"Minimalist"?

In view of my opines regarding "minimalist photography" I should perhaps follow up on that with an example of my own.

I grabbed this when I was leaving the Manukau Photographic Soc meeting, after I had made up my mind that it was not really what I was looking for. I went to the car for the camera (the Lumix) and was returning to get the image set up when one of the members walked past and asked what I was doing. I gestured to the trees in front of me and she said, "You know, I have never seen that!".

Just goes to show...

On the topic of minimal whatevers...

I had an email from a very good friend concerning my passing comments back here on minimalist photography. He was kind enough to include a photograph of his own that I would count as being a worthy example.

His communication had the effect of twisting the probligo's tail just a bit. Out of that I have taken yet another run around the traps of the various webpages that google throws up. The exercise has done nothing to change my mind about my original comments. I think I am beginning to get an idea of why that might be so.

I have an image that is similar to that of my friend's; it is misty, it is of a set of mooring poles in the Tamaki estuary at the end of Waipuna Rd. The mist was thick enough that the bridge (an enormous concrete thing)behind is invisible despite being no more than a couple of hundred metres away. I have others that would "qualify"; such as a liquidamber tree seed pod against a brilliantly clear blue sky. (Both are candidates for competition at the club next year). I have posted another example here. That is an idea that is on my list of works in progress; I think it has potential.

The point of difference between much of what I see on the 'Net on the subject, and what I and others (my good friend for example) see as "minimalist" includes one very major factor. It is not difficult to separate subject from background in a photograph; there are a number of different ways of achieving that specific objective.

A very large number of the examples I have seen - and I include in this category my own and my friend's examples - are based upon atmospheric conditions such as mist and/or very long exposure times to get that separation. The second of my examples does not use the "monochrome effect" that comes from low light low contrast scenes but from the opposite; using uniform colour as the "separator".

When you start digging into the "how to" pages though, a somewhat different aspect comes to the fore. Rather than doing the work of separation "in the camera" - working the image and components to achieve the effect of isolation - the process changes to the use of image file processors to "dodge and burn" the required effects.

Now I know that makes no difference between digital and film examples and the comparison (highlighted intentionally with "dodge and burn") between the two is entirely valid.

I still think that the challenge of photography is not just in the capture of the image, but in making the image directly what the taker is seeing. In other words, what the camera retains is the image; it should need no further "processing" to convey its reality to another person. I read someone saying "that if an image requires explanation then it is not a good photograph".

I agree that is a very fine hair to split.

Post -

To return to the topic of labels, I try and take images that interest me. Difficult or snapshot is not the point. The photo at Waipuna was hand-held, 1/80 exposure. That does not make me, nor do I want to be, a photographer who is a "minimalist".

All about labels...

Karl du Fresne writes about “A ruinous and oppressive ideology” to which I have commented that what he is really speaking of is the appellation and interpretation of labels.

If he is going to get too righteous about that comment, there is another – totally independent but equally contentious in its own community – example that I have come across in recent times; though the debate has been going for many years in the past.

Those who puddle around in the morass that I call my virtual home might have realised that I have a passing interest in photography. That interest has strengthened to the extent that I have resolved to join (re-join, as I am a past member) the local camera club. I originally joined in order to learn how to take better photos, how to see better images. I was successful to the extent that I did learn enough to earn (as a lower caste animal) recognition for a number of my attempts at fame and winning in the process a couple of the Club annual awards. Yes, I was a very small fish floating around in a very small puddle, but I did get a request to submit a portfolio of three images to the North Shore Salon and a specific request to include one photograph taken at the Auckland Commonwealth Games.

How does this come through to the debate about labels? Well, that starts with a question I was asked recently, “What kind of photographer are you?” My immediate response was “A not very good beginner.”. The intention behind the question was in fact to apply a label; portrait, landscape, abstract… there is a great long list to choose from.

