photo-breezing

in which we shoot the breeze about our photo lives

- considered (/imagined) buying a leica iii (kinda just cause)

- still mad at myself for not photographing cute, sunblushed skater couple a week ago, cropping heads & capturing their cutely accessorised frames

- feel like i should learn to use the digital camera on my phone better? i really like it, its grainy blur, but i can't use it very quickly or well

- thinking about bulk-buying kentmere 400 & whatever slide film i can get my hands on

- read that stephen shore book about photographs; his crazy differentiation of the planes & levels involved didn't mean a whole lot to me but the images are really beautifully chosen

digi-blur

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-mRdEu7w0mKw/UcM7FpaQeRI/AAAAAAAABZw/kdVKl6y0LR0/s800/DSC_3296.jpg

- also feel like i am maybe the most prolific/profligate film photographer in the world? ready to throw down with you guys but i kinda can't believe how much i shoot/edit/post

Inspired by my friend Hong-An to shoot more film - she rented a Pentax 67ii for a weekend* and loved it so much, she bought one, so I really should crank a roll or two through the Bronica before the "summer" is over...

(* - http://ruinista.com/ )

Camera+ has been joined by Snapseed on my iPhone; the former for one-click processing and sharing, the latter for dicking around for 5min on the train, and then deleting cos it wasn't that interesting an image in the first place.

Might rent an EF-S 15-85 for our week in Edinburgh; it was great for seaside/Olympics last year. L-glass is a bit of a waste when it's just holiday snaps on a crop sensor.

Wish I had at least a couple more paying gigs this year. Next potential wedding is Nov 2014! When we got married we set the date only eight weeks in advance! Where are all those people? And would like a photojournalist-style shooter at their nuptials?

Still dream of full frame, but that probably means a new computer too...

hey!, Hong-an is great. she does something really satisfying & distinctive within quite tight constraints; a lot of people are shooting dinner tables but her food shots are really well judged. a blurb for a photographer we were just discussing on the other thread talked about her sensitivity with depth of field, which could be a minor point, but it can be very true of some photographers, I think, inc the ruinista Leica shots.

I have never rented a camera, maybe I should sometime. it would be nice to see what another lens changed.

I've not shot much film this year at all, a bit disappointing after doing quite a bit last year. A friend has lent me a Mamiya C330 but I've struggled with getting the shutter to work.

I got an iPhone 5 last week, I think the camera is noticeably better than the iPhone 4. I've mainly been using VSCOcam for a while now, recently upgraded to the new one. I quite like Hueless too for B+W.

I keep getting urges to go full frame with a D600, but I can't help but feel it's a D7000 with a bigger sensor. I do a lot of low-light live music photography, so maybe it would be a good move, but the D7000 handles things fairly well just now.

I need to get back into the habit of photographing things other than gigs. I have a weekly portrait project that's ticking over nicely (http://fiftytwopeople.tumblr.com) but would like to do more.

Hong-An's portraits are lovely, really beautiful.

My mom just mailed me a ton of slides of my uncle's from Germany in the 70s (he lives there) and I guess it's up to me to scan them. Kind funny, mostly great looking Kodachrome and then like 10 of something else that have shifted completely red (ektachrome?). Good reminder that all our color negs are doomed in the long run.

But then, in the long run, we're all dead. /Keynes

Anyway I'm sitting down here in NYC while my gf is upstate in a photography mfa program. Kinda weird. I haven't been shooting enough, but have been scanning 30 rolls I got back the other day. Good to keep me busy.

Trying to edit stuff for a book format also.

And about to go get noodles

you know this thread is enviously inspired by the i love vinyl gang, & i feel like they make sure to have ample discussion of vinyl-accompaniment snacks. i have been scanning while eating toast & watching the first three seasons of arrested development in one corner of my desktop.

symmetrically i also just rescued a stack of kodachrome slides from my gf's family's loft. her grandparents in the sixties. i won't have them to start scanning for another month or so but it feels like a cool thing to be doing, sorta diversifying what i spend my time staring at from just stuff that happened to me three months ago. i keep checking in w/the homemoviearchive tumblr & am always really touched by the detail of old family photos. they look great. idk if they have plans for them but i would be really into digitising & sharing them online if they're into it.

i am p happy with online instead of books, but editing for publication is real exciting. is it gonna be one of those books that cost $1500? i found this cool (tho: lo-res) blog that reviews photo-books. it is such a weird industry.

I have no idea what it's going to be. I just need to try organizing photos in a new way, instead of just throwing stuff on flickr from time to time to see what sticks. I don't know how I'm going to print it or anything. and also I start wondering how in the world to sort through photos, and whether I've got enough decent ones, and whether they make sense together, etc. it's pretty easy to take pictures and toss them online, but now thinking of *printing* them I feel like I need to be more discerning and really edit. I find that I am much less satisfied with the pictures I have than I thought I'd be.
it's going to be fun to scan the germany slides, but man is it ever going to take *forever*... scanning slides is so much harder than scanning negatives.

noodles were great, btw.
loaded b&w film as promised and wandered through soho, with a whiskey break midway (george dickel), then on to lam zhou. now back home and listening to some, aha, RECORDS, with some more whiskey. I'm trying to combine all ilx hobbyist threads in one.

and finished off multiple rolls

I'm finding out that Lightroom is an excellent way of listening to new music, just the right amount of distraction.

I rediscovered Station To Station while I was ploughing through my Kent wedding shoot in Lightroom! I think I listened to it three times in a row when I was in the "reclaim the 3-star photos" frenzy at the end of the process (this was when I realised I hadn't flagged any cake-cutting, bouquet-toss, arriving-with-Dad, first dance pics as 4+ stars and my final set was looking pretty weak on narrative). The kids were tough that week and I didn't really start any night before 9:45pm; I made the most progress on the Saturday (a week after the wedding and self-imposed deadline day) when Pam took them out to the coast for the day. Thanks to Bowie.

scanning slides is a build-your-own-boards-of-canada-album-cover exercise sometimes

http://www.altairnouveau.com/slideslooklikethis.jpg

That one was labeled "Taking off from Calgary 3:15 P.S.T."

the plan is to do a bit more of this, drink some more whiskey, then wander into the city a camera and sorta mess around.

"Hills outside Zwettle on which is a church, radio station, & a place to eat & look down upon the city. We later visited this place, I believe on July 5 although possibly the 4th. When the Turks overtook the city in 1525 (the first) 1683 (the second), one of the times, the forces collected upon to overthrow them. - Perhaps it was Prince Eugene who led them (if it was after 1683) but my memory failed me. Can't remember their names though."

http://www.altairnouveau.com/hill.jpg

(these note are all scribbled in pencil on college ruled paper, with identifying numbers for all of the slides)

Those scans are great CV, thinking instant Pinback album sleeves too.

I'm finding out that Lightroom is an excellent way of listening to new music, just the right amount of distraction.

― MaresNest, Friday, June 21, 2013 5:23 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

scanning is so mellow. i have been out of the house recently & caught myself half-longing to be back ~in my zone~, just kind of perfectly fed & absorbed, seeing images slowly uncovered in something digitally equivalent to watching images slowly appear & cohere in a tray.

i went to the library & borrowed a lot of photobooks. they had friendlander's america by car, which is exciting. so in love with meyerowitz's wild flowers; it's such a beautiful book & such a pretty thread to draw between a set of photographs, really none of which i can find well represented online,

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IZYlQVDpG-4/Tnthhimox8I/AAAAAAAAAAg/98iNT3Nmhh0/s1600/jm2.jpg

http://i1180.photobucket.com/albums/x418/omanavvanamo/joelmeyerowitzss.jpg

where is that fabulous bed?!
also, what is photo-breezing? i have been reading this thread and i still have no idea.

it's in cornwall, england, i think. it's really such a pretty book that you should obtain from your library or interlibrary loan service if possible. the girl is vivian, who is in a couple of his other pictures, too, & who i just googled awhile to see if i could find more evidence of, photographer's girlfriends obviously being an awesome subgenre of photography, edith gowins, ada katzs, june leafs.

&: in which we shoot the breeze about our photo lives. photo-breezing. where we photo-breeze.

It looks a lot like a room in the Greenbrier -- resort/secret nuclear fallout shelter. Dreamy bed, wherever it is.

Ok now i get the breezy nature of this thread. I like scanning a lot too -- have been slacking in that dept because it's summer, I guess?

i was just reading about alex webb taking photos, talking about being outside, getting breakfast when the light gets a little less interesting & then being out again a lot through the late afternoon & early evening. i am shooting a lot while i walk into town at the moment, flowers & texture, but i am pretty often at home scanning late at night. & it's nice: the time delay involved in processing means i am still working through the end of the winter, seeing snow on the ground. it's a good combination.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-7vjWc_XPnlw/UcXuYGi52DI/AAAAAAAABb4/ATdjEUULcw0/s0/1825.jpg

Can we talk about frustrations in here too? Kind of an ill wind part of our breeze-shooting?

I think of myself as an immensely frustrated photographer. I forever seem to be thwarted in my efforts to document and record, capture and illuminate. Usually because I'm in a rush to be somewhere, or I'm carrying kids' coats/backpacks/snacks or holding their hands, or trying to stop them wandering into traffic/off a platform edge. There's also the crushing routine of my work life/commute. That's more of a mental dampener; I can have my camera with me all day but not be moved to use it. This is why I love being given commissions - a whole day or half-day to actually do nothing but shoot? What a luxury. I don't think there's anyone in my social circle who actually wants to be photographed either.

Living in a country that's under a grey blanket about 300 days of the year probably stifles me a bit too.

That was a bit of a moan. Sorry.

frustrations come in waves. I'm pretty sure I haven't taken more than 10-15 pictures total in the last 4 days. it comes and goes.

there was a documentary on bbc tv a couple of days ago about vivian maier. it should be pretty easy to find online. i just watched it & really liked it, though there is a lot of really dubious narration (SPOILER: they decide she gave up on life at the point where she began shooting garbage). joel meyerowitz contributes, intensely. it is a really intense reminder of how good she was, just cause it cycles through so much of her work,

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-IEX8S_Mjdb4/Uc3jmbi88ZI/AAAAAAAABeE/v1mwZp9Qwro/s0/vlcsnap-2013-06-27-22h19m05s145.png

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-_XSOIsSiCKs/Uc3jlnMg_dI/AAAAAAAABd4/1rGvhjebZFo/s800/vlcsnap-2013-06-27-22h19m33s242.png

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Rk_nii_J10g/Uc3jlvljklI/AAAAAAAABeA/hEuufvqEE4Q/s800/vlcsnap-2013-06-27-22h22m25s135.png

they also keep emphasising just the sheer quantity of photographs she shot, which i mean maybe to a michael jones or a roll-a-week chinavision might be something but .....
no, kidding, but it didn't seem that many, in seriousness. it must be weird shooting with a camera that gets twelve shots to a roll, though. all of this made me wonder; did you guys ever use a tlr camera? the tones on some of the photos were just breathtaking, i guess particularly because they're formally terrific portraits of scenarios you usually see shot on smaller stock.

didn't find your post too heavy, michael. i think it is pretty good to just be shooting when you want to shoot. also just in defence of grey days, sometimes colours pop harder in the rain, ime.

alright out with it. how many rolls are you shooting per week?? the public wants to know

i gotta post a picture of my fridge. it's disgusting. both in the dietary & photographic senses. i think i have screwed up by shooting a lot of twenty four exposure films, buying superia three packs from walmart. it goes by so quickly. for the last while if it wasn't quite a roll a day it was probably still five a week. i drove to vermont, i was at a barbecue. yesterday was such a good day. i am really in love with what i am doing with it, though, even when it is not good. there is a part in the vivian maier programme where they show a wall at an exhibition of hers in which they've sequenced blow ups of the negatives in chronological order, so you can just see her zig-zagging across town, tracking certain scenes, covering the same types of material again against different backdrops, & sometimes i look through what i've shot & find it's like ... more scenes of my friends talking, another of somebody drawing on a blackboard at school, another vague formation of blossom on the ground & whatever, but the repetition of it & the sense of time passing with those things being directly juxtaposed is really satisfying to me. like so much better as a document than as photographs. diarism.

i was just looking at some tri-x i shot & i don't know why i shoot anything else. which in fairness is how i feel about several different stocks.

