I feel like I am watching the last episode of American Idol with my wife. Yes I admit I’ve caught an occasional glimpse of the show here and there and sort of know the drill. After the voting there are just three left standing on the stage.  So here we go … This, America, Is Your Top 3!  Do I sound like Ryan Seacrest or not?  No matter, but we are down to the final three of my My Favorite Top 10 Black and White Analog Photographers!! And who is my number 3. That’s right, it is none other than Henri Cartier-Bresson!!

Henri Cartier-Bresson or HCB, is in my humble opinion the greatest street photographer of them all! Think The Decisive Moment. Not just a book, but a concept and a way of photographic life!!!

Every Cartier-Bresson photograph tells a story and is special. And there are just so many of them! His hit rate was simply astounding! So much so that he was and is the photographer that has inspired and launched the careers and aspirations of thousands who would seek to emulate his greatness.  Her are just a few of my favorites out of the many: Behind the Gare Saint-Lazare, 1932; Children Playing in the Ruins, 1933; Madrid, 1933, 1933; and Rue Mouffetard, Paris, 1954.

And now for something to ponder from the preface of The Decisive Moment … “To me, photography is the simultaneous recognition, in a fraction of a second, of the significance of an event as well as of a precise organization of forms which give that event its proper expression” — Henri Cartier-Bresson.

Damn!

I could never afford the original copy of The Decisive Moment published in 1952, but when a beautiful new addition came out several years ago I jumped on it. It soon went out of print and became very expensive like the original. It proudly sits on my bookcase shelf alongside a number of other wonderful HCB monographs.

Take a look at what passes as mainstream street photography and then look at The Decisive Moment or any of HCB’s other work … he also made marvelous environmental portraits (Tete a Tete) and even did cityscape and landscape work (Henri Cartier-Bresson: City and Landscapes)!  There is no comparison.

Please, if you’re not familiar with Henri Cartier-Bresson’s splendid work, check it out ASAP!  You might well have your own decisive moment!

Happy Memorial Day and stay well,

Michael

I’ve just about wrapped up my basement project and am about to reclaim my darkroom from the storage facility it became. All that terrible classic rock music I had to endure with my neighbor during the project has yet to fade from my memory … like a bad dream that won’t go away, or an adolescent zit that kept growing. As I wrote before this stuff has not aged well at all, and for good reason … it was weak, over wrought and/or bombastic to begin with and has certainly not improved with time!

I’m trying to move on, but while I was cleaning up the other day I started thinking about my recent entries regarding kitsch and photography and how not to be derivative.  Then when I was on my morning walk it all came together.

When something is good it will stand the time!

Duh.

Some things are a hit right off the bat and continue to stand the test of time because they are truly great. But often things that were not widely accepted when first introduced grow to be appreciated because of the fine work and originality they represent.  As with the case of bad classic rock, bad photography does not. Both hang around like a bad odor that just won’t go away.

So what does this mean? Not completely sure, other than people have questionable taste in everything from politicians to culture to art. Can’t help that. Ok, so what do we do as photographers trying to make work that will stand the test of time? I think the only thing we can do is to make well-seen pictures that are personal and come from the heart. They should clearly say something or tell a story, either individually or as part of a group. If not why bother?  I also think that carefully seen and well thought out pictures, not made as part of barrage of hundreds produced over an hour or so using the latest digital camera and later doctored by Photoshop have a much better chance for immediate and long-term greatness.

Think hard, see well, make it from the heart, and don’t worry about what others think … it’s your picture … and it will stand the test of time.

Stay well,

Michael

I’m pretty sure we were all born originals.  Great … now hold that thought!

Some time ago I wrote an entry called Make Your Pictures Stand On Their Own.  I talked about an interview I had read of social documentary and street photographer John Free. There’s a lot that can be taken from it.

Free said “I think that the three most important and also difficult forms or types of photography, is social documentary, photojournalism and fine art street photography, which was called straight photography when I started. I think that the difference between them is rather simple to understand. In photojournalism, six photographs with captions might be required. Social documentary photography requires 25-50 photos, which are each supported by a caption or short story. In street photography, it all must be done with one photograph and with no caption to help explain what cannot be seen. No caption and no posing, make street photography the most difficult form of photography that I have ever been involved with. My professional work in social documentary photography was very helpful in teaching myself how to get closer to the subject. Closer in many ways, not just where I stand, but how I can convey my feelings about a subject in my photograph of that subject. To bring as much life and understanding into the image, in order for the viewer to better understand the image.”

Free focuses on the areas of photography that are of interest to him, but as we all know there are many genres and styles of photography beyond that of photojournalism, social documentary and street photography – landscape, architecture, and portraiture to name those we may be most familiar with.  The key is to be yourself for whatever photograph you make. Don’t think about what category your picture falls under, or whether you could somehow emulate someone else’s work.

I’m pretty sure almost every type of picture has now been made in some manner.

Who cares?

Unfortunately, in today’s world there is great pressure to do “something different” and “unique” otherwise you will be seen as derivative and passé. Sad. I don’t think you want to focus on being different. Your pictures might become really large mediocre junk … just like much of what you see in the current gallery scene.

In another entry I wrote, “I think it’s vitally important that our photographs be able to stand on their own as complete and self-contained personal statements.  All of your creativity and vision must become dedicated and focused to ensure that the picture you make faithfully reproduces what you initially saw in your mind’s eye … and felt in your heart ….when you make a photograph it should be a personal and intense experience.”

