58 Sterile or soulful?

Through TOP, I encountered Jeff Ascough and his masterful wedding photography. But just as enjoyable as his photography, I found his blog to be eminently readable. In fact, like a good novel, I couldn't stop once I began.

Something that resonated in me was Jeff's embrace of imperfection. He argues that imperfections lend an image it's 'soul'. This hits home. I've been minutely mired in the malodious muck of manic perfectionism and my photography is losing it's soul. The image above is a great example.

Photoshop and ACR enable us to correct all the little technical bugaboos in our images. We can boost detail in shadows, fix colors, add local contrast, correct lens distortions ... and on and on.

Jeff, on the other hand, wields the sword of imperfection with skill ... slicing the heads off marching hordes of barbarous technical critics.

I'm reminded again of the Sir Francis Bacon quote: "There is not beauty that hath not some strangeness in its proportions". I propose that that extends to other aspects as well. There is not beauty that has not some degree of vignetting ... or there is not beauty that has not some inky black shadows ... Ok, these are all overstatements. But there is room in the cab for both.

I vow to shake the shackles of that certain stale and soul-less stench of perfectionist sterility and let my crappy photos stay crappy ... but at least they have real soul!

Peace,

Glen

53 Silent sailors seeking harbors

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Quiet corners and dusty posers floating freely through the air

Sunlit seaboats sailing softly shining brightly just for me

These silent sailors do they realize I can see them dancing wildly

Do they care, do they dare

and will they ever leave?

(c) glen goffin 2009

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

52 When to Sign Your Work

I discovered a thought-provoking article by Ted Byrne today. My thanks to him for challenging my sensibilities. Oh ... yes ... and for providing me a nice topic to write about ... hehe.

Having said that, I think I disagree with him :)

**** Author's Warning

Long term exposure to this article may cause elevated blood pressure, acid reflux and marital distress. Warning signs include:

- failure to laugh, chuckle, snort or giggle

- incapacity to pronounce the name "Glen" without foam or spittle

- uncontrolled outbursts of "that idiot!" or "clueless goof!"

******

Ted raises the question of credit and it's relation to proportion. That is to say, proportion of contribution to a final work between subject, tool maker and artist and who deserves credit for what? It is a rare work indeed that does not include some element of a real subject even if abstracted. So most, if not all works include at least these three contributors.

Let's take an easy example. If I create a faithful copy of a Jackson Pollack, should my signature be on that image? So far, Ted and I agree. The artwork is Pollack's, not mine. As Ted admonishes, it would be vulgar of me to take credit for that artwork.

Now, what if I had made that faithful copy using colored beads glued to the side of a skyscraper 200 feet in the air? Or hand-dyed dog hair and sea-glass pasted to the side of my car? It could be argued that that is craftsmanship ... not artistry. Should it be signed by me?

Is there a difference between 'taking' and 'making' a picture? How much does a photographer have to do to 'make' a picture? Or what measure of influence must a photographer exert for the work to become "theirs"?

These questions hit close to home for us macro-n-nature-photography-enthusiasts. Let's call them manaphothusiasts for short. Or, better, manic-phothusiasts. If you like landscapes, too ... well then you'd be a lanamanic-phothusiast ... uhh ... duhhh. Do LPs actually contribute artistically or simply render flowers, rocks and trees on pieces of paper and liquified crystals?

First, I recommend reading Ted's essay directly rather than my interpretation. It's located here:

http://imagefiction.blogspot.com/2007/10/when-to-sign-photograph.html

Is it worth asking - what does signing your work mean? Is it any different than giving credits to a photographer? Clearly, it is. It says, "this is mine".

Not one to shy away from controversy, I've listed some rhetorical and intentionally irritating questions -

1. Should we add credits for every subject we ever take (model name, building name, architect, etc).

2. Is photography ever true creation or always manipulation of something previously created?

3. When is there enough contribution to call it 'ours'?

Those are softball issues. Old hat. Photography 101. Let's get serious ...

1. Photojournalists often only have an instant of time to point and click. Did they really contribute to the image?

2. Some of the best photographers need little to no post-processing (other than adding their watermark, that is :) Did they really do any work?

3. Should your child have signed his popsicle stick picture frame ... even though the teacher bought all the supplies and told him everything to do? He certainly didn't make the popsicle sticks or the glue.