Oh, definitely prefer flat light to blazing sun but it's difficult to have a golden hour when there's been no gold all day.

Right, back to the 251 images I shot at a kids' sports event in the local park yesterday. Gotta find 10 good ones for their website. I was cycling between three primes, never sure what I should be doing, forever in the wrong place.

Schlump... guessing these means a lot of unprocessed stuff huh? That's a good feeling to think of the potential of all those roll.

Right so I'm prob not shooting as much as you, but I still do about 20-30 rolls every month (or so). So I guess .5 to 1 rolls/day, but the way I shoot kinda means 4 days for 20 shots and then like 5 rolls in 3 cameras in 4 hours on some day. And I only develop every couple of months now and I find that that makes me waaaay pickier about what I qualify as useable.

My new Friday tradition this summer seems to be getting a slight buzz then trying to burn thru rolls in soho or the lower east side. The (illusory) single life creates strange and fun habits.

I used to hate blazing sun for photos but now I can dig it. But only if I'm shooting b&w. I don't have so much luck w color.

I decided to do a Flickr set for the near-daily photos of the sky I take on my rail commute with the iPhone thesedays:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pernfors88/sets/72157634338728956/

stuff piles up, for sure, but I'm in a pretty good routine with it, like atm I'm scanning through stuff from mid-March; I think cause in February it was minus thirty out, & actively painful to take photographs, I shot less, so got to catch up some. writing down how much I shoot did take the edge off my macho sabre-rattling some, sure (& I think if you're shooting that much ~ on the street ~ that's almost another thing altogether, a lot of my stuff being p domestic or less in the moment/risky). it isn't like a Winograndian two rolls a day or anything. it's just that I scan & publish/"publish" really pretty much all of it that makes me feel prolific. the mixture of time before seeing & spending time scanning should have a very positive effect on the editing process but I kinda like the digital-esque maximalism right now. btw I feel like I have maybe said this frequently since beginning to scan negs but I'm such a superia convert; it scans so nicely, I have a really nice set of grainy winter 1600s that whenever I see make me want to pick up some more.

yr downtown routine is so classic! feel like this is gonna make you into a manhattan stock character, like a cross between dennis hopper in apocalypse now & the bird lady in home alone ii.

, lost in new york

psyched to check yr sunset sets, Michael, I've been digi-snapping a lot myself

yeah these are really nice

did you ever see those Abbas Kiarostami photos, Roads and Rain,

http://guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/gallery/2009/may/19/abbas-kiarostami-photography-exhibition

Oh wow, I love those. The iPhone freedom is a great thing; not self-conscious about snapping out of packed trains and the happy accidents of reflections and imperfections - the sort of things I'd delete an SLR shot for - are just grist to the mill.

Oddly enough it was my mum that told me the Maier programme was on, having talked about her work before. Not watched it yet, will do over the weekend. Although I've done one or two black and white rolls this year, I think the colour film I dropped off last night was the first this year - a drop off from last year, but even then I was only one a week or fortnight, nowhere near schlump or chinavision! levels!

Not sure if here or "Let us discuss..." is the place, but just home from Glasgow, went to the opening of an exhibition of some of Steve Gullicks's 2000-2006 work, with a talk between Gullick and Stevie Chick. Once they warmed up it was a really interesting chat about his career, his approach to portraiture and dealing with musicians/reluctant subjects and how he goes about his work. He darkroom prints all his own work, colour and black and white, it's all beautiful. Really nice, kind of inspiring evening. Had a couple of brief chats with the man himself, an absolute gent.

that's really nice, Michael. I blank on a lot of contemporary guys, particularly w portrait stuff, but remember him. he did all of that careless talk costs lives stuff, right? was it at GOMA?

tonight:
- sitting by the scanner internally singing "chopping negs" to the tune of poppin tags
- coined sassy photographic religion, see display name. I'm still working through looking at photographs, it's so consistently mind expanding

Yeah, he did CTCL and LLSS, most of the exhibition was work for those magazines and a few others. It was at Static Collective on the Saltmarket, a pop-up gallery that use disused retail units.

https://www.facebook.com/events/452830751474850/

got drunk on bourbon and watched william eggleston in the real world last night. seemed appropriate.

ha ha. I like the kinda realitytv vibe, just watching eggleston chill in hotel rooms, cruise with his son. I tried to find some of Winston's photography after but couldn't (did anyone ever see any of Emmet Gowin's son's photos. they looked not so hot to me. like sparklehorse album covers). lol at eggleston's drawl being subtitled throughout. the last, kinda mystified conversion between MA & WE is so great. really inspirational. I like that doc about Andy Goldsworthy that's similarly kinda non-expository, like he doesn't know why he's doing stuff or have some grand allusive purpose.

I have one of the other couple of WE docs to watch, soon, I'll report back

Watching the Maier doc on iPlayer, drinking a beer.

http://www.altairnouveau.com/A-30.jpg

still going at it with the slide scanning

weird cross-cultural vince cable cameo:
http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article1207683.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/British+Business+Secretary+Vince+Cable+speaks+at+the+Global+Investment+Conference+2012+in+London

yes despite the decades they all just read as 'politician' which is sort of comforting for the sake of continutiy

and universal language

http://www.altairnouveau.com/A-95.jpg

I would murder people for a streetscape like that one. new york is all wide roads and cars.

I could live there and never leave the block

fred herzog on kodachrome,

"Kodachrome was the best film and the most reliable development, but it was far from reliable. I was so frustrated at times I sent film to Palo Alto or to Rochester, just to get them developed right. And of course that entailed an extremely long wait. You’d take the pictures today and they would come back in two weeks or something.”

“But Kodachrome was the best film. I have to thank Kodak for making that product. Without that product, we would not have the pictures. Pictures that were taken on other films have suffered more than Kodachrome. Kodachrome was thought to last 50 years, and it has.””

think you have to take your infrastructural yearning to one of the city threads. I have been looking at more street photography lately (just as a consequence of looking at more photobooks in general, lately; the deserted-through-summer library is really delightful - I have chromes coming, soon) & while explaining to myself why I am not making profoundly interrelating street tableaux of modern day society have just been attributing this to the relatively modest amount of time I spend outdoors anywhere as crowded or populous as New York. not sure where your slides are taken but it goes both ways I think. maybe somewhere smaller you'd be schlepping a tripod around & Robert Adamsing deserted cityscapes.

well I think the photo above was taken in Vienna (but let me check the notes)
and, yes, plenty of good photos to be had in nyc (except lately, with gray skies, and much work in the office), but I'm talking from the urban planning perspective.
which, ah, yeah, that's sorta suburbs thread appropriate.

but foreign environments are great. after a while I find myself just setting the camera to a reasonable shutter speed/f stop setting, prefocused to about 10 feet, sometimes 8, or 6, etc., but basically I just end up doing snaps of people I'm walking past. It's not that compelling! the composition is rudimentary, and the subject matter is just kinda, you know, normal stuff.

it's easy to get dull in nyc too. a change in location is always good.
my photos look really flat to me lately.
I want to, like, go to paris or something for two weeks.

$$$

man, what a rut

I prefer the scan of my uncle's snapshot above to just about anything I've taken in the last few months, pictures of my girlfriend excepted, of course.

the red car, the intersecting lines at the top etc.

I watched the Maier doc on my phone over the course of two commutes. Amazing. I was inspired enough to switch my 40D to B&W JPEG, ISO 400, and shoot a bunch of things. This lasted about five minutes until I realised I was late for work.

but foreign environments are great. after a while I find myself just setting the camera to a reasonable shutter speed/f stop setting, prefocused to about 10 feet, sometimes 8, or 6, etc., but basically I just end up doing snaps of people I'm walking past. It's not that compelling! the composition is rudimentary, and the subject matter is just kinda, you know, normal stuff.

yeah i feel you. it's interesting seeing how photographs change over the tenure of living somewhere, too; partly because you burn out on certain fixtures and styles & partly because you're so fresh at the start. i have some nice pictures of montreal i took from the cab when i moved here, & they're very different in character from what i take now. it's funny, sometimes when i go to new cities i notice that i haven't taken any photos in the first little while, walking around, maybe, & it's like i don't speak the language, or have the same kinda crutches or instincts. but that's a good thing too. i guess i am delineating street stuff as being something p specific & winograndian in its aims, here, though, in which landscape is secondary.

i went to paris awhile ago & have barely touched the film i got back, i'm p psyched to. the vienna slide you posted is nice, & it's kinda tantalising having glimpses of something that would be alluring in its novelty. have to thank you for your slide posts, btw, i started on the kodachromes i have last night. i might try not to talk about them too much because i'm not sure if i'm really at liberty to share them, & i assume just describing the wonders they contain is going to be frustrating in the vein of black and white '70s paperbacks of colour masters, but just: they're pretty beguiling, & there are some areas of just aqueous, soft-focused radiant colour that remind me of stephen gill. really transportive.

wow I forgot that I wrote that last night! this summer is doing weird things to me.
I'm not as down on my current shooting as all that, but I would love to have the money to afford a trip abroad! and I *am* tired of a lot of the passing-strangers-in-the-streets photos. but I think my recent increased pickiness has been good, and I've been thinking less and less about my photos' online lives and more about what *else* I can do with them.
man, I listened to some great music and had a blast last night, and over the course of the day I've been remembering a few other things I did as well (nothing bad).

I suppose I'm not totally sure if the slides I'm scanning are really really supposed to be for public consumption, but I've been telling myself that's why I'm only putting low res versions on this site only, and then only ones that show landscapes or strangers. no relatives or acquaintances.

and I get the same feeling about initial photographs in a given city as you, schlump. I've learned the reliable patterns too well. but on the other hand I think I've gotten better as a photographer when I really muster the effort. I think that's part of the problem: I know that I've become better, so I don't work as hard. some early successes are the result of me pushing in new and uncomfortable ways.

i started thinking about other stuff to do with photographs, lately. once in awhile i am on somebody's blog & there is for sale their $3 printed & folded one-sheet pamphlet collecting not-necessarily-totally-showstopping b&ws, & it feels kinda appealing, the smallness of uniting & finalising some photographs you took, like the old editions of four of photographs or even records. i feel like maybe there should be some kind of healthy, complaisant counterpart to shooting & editing which even gently tries to engage, some, or to propogate one's photos (i was just reading this rad khaela maricich piece about the lines between art & audience) somewhat. for me at the moment this is just website stuff but i'm sure i could be doing cool inventive things with my photos. printing them onto mugs.

in other photo breezings i am still so into reading szarkowski atm. i'm reading his essay on winogrand from the big book. very curious to see some of the later work realised; sorta almost disgusted by some of the contact sheets excerpted, which i think reflect drives in which he's shooting & winding & shooting & winding non-stop (leaving a third of a million LA-era exposures unseen, apparently), but some of the late stuff is really democratic & interesting. also his grain still just makes me swoon. szark referred to the expressive ugly gray scale of '60s art movies as influential on those guys.

It was the Crystal Palace Overground Festival last weekend; two years ago I was one of the official photographers - stumbling around with my hired lens, trying and failing to find parents to sign waiver forms when I found I'd snapped an unidentified kid in one of my crowd shots, generally making a bad job of it, etc.