Do that and your picture won’t be derivative … unless you deliberately set out to make it that way.

I’ve read that some people try to find Edward Weston’s and Ansel Adams’ tripod holes at Point Lobos and Yosemite. Now that’s being derivative and a complete waste of time. The results will only be cliché. Do that and you’re a bozo. Time to hang it up and do something else.

No – the photograph should be yours. Actually, it must be yours! It doesn’t matter if someone’s been there before or made a similar picture. Nothing will be the same as your picture because no one felt like you did, saw what you did, and cared like you did during that fleeting moment in time when you clicked the shutter … unless you’re trying to copy someone else.

So be yourself and make your picture! It will be an original, just like you!

Stay safe,

Michael

I am truly lucky to know some outstanding photographers. Many of them are members of Monalog. When I came up with the idea for the Monalog Collective the first person I called was Jim Fitzgerald. I had met him a couple of months earlier at Steve Sherman’s PAX event and just couldn’t stop thinking about his work … and his accomplishments. First of all, his large format contact prints were beautifully seen with a vision unique to him. But, what really made his work so special was that they were produced with a little known historic process call Carbon Transfer Printing.

To be honest, I’ve never seen anything like a Carbon Transfer print and I never cease to be amazed when I look at Jim’s work.  Quite simply, they’re three-dimensional jewels. You can really look into the pictures! All I can say is that you have to experience this in person to appreciate such a thing. If you truly love photography nothing can prepare you for such a moment.

It takes an incredible amount of dedication to create work like this. That and a lot of time! It takes a minimum of four days to produce one finished print!  Think about that.  But when you have a passion to create one of a kind images that are a such a personal labor of love, then it’s worth all the time and effort.  At least it is for Jim.

Then, not satisfied with available commercially produced cameras, Jim decided to build his own to create the negatives he needed to pursue his craft – 8×10, 8×20, 11×14 and 14×17 beauties made from walnut.

But what really sets Jim apart in my opinion are the books he has made. No ordinary books mind you, they are made and bound by hand, and every image and the accompanying text is printed using the carbon transfer process. I was awestruck when I saw Jim’s first book, Survivors I, with its walnut paper cover. Printed using the finest watercolor paper, each image was exquisite – just like individually mounted prints! His second book, A Banquet of Light, composed of panoramic images is covered with amate bark paper and is 15 x 52 inches in size! Only several copies of each book will be produced.  Alas, while I’ll never be able to afford one, I will never forget what Survivors I looked like and how I felt that evening when I saw it!

What can one do knowing that such a person so driven in the pursuit of excellence for his unique vision and its presentation exists? There’s only one thing if you really care – continue to strive to be the best you can be, doing all you can to make your own art in your own vision.

Until recently, I walked five miles a day. I wanted to increase that to 10 kilometers. Sort of has a nice ring to it and was a good goal for me.  I’d been thinking about this for several months but hadn’t tried it yet. The last week a saw a news story about a women twenty-one years younger then me who had lost a leg to cancer. She had just completed running the equivalent of a marathon for 104 straight days!  I was inspired! Two days later I did my first 10K. I will never be able to do what she does … not even close.  And I will never do what Jim has done either. But like that incredible women, Jim’s accomplishments will inspire me to be the best version of myself … in my photography, and in my life.

Jim can be reached for information about his books, prints, and unique workshops (yes, he also teaches at Yosemite and other locations!) through the contact page on his website at https://www.jimscarbonartphotography.com/contact/

Stay safe,

Michael

Well all right!  Let the games begin, shall we!

A couple of week ago my wife showed me an article in the Bucks County Herald concerning an annual photography show now going at a well-known venue. It’s been bothering me ever since so now I’m writing about it.  The story described the show and contained reprints of pictures that were selected for awards. She likes things done in good taste, so she was complaining that they looked heavily altered and … well …  kitschy.  She also lamented about the sad state of affairs for photography.

Interesting.

It’s not just how digital images look vs. analog, it’s all the obvious and over manipulation that is done to create what can only be described as tacky. What I saw in horror was not limited to color. No.  Black and white was not spared either.  Perhaps one of the problems is just how easy it is to create this stuff, allowing those who produce it the unbridled power to let their worst excesses run wild.

So just to be fair, I’m not a fan of manipulated analog photography either, although what I have seen does not sink to the levels of tackiness exhibited by much of the manipulated digitalia. Why? Perhaps, because it is so easy to accomplish.  It would have been too difficult to achieve the same level of tackiness with analog.

This week in the same paper, I saw a couple of articles discussing two art exhibits, one focusing on work by students, and the other a call for entries for a statewide show.  It was interesting that the categories of art for both shows included photography, but also digital media.  Something I have been thinking about for a long time apparently has thankfully been accepted … the unambiguous difference of images created by analog and digital means!

Such clarification is a good thing and can only be helpful to the well being of analog photography. That having been said, now that the differentiation is established, I think it is also necessary to also consider the establishment of an important sub-category within the domain – that of kitschography or digital kitsch. I could be happy with either term.  One problem though – I’m struggling to decide which is tackier, kitschography/digital kitch or portraits of Elvis and Jesus on black velvet found in Greyhound bus station lobbies. Tough choice!

Seriously though, all of this has broad implications on what is considered art, let alone good taste. While unimportant to the vast majority, it does force those that are serious about the art they create with a camera to consider what in fact is good art.

So there you have it.  I’d love to know what you think.

Stay safe,

Michael