4. Do I want to know who took my mom's childhood photograph ... yeah, I do. I already recognize my mom.

The final analysis ... artistry is about choices. Choices include what to shoot, when to shoot, how to shoot. Just because two people might shoot the same thing the same way doesn't mean there wasn't artistry involved. It simply means that that artistry is of a more common breed.

In the end, it's really quite simple. Give credit where credit is due and add a double dose of humility.

Interestingly, as a Christian, I see this issue in a broader context. It relates to what the root of sin actually is. That is to say, mankind pridefully taking credit for the things that belong to God alone.

For more opportunity to scoff and/or foam see my other (tongue-in-cheek) article on photographic abstractionism.

Oh ... and one last thought before I go. There is another reason not to sign an image ... when it stinks :)

Peace and love,

Glen

46 Photography with a Conscience

I was going to title this: Conscious of Conscience. Say that 5 times fast and I'll buy you a seashell from that girl at the seashore or maybe a peck of pickled peppers from Peter ... well you know what I mean.

I was moved by the collection of short, 5+ minute interviews with leading photojournalists hosted by the Canon Professional Network (go here). From elephants to silver-back gorillas to Iranian refugees and Bangladesh social plights, these interviews are passionate and sobering. Don't expect to look at your pictures of flowers or streetlights or park benches the same way again.

These are photographers with a message and the message itself is more important to them than the photograph. I tend to focus on the photograph and forget what I was trying to say. Or actually, more often I never had anything to say to begin with.

Photojournalism isn't fine art photography which isn't commercial photography which isn't sports photography which isn't ...zzzz ... what? oh, yeah ... I mean these are great photojournalists and their whole gig is to go where we can't go and show us real situations, real people, real emotions, real joys and sorrows. That probably isn't our gig and I'm not saying the same shoe fits us all. But I do believe that even fine art photography is benefited when we at least ask ourselves, 'what am I trying to say?'

Coincidentally, I also layed my ears on an interview with Bob Krist by Matt Brandon (here) and was caught by his lament that the new 'ethic' sacrifices truth for aesthetics. Bob was a National Geographic photog and considers himself a storyteller ... a communicator. Hmmm ... I tend to think in terms of 'vibe' more than story. I try to express a feeling or a mood that maybe doesn't even have words to express it. That may also be why my stuff stinks!

Anyway ... as brainfood goes ... this post was bologna on a week-old pita so I hope you have some mustard ...

Peace and joy,

Glen

43 Little Boy Days

Don't you love the expressions on these little boys!?   There's something really wonderful about the faces of children.  So genuine.  PS - do you like how I made him stare at my name!?  Shameless, isn't it ;)  It's kindof like he's thinking ... "who the heck is that!?  And what is his name doing there?oh ... and I have to peepee."

~~~~~~~

Little brother, these days are ours to share

There're no cares to care, no enemies to beware 

Just dares and ice cream and little dog tails

There're trees to climb before mom calls, before light fails

There're girls to hide from and spy on and pulling pony tails

Little brother, these days are licorice and sweet

And though we don't know it now

These are days we will long to repeat 

(c) glen goffin 2009

~~~~~~~

Peace and joy,

Glen

41 Destination: unknown ... let's name it

Let's take a journey together ... to a place not only of sight and sound but of mind.  A journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination.  That's a signpost up ahead.  Destination: ... ummm ... crap!  I don't know the name.  Ok, let's pick a new name for this twisted car wreck I call a blog.

photopoema

Poema is latin for poem (oh, gee, really!?!).   This is one of those names that sounds cute but you can never remember it.  Ummmm ... was that photopopo ... or, uhh ... photopoma ...grrr ... no, I know ... photo-dodo after the dufus that thought of it.  Forget it, let's just go visit PixelatedImage.

glen goffin photography

Now that's cutting edge!  Nonetheless ... my leading candidate.  At least it perfectly captures my complete lack of imagination.  "Yeah, mom, I would've used a cutting edge name but they kept confiscating it at the airport."

stinky fish photography

Brilliant!  And by brilliant, I mean lame.   So why do I like it?  Wait, don't answer that.

So I tried to find an English to Gaelic translator because Gaelic is just sooo cool.   So many vowels and stuff.  I like that arthurian faery woodsy vibe.  Hmmm ...

Ok, so what are the goals for this new name ...

