I wrote about the placement of a single isolated subject within the frame and how one's native language can influence that placement. In that post I had presented an image and stated that:
"In cultures where language is read from left to right, images that ‘flow’ from left to right (or have an isolated subject placed on the left) are said to feel more peaceful than those which have a flow in the opposite, or right to left direction. The theory is that eye movement from right to left goes against the natural tendency for people to ‘read’ an image from left to right, thereby causing a sense of tension. In cultures where written language is read from right to left, the opposite is said to be true."
Well, I have been working on an image in which I feel the exact opposite is true, and thought that it might be interesting to present it. The image, which I entitled 'Surviving Winter', is of a minimalist nature, bit it seemed to express to me the idea of the brutal solitary existence needed to survive the winter season.
My first version of the image was this one:
Today’s e-world has opened a multitude of ways for artists and photographers to make their work accessible for viewing. No longer must one have a gallery exhibition or a published book under their belt to garner an audience. With only a computer, one can open their own website, post images to collaborative websites, send images via e-mail, generate downloadable pdf portfolios, and publish e-books.
These are all marvelous and, for the most part, relatively new ways to share, market, and even sell images. But, for me, the most important end product is still the print…..the tangible, mountable, frameable, and ‘hangable’ hard copy print. There is still something special about being able to experience, examine and even pick up an image that carries with it the unwritten statement that it is the final common expression of an idea; that it is the best output that the artist was able to achieve. Simply put, there can be no question that the print is the way the artist meant for the image to be seen, as even with monitor calibration there still ends up being, at least in my experience, some variation in the way an image appears on different computers. Once printed, it has been set free by the artist and is now part of the viewers experience .
Interestingly, it doesn’t usually take me very long to bring a photograph from a RAW file to a low-resolution, internet ready image. However, to turn that RAW image into a ‘perfected’ large print that I am ready to ‘set free’ can take quite a bit of time indeed. I think that is interesting. I think that perhaps there is a message in that.
One of the things that I like best about subscribing to and reading a wide variety of photography magazines is discovering artists/photographers whose work I enjoy, but had not previously known about. I recently, via Camera Arts Maragzine, discovered Cole Thompson. His black and white images are hauntingly beautiful and luminescent; they really strike a chord with me.
Rather than my trying to describe them, why not take a trip down to his website and see if they have the same effect on you.
His work can be viewed here.
While in the car this morning, I was listening to one of my favorite podcasts.......Ibarionex Perello's The Candid Frame. In the latest installation, he interviews Dennis Keeley, a photographer and educator who serves as chair of the Photography and Imaging Department at the Art Center College of Design in Pasadena, California.
During the interview, Mr. Keeley made a statement that, while not entirely profound in the same sense as some of my prior "Quick Quotes", nonetheless captured my attention and made me think about the nuances of what he was saying. The topic of discussion was the democratization of photography and the fact that there has been an unprecedented proliferation of cameras. In many countries, huge portions of the populace are walking around with cameras most of the time, in the form of cell phones with integrated digital cameras, enabling them to take photographs of anything and everything. During the course of the discussion about the multitude of images being created on a daily basis Keeley notes that today:
I continue to think about (and be plagued by) the whole issue of 'greatest hit images' versus images that serve as part of a 'self-contained' project. I have posted about this before and, almost assuredly, will do so again in the future, as it continues to be a source of confusion and uncertainty for me.
The issue, in brief, concerns the use of images that are related as a project in some way, as compared to what one might consider a collection of their best images. The obvious example I have in mind is my Twin Jewels Project, which I have written about before. It is a project that seems to pull me in two directions since, on the one hand, I want very much to complete and 'market' it, in terms of having it shown but, on the other hand, the images simply aren't my 'best' work because the beauty of the locale is quite subtle. If one took ten of my best shots of this particular location and mixed them in with ten of what I consider to be my best landscape images (taken around the country), I suspect that most people would be able to fairly accurately divide them into two separate piles. If one has not had many local area showings, wouldn't it be preferable to have their best work shown? On the other hand there is certainly something to be said for work from one location that is coherent and would also have local interest because the parks are nearby? See.....back and forth, back and forth, while at the same time I continue working on the project because I know it is something that I want to and should do.