This year I noticed a LOT of L-glass around, like our little local-bands-foods'n'craft in the park thing had become a big deal and pros were documenting it in glorious detail. Most interesting to me was the guy with an Auto Graflex 5x7 with Pentac lens (he was also shooting with a 5D2 and a Hasselblad) - gorgeous stuff...

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3774/9175102820_cc05a55896_z.jpg

http://uploads8.wikipaintings.org/images/balthus/th%C3%A9r%C3%A8se-1938.jpg

http://uploads7.wikipaintings.org/images/balthus/the-white-skirt-1937.jpg

http://a397.idata.over-blog.com/550x442/4/50/71/33/oeuvres-contemporaines/balthus.jpg

http://uploads2.wikipaintings.org/images/balthus/the-cherry-tree.jpg

i have chromes from the library; it is just unreal,

http://www.duncanwhyte.com/Images/Layout_Production/Eggleston_Chromes/pages/Eggleston_Chromes_1_Fin_Page_13.jpg

http://www.pacemacgill.com/gfx/images/rf/robert_frank_730.jpg

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-tU1axBJcRjw/UebKYZky29I/AAAAAAAABks/aOFQUhtRDNQ/s0/jf.png

grumpy breezing
one time when gawker had one of their general calls for new writers, I semi-drunkenly sent a letter that instead said that they should have a new heavier photography thing going on, and that I'd be into working something like that. I never expected a response (it wasn't convincingly written) and didn't get one, but man, within a few months (maybe a little longer I guess) they unveiled that dodge and burn page, and let me tell you, it suuuuuucks.
if you like boring pictures of things that ought to be interesting it's cool though I guess. ymmv I guess but I don't get it.

I guess

do any of you like hedi slimane's stuff? http://hedislimane.com

i'm not a photogapher; i'm into it

also, if you know of anyone else who does shit sorta like his, i'd be interested in checking it out!

http://24.media.tumblr.com/63e201e46e7617b00e121a1b90b8114f/tumblr_mrwj2uFz8F1snq421o1_500.jpg

i feel not very interested in focus anymore. even focusing my eyes.

http://ruinista.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/blurry-street-1.jpg?w=720&h=480
(hong-an tran)

huh. lots of nice photos there.

home along, drinking nothing but vermouth (blanc) and scanning. catching up on summer. the weather has cooled down, I'm getting a breeze in the place, and am in a techno zone at the moment.

my girlfriend just texted me with a vague fuzzy picture to prove that antony from antony and the johnsons is at the restaurant she's at.

this is breezing.

she is good I think. she came up before somewhere? I think maybe Michael knows her a lil. she does a lot of things I generally think of myself as immune to nicely. peaceful modern landscapes. shallow focus restaurant-table photos that make me think about qualities of lens glass.

I am scanning spring too. may second right now. I just finished the first roll cluttered with pictures of the sky. I was kinda bummed out last week & walking along this one long road in Montreal with an uncluttered horizon & watching the gradient slowly change, I feel like photographing the sky is simultaneously totally useless, & impotent, & then also kinda beautiful, to be moved to just sloppily document something so blunt & obvious & huge, in spite of its bluntness, obviousness, hugeness. I know my spring photos are just going to be pictures of the sky & flowers. like that Emmet Gowin interview where he talks about some photographer he liked who thought his late work of skies was his best stuff. I like ageing into unavoidable cliche.

hey btw, have you ever seen any Nathaniel Dorsky films, China? ccing dayo here, some are playing at NYFF & they are precious photographic research ime, like he owns his own wavelength.

not aware of dorsky, but looking up now. looks like he got a really nice NYT writeup.
could it be steichen who's sky photographs we're thinking of?

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/49.55.29

they're some of my favorites, although I don't think they come of as well online. in a book or on a wall though they are really great. I've got a big stieglitz book in which that series (equivalents) is printed pretty small on the page, and pretty low contrast.

http://sandrakontos.wordpress.com/2012/12/14/alfred-stieglitz-equivalents/

whose not "who's"

I need to learn to proofread before posting.

cheap film in candlelight

http://altairnouveau.com/631-19.jpg

just realized that's the lawn mower above is a paul graham

proofreading again

hey guys. i don't have much to breeze about right now, but i'm sitting on a commuter train for the next hour or so drinking beer.

i have a technical question/problem i've been meaning to ask you guys about but i'll wait till i'm back on a real computer and can upload some scans.

for now i'll share this girl's flickr i came across today while looking for photos from a show that happened at my old apartment 10 years ago this month. (apparently she lived in the same apartment years later).

kind of ho-hum subject matter but she really has a wonderful eye and i want to know more about what she shoots with

oops use this for the 2nd link http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/skylookslikearoad/6866627636/

i kinda don't wanna go over the top in describing Dorsky, here, for fear of hyperbole or else overloading the expectations one could arrive at a screening with, but: i saw his film hours for jerome, recently, & it's a new favourite film, something i didn't know existed. he has been around for a long time, supremely attuned to the stocks he's working with, & i think a kind of longstanding ghettoisation of what i understood by experimental film meant i'd never really got into him. his stuff is only ever screened, not available online (even clips! no nothing!), & just i would endorse checking him at some point - nyc an easier place to intermittently catch something than most - because he's both expert & dedicated to something that i think anyone walking around with a camera is dedicated to. this is my way of elevating myself to peer-status by virtue of taking blurry pictures of flowers, sometimes. (i'm on my phone right now so had limited success finding out what was playing at nyff, but i think at the very least there's some event in which he's screening unscreened footage as part of wavelengths)

& those steiglitz photos do look good. i take back all the mean things emmet gowin thought about them. i'm reading (/staring at the plates of) a book aperture just re-released right now called the edge of vision, dedicated to the various stages of abstraction in photography (which kinda almost has just got increasingly less abstract in some ways, given the sorta image denigration, non-reprsentative chemicals & romantic structure of everything early), & those steiglitz photos fit in. the cyanotopes throughout are killing me. i like the way that i understand photography (like a bunch of other stuff) so much better working backwards. i only just kinda got imogen cunningham. it takes me a long time sometimes.

cheap film v nice. it lazily just makes me think of gerard richter & sonic youth.

squinting at small phone thumbnails but otm about her eye, they're nice

man there is something so devastating about seeing photos of spring, & feeling alive with the possibilities afforded by copious light, i september. I guess at least that low autumnal sun is comin.

get ready to shoot dark pictures. underexpose. get down with it.

I ebayed a video camera and am watching old videos from the early 90s-mid 2000s so I'm getting a bit lost this eve /breezin

for real scanning has kinda limited my comfort w underexposure; I mean obviously I am doing it all the time anyway, doing it more often than not, but when I think of it as a strategy I just see visions of some accidentally solarised picture of one of my friends from which all the technology in the world can not coax a blue channel

really good article atm somewhere on the Atlantic site about XFR STN at the new museum & the work it's doing transferring old video before it's lost to technological incompatibility. are you talking video-video? I am fooling around with a friend's digital camera trying to get it to work, I would love to be able to shoot video somehow rn

( http://theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/07/new-museums-vast-beautiful-and-insane-digitization-project/67567/ )

I'm talking video video I think except that most of the stuff I've been playing back so far has been in the weird format of digital 8 (digital video on a hi-8 tape). I have older hi-8 stuff but I haven't tried playing it yet on this camera to see how it looks or whether it works.

kind of ho-hum subject matter but she really has a wonderful eye and i want to know more about what she shoots with

― ᶓ͠סּᴥ͠סּᶔ ᶓͼ᷆ₓͼ᷇ᶔ (gr8080), Friday, September 13, 2013 9:51 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

looks like a DSLR / other big sensor digital, maybe some light lightroom/PS manip

i feel not very interested in focus anymore. even focusing my eyes.

― szarkasm (schlump), Saturday, September 7, 2013 4:01 PM (1 week ago) Bookmark

feelin this, took this on the same trip as the others in the wdysl thread recently:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/m15.jpg

think it was cv and you who mentioned being into photos with a sharp background and something completely OOF in the foreground. it just hit me that technically, it's the exact opposite shot of the 'sharpness big aperture' shot that newtime camera folks love. the sharp background out to infinity, however, is never seen as a mark of technical competence. i dunno, for obvious reasons. but OOF things that don't erase themselves into abstraction, are a thing, yes

shallow focus restaurant-table photos that make me think about qualities of lens glass.

schlump you are the photo whisperer today

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/m16.jpg

(nb i think this was taken by another ilxor)

eggleston took a lot of sky photos at some point.

saw the chromatics last night and was kind of disappointed that the show didn't look like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0mxXrHowHQ

but instead were just guys and gals in hyperreal RealVision

xp to myself: the older pics on her flickr are definitely film, dunno what they're shot with, looks like drugstore scans tho

(Hong-An Tran)
she is good I think. she came up before somewhere? I think maybe Michael knows her a lil.

Yeah, she's a (mostly online) pal. We met years ago in South London and again last year in NYC. I really like her work. She's recently got herself a Pentax 67 II, so she's shooting a lot more medium format of late.

yeah, i feel like maybe slightly-outta-focus phots would exist more easily seen very large, because it is maybe hard to see them on the page without the kinda learned, technological reflex of it's out of focus, this being a failing. i have recklessly spun the focus wheel over the past few months & am waiting to see what it came out like.

re: eggleston sky photos:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51wnnNGXhDL.jpg_SX350_BO1,138,138,138_SH30_BO0,100,100,100_PA7,5,5,10_.jpg

seeing his occasional lilac-suffused sky photos is always intoxicating to me. it is funny you mentioning Newtime Photo trends, because sometimes i feel like i am having to work back toward some of those things, having kinda binged on & exhausted them early on. like whenever i see some kinda Ed Ruscha nighttime convenience store shot, or a Meyerowitz New-England-light shot, i have to remember that long exposures are an actual constitutive technique of photography, & not just One Neat Trick for outsmarting the stars & revealing their secret motion while vacationing somewhere cloudless.

i think if i was going to see the Chromatics i would be really worried they would be all too human. Ruth's voice not being like whispering in my ear definitely sounds like some kind of jeopardy.

how is the video goin, cv? i had a big plan to start a cellphone video thread a while ago that i never pulled the trigger on. i have shot a lot of stray video i like & which feels entwined with shooting stills, to me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrsAqmhSnFg

& Michael did we see your nyc shots, y/n. i find it hard to go there & not just fall into stars-&-stripes documentation.

Not sure if I posted anything from NYC 2012 or not... Here's some...