1. fun

2. creative (aka. fresh)

3. memorable

4. distinct 

5. makes people think you know what you're doing

6. looks impressive on business cards

7. makes your mom say ... oh, son, I'm so proud of you

8. sorts first alphabetically ... just kidding ... that doesn't work anymore

9. still available - this is the toughest one

Oh, about this photo.  I was at our local high school picnic and the kids were bouncing around in the inflatable bouncy thingies.  This little girl was drawn straight to my camera.  Her face is only inches away from my lens here, that's why the DoF is so narrow.  I tried my best to get her eyes in focus but that left the netting and even HER EYEBROWS out of focus.  Now that's narrow!  And this was at f/4.   Just goes to show that focal distance is as much a factor as f-stop.  

I did a little dodge/burn on her eyes and teeth and I'm still working on skin tones.   Skin tone was a killer.  I tried many different approaches.  In this, I used a PS action from Night Fate (#62-5) that I loaded from Deviant Art.

And to quote one of my favorite commercials ... oh, Miss Foster! ... my daughter loooves your art class!  

Peace and joy,

Glen

40 How much color or ... "Desaturated Dreams" or ... less is more

This image is a perfect example of the dilemma I face these days.  Being a relative newbie (in a middle-bie body), I struggle with very basic issues right now and this image demonstrates my clear lack of tokens for the clue bus heading to ...

how much STINKING COLOR - ville !!?!

Of course, it's the choices we make that define who we are as artists ... yeah, yeah ... and I should always wear clean underwear in case I get hit by a car.  I  know, mom, I know.   

It is Kathleen Connally's work (see the last post or go here) that has me really thinking about this.  As I continue to study her work and shamelessly copy elements of it, I realize that it varies in it's level of saturatedness (saturation being such a boring word).  The pieces I like most, however, come across as rich and full but somewhat desaturated.   My head is trying to wrap itself around this magic spot where less is more in photography.  Where pulling color out ends up releasing richness and vibrancy.  

I think color is often used to mask other problems.  It's like ... hey, this is a picture of a dead leaf ...  but if I crank up the color it kindof grabs your attention.  Sortof like ambulance flashers at a crash scene.

I think it's more like salt ... too much is nasty and too little is bland.  But the only measure for the right amount is ... well ...  'a dash'.  Ok, I guess I'm still figuring out what a dash of color means in photography.  I know that the image above is too much.  I guess I'll just have to keep tasting till I like it :)

Love and peace,

Glen

39 Kathleen Connally - A study in light

Ok, I'm infatuated again. This time with a woman named Kathleen Connally ... or rather ... her photography, that is.

A couple of posts ago I wrote my opinions on the difference between good photography and great photography and about how great photography won't let you go. It's borders are secure and, once inside, you don't want to leave. Captivating ... taken captive ... captured

Well ... I've been captured and, if you dare, go here. But remember that you were warned.

So what is it about her work?

1. Light - She likes to shoot on overcast or foggy days

2. Light - She likes diffuse light for the most part

3. Light - She likes the subject to glow

4. Sharp - she has a very steady hand indeed!

5. Almost 3D quality - I think it is her beautiful 85mm f/1.2 and her Canon 5D that have an almost magic quality. So much so, that I've begun reconsidering my Nikon friends! But she is by no means limited to that 85mm lens! Graciously, she describes each photograph and the lens and processing she uses. I have scheduled much study time :))

6. Wonderful choice of models and subjects - Her children, her family, her pets, her farm ... all are adorable and captivating subjects. In fact, she has dedicated her blog to her township and she calls it ... "A Walk Through Durham Township".

7. Gentleness - For the most part, her images are very understated. Desaturated more than saturated but perfectly so. You know that spot where the colors pop even though they have been pulled down? It's that 'magic spot' where the image comes to life. This is her gift. Finding that spot.

Please, you must go visit. But promise to come back ... even though you won't want to!!

Peace and blessings,
Glen

38 Hosting adventures and what's in a name?!

I almost called this post 'Out of time' but that would be about 1.6 inches of exaggeration... since I HAVE ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD!  Only my mom and my wife even know I'm rehosting (hi mom:) and my wife thinks that means we're gonna have another dinner party.

But in case some bored surfer (or is that surf boreder ... sic) happens on this post on their way to TOP or David DuChemin's or something ... well ... my condolences.  But here it is anyway.

My faithful readers know (hi mom;) that, after reading David's post on blogging, I started to get the bug to rehost Stinky Fish on a more professional site.  Now, don't get me wrong.  I've had a great experience with Blogger so far.  In fact, what they offer FOR FREE is quite amazing really!  I have only a few complaints and I think one of them is actually reasonable ...