Let me give an example that consists of two images, the prints of which I just completed. As individual 'stand-alone' images, I don't find them particularly compelling but they do convey a feeling about the location where they were taken; at least that was my intention.
I will sometimes post images on a photo review and critique forum or two, and did so with these two shots. Neither of the images received much attention or garnered any notice. Only one comment was made , and that person felt the image was mediocre. To be fair, I am not at all sure that I would have paid much attention to them as 'stand-alone' postings on a critique site either. But how do they fare as part of a larger project aimed at depicting one location or area? Should they be judged as if they were one lone picture on a wall looking for 'stardome' or judged in another fashion, as part of a greater whole and as an image of a location that will never be particularly grand by 'grand landscape' standards. How can one tell if an image is effective as part of a greater whole? I know that when reading LensWork, for example, I see portfolios that hold together extremely well but I know that I would not be excited about many of the images if viewed singly and out of context of the greater project. And how does one reconcile this with a desire to have the project shown on 'gallery walls', if you will, if they don't stand up as individual pieces of art?
Rocks And Mist
Walking Into WinterI have previously written a post about Tony Kuyper's incredibly useful Luminosity Mask Actions. No need to rewrite about how good they are, if you have tried them out you already know. But it is worth mentioning that he has updated them. The tutorial and updated actions can be found here.
In addition, he has now developed actions with an associated tutorial for generating saturation masks, aimed at providing fine control over the saturation of very carefully targeted colors. They are available here. I have just downloaded them but have not yet had the chance to use them in earnest. However, if they are anywhere near the quality of his luminosity masks they will undoubtedly be very useful indeed.
Once again Tony, thanks for making these tutorials and actions available to all!
If there is an overriding presence of anything in the parks that make up my 'Twin Jewels Project', it is water. Lots of water. Creeks, rivers, lakes, waterfalls....you name it. Nothing on a grand scale, mind you, but one of the purposes of the project is to depict the beauty that can be found in these parks, independent of their scale and without trying to make a comparison to what can be found elsewhere.
"Veils"I was feeling very bogged down and concerned that my photography was getting a bit repetitive.....and thus took a break, delving into Holga/Diana and pinhole imaging. It was time well taken. Making images with those cameras is truly an enjoyable experience, and I plan to continue photographing with them. But, most of all, it has allowed me to feel quite rejuvenated. So I am once again turning attention to my 'Twin Jewels Project'. As I think about my progress with this project, I realize that it has slowed for many reasons....and I found it useful to think about and enumerate them as part of a photographic process of 'self discovery', if it can be termed that.
After self-examination, I can recognize the following reasons for delay:
1) Concern (? fear) that the images are just not good enough. Concern that I would have put in a great deal of time/effort/expense and, in the end, it would have not been a worthwhile or successful endeavor.
2) Concern that by working on making the prints for this project (it takes me a while to make a print I am happy with) I am spending time that I otherwise could use to make prints from my multitude of backlogged images from past workshops, which, as individual prints, would likely be more powerful than any single print from this project. The corollary is fear that by showing the project I might get judged by criteria which assumes that this is my best work, as opposed to my best work from this one particular location (ie, a variant of the 'project vs greatest hits' issue).
3) Concern (?fear) that, once completed, there would be no venue to show the work.
4) Revisiting work. After I have completed a print, I will frequently return to it and decide that it would look better a bit warmer toned, a bit cooler toned, a bit more/less saturated....you get the idea.
5) Desire to go back on location and improve on particular shots (shooting close to home can, I guess, be a detriment as well as a benefit).
6) Desire to shoot specific locations within the parks that I have not yet had the chance to go to.
I have taken time to think these issues over, revisit some thoughts generated by reading the superb book 'Art and Fear', and have even spent some time (re)listening to some of the Brooks Jensen LensWork podcasts on the subject, which I find quite motivational.
The time thus spent has been quite helpful, and I have come to some conclusions and decisions.