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7224/7373160904_f92ac454ec_z.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5345/7187924709_f0bfae2467_z.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7105/7187953337_0e493f7b53_z.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8156/7577536308_a1aa1221b5_z.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7219/7187942963_9c2f6f61e3_z.jpg

all I've been doing so far with the video is getting a bit buzzed and watching it. lots of road trip footage, lots of friends horsing around, attempts at filmmaking, special effects experiments. and just tons of shots out car windows. more of that than anything else. I don't really know what to do with much of it, but there's some entertaining stuff there.

speaking of cellphone videos, I think I've benefited over the last year from remembering to pull out the phone a bit more often and I've got stuff that I'd be up for putting online. I like that thing you posted, and that's often the most meaningful kind of video to me: a bit bumpy, on-the-go, but with a strong sense of the air.

maybe I'll start a youtube channel when I've got a little more time.

ha, i can imagine all video shot 2003 - 2010 just being fried by Special Effects Experiments. car window shots sound great! i am resisting the temptation to post some of my cool Train Journey Window footage here but it is totally alluring to me. i was cruising the website of the photographer Grady posted a few days ago & saw some video she made, which i have a couple of things kinda in the same ballpark as; crushing together cellphone footage & just paring things down until you have the spare frenetic moments bouncing off each other fluidly. i all seriously don't approve of there being music on top but it is satisfying to do, to me, to learn how to edit as much as for anything else, as much as for giving it a home. diarism is such a strong pull to me, &, like what you said about remembering to shoot stuff with a phone or whatever, it is pretty powerful to momentarily inhabit somebody else's historic very slight moment through that kind of footage or film.

some breezing:

- watching the Francesca Woodman documentary
- sometimes I go to the library & look through her books, her work is arresting, weirdly it is often the lightest/cartooniest stuff I find heavy
- & my camera is fucking up, just in small ways but several small ways simultaneously. I have never been a gear person & I wondered, before I just picked up another olympus, whether anybody had other-brand recommendations for something in the same ballpark. I'd be trying to get a kinda lateral equivalent of the OM-1, <$100, &'d be trying to pick up a 35mm lens or something similar. go-w-what-u-know is my reflex here but if anyone was particularly effusive about some canon SLR or w/e I would be receptive

http://instagram.com/p/eZtmo6GGXN/

i love that dude to death but every time he gets on instagram it's like 30 pictures in a row

take away his camera

it's missy elliott on twitter all over again

these are the nathaniel dorsky nyff programs that i was endorsing btw:

http://nathanieldorsky.net/post/61132469758/kodachrome-dailies-from-the-time-of-song-and
http://nathanieldorsky.net/post/60005803288/song-and-spring-will-play-twice-at-the-new-york

http://25.media.tumblr.com/0fcf25247cdc249c1b23802f336e7d83/tumblr_mt2x8hZ3Uu1s6z4s9o1_1280.jpg

I think most 60s 70s SLRs are pretty interchangeable. Just check to make sure everything's working. See if you can luck out on a nice Nikon or something maybe

i read some Rangefinder Guys Forum discussion last night & it sounded that way. i will get something & like its light meter less than i like the om-1s but it seems okay. it sounds like nikons are pretty tough, & i like being able to treat things badly, so that's a plus maybe. unless anybody is effusive about retailers this is a purchase i am going to make on ebay between 12 - 2am at some point in the next couple months i think.

Guys any tips on a good & chrap manual focus Nikon lens 30-35mm range, big appurature?

cheap*

Ebay's been good to me but of course then you can't test the thing. Do you get many Craigslist listings in your city?

That was re SLRs. Dunno about Nikon lenses.

yeah totally, was just wondering if there was a specific lens anyone wanted to steer me in the direction of

oh xps

Sorry. Only ever used my gf's Nikon with its old slow lenses.

nikon lenses are weird to price because they hold their value pretty well? since they never changed the mount. i dunno i could be talking out of my ass

i just walked past this:

http://butterfliesandbuffalo.com/theproject/camera/

would any of you guys have any idea why the buildings here are increasingly out of focus moving left to right? what would cause that? they're all the same distance away pretty much...

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2879/10028949374_0b6429e0ba_b.jpg

i really don't know the answer to this (& they don't look too-jarringly-different, to me), but is it the amount of ambient light, which is kinda abundant on the left & minimal on the right? i want to talk poetically about air purity like hearing joel meyerowitz talk about taking photographs of light in cape cod but i don't really have the stats to back this

tilt shift?

could be that they're actually not all the same distance away. with aperture at f/2 your DOF is gonna be fairly narrow, esp if the focus is not at infinity

there was a TOP post that mentioned stuff about air purity & c. here http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/09/leica-on-high.html

huh i guess yeah could just be that--aperture, etc. maybe ill test it out again. i noticed it and then the first person i showed it to noticed it and now i can't not notice, oh well

was for a few reasons (work stuff, friend stuff, a first date that didnt go very well, etc.) feeling really crappy on sunday. got myself out of bed and wandered around town. still feeling all bummed and sorry for myself when this happened. background is that domestic helpers, mostly from the philippines, work extremely hard, are separated from family for years at a time, are treated very unfairly under the law here in hk, and generally get only a few hours a week (on sunday) off. yet, they remain for the most part the warmest, most cheerful people. anyways, they all get together on sunday. walked through a big group. i just held up my camera and flash and shot off 3 pics quickly. this is the third one. just..this was the spontaneous response and captures the exact moment i felt better...best ppl ever:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7432/10119561994_095c6f51da_b.jpg

aw <3

that is fucking awesome

that's so great

i watched a bunch of jonas mekas films at a retro, here, having always felt like i kinda got JM & admiring him a bunch & liking the lithuania film without loving it, & i am really just knocked out, now, like by how much of a template he is for diaristic art, & then also just by his occasional - as in not constant, & not immediate - skill as a filmmaker. there are parts of walden that resemble the best of saul leiter's photography, i think, & parts of as i was moving ahead that are as good at recording & working with images as any of the like top shelf still photographers i can think of. brutally underserved by youtube's colour rendering here (& i'm trying to link directly to 1 hr 7 min & 49 seconds through, which it mightn't), but his recording & frenetic reediting of a snowball fight is such a powerful, reverberative glimpse into something that happened forever ago & still just pops from the screen,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD1CfCV1rPw?t=1h7m49s

road surfaces and slide film, the dream combo

does anybody who has ever had a prolonged internal moral debate about the ethics of cropping feel like sharing their thoughts, here? i have never wanted to crop. or zoom. jesus christ. but I have a fridge full of photographs that I took with a lens I was too distracted & dilettantish to realise was pretty beat up, the photos which were taken through bearing the slight scars of. one edge, when i've shot toward light & focused a long way away, has a slight clustering of a few lines, eating into the sky & ruining its uniformity. it only occurred to me while i couldn't sleep last night, after being kinda bummed about this occasional distraction that: oh yeah, i could just crop. & robert frank cropped! & before that i'd been trying to find comfort in how beat up some peoples' photos are anyway. or thinking about jonas mekas' film work, which is usually pretty jagged-edged, sixteen mm camera frames not usually absent of some kind of interference.

cropping. what do you think about it. i play with the frame a lot i think. but also sometimes maybe it's more important to concentrate on serving the thing you took a photograph of?

99.5% of the time i don't crop

I crop a lot. I just checked the last 100 images I published out of Lightroom in some form, and 60 of them were cropped from the original 3:2 ratio. Some were product shots I had to crop square, other times I was going for some cinema-still effect, other times it's just sloppiness by me not getting close enough to my subject. I'm not remotely precious about it because I'm not good enough at composition.

When I've shot weddings I'm mindful of the fact that ppl may want 3:2 prints (6"x4" being yr standard high street lab print), so I lock the ratio and only crop in 3:2.

Cropping is fine don't let anybody tell you otherwise

Plenty of famous photogs cropped

Just don't let anybody see the uncrops

I think that HCB's 'puddle jumper' was in fact a crop but being HCB the original exists nowhere

As for film - no, I don't crop. For some weird reason I can't bring myself to crop a scanned frame. It is what it is.

http://i.imgur.com/xP2Qwaz.jpg

The original puddle jumper

THe part on the left was part of the fence he was shooting through

http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2009/07/26/derriere-la-gare-saint-lazare/

Apparently one of only two of his photos that were ever cropped

Like we could prove otherwise though

He probably burns all his contact sheets

And of course the version we all know now crops out the bottom 1/3 of the picture as well

http://i.imgur.com/gHIb5hd.jpg

Gordon Parks shoots the Invisible Man, Crops

the most reproduced portrait of all time was cropped

http://i.imgur.com/sHiyNhL.jpg

Cropping was arguably better in the film days

You'd just move the enlarger head closer

Bigger grain yeah sure but you could sometimes get more detail too

Cropping digital is okay if you have a large source file and you're gonna show at 1024x768 or some other web resolution

when i see something that visibly doesn't conform to a common ratio i am raising an eyebrow

bigger grain would actually probably be an argument for cropping for me

the same way deep overexposure + then scanning can get you something you can't get otherwise

Fucking hell, the original negative

http://i.imgur.com/8Ib5avK.jpg

I'm glad to see HCB underexposed too

You can think of anti-cropping people as being photography's rockists

But given all the other ways we manipulate images

Color balance curves printing big small whatever

Intentionally overexposing underexposing shooting expired film cross processing shooting movie film

Cropping is just one more tool in the kit

Nobody has to know

It can be your secret

Take it with you to the grave

Destroy your hard drive when you die

On my tombstone it will say

He was a cropper

I am not ashamed

Now with all that having been said

I have never cropped a single image in my life

yeah it just goes against my instinct. I've done it a few times and then later replaced the cropped with the uncropped.

honestly it just makes life easier too

ha ha 乒乓 you are pretty much the disappointed paternal voice in my head ruefully shaking his head at my first inclinations toward cropping. like you appreciate the arguments but also something will have changed if i do it. i just can't even look at the disfigured skies that my lack of care has wrought anymore. it's like the guy in the godfather's unbeautified daughter.

i feel like i am applying for one of those licenses that means you can smoke marijuana in public because you have ptsd & so should be exempted from having to comply with certain social mores. the idea of cropping to me is so awkward, like it is a lie. didn't alice notley say the wrong word in a story is a lie in the middle of the page. i can't even make myself crop the selvages.

you are allowed to crop, but it must be done on the negative, with scissors.
accept this ruling.

that's perfect

mentally consulting robert frank's career to create parameters for everyday life

alternately, now that you know about your lens deficiency, next time you use it you must tape a piece of cardboard to the offending side.

i feel like when i look at my photos i'm already disappointed by how much i missed getting in to the frame in the first place

i want to put the whole world in to every shot more or less

mentally consulting robert frank's career to create parameters for everyday life

― love mike love (ko komo) (schlump), Thursday, November 21, 2013 5:14 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark

This is how I live tbh

If it helps you to be a uncropper while following robert frank

Remember that frank did not think the negative was sacrosanct

As evidenced by his later work in nova scotia

What you need to do I think is to take a roll that you have developed

And eat it

Or burn it

Then and maybe then can you start to crop

Tbh I remember reading that robert frank had arranged with Steidl

To publish a new edition of the americans

With all new crops

Probably the most disappointed I have ever felt with Frank

Not because of the cropping but because I did not think the new crops could bring anything to the images that we did not already know

I don't think I necessarily pre-visualise in 3:2. Sometimes I know I only want a sliver of what I can capture from where I am.

i want to put the whole world in to every shot more or less

i think more & more that the less you are taking a photograph of - "of" - the better. i just was at the library looking at eggleston & koenig's (lovely) double exposure, i have maybe a new favourite eggleston (no i don't), this 2004 shot of half a phonebox and just some yellow canvasing in madrid. like obviously with W E the deal about ~life continuing beyond the frame~ is popular wisdom but also he just so delicately unites everything that's happening, pinpoints the essence & needs little more.

i have replaced my lens fwiw. i have a 35mm now. i miss the kind of innate hyper closeness of my 50mm, like it has come to just represent the act of literally focusing on a thing to me. but i am figuring it out.

i think frank has fucked with the crops used in editions of the americans at least twice?? usually erring toward revealing the full frame iirc. there's a section in the THE AMERICANS: THE ~~RE-MIX~~ deluxe book about it

i think more & more that the less you are taking a photograph of - "of" - the better

don't tell that to friedlander

i think wrt anti-zoom sentiment i feel there is definitely some kind of poetic (don't say truth don't say truth) righteousness to just dealing with what you confront through your camera. to crop for the juice seems to deny some basic idea of what photography is, to strive for some other kind of image making practice.

i feel like friedlander is with me on that! from his pics at least. like peak friedlander is, at least in the context of his time, not taking pictures "of" anything significant ..? excluding madonna nudes obviously

Right, that's it. I'm not cropping for a month.

I took less and less to mean fitting content in. feel like friedlander stuffs content anything, regardless of significance

Though my eldest might be happier if I just put away the camera altogether ("Stop taking pictures, Daddy!")... uncropped, 50mm prime, btw...