The debate that I tripped over came from a comment concerning an image I had posted up on the net recently. It is a photo of the end of a twig, on which there is a drop of water (it was raining) and in that drop was lensing a branch from another tree. One comment (received by email) admired it as an abstract, an excellent “minimalist” image. That comment tweaked the interest; not because I want the label, I abhor them. It was an idea that had crossed my mind in the past and I was interested enough to see what others were doing…

After three days of searching around the ‘net I can report.

“Minimalist” photography is a category that does have some very worthwhile work. There are some very expert photographers included in the producers, the artists, of those images and I can admire their expertise and vision.

There is also a huge quantity of images, sincerely and seriously presented as “minimalist” work. In my opinion, the label in fact covers no more than a range of work from reasonable, landscape, still life and other generalised categories to the “almost offal”.

In general there is a similarity between the best; they are usually monochrome, with just enough to outline the subject. An instance – submitted to one debate in jest – was a white image titled “Golden Gate Bridge in fog”. Yes, I can image-ine the Golden Gate Bridge right there… That image gave rise to a side-debate about “photography in the absence of light”.

And that, I think, is a good point at which to return to Mr du Frene’s comments.

Spring is sprung...

Al the bourgeouis philistine had a couple of quite colourful Fall shots from round his place.
About a couple months back yt had to act as chaffeur to SWMBO when she had a cataract op. Went for a walk around some of the local streets during the couple of hours she was in theatre and found a tree absolutely overflowing with silvereyes.

I have no idea what the tree is; it is large, deciduous and smothered with these pink flowers.

Our mid-winter break...

This being somewhere near the middle of the long stretch from Queen's Birthday weekend and Labour Day SWMBO and the probligo took themselves off to Te Aroha for a day trip to one of our favourite waters for a good soak and lunch. Travel time is about 1 1/2 hours and a fairly good drive at that. Weather was atrocious the night before but we went anyway nothing daunted.

The photo is a montage, of the storm cloud clearing the top of Te Aroha, and the rain still persisting down in the Orongomai to the south. It would have been a far more dramatic photo had I been able to take it when we arrived about 3 hours earlier; but it will do.

Atamira

This year was the second Atamira - the first was two years ago, the next will be 2011 to coincide with the Rugby World Cup. It is a "cultural presentation" of urban Maori and is funded by Auckland City and Manukau City. Confused yet?

Admission is free - how "collective" is that!! But then, I refuse, point blank, to pay to attend similar "shows" where 90% of the content is commercial and advertorial.

Anyhoos, it was most enjoyable. There was plenty of people, but not the crammed-in-shoulder-to-shoulder crowds of the Easter Show of past years (the commercial and advertorial referred to, and which cost $25 per head last time we went 30 years back).






I enjoy faces - and I hate formal and posed photography. So, what is set out below are all hand-held, natural light, shutterspeed as slow as 1/4s.


This lady is stripping flax to remove the "plant" from the fibres. Traditionally a pipi (like a cockle) shell is used. The strips she is working on will end up as "lilys" like those in the foreground.








It is a long time since last saw this being done. The panel is tukutuku, thin wood laths bound over raupo (you can see that in the gaps as light fawn vertical bits). The panels were used as lining in important houses and there are many traditional patterns used as decoration. This panel was about 4m long and 1.5m high - large! The binding is done in pairs, one each side of the panel, and when there are three or four "teams" singing as they work it is great to sit and watch (if you are allowed).







Also performing (two 20 minute stints) was Whirimako Black.





The "theatre" is no more than 8m across, and about 3m from stage front to back. Truly, "intimate" theatre!

It was good to hear her sing, in person, and with no "backing" other than Kevin Kereama doing the percussion and bone flute bits reasonably well.

Oh, one last thing. The woman pictured above, peeking out from behind the white and blue needs explanation. The white and blue is the back and head (hoodie and balaclava) of her son(?) who is a quadraplegic and is a mouth-painter. I thought her face was quite dramatic and wore the cares of looking after her (30ish) son.