First of all, I must produce a finished version of this project. If it ends up having no venue for presentation, so be it (though as part of the thinking process I have some ideas which I think could come to fruition in this regard). However, unless I finish it I will never know how it might have turned out and never feel comfortable, or perhaps even confident enough, to move on to the next project. Whether it is successful, of course, depends on the yardstick used for measure, and independent of it's success there is no question in my mind that the endeavor will be worthwhile.
Secondly, I must 'let go' of the artwork. While my 'revisitation' of the images and the improvements that I might make to them could well prove beneficial to any one given image, they are clearly, by significantly impeding progress, detrimental to the project as a whole . Once I consider an image finished, it is not to be revisited until all the images are completed and efforts are being made to obtain a venue to show them.
Thirdly, I will not go back to purposefully reshoot images that have already been made, though it seems reasonable to try to capture them in a different season etc. There are also one or two more locations that I would like to try to capture.
Finally, I will need to give up at least some of the time that I would spend out photographing in order to work on the prints.
I have some ideas for different projects, but will not even think about working on those images until this project is complete. I am, however, going on a workshop to the Smokies in October and will take a break for that.
As a result, I have taken the bull by the horn, so to speak. I have, literally, close to a thousand images from the parks (granted some of them are bracketing, different focus and apertures etc...I tend to take a lot of images from one spot) and, prior to this, had been picking out images for printing one at a time. Since my last post, I have gathered them all together in Lightroom and 'brutally' edited them down to probably 60 or so that I think might be included. Are they all wonderful stand alone images....no, but I think they do nicely depict the personality of these parks as part of a themed project. I probably have 10 or so completed previously and would like to end up with 40-45 images in the project. I have started to work on them in earnest.
In the coming days/weeks I will post other images that I have completed or am completing as part of the project. I am also giving thought to an "Artist's Statement" to help pull it all together.
It turns out to have been quite helpful to really sit down and be brutally honest with myself about where I am going with this and how it is progressing. There are probably multiple times throughout everyone's artistic career that a session like this can be helpful!
A few weeks ago, I wrote about a quick 'trick' I had discovered on the internet that would allow Photoshop CS3 to be installed under Windows XP SP1 (CS3 will normally abort the installation unless SP2 is in place) using a registry hack. I initially thought that CS3 was working perfectly, but ultimately found a few unexpected problems of the large variety.
First, I found that Bridge CS3 would stall and get sluggish....but that didn't worry me too much as Adobe, on their own website, has official knowledge base papers reporting the problems with Bridge CS3 and very large files, such as the ones I tend to have. I just used Bridge CS2, which has never given me a problem generating thumbnails from large files. Again, I was sure this had nothing to do with the aforementioned 'trick' installation, as the problem was reported on the internet as well as receiving official Adobe mention.
However, I soon discovered that Photoshop CS3 would freeze and crash the system whenever I attempted to save a file, even though it would function perfectly normally in every other way. I would have reported this as a blog post to 'rebut' the installation trick, except that it made absolutely no sense that the problem should be related to the installation and, additionally, I had received messages from others that had used the registry hack to successfully install CS3 under XP SP1 and were having no problems.
After wasting a good bit of time trying to figure out what was wrong, I initially uninstalled CS3. However, after spending another good bit of time Googling the problem, I discovered that I was far from the only person with this rather 'fatal' problem.....and those other folks had not done the installation hack. This was a reported problem under both Windows and Mac for some people.
But the fix was so simple that just thinking about the time previously spent was maddening. I reinstalled CS3, did the 1 second fix......and......it works perfectly. No more problem with saving files.
So what is the fix? Apparently there can be problems on both Windows and Mac with the new form of Version Cue. If you want to use Version Cue to allow multiple workgroups to work on a file, I did find a somewhat complicated fix, which can be found here. However, unless you use Version Cue (which few people seemingly do), the easy fix is simply to disable Version Cue in the Photoshop CS3 Preferences dialogue.
Yup, that's it. I simply unchecked the 'Enable Version Cue' option in the preferences and no more problems whatsoever! I don't know if anyone reading this will also have this problem, but I thought that posting the fix somewhere searchable, such as this blog, was worthwhile if it helped someone else resolve what is truly a very frustrating problem.