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2880/10800776133_e90bcf37af_c.jpg

I mean like

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/photobooth/100906_friedlander-3_p465.jpg

The A-frame is the crop

So is the sideview mirror

I took less and less to mean fitting content in. feel like friedlander stuffs content anything, regardless of significance

― chinavision!, Thursday, November 21, 2013 6:35 PM (34 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah i guess i am leaving this open & hoping to just trade of its (robert) bressonian poetic ambiguity but yeah i think i mean in terms of significance or identification. like there is a sort of higher ground of aphasic ignorance toward subject or content that pays off, the point at which you're totally just recording constellations of space like leiter did. i maybe don't know friedlander well enough to parse him in this argument but he has the kind of rephrasing democratic thing down enough to me that it fits with what i feel, like he is uniting what's there rather than trying to just capture an object.

not holding up friedlander as a non-cropper, just sayin, he puts a lot of stuff in his pictures

I crop film scans slightly to get them back into 3:2.

I crop digital a lot less than I used to. I've started finding images look a little odd to me if I crop them, but i'm sure if i stepped away from the computer and went back the next day i wouldn't notice.

I certainly don't hve any purist stance against it. I make plenty of other adjustments to my photos.

michael btw i am using your cropping pass for the next month just to try it on for size, let's trade back in dec.

I can't believe how expensive a roll of provia is now

How much??

close to $20 in some places!

then factor in e6 processing charges you can spend around $1 per frame

Damn

I bet you can find some cheap-ish places in Chicago to process? Or are you still doing mail order

actually i still prefer cross-processing

until recently i had to go to labs that would do it but still charge the slide film rate

but i found a walgreens near me that as long as i'm dropping off a bunch of c-41 at the same time, i've been able to sneak a roll or two of slide in w/o getting caught

i need to get a good scanner and start developing all my B&W at home

for some reason drug stores here charge ~$10 for a develop & scan to cd, compared to ~$5 in hawaii

and costco stopped fucking w/ film entirely around the time i moved

Time for home scanning indeed. You get a little more control then too.

Spending some $$ on a scanner now can save you $$$$ over hundreds of rolls

yeah but time spent at home scanning is time i could be out shooting

jk (kind of)

Nah that's true. You just gotta find a way to integrate ILX time and scanning

maybe I should quit my job and become a photographer

the time i shot positive film & developed it recently made me so sad, like i almost felt better equipped to bemoan the inimitable heights reached by all the guys who took photos in the fifties, cause i could be like you got to shoot slide film ~all the time~. it was the same kinda prices gr8080 talked about, just to get negatives processed. nathaniel dorsky talks about working with different stocks after kodachrome's discontinuation & says it's like working with a less precious metal, & very occasionally accessing slide reminds me how lovely film can be, how much emulsion can be this vivid conditioner of the material you work with as opposed to just slight variations on realism.

just to add to the chorus you should totally get (or: find!, in case you're even vaguely affiliated with any sort of institution that might have one you could use, library/school/department at work/club/&c) a scanner. i miss prints but yeah the control is nice, & it paid for itself super quickly. also i think i love scanning, the true name of this board, became kind of a jokey self-deprecating thing after awhile but scanning is seriously how i unwind, like i am at home for three or four hours a day right now & the thing i want to do is just scan while watching a shitty movie. it isn't effort, i don't think.

Yeah becoming a photographer full time would be pretty ace. I follow Brian Finke on tumblr (http://brianfinke.tumblr.com/) and he seems to live a very good life. Ignore the pictures of meat and every 10 days he has his checkered Vans in another airport security bin and he's going somewhere else.

But it's not like there are 10,000 Brian Finke positions out there to get.

promised i would pressure-bump this thread to hassle nyc folks next time this was happening; one of my fav films, by Understander Of Celluloid Nathaniel Dorsky, playing at Light Works next wk: http://www.lightindustry.org/calendar

For sure

damn i'll miss that by 2 days

i can't remember who fuks w/ nikons, but i'm curious what ILP thinks about the new Df; the rest of the photosphere certainly has ~opinions~

i love the idea and obv it looks beautiful but the decision to not support video is hilarious trolling and def a dealbreaker for someone looking to get my first dslr

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/12/random-excellence-paul-swee.html

This is me ;_;

i can't remember who fuks w/ nikons, but i'm curious what ILP thinks about the new Df; the rest of the photosphere certainly has ~opinions~

― |$̲̅(̲̅ιοο̲̅)̲̅$̲̅| (gr8080), Wednesday, December 4, 2013 9:26 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark

Not a nikon or DSLR guy at all but I wasn't too excited by it. I feel like other companies get retro 'better,' like the Fuji digital rangefinders, and the Olympus OM-D

But yeah if you're gonna pay mucho money for a full frame DSLR you'd better make sure you're getting video

I use Nikon, I was pretty excited by the concept of the Df, when I first bought a DSLR I really wanted a retro-style one, but TBH it's a bit expensive and I'm not convinced it'd be that different to the D600 I've only just got, other than having the D4 sensor and no video. And yeah, Fuji and Olympus do retro 'better'.

for someone looking to get my first dslr

Really? I can't wait to see what you do with digital.

Does the Df have a live view mode at all? If it does I imagine someone could hack it to access video.

I'm taking the 6D out every day. A joy to use. But video is something I've barely touched - I need to teach myself Premiere Elements that was bundled with the camera. I'm just taking little standard-def clips of the kids, music, etc. If I'm going to use 1080/24p I better have something to say...

I've barely used video on either of the DSLR's I've owned that had it. It's great that it's there, but I struggle to think of anything to film.

Does the Df have a live view mode at all? If it does I imagine someone could hack it to access video.

no mic/mic input though

i think it would be cool to be able to do simple but elegant stuff like this

http://vimeo.com/14650029

Re mic input - you could post-sync sound. But carrying round a Nagra and a retro DSLR tethered to a netbook to capture hacked video might just be taking things too far.

I have small-capsule binaurals (with something like a 1.5m cable) that I used to use for field recordings to MiniDisc 10-12 years ago; they worked pretty well on borrowed 7D/5D2 bodies last year, yet to try them into the 6D. But, yes, little fragments, edited together, maybe verite sound coming and going. So much more work than stills though!

i had this book, images cachees, hidden images, from the library, the catalogue for an exhibition mounted in luxembourg in which they held an open call for home video submissions, to testify to the country's semi-forgotten domestic youth. the catalogue is stills excerpted from i guess mainly eight mm home movies, some with unnecessary captions, difficult to look through without feeling frustrated by some of the curatorial selection totally necessary for it to exist. but it's so arresting. like szarkowski's line about how much there is for us to like coming from snapshots & drunks.

http://i.imgur.com/A4iv9O2.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/p2aPK76.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/5g5yJAz.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/gzPd5bV.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/tqh7o7g.gif

THANKS OBAMA

just got an awesome surprise* gift in the mail from dayo, thanks dude!

have you ever pushed this film? if so, how far?

*if this wasn't meant to be a surprise then i was def a few old-fashions deep when we discussed it and i gave you my address

Haha wasn't meant to be a surprise afaicr but that was a busy night for all involved

Haven't pushed that film myself - haven't actually shot it really. Maybe use a flash if it's too slow?

Figured I'm going to be in a place where it'll be relatively easy to get it so I should part with what I have

why is he eatin g abee

hi everyone, i know nothing about the technical side of photography but i watched Everybody Street last night and it really captured me, made me want to buy a cheap rangefinder camera to mess about with. any suggestions before i just buy the cheapest one i can get hold of on ebay?
also Bruce Gilden seems like such a dick

Canonet QL17 GIII

also Bruce Gilden seems like such a dick

ha ha word
it's not like he even has this groundshaking collection of stolen pics like weegee's or anything, he just has shit he could probably achieve by waving a flash around in more amicable circumstances

Left the 6D at home today for the first time since I got it. Felt good not to have a kilo and a half slung over my shoulder but, of course, I'm assaulted by images all the way into work - sky like wrestling ghosts, vivid patterns in the rain-coated streets, a gaggle of hard-hats peering at a cherry-picker, so much signage. Good to refresh the senses though.

The last two years I've done a time based challenge/project (photo a day in 2012, portrait a week in 2013), it's been nice to not have anything like that hanging over me so far this year, both could be quite time consuming or distracting. I've enjoyed the space to think more about what I'd like to achieve with a camera this year, without having come to any conclusions. Maybe improve my developing technique.

I've set myself a deadline of March 31st to use up every roll of film currently in a camera and, thereafter, get an order into AG Photo at least every two months, concentrating on the FTb and the Bronica. I've let my film shooting lapse for so long I no longer have an unexpired roll in the house.

This is my wife's 1974-ish FTb and she's keen to start cranking through fast B&W again (but we don't have any!).

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5541/12180667223_d6229f51cb_c.jpg

(Taken at ISO 25600 with the 6D... you can kinda see the appeal of digital).

Picked up an open-box Sigma 85mm f/1.4 from Amazon for a (relatively) bargain price last week. Presumably it was returned to Amazon by its original buyer because it front-focuses like crazy. I'm hoping AF microadjust on my 6D can save it, because when it does nail focus it is gorgeous.

http://i1247.photobucket.com/albums/gg622/bizarrogazzara/2014-01-27_zpsd3d43943.jpg

(focus is a little off there, admittedly, but I like it anyway)

Thanks to cerealbar for the recommendation of Everybody Street upthread, by the way - I watched it recently and thought it was great, although I wished there was more on Elliot Erwitt, who I love.

I'm making books now. it's fun! Just doing blurb. it's a whole new angle to scanninglove.
also thanks to a very kind loan I'm messing with medium format! but maybe being too precious about shooting (it's only 8 photos per roll at 6x9!). it's tough to decide between formats since I've never had that question before.
I also picked up 4 wolfgan tillmans books last night and they're great!
so long flickr... hello bookworld.

sweet bokeh bizarro

I know, right? Even if the lens does turn out to be a dud I think I'll have to get another one at full price because I dunno if I can live without access to that kind of optical quality.

china that's really inspirational!! keep us posted

Getting pretty excited about Blurb myself, having just offered it as an option to a bride'n'groom. I should do a test run with 20 pix of the kids first...

i've spent a while on blurb's website and still can't quite get what it costs... like, a 40 page book is gonna run you around $40 right?

bokeh computer

Well, I'm looking at the UK site and...

40 pages, standard paper (118gsm), 10x8, softcover = £17
40 pages, Proline Pearl (190gsm), 12x12, hardcover w/image wrap = £60

I guess I'd go for something inbetween - premium lustre (148gsm), 13x11, hardcover w/dust jacket, £46. A fiver to ship.

I know what I'm doing this evening.

I did a 20 page 7x7 as a test. I guess I'll get it in a couple of weeks. I think it was $15 or so, and then maybe $25 with tax and shipping? My girlfriend printed a couple that came recently and they look nice. She did one on matte and one on a semi-gloss, and I sort of preferred the matte.
I'm just gonna make cheap stuff for now until I have a layout and order I like. Then maybe I'll do a small batch.

I've had a voucher for Whitewall since the summer (unexpected leaving gift from changing jobs) but struggling to settle on one thing to get printed.

Haven't made a book myself yet but did help my mum do a holiday one. What's the quality like from Blurb?

how big should image files be for a 7x7? are my drugstore scans not gonna cut it?

don't think they need to be that big really. I resize my pictures for 6x4, and for the book I sized down to 90%.
Sooo... that's 5.4" x 3.6" and at that size an image that is 1620 pixels wide by 1080 pixels high would print at 300 dpi, which is plenty high res.

hey have we never had a hysterical matte vs gloss print discussion on ILP? bc FUCK GLOSS

And now I've spent the evening putting a book together.

Me too! Just a simple 7x7, soft cover, 40pp, kids' pics from 2013. Should be under £20 with postage. Rendering out to Blurb now...

Did you use Lightroom to put it together? I've done mine that way, felt a lot easier to work with than any web editor I've tried before. I think I have my final version now, won't order it til tomorrow night though just in case I think of something else I want to change.