1. Limited set of templates 

2. Domain name includes 'blogspot' ... (omg ... run for shelter!!)

3. Commenting support seems to only work intermittently.  Debra Trean tells me that she can never post comments on this site.  I've reset the scripts several times but no luck.  A google search shows that I'm not the only one with that issue.

4. 

Ok ... now the REALLY BIG NEWS!  I'm also thinking of renaming the site.  I chose Stinky Fish because every other name that occurred to me seemed pretentious and self-indulgent (as Simon would say).  I wanted something with whimsy and humor to encourage a spirit of fun and adventure in photography.  I actually have some friends who think that Stinky Fish is too self-deprecating (love that word).   

What I think they mean is that it is hard enough to be taken seriously as an artist with out deprecating all over yourself :)  But I've always been someone who feels that the work should speak for itself.  If it is good ... or even great ... no title or name or silly blog posts can change that.  It will be self evident.

Now, the reason I'm considering the change ... is the COMMERCIAL aspect.  Would anyone hire a wedding photographer from Stinky Fish Photography?  Would you like that on your wedding album?  hmmm ... maybe they are EXACTLY the people I want to shoot for ... decisions, decisions

If anyone does read this ... please leave me a comment (if it lets you) on your opinion of the name :)  In fact, if you would, could you go to http://stinkyfishphotography.wordpress.com/ and let me know if you like that site better than this one?

Peace out,

Glen

27 The sweet smell of magnolias

It's spring ... and not a moment too soon >.<>

Here's another ;)

So gentle and lovely. And the miniature magnolia that we have only grows a few inches a year. Very bonsai in it's attitude really. The feng shui of trees I guess.

Those of you with a keen eye (and that's all of you, of course) will spot that I moved the tint a little toward yellow to warm it up a bit while still trying to keep it close to white. What do you think? I only used LightRoom (demo) for image adjustments on these. Didn't even go into PS. They could use some dodge/burn in the petals and someday I may go in and finlaize them. I have a feeling I'll be finding some other shots more worth the time ... hehe.

We also have another of my most favoritest of trees ... the cherokee chief dogwood. But that hasn't bloomed yet. I'll post again when it does :)))

I wish this post was smellovision but alas, you'll have to imagine it yourself. Fresh and clean with a hint of sweetness ... mmmm

Here's another flower from the same tree. This guy had a tougher go with the rain today but he'll bounce back.

Hope this brightened your day ;D

Peace, my friends

Glen

26 Frontyards ... a new spring universe

A couple of mornings ago I wandered out into my front yard with my new Sigma 24-70. I'm certain my neighbors think I'm nuts because I was wearing my PJ's. With spring here now and the new growth, there is a whole new universe of macro-ish things to shoot. This is the tree in my front yard. A silver maple, I believe. The daylillies are blooming and everything smells fresh and earthy! .... mmmmm ... wonderful ;D

Weekends I usually take a two or three hour drive and explore hoping to find inspiring sights and, more often than not, come back with nothing noteworthy (the sounds of faint sobbing here). But when spring comes, our frontyards are the source of a thousand beautiful macro shots. Tiny universes ... and a lot less gas!


Here is another one of some drips hanging off another tree in our yard. I am really enjoying this new lens. I think it is the combination of relatively close focus with a short DoF and the resulting nice bokeh that is produced. Probably any good 50mm lens would have worked just as well but, for now, this is working well for me. The equivalent range of 35-105mm due to the aps-c format multiplier seems to suit me well. Of course, a little more range in the lower end would be wonderful. I enjoy the 70mm/105mm end a bunch for the close in work though. I plan to try portraits soon and see how this does on those.

Peace out,
Glen

25 I am only flesh and bone ... he is mostly wood ...

I DID IT!!! I finally made a decision! WOOOHOOO ;D

I bought the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8. Oh, and so far, I'm really happy I did! This lens and I became friends immediately. You know that feeling when you 'click' with a lens (sorry for the pun)? I think it is the creamy bokeh that just spoke to me immediately. That's why I posted a bokeh shot ... so you could see how nice it is. And the zoom range seems to be just right though I'm still not certain about the lower end yet. We'll see.

More later ... peace out!
Glen

PS - thanks to Paul Grand for this texture!