The other day, I was showing a close friend of mine one of my pinhole camera images that I had recently taken. As I was doing so, he asked me an interesting question. He was interested in why, if I want to produce and show my best work, would I bother making images with a lensless camera which were clearly not going to be as sharp and free of distortion as images made with my expensive digital SLR? Indeed, a very interesting question.
There is no doubt that the pinhole images are not tack sharp (though the depth of field is infinite). They definitely ‘suffer’ from distortion and light falloff at the edges of the frame. With no viewfinder, composition tends to not be as perfect as one might like. And on top of it all, it takes time and expense to develop the film and scan the shots that one wants to keep. Why go to all that trouble? To be honest, I am not entirely sure why I do it.
Nonetheless, I do know several reasons why I am attracted to the modality, though, from a logical standpoint, I am not sure they completely ‘justify’ the time commitment. In the end, and as in most endeavors such as this, considerable weight has to be given to the fact that I just find it enjoyable.
So what do I like about it?
There are always two sides to the same coin. While a pinhole image is not tack sharp, there is a beauty to the gentle softness that is inherent to this type of photograph. While the image does have distortion and light falloff at the edges, there is a uniqueness and timeless quality to that look that I find attractive.
Perhaps most importantly, pinhole photography is a medium unto itself and therefore can not and should not be compared to lens camera photography. It has its own unique look and aesthetic. Trying to compare sharpness and distortion between pinhole and lens cameras is akin, I think, to asking why one would paint with watercolors instead of the enhanced reality attainable with oils. They are different and each have their own aesthetic. An exceptional watercolor portrays a different ‘reality’ than an exceptional oil painting; neither can be deemed ‘better’ than the other.
Finally, when I started dabbling with pinhole imaging, I was feeling a bit ‘burnt out’ from the creative standpoint. After getting a bit involved with both pinhole and toy camera photography, I felt rather rejuvenated and once again excited about digital. So now, when I go out shooting, I often go both high and low tech, as the added weight of the pinhole camera and a few rolls of film is negligible.
As to the image that I had been showing my friend……it is a shot of Ohiopyle Falls in Ohiopyle State Park, which I have previously written about in my post entitled ‘Western Pennsylvania’s Secrets’.
The Power Of Ohiopyle Falls
Copyright Howard Grill
In this particular instance I far prefer the above pinhole image to the shot taken with my digital camera:
Copyright Howard Grill
By the way, if anyone should get the itch to try this type of imaging there are two wonderful and incredibly receptive on-line communities dedicated to ‘lo-fi photography’. They can be found at f295 and at the toycamera.com forums.
Addenda: Here is an interesting thread I ran across on the f295 forum entitled 'Why Pinhole? Why You? Why Now?' that deals with some of the issues I noted above.
In my post entitled 'Western Pennsylvania's Secrets', I mentioned the benefits of photographing in one's own area and the advantages that one has as a 'native', as opposed to a visiting, photographer. Specifically, when one lives in an area, the locale can be photographed throughout all the seasons, in many different weather conditions, and at various times of the day. As I was looking through some photos I had taken and was considering for inclusion in my 'Twin Jewels Project', I ran across one that I thought really exemplified this advantage.
This particular location is usually quite non-descript and very ordinary appearing. It is on the edge of a small body of water that is out in the open and which, on most days, is illuminated by very harsh light and is, overall, not particularly appealing. Nonetheless, every time I would drive by it I kept having the nagging feeling that it should be appealing. It just never seemed to reach what I thought it had the potential to be, at least from a photographic standpoint.
I was out photographing quite early on one foggy morning and wondered what the fog might do for the location and decided to drive by and take a quick peek. Not only was there fog, but the whole area was warmed by filtered light from the rising sun giving it a nice warm, yet contrasty feel.....so I pulled out the camera and tripod and gave it a whirl.
Foggy MorningWestern Pennsylvania has many beautiful natural areas that are known locally, but, surprisingly, do not seem to have much recognition outside the state. I suspect that part of the reason is that these locations tend to be relatively small in size and are not 'national' parks. In addition, the beauty in this area of the country is generally of a 'quiet' kind. We have mountains, but they are not vast and towering ranges. We have rivers, but generally not massive and powerful ones. We have canyons that are grand but not Grand.