ILP books in '14

Yeah, Lightroom. I kept it very simple.

Made this motherfucker:

http://richardgin.tumblr.com/post/74949332873/good-morning-internet-friends-i-am-pleased-and

Let me know how your Blurb stuff looks. I'm so anal about my colors that I decided to just go w a c-town printer in NYC (vs blurb or shutterfly or kodak or w/e) because I would have rather have the 'we only guarantee to w/in 10%' problem removed from me so I can say "well It's a digital print wtf do you want, dummy?"

Blurb etc all seem so permanent; if I pay 40 bux to have a book made it had better be goddamn ass perfect.

I bought that motherfucker.

(My Blurb book, with shipping and first-time LR discount, was £15. I guess any I order this year for weddings are going to be £50+).

my gf's brother and his gf made a photo book for their parents of their italy trip (which we were also on) and immediately because furious and jealous that I didn't do that myself. I just don't have the need/financials to do a bulk order and get a discount of any note

also your motherfucker is going out TOMORROW dogg

Pretty excited.

To me, the biggest hurdle is any non-photographic content. I'm no great designer, I don't have the tools anyway and, going by last night's experience, it's fairly tedious to layout text and so on in Lightroom. You don't want the cover of a wedding album or whatever to be just thrown together and, if it's a showcase of work for sale, it better be brilliant. I really like your letterpressed cover. I have a friend who could do this...but I'm not sure it would be possible with a finished hardback book with the gear he has.

having a printer you can talk to is a p big deal. mine was INSISTING that we make the cover separate from the guts of the book and then stitch them together. letterpress machines don't like having whole books stuffed into them, y'see.

depending on how DIY/punk rock you are willing to get look @ silkscreen instead of letterpress?

My wife used to do silkscreen; we have Gocco but the ink/bulbs now seem hard to find. She also use to do bookbinding. Somehow I think there enough skills at hand to fashion something, if I just take the pictures. For now, let's see what I can do with LR/Blurb. I'm just lazy - I wanted to be able to knock something together in the Books module in like five minutes and it took - JESUS - ten. If I'm getting paid or aiming to make something worthwhile, I'm sure it won't seem so irksome to take a couple of evenings over it, and learn all the tricks.

JtM which Ctown printer did you use?

Also can I buy this in like 2 weeks?

Hello! Yes I used g&p on Baxter. They were rec by a dude who knows more abt printing than I do. They also beat minuteman by a few hundred bux in a blind bid.

Also as much as I want to say otherwise there will be copies next wk!

http://browncardigan.s3.amazonaws.com/imagesfarm/2014/LbdpMXkjorLaMDm.gif

My Blurb book turned up today, had gone for a hardback with standard weight paper (I think). The quality is quite good, the paper is a good thickness and the hardback is sturdy. Not sure how resilient the binding is though, and the print quality is good rather than excellent, but I guess these are downsides of print-to-order efforts.

Actually it was the Premium Matt paper. Link to it here: http://www.blurb.co.uk/b/5052725-fifty-two-people

One thing I forgot to say was that the layout of the text works better on screen than it does in the actual book.

removed from public view...

Ah, sorry, this might work: http://www.blurb.co.uk/bookstore/invited/4288949/59bfde5051c2d90ac1d143c61d71b684d4bd574c

Here's a couple of crap phone snaps of my Blurb book. I like it, it's pretty good. Print quality a bit better than the likes of Photobox but I'd be interested to see what it looks like on different paper.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7412/12320708875_97a753d5c6_z.jpg

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3805/12320705405_7d2577f775_z.jpg

oh yeah I got my test book back and I'm pretty pleased! printed on the cheapest paper.
the only element I haven't liked is the way text is printed on the cover stock. it's a little 'soft' and looks sort of cheap, but I'm totally satisfied with the print quality inside the book.
of course the pictures don't look like inkjet prints, and I never really wanted them to. they look like digital offset, which is just fine and, importantly, I think the color reproduction is nice! comparable to commercial photo books that I like.

hows the black density

http://gizmodo.com/led-streetlights-will-change-hollywood-and-make-every-c-1514840416

:( :( :(

First thought is that the new LED lights make LA look like a video game

a cool dream of an led-enriched future is their potential to simplify mechanical projection of film, replacing awkward/hot/scarce old lamps inside small gauge projectors
but yeah that's interesting! like gaslamps -> electric almost

in theory LEDs are dialable to kelvin of choice but god knows we can't be bothered to set a lamp at, like, 4000 K vs 5600 K to keep people from going crazy. on the other hand, alaska in winter

This is my aunt's ceiling lamp, I love the mismatched bulbs (two inc's and 1 fluoro I think)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/colortemp.jpg

The original teal & orange.xls

"... Because once you've begun," he would preach, "there is no reason why you should stop. The line between the reality that is photographed because it seems beautiful to us and the reality that seems beautiful because it has been photographed is very narrow. If you take a picture of Pierluca because he's building a sand castle, there is no reason not to take his picture while he's crying because the castle has collapsed, and then while the nurse consoles him by helping him find a sea shell in the sand. The minute you start saying something, 'Ah, how beautiful! We must photograph it!' you are already close to the view of the person who thinks that everything that is not photographed is lost, as if it had never existed, and that therefore, in order really to live, you must photograph as much as you can, and to photograph as much as you can you must either live in the most photograph-able way possible, or else consider photographable every moment of your life. The first course leads to stupidity; the second to madness."

Read the closing sentences as saying "You must either live in your photographs as much as possible" and I thought, well, I hadn't considered it that way before, but I'll try it out, inhabit those grays, stretch out and lie down and let halides wash over me

Got it! Love the cover material and look.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3796/12456873135_2fc2ffb6c2_z.jpg

is that jimmy mod's?

Yep.

WOW THAT GOT THERE FAST!

that picture of montana is v popular

http://thedissolve.com/features/exposition/429-film-preservation-20/

Remember optical media being touted as a very stable way to store digital information - but I dunno how long a blu-ray keeps for

I had thought Fuji Neopan 400 was long discontinued but I saw some at a shop today... a lot actually

Apparently it's still 'in stock' at a lot of places, though will be discontinued soon

http://www.wired.com/2014/04/covr-prism-mirror-iphone-case/

is this dumb?

http://www.amazon.com/Wolverine-4-In-1-Digital-Converter-F2DSUPER/dp/B00GIDADP0/ref=sr_1_9

also slide film prices continue to skyrocket

fisher price aesthetic super appealing to me
though i just want a koolscan

Wedding at the weekend. Full frame + f/4 zoom and crop frame + fast portrait, but I just kept swapping lenses cos I wanted to use the FF *all the time*. I've just been spoiled by it (particularly by the immensely flattering hi-res LCD).

Will take me all week to weed/pick/process/review but there's not much I enjoy more. Hopefully at least three more this year.

Maybe not that exciting to anyone but me, but someone at Dundee City Archive has started uploading lots of old photos of the city on a Flickr account and I've been finding it fascinating - whole streets in there that were torn down in the modernising zeal of the local council from the middle of last century onwards, continuing to this day with the latest rounds of regeneration. Not to say that it was the wrong thing to do, just that it's brought it home to me how much more the city has changed than I thought it had. I grew up in a village outside a town 20 miles down the road that I suspect has changed very little in the same time.

Here's the whole lot:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/118069284@N05

Here are a few I liked:

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7167/13625976114_436b342d77.jpg
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2874/13535668883_40f717c044.jpg
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7174/13756596403_b9199fc0d0.jpg
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7020/13756457735_af7af8449b.jpg
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3696/13718548553_118ee22500.jpg
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3734/13716379235_6e18844d05.jpg

Love those. That pedestrianised parade of shops is by the railway station, right? I visited Dundee a couple of times about 25 years ago.

Second last shot? Yeah, that's the Overgate, which has since been completely redeveloped again so looks nothing like that. My earliest memories of Dundee are getting the train through with my mum and gran and visiting the numerous 99p shops in there. The station is a few minutes walk away but not far.

I think there was an Our Price there in 1989 or so. I knew a girl who lived on Roseangle, while she was doing her Masters. We went to Oblomov's on Nethergate and climbed to the top of the Law at sunrise. There should be photos somewhere but they may be lost...

my sister lives in rural nebraska and sent me these cellpwn pics of an old red piano that appeared on the edge of a cornfield along her commute a few weeks ago; almost makes me wanna hop in the car and do the 8 hour drive so i can take my own

http://i.imgur.com/ZJFvOzz.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/XyuupqO.jpg

always hyped to have a new red thing to photograph

hey ilp-
i just started watching this, william klein's series of short films about photographers, walking through waves of photojournalism/artists/& then conceptual photographers in ten minute episodes. it's so good! pretty much all subject-narrated montages of work by like sophie calle, duane michals, baldessari (who i never see without feeling like i have unduly shortchanged him my whole life by not thinking him my #1 guy), tillmans, &c&c&c. i looked & i think some are available on vimeo or whatever. but it's really good. bitesize. for while you eat.

How do people here use Instagram? If they do?

At first, I treated it like a photographic tweet - snaps with the iPhone, instantly shared. Now I wi-fi pics off the 6D to my phone, or even download LR-processed 6D pics from Flickr to my phone, square-crop, perhaps a filter, and then share. It's no longer an instantaneous thing for me, more a sort of short-term curatorial thing - something selected from my general, daily shooting with the proper camera, uploaded to Instagram every few hours.

I realise there's now a class of images which I wouldn't bother working up properly for the permanent online record of Flickr, or share on Facebook, but seem ideal for Instagram.

http://instagram.com/p/oSu1X3Lwt4/
http://instagram.com/p/oQBxa7rwnY/
http://instagram.com/p/oHYP7Lrwhf/

(Apologies if they don't work; I logged out and tested the links but I'm never sure...)

(And that was literally the first time I've logged into the web version of Instagram on a PC. They all look crap! Jokin')

something i imagine sometimes but which i'm generally not equipped to really render in my imagination is how nice it would be to have a subscription to aperture magazine

i just can't even imagine
like as far as i get is it's delivered & comes through an expansive actual letter window in a doorway, in a house i don't own, & then i collapse into this comfy minimal subdued charcoal couch to read it & then i black out

in case anyone still wants a mirror tube:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vario-Spiegel-Vorsatz-Mirrored-camera-lens-tube-special-effects-/310970741092

In London for a couple of days so popped along to The Photographers Gallery to check out the Deutsche Borse finallists. The prints of Richard Mosse's 'The Enclave' look incredible, they do the images justice in a way I don't think any magazine or website could - the only way i have seen them so far. Managed to behave myself in the shop (more photobooks than I've ever seen in one place!) and only bought Robert Capa In Colour. There were a few other tempting things, though.

There's an Edgar Martins exhibition on I'd like to see, but record shopping on Berwick St has left me with too little time to get there and then back to where I've to meet friends. Having a pint instead.

Realised my error, it appears 'The Enclave' is a film and the photos are 'Infra'. Either way, very good.

http://shophamburgereyes.com/collections/frontpage/products/internet-k-hole-vol-3

http://i.imgur.com/vI8y9j9.png

shitty cellphone camera pics >> film photography >>>>>>>>>>>>>> digital camera pics

recently at least

There's a hierarchy?