A good "boil-up" for lunch, $10 per head. Mutton, kumera, potato, watercress boiled (hence the name) for quite some time. The hangi was $15, but I haven't had a decent boil-up since I was a kid so there was no contest. We were there for a good 5 hours.

Time well spent on a wet and cold winter Saturday.

Kea, kea, keaaaa

For those coming to NZ, this is how friendly the locals can get.

The picture comes from the Herald the other morning, published as one of the entries in the summer photo competition.

The bird is a kea, Nestor Notabilis. The one in the picture is just a youngster, one of this year's offspring. The adult bird is quite a bit bigger, and not something one would want on the other end of your hand. They are reknowned for stripping rubber sealing strip from car windows, bending car aerials, and (most unjustly) killing sheep.

EYES FROM ETHIOPIA

This I must bring to your attention.

Earlier this year a New Zealand photographer took some small digital cameras to Addis Ababa. She gave them to 16 homeless children and asked them to record their lives. They were given some tuition, some guidance, but the images are entirely the work of the 6 to 9 year olds.

Most highly recommended.

(Link in header)

The raruraru about the things you see - 5

Y'know, this is almost getting to the point of total stupidity.

This series of instances all come out of Sydney, thanks Sydney Morning Herald for the entertainment. And yes, from Sydney, the promised land of moral probity and righteousness; the land that brought (and expelled from society) Norman Lindsay for images such as these -




Firstly, and kinda related to the billboard that was erected (gotta watch my language here :) ) in Auckland comes this Blog stream. No, I didn't read any more than the first couple paras, and the opening .gif was more than enough.

Then over the past couple of days comes a parallel to the Cyrus argument. Again, I have not personally seen these images but the news item (including interviews and vox pop from both sides of the argument) gave a fair idea of the content. Seems that the difference between these and the Cyrus cover(less) image is a matter of being far more explicit and much less "demure". That is all on that.

But the hoo-ha is so great that even the PM gets in on the act -

Photographs of naked 12- and 13-year-olds at a Sydney exhibition shut down by police are revolting and have no artistic merit, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says.
...
The show includes large photographic prints of topless children, one of which was included on the opening night invitation.

Mr Rudd today weighed into the debate about the merits of the artworks, saying he thought they were "revolting".

"I find them absolutely revolting," he told the Nine Network.

I am not going to be judgmental here about the images. The SMH poll is interesting though -

Reader Poll

Bill Henson exhibition and images of naked children
Where do you stand?

It is art and acceptable - 35%

It is art but inappropriate - 24%

It is more offensive than artistic - 12%

It should be illegal - 29%


Total Votes: 5608

And yep, one of those votes is mine. I had to think, and voted accordingly in order to get access to the results. SMH is careful to point out that their surveys are not to be considered scientific and represent the views of only those who wanted to respond. That qualification is apt and required.

But I can't help wondering (and perhaps the SMH did too) if there was a connection between Rudd's comments and this little contre-temp.

As political commentary,


that is an excellent piece of art.

Melbourne City Council has defended its decision to reject a controversial painting by the nephew of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

The painting depicts a Ronald McDonald holding a flaming Olympic torch, while a monk burns in the background.

Van Thanh Rudd's work, which he this afternoon revealed was intended as a homage to British street artist Banksy, shows Ronald McDonald carrying the Olympic torch past a burning monk.

UPDATE - SUNDAY

Clearing my (non-existent) mail this morning and turned this out from the Yahoo home page

Is it acceptable for nude photos of underage girls to be shown as art?
Thanks for voting 35455 votes since May 22 2008
Yes 18% 6494 votes
No 82% 28961 votes

Interesting contrast, and the same caveats as the SMH poll.

The raruraru about the things you see - 4

Over the past two weeks I have been reading a book on the history of the photograph as art. Quite interesting, with some fantastic images that I have not previously come across.