The interesting thing is that this is probably true of, well, almost anywhere! Which is why it is a good idea to spend time exploring, as they say, "right outside your front door". Areas close by are easy to get to again and again, and the more often one goes, the more experience and knowledge can be had with a location under many weather conditions and seasons. That is an advantage that a 'native' has when photographing an area, as compared to a visitor.
So, without further ado, here is just one of Western Pennsylvania's 'secrets'.....Ohiopyle State Park.
Cucumber Falls
Cucumber Falls
So far, all of my posts have been purely about photography which, of course, seems entirely reasonable given that this is a photography blog. However, on occasion, I do run across something non-photographic that I think would be of interest to people who take some of their precious time to read this blog. I don't mean that at all facetiously......time is a very valuable and limited commodity and I am honored that people would take some of what little they have to spare to come my way and read what I have to say and look at what I have to show.
At any rate, over the last few weeks I have come across something that is art related (but not the photographic arts) and which I have enjoyed very much. Perhaps you might like it as well. I am referring to The Classic Tales Podcast. This podcast can be subscribed to via i-Tunes, but I will give you the link to the primary website as well as to the podcast episode download site. For this podcast, BJ Harrison regularly reads an unabridged classic short story that runs anywhere from 30 to 60 minutes in length. Mr. Harrison is an artist; a sculptor, a painter, an actor and, as it turns out, quite an accomplished storyteller as well. He uses his voice to play all the parts in any given story and is an absolute joy to listen to.
In addition to the free podcasts, Mr. Harrison has just come out with his first audiobook, reading Robert Louis Stevenson's "Treasure Island" in its unabridged, seven hour entirety. Sounds like a long time doesn't it? While I had initially purchased the $9.99 audiobook to listen to (via my i-Pod) during the frequent one hour rides I have to take to Ohio for work, I soon found that I couldn't stop listening and also had it on for every five or ten minute ride I needed to take around my neighborhood. Seven hours never went by so fast, and I honestly wished it went on much longer. He gives such life and personality to the characters that you feel you know each and every one (not, of course, to take anything away from Robert Louis Stevenson). He does the greatest Long John Silver you could ever imagine.
I have no connection in any way with Mr. Harrison, I just very much enjoy what he has done. Give the podcast a shot (I particularly like 'The Lost Phoebe' by Theodore Dreiser). Tell me what you think. If you like it you will certainly also enjoy "Treasure Island", which I think is even better than any of the podcast readings.
Hope nobody minded the brief departure from photography!
There is something very elemental about pinhole imaging. Nothing between the light and the film itself. I am finding that composition using a camera with no viewfinder and a wide angle of view isn't as easy as one might think. I had some shots from an overlook that kept including a portion of the safety railing. In this shot, I had one tripod leg over the railing and resting on a rock, while the other two legs (and myself) were behind the railing.
The two aspects of pinhole that seem inherent are the infinite depth of field with an associated softness to the image, both related to the pinhole, and the portrayal of motion related to the long exposure times. I think that finding subject matter that plays into and benefits from these qualities are going to be important in producing good images with the pinhole camera.
Pinhole ImageI went out to photograph a bit this morning with an aim towards experimenting. I wanted to try out a new 'gadget' that I just purchased (though, given the {over}price, I hardly think it could be called a mere gadget).
I am speaking of the Singh-Ray Vari ND Variable Neutral Density Filter. This rather unique filter lets you 'dial in' a neutral density 'strength' of up to 8 stops. Today, I gave it a whirl with flowing water. This image is shot at f16 with a 1 minute exposure using the filter dialed up pretty near to its max:
Copyright Howard GrillThe childlike playfulness of this post's title was chosen with just that feeling in mind. Because that was what it was like to watch my first pinhole images come off the developing reel ...... and even more so getting the first glimpse of the positive images after the rapid prescan.
A sort of amazement that it could actually work.....pictures with no lens, who are you kidding.? Sure, I know the physics of it and had seen other pinhole shots, but they seemed so foreign compared to anything else that I had done. So when making various exposures with my Zero Image pinhole camera, I half expected nothing to be there when I developed the film. But lo and behold, when I pulled that filmstrip off the reel there it was:
Boardwalk