I was just admiring these game boy camera photos actually

http://i.imgur.com/LajEYUC.jpg

http://www.ironicsans.com/2014/05/new_york_city_in_2000_photogra.html

(Wow what an intentionally awful website name)

http://milkmade.com/articles/2718-Milk-Gallery-Presents-The-Magnum-Contact-Sheet-Exhibition#.U7aqxo1dWXj

it's like just as i'm finally getting to grips with latin i glimpse a teenager sexing demotically, &

oops, sexting

i see people do cool things with film all the time, & i'm still responsive to it. i am watching a lot of video, recently, old video tapes, & it's crazy how kind of powerful & different the images seem, now, just by virtue of having aged a little, betraying their age, blearily affiliating with your memories. & film is obviously that too; you can still use it without it being a statement on the medium, & otherwise you can use it for what it means for there to be grain, &c. but it feels like an established language. this is what china was talking about, forever ago, i think, about people going to shoot pictures of cars, because old cars look like old pictures. alleyways look like films, ripped posters like walker evans, &c&c&c. i see just the most everyday digital pictures & it's like they just have so much less weight. there aren't the parameters. some of the film photography i respond to is the kind we talked about, a little, like a lot of light, some bright surface catching natural-seeming neon colour, a girl with dyed hair or whatever. but even when i'm chasing those kinds of pictures i feel like it's because they're a kind of picture. like i learnt it. i don't know that that exists, yet, with digital, & i feel like there's so much more space to have the picture be an actual kinda slightly provocative picture, not a successful or unsuccessful variation upon an existing formula.

Not sure where our discussion of cropping occurred but I checked out the Magnum Contact Sheet exhibition & found this:

http://i.imgur.com/Z9Pv8q2.png

http://i.imgur.com/eBHdD2B.jpg

rewarding evening cruise through chinavision's photos, everything still fresh & busy

https://fstoppers.com/film/leica-loves-film-announces-new-m-type-127-fully-mechanical-35mm-film-rangefinder-37486

^ i do kinda half-interestedly cruise things like this but the price always feels like such a weird caveat. like it's almost not even a real thing it's so prohibitive.

meanwhile:

http://i.imgur.com/9TmnqBF.png

http://www.moma.org/explore/inside_out/inside_out/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Watkins_Peaches_sharp.sm_.jpg

carleton watkins

i wonder whether the lens redesign accidentally committed them to privileging medium- & large-format square photography in their front page content

Hah is the top story always a square crop

ready for fresh boring playground photographs every single day

On a tangent, surprised I've not done this before but after "a few" beers on Saturday night managed to knock the quality setting on my camera from RAW to basic JPEG. Took a load of photos yesterday before coming home and noticing what had happened. It's the kind of thing that's inconsequential but will bother me.

i believe the pros call that "raw dogging"

I did consider googling that at work.

Ray K. Metzker :(

yeah. rewarding google image search right now.

hey how is everybody doing in their photo lives. what's good.

Nothing is going on in my photo life right now :( but check this out http://instagram.com/p/oTK4a2whRa/

hey that's good
i like it now that instagram is less a thing about filters & is more a kind of diary

schlump I'm really into this tag rn http://www.modeschina.com/tagged/heartbreakclub

hey i had forgotten about this site

http://31.media.tumblr.com/ba04406ef621ef708bbd534e1958df88/tumblr_nd2kz2a9HF1s48vuqo1_500.jpg

these feel like watching neighbouring sounds, to me-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeDOSDOs2X0

being in the city at night & it really feeling unlit

Papa Cuppa
1 year ago
in reply to bv2112

This is capitalism

George Ricardo
1 year ago
in reply to Taylor Productions

sometimes random images say it all.

http://www.moma.org/explore/inside_out/inside_out/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Watkins_Peaches_sharp.sm_.jpg

― schlump, Monday, October 6, 2014 4:54 AM (1 week ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ban this sick filth

http://www.volkerheinze.de/files/gimgs/13_eggleston.jpg

That's William Eggleston by Volker Heinze, right? As much as I love that image I can't help but think of this when I see it:

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--jQv3VBSV--/196fuarapyylmgif.gif

http://i.imgur.com/NSj7ban.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/gs22GJv.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/wncEsGq.jpg

http://www.julienmagre.fr/

That's William Eggleston by Volker Heinze, right?

yes! i didn't know it, or him, until yesterday, & i'm really taken. for what it's worth, in case it maybe saves you from banderas flashbacks, it's described by heinze as being eggleston asleep in a restaurant, in berlin in '85, so maybe needn't be understood as such a moment of ecstasy. it's a really beautiful, rich, layered picture i think, the overbearing red glow unavoidably intertextual feeling.

i really am not a portraiture person but his work is strong, i think. hung up on some of his ahnung series, too-

http://www.volkerheinze.de/files/gimgs/3_periskop.jpg
http://www.volkerheinze.de/files/gimgs/3_olymp1.jpg

those julien magre pics are neat, too; nice to go to her site, cruise into journal just for the volume of coolly lit home photographs. i have had such a strange time, recently, hungry for pictures & feeling kind of exhausted by a lot of the work & the presentation, too, of Photographers Online, using some kind of cargo-squarespace-wave site to show off, you know, bleached out foliage & girl hair pics. i found a site which reviewed & excerpted photobooks & felt refuge from it it, thinking maybe the best things were happening in books, now, nicely printed books and unaspirational cellphone snaps. photography is obviously so big but when i try to remember the people who are active, prolific, whose work i love, who i can consult online as a way of looking at something; there are six or seven. i don't think the complaint is about the lack of good photographers, just about the availability or closeness of new work, & the slightly hermetic tone of the things that are obviously done well - getting to click through a twelve-picture slideshow of gently glowing selected-best-frames kinda not satisfying, not real.

being in the city at night & it really feeling unlit

― schlump, Saturday, October 18, 2014 12:32 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark

I think I'm in love with dark pictures right now

But yes being in a city at night, unlit

Life lived that resists the recording. I think most of those pics were scrounged from weibo, from people's cell phone cameras that are two generations behind. Tiny sensors struggling to make anything out of the life being lived at the shadow. Barest outlines but cohering in the way that comes from watching an artist dab at a canvas, everything falling into place but only after you fall still. IDK they evoke such memories in me, walking the city til dawn, the flâneur inside restless and sad. I want to go back, I want to be there.

I used to think that maybe photographers got boring as they grew older and released their 'mature' work but I think I'm beginning to understand and to see

http://i.imgur.com/H5pXsFo.jpg

This was me at 3 AM 4 years ago, coming home

I wish I were home

It would not be a gross exaggeration to say that, in the eyes of the young turks, a photograph that was sharp all over, that was fully exposed in the shadows, and that was not visibly grainy was insincere. To add artificial light to the scene was worse, it was simple fraud.

In rational terms this was nonsense, but in artistic terms the question was not so simple. To the new photographers the old pictures seemed planned, designed, conceived, understood in advance: they were little more than illustrations, in fact less, since they claimed to be something else—the exploration of real life.

The new style was also called the available-light revolution, and if one forgives its portentousness the phrase is useful. Photogra­phers had of course always used available light, which during most of the medium's first century was generally daylight. It was not until the twenties that artificial light began to be a standard part of the working photographer's vocabulary, and not until the early thirties that devices were marketed that would synchronize the light of a flashbulb with the operation of a camera's shutter. The possibilities of artificial light had been quickly seized by the picture magazines, whose editors appreciated the new tool not only for its ability to produce pictures where photography would otherwise have been impossible but also for the fact that it could describe a scene with sharply incised detail and a graphic simplicity that made the photograph seem clearer than real life. Artificial light was embraced with special enthusiasm in the United States, particularly by Life magazine, whose example in photojournalistic style was decisive. The more sophisticated users of flash photography quickly developed techniques that utilized several bulbs for a single shot, producing results that were less obviously artificial than those achieved by a single bulb attached to the camera. These pictures approached in their character the immaculately lighted Hollywood movies of the thirties, whose imagery came to be accepted as natural in spite of its uncanny, luxuriant clarity.

European magazines had tended toward a photographic style that favored ambience over clarity of detail—a sense of immediacy over the quantity of information conveyed. After World War II this approach began to gain favor in the United States. In 1946 Life lured the English photographer Leonard McCombe to its staff and stipulated in his contract that he was not to use flashbulbs.4

In 1948 the exhibition French Photography Today, selected by the American photographer Louis Stettner, was shown in New York at the galleries of The Photo League. Although Stettner praised the work, he felt compelled to apologize for its failure to meet American standards of technical finish, but added, 'It must be remembered that most of the photographers in this exhibition consider their work finished when it appears in reproduction form. And they print accordingly.... French photographers have not yet learned what Stieglitz first taught us: that a print can exist as a thing in itself." Beaumont Newhall noted that "admiration for the images was qualified by frequent puzzlement by visitors at the photographic quality of the work. How, they asked, could the League show prints so poor in quality?" But the prints that survive from that time by the photographers included in the show (among them Boubat, Brassaii, Doisneau, and Ronnis) today seem technically unexceptionable. In comparison to what would soon follow they seem in their craft models of conventional virtue.

The spirit of what was to come was presaged by a statement that Doisneau had written on the back of one of his prints in the Photo League show: "The photographer must be absorbent—like a blot­ter, allow himself to be permeated by the poetic moment.... His technique should be like an animal function... he should act auto­matically."7 The new photographers who emerged in the next years followed Doisneau's advice with an abandon that he could not have envisioned.

By 1952 the new purism had been ratified (it seemed) by Henri Cartier-Bresson, who in his introduction to The Decisive Moment proscribed the use of flashbulbs, "out of respect for the actual light—even when there isn't any of it."8 On the basis of his own work, one might guess that Cartier-Bresson meant by this that if there was not adequate light one might go to dinner. The new photographers kept photographing with what to the casual observer might seem to have been no light at all, and on occasion made a coherent picture in terms of nothing but a pattern of glittering highlights—smeary white shapes against a black field. Although the picture might bear little resemblance to what an eyewitness might have remembered, it had about it a quality that one could at the time call honesty, perhaps because it was clearly different from the familiar varieties of artifice.

One of the consequences of the available-light morality was that its adherents were forced to work in graphic rather than tactile terms if the meaning of their pictures was to be clear. One could describe a head with a few broad tones of gray, but one could not with the same technique describe a crowd. The available-light photographer moved in closer and included less in the frame; the best of his pictures came to resemble posters. The new style sacrificed all other virtues to the virtue of simplicity. It was a style nurtured by the magazines, designed to produce pictures that would convey meaning at a glance. Eventually it produced pic­tures whose meaning seemed exhausted at a glance.

szark

i remember clint eastwood saying films were too bright, now, that there was too much information in the image. & i always think of m, which i probably misremember or don't accurately remember, details imagined to match its effective mood, & how a lot of the film is dark night street scenes, awkwardly framed to partially crop peter lorre, whether this is pushing you back into your imagination, more, or to understanding the image by what's not there, like you're hungrier to process it, you are meeting it halfway.

http://www.christies.com/lotfinderimages/d47953/d4795364x.jpg

http://33.media.tumblr.com/895a1ca29692389a55801f830446ea74/tumblr_ncwlnglBaN1tutbito1_1280.png

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RmmdApyflVM/ThmnGBlhkRI/AAAAAAAAGng/20gFz0CyjiQ/s1600/steichen-2_0001.jpg

Dirty photography trying to look honest, is how it seems to me after the wine wore off

I saw a Richard Avedon exhibition and they had some of his early work which is impossible to find online

Think it was impossible to come up in the 60s and not do dirty black and white and Avedon was no exception

http://i.imgur.com/68mqrHR.jpg

h/t to s1ock1

http://riowang.blogspot.ca/2010/06/tarkovskys-polaroids.html

“In 1977, on my wedding ceremony in Moscow Tarkovsky appeared with a Polaroid camera. He had just shortly discovered this instrument and used it with great pleasure among us. He and Antonioni were my wedding witnesses. According to the custom of the period they had to choose the music played during the signing of the wedding documents. They chose the ‘Blue Danube.’

At that time Antonioni also often used a Polaroid camera. I remember that in the course of a field survey in Usbekistan where we wanted to shoot a film – but finally did not do it – he gave to three elderly Muslims the pictures he had taken of them. The eldest one as soon as he took a glance at the photos, immediately returned them with these words: “What is it good for, to stop the time?” This unusual refusal was so unexpected that it took us by surprise and we could not reply anything.