Included is this at the top of the page by Henry Peach Robinson, dated 1858 -

Apparently it caused a considerable stir as "inappropriate" and "immoral". Why? Well the clue is in part in the title "Fading Away". A family gathered at the slow death of a daughter and sister.

Presented as one example of how attitutes to images can change over time.

BTW the techniques used are more of interest than the image. Apparently this was made from 5 separate images - an early example of photographic manipulation...

The raruraru about things you see - 3

Prompted by Lucy and her response in the previous post, and because this has gotten me more than just a little irate -

From Monday's Herald comes this little piece.

A 16-year-old New Zealand model has been pictured topless in fashion magazine Russh Australia - prompting a "please explain" call from her agent here.

The Australian magazine is being investigated for pictures featuring Auckland model Zippora Seven and 16-year-old male model Levi Clarke.

One image shows the pair in a bubble bath, with Zippora topless and Levi's eyes closed, as if he has passed out. Four bottles of champagne are visible.

The Australian Classifications Act prohibits the depiction of nudity and sexual activity of minors under 18, and a spokesman for the Australian Classification Board said: "I can advise that the board has contacted the publisher of Russh Australia."

Zippora's Australian agent Priscilla Leighton-Clark yesterday admitted the shoot had gone too far.

"It's wrong that our girl has appeared in our magazine exposing her breasts when she is so young," she told the Sunday Telegraph in Sydney.

However, Russh editor Natalie Shukur defended the shoot, claiming it was a homage to supermodel Kate Moss and her one-time boyfriend, actor Johnny Depp.

So the mag considers Kate Moss to be an appropriate role model for young teen girls?

Zippora's New Zealand agency Red Eleven said it had no involvement with the photo shoot.

Director Mandy Jacobsen told the Herald Red Eleven was "shocked" and "disappointed in the pictures", shot about a month ago.

She said the agency would be talking with Ms Leighton-Clark this week, and wanted an explanation.

There is an unwritten law in New Zealand preventing the use of under-18s in nude photo shoots, Ms Jacobsen said.

"We have to be very careful about these girls on shoots, and what the story's about."

Well, for a start, this stinks to high heaven. Despite the very direct parallels to the Cyrus instance there is one distinction that is very clear. I am prepared to accept that the Cyrus photos taken by Liebowitz were not taken primarily for publication; that they were taken as an add-on and forwarded to the magazine as part of a portfolio by Cyrus.

This instance involves, as clearly, the magazine taking the images with the clear intent of publication.

Today's Herald -

The responses in the public forum make depressing reading, even for an old lech like me.

This one is WRONG. Read that ? WRONG!!!!!

It is patently illegal under Aussie Rules. That should be enough for anyone. For me, the rules would be WRONG if they allowed the publication.

That opinion might seem to differ from my somewhat guarded acceptance of the Cyrus photo. The latter was (my vain hope) taken without the intent of publication. I have not seen the Aussie photos, and I won't be going looking for it any time soon. From the description I would have some "difficulty" putting it into the same category as the Cyrus photo.

There are limits. Cyrus I can accept (if only because the photographer was Liebowitz). This example I can not, irrespective of the name of the hack who took them.

One of the dangers...

...of flying model aircraft.

This is from the front cover of the latest NZ Model Fliers World, the official magazine of NZMAA. The photo comes from an on-board video camera on a model owned and flown by Ian Graham of Gore in the South Island.

The Wild West comes to Waimamaku...

_______________________________________________

The young...

and the old;

On big horses...

and little horses;


The good guys...

The local nut seller - who had a machine that cracks open macadamias and sounds like a Gatling gun...



and the bad;

and a quiet gossip over the back of the gig.

And not everyone had a horse...

I am enjoying playing around with "multiple" exposures

This comes from a RAW file, pushed through Silkypix to tidy up my rather rough camera handling to create the originating JPEG.

That gets fed into my now very venerable Micrographix V6 (who needs Photoshop at $2000 when a freebie does the job?) to create the double image.

Oh, and the vase came from a local shop at less than $10.

Ah, bliss!

Christmas images...

One of the traditional images of Christmas in NZ is the pohutukawa tree, which turns to a blaze of red in the weeks between mid-November and Christmas.

This particular one is at the bottom of our driveway, over the fence on our neighbour's front lawn.

This is a closer of the tree showing the flowers a bit better.

THere is also an element of skite here too, as these were taken with my birthday present, a Panasonic Lumix FZ50. Both photos are unenlarged, unmodified, except for the file size, straight from the camera and in the second photo cropped to fit at 1:1 from the RAW file. The camera produces both jpg and RAW files. The RAW file is amazing, and at 100% you can see the individual stamens in the flowers. That from a photo that frames the full height of the tree.

I like it!! Thanks family, this is one camera that will get USED!

Mind you, the multi-exposure studio work still comes out best on film rather than processed digital. So the Sony is still in demand as well.

The passing years...

The ol' probligo turns 60 at the end of the month and the family has been putting the acid on to get something presentable together. In an attempt to keep some of the more embarrassing examples well hidden, the probligo agreed to sort a few out.

Of the two, the earlier one is more like me, the second (how gawky can you get) was taken in studio when I was 16 or 17.

A recent visitor

On our way out one morning we found this visitor on the floor inside the garage.

First to give an idea of scale, the body of this small gent is about 50mm (2 inches) long. Despite the fairly fearsome appearance - the manibles are visible and can give a fairly painful nip if he gets really annoyed. The earwig style "nippers" on the the rear have only one use and it is not defensive.

Say "Hi" to an ancient member of the cricket family. Native to NZ; feeds mainly on fungus and rotting wood; makes a very quiet chirrup; and smells of cinnamon during the breeding season.

Tena koe, weta.

The family -

I have mentioned my grandfather on various occasions.

You will find this photo, and his name, in National Geographic archives. He will also appear if you google "image pamir".

Photos - fwiw...

I have been playing around with the old camera again...

This is an image that I can not get Shirley's digital to produce. There may well be others about that can.

No photo-shop, the image is produced "in camera".

_________________________________________________

I first saw this kind of image as a prop in a tv programme - goodness knows what the programme was - and it really grabbed me. It was based upon a woman's high-heeled shoe. It took me about a week to work out what that image was, and another three months to work out how it was done.



This is the base objet for the image above. It is a small vase ( el cheapo well made in Vietnam ) that Shirley liked the look of and which it occurred to me had some possibilities.

How was it done...

And if anyone can point me in the direction of a digital camera that can replicate the technique I will be sorely tempted.

Oh, and I am not 100% happy with this effort either. I need to set up the old Minolta so that I can set the flash to light the back-board and remove the shadows on this version. Does that give a clue? No, not really.

A blast from the past...

This is not a photograph that I have taken...

It is, however, an image of a place with which I have a very close spiritual attachment.


My parents taught at the Te Whaiti Maori School in the mid/late 50's, when I was 8 or 9. I was taken, once, to the area at the bottom of the Te Whaiti gorge, about 200m downstream from where this photo was taken (at the top end).

The river is the Whirinaki, and the full name Te Whaiti Nui A Toi means (as I get it) "Where the narrow part widens out".

There are a number of other places in the district which (sad to say) are no more.

There was a stand of totara, some twelve or more mature trees perhaps clear to the first branches at 10 or 15 metres, in a ring. Standing on the edge of that clearing was like the entrance to the greatest of cathedrals. As I recall, the clearing

A small lake, perhaps no more than half an acre in extent, with no outlet stream. The open portion hidden from the edge by the stands of podocarp (rimu, miro and matai particularly) standing in the shallows. Walk out through the trees to the edge of the clearing to see the mist rising out into the hills and the early morning light.

Both of these are now exotic (mainly pinus radiata) plantations.

So sad...