Tarkovsky thought a lot about the ‘flight’ of time and wanted to do only one thing: to stop it – even if only for a moment, on the pictures of the Polaroid camera.”

holy cow, those are amazing. really striking how essentially 'tarkovsky' they are.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-DZ907_Basqui_OZ_20140807020548.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/bE46pWa.jpg

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/03/magazine/01-brown-sisters-forty-years.html?_r=0

i saw that come up, a couple of weeks back, & wanted to see the new pics, & couldn't even click through it on the website; it's too much all at once, like you need to be turning pages just to pace yourself. so strong.

http://www.lumiere-editions.com/lumiere-editons.com/Gallery/Pages/William_Eggleston_files/Media/e34240%20Printing%20master/e34240%20Printing%20master.jpg

UNTITLED (SOAP ON WINDSHIELD, CAR WASH, MEMPHIS), 2004

also hyped to know eggleston, shore, meyerowitz, winogrand were loose on the set of annie,
http://iheartphotograph.blogspot.com/2007/01/guide-to-long-lost-photo-books-of-80s.html

i don't know if the freshness is transferrable but i saw this & felt like i'd never seen it before-

http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls3ito0XbT1qz8ramo1_1280.jpg

can't remember if we ever talked about seiichi furuya here
having a nice time looking through the everyday stray digital pictures that populate his blog

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Coys1C2zjP0/VEa0i3cpuTI/AAAAAAAARx4/A04MPYjjOQ8/s1600/P1040117%2Bcopy.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_e_uERAsxbZo/SeDiokQyB2I/AAAAAAAAIic/W1eoY5UdUto/s1600/P1020414+Kopie.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_e_uERAsxbZo/Rz-WMGJxtoI/AAAAAAAABgk/-B5e3LdlveY/s1600/DSCF9540+copy.jpg

& reading about last trip to venice, which i hadn't known the story of-

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-H-huuY0Xjc0/UkwrdD5QBdI/AAAAAAAAAIk/kE_NfA3QqdY/s1600/Last+Trip+to+Venice+2_small.jpg

http://americanart.si.edu/images/1988/1988.19.15_1a.jpg

That Robert Frank US 285 pic. It has everything.

Can't recall where I read it but someone said every photographer from that era has their own "vanishing point highway" pic e.g. Dorothea Lange http://i.imgur.com/XLjMMia.jpg

Frank would often put his camera at feet level http://i.imgur.com/IvvQ1Bw.jpg

xp
yeah i remember that too
isn't the article a kind of robert frank truther thing, sorta arguing against him innovating it

& yeah i don't know i have seen that picture a million times, maybe it's just a different print showing it in a new light or something; the grain density of the sky. really wonderful.

You made it a hot line I made it a hot song

ha ha

This is also the method I used to create “the Americans.”

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oowPAHJVsxM/UvYvhqZDJdI/AAAAAAAAZEc/Dm8P--zauXs/s1600/El+fen%C3%B3meno+del+%C3%A9xtasis,+1933.+.jpg

http://www.metalocus.es/content/en/system/files/file-images/ml_surrealismo%20y%20sue%C3%B1o_12_BrassaiExtasis_1200.jpg

http://api.ning.com/files/Jr8oyRhpCfhkQTUJOkC10uP3qM3fyHcbbbFUW4DO2EqyQBqoAwHLV4uzyK9CqIL3K2Iq*hTsDsouttBWq8kSsx-vQ0ey0WN0/L1100065.jpg

http://bremser.tumblr.com/post/104332554872/marc-ferrez-soil-preparation-for-the-construction

http://mashable.com/2014/12/02/80s-shopping-malls/

Follwoing up on gr80

http://www.boredpanda.com/hong-kong-street-photography-memoir-fan-ho/?image_id=street-photography-hong-kong-memoir-fan-ho-39.jpg
http://www.boredpanda.com/hong-kong-street-photography-memoir-fan-ho/?image_id=street-photography-hong-kong-memoir-fan-ho-301.jpg
http://www.boredpanda.com/hong-kong-street-photography-memoir-fan-ho/?image_id=street-photography-hong-kong-memoir-fan-ho-37.jpg

http://www.boredpanda.com/hong-kong-street-photography-memoir-fan-ho/

http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/street-photography-hong-kong-memoir-fan-ho-39.jpg

damn

fucking amazing stuff in the link which my iPad is struggling to paste here

no they're astonishing; something really unusual in the rendering of light
also the idea that this was intentionally composed in-camera is mind-expanding

http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/street-photography-hong-kong-memoir-fan-ho-341.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/6sI3y5F.gif

photo-drizzling

http://i.imgur.com/ejsTtO6.jpg

https://placesjournal.org/article/swingsites-for-singles/

http://craigslistimages.tumblr.com/

criagslist mirrors guy starts a more general craigslist images blog

Feel like there was one of these already

Can it fill the void left by internethistory??

fantastic.

http://souleyes.tumblr.com/post/105986667580

Christmas office party from '66

^ Found out that was on LEns orignally (I am very far behind on my blogroll)

http://i.imgur.com/qnVk80o.jpg

I really like the balance and heft of this picture

do these men have really big coats on or is this a couple of men with very small heads or ???

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7517/15942169800_ed9800d88e_c.jpg

the one on the right in particular

Big coats, looks like a wide-angle camera lens (uncorrected too) which exagerrates features closer to the camera like their hands

that makes sense
i follow this romanian photo archive on flickr so i can look at ppl's faces and noticed that these heads are rly small!

http://dig-image.tumblr.com/post/106505312068/yuan-dongping

http://instagram.com/p/q73vLIR2OT/?modal=true

finally catching up on this thread, thanking everybody for the amazing links etc. those hong kong street shots, wow.

fao nyc-
http://amandajas.tumblr.com/post/107431536807/prattphotography-pratt-photography-lectures

also like

http://36.media.tumblr.com/da2a4a10656dfd22b4a860405e029330/tumblr_nhkyd6P91F1qm2tbjo1_1280.jpg

amanda jas

Reaaly keen to get a copy of standing trap http://www.modesvu.com/tagged/standing-trap

hey photo breezers

i think about film & digital all the time, & i take my camera everywhere, taking photos with film. over the last couple years i felt like i got less & less out of the medium-specific qualities of film - its richness & grain, its kinda hypothetical $lide-film primary colour vibrancy - & more & more out of what digital images could be like, either seeing my own blurry cellphone pictures, watching new digital films that understood light in a new way or appreciating the people i knew online who played with digital & made images that felt fresher & newer than mine, pictures which weren't so weighted down by the thing that, i forget, garry winogrand or walker evans talked about, how we know what a picture's meant to look like, which could instead really make images you'd be confronted by, rather than judging the success or mastery of, informed by established guidelines. anyway, because my otherwise adequate & appealingly-shitty cellphone camera is slow, i am kinda interested in buying a digital camera. i don't really know anything about them, & find it difficult to research, because, as a contrarian, the characteristics i want are things that are generally perceived as negatives in the digital-camera-consumer-advice world, to be able to cultivate grain & blur & to work in lo-res & to be quick & not sharp & to be open to digital error. i don't really have a specific question here but i wondered if anyone had any guidance, or had a camera they liked, or had advice about avenues i could look into; cameras that were weird or were discontinued or, by virtue of being where it was at in 2006, would adequately serve my lo-tec needs. i don't think i'm necessarily looking for the kind of perverse holga-ish complement to a more straightforwardly, technically functioning primary machine; just something that's normal & uncomplicated & adequate. film is still interesting to me, & all the time i see pictures that kind of almost just theoretically couldn't exist as digital images, to me - this sarah soquel morhaim picture, say - & i can imagine shooting black & white film & using digital for colour, keepin' the flame burnin'. but i am sort of tired of film i think; it feels narrow & digital feels open. the experience of being alive feels digital, & the amount of time i spend staring at screens seems to have re-weighted the balance of what colour feels like in the world, these very equal plains of unnuanced tone stretched before me all the time. can i play with any camera? can i attach a russian dashboard cam to a bike helmet & just wear it all the time? should i just buy coloured pencils instead? breezer assistance appreciated.

Would you be thinking of getting a digital SLR or a compact? There must be loads of compacts available second hand that would fit the bill you describe, without requiring much outlay if they're not what you wanted.

I feel ya schlump. I"ve thinking of switching to digital too, mostly because of new constraints of my daily life, been thinking about what to get

Have some old and very old digital compacts at home, worried that they might be perceive as too HOLGA ESQUE

My feelings about digital are still kinda unchanged in that I think the output is m/l the same across models - the differences are such minutiae

That it's just about finding one that you feel 'comfortable' with

Most 'professional' and pro-am digicams are so feature packed

That maybe you just default to your phone's camera, or you should buy one of those dummy, easy-use cams (which I think are rapidly dying out as most mftr's realize people are content with tehir phone cams)

hey thanks, folks.
i guess i am thinking of getting a compact, just because those big cameras always seemed so terrible, & complicated, &c, the options, although i feel like i would really miss the focus wheel of an slr so who knows.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61qWLit7dIL._SL1001_.jpg

&, re the output is m/l the same across models: this is really true, & took me a long time to notice; i think there are several-shots-a-roll where it isn't the case, if i'm taking pictures of people & at least just the kind of control i'm familiar enough to be able to exercise using an slr affects things, but most of what i take is just a kind of recording, so, anything would be fine. at the moment it makes me kinda uncomfortable to exist too much in viewfinder world; even my cellphone camera neatly files away everything i take without showing it to me, so you're still looking at the image as a viewfinder rather than a gauge of success/failure. digital can be really casual in a way i like. am looking around for something cheap & bad. i love these david hockney pictures he took as stills from a videocamera he was playing with in 1990-

http://www.tate.org.uk/art/images/work/P/P20/P20140_10.jpg

I like my digital SLR and wouldn't be without it - even if I don't carry it everywhere with me due to bulk. I bought a Fuji X10 as a kind of remedy to that, but I rarely use it. I use the camera on my phone for general snaps or "visual note taking" (mostly puppy photos, recently) and probably prefer carrying a film compact for snapshots if that's the route I'm going down.

We must be getting to the point where old digital cameras are cheap enough to pick up out of curiosity and the "lower" image quality becomes a fetishised aesthetic.

IH is back btw http://i.imgur.com/2OccVKS.jpg

The thing is, digital photography isn't just a camera, it's a camera plus a computer. I find it quite hard to get out of the mindset of "what can I do with this scene in post?", even though most of what I do in post is exactly the same (gentle S-curve, clarity, lens geometry fixes, noise reduction).

Schlump - I'd recommend getting a used DSLR from 2007-08, maybe, pre-video, pre-super high pixel counts, pre-hi-res LCDs; perhaps a Nikon that you could put a cheap, manual-focus 50mm on. It should be possible to do that for $100-$150? The problem with compacts is that you may not be able to quite as easily escape from the processor's "auto-correct" world view. I guess it's that balance between giving it up to chance (compact makes the focus/exposure decision, with unexpected results... though usually, they're entirely expected) and wresting control from the device (DSLR: de-focus, over-expose, (de-)saturate, etc).

The "camera plus a computer" thing is a great point and one I hadn't even thought to mention - maybe just seems second nature now? I always shoot in RAW and find it difficult to hand control back to the camera now, even snapshots get run through Lightroom. Sometimes feels like I'm wasting a lot of the capabilities of the camera (and probably covering over weaknesses in my technique), though.

thanks so much, michael - michaels - that's a really thoughtful post, & some kind of weird historic DSLR is maybe appropriate. a couple of nights ago i found a bunch that i thought at least looked cool but the photos i'd find tagged with the model # on flickr still had this weird digi-gloss i couldn't shake.

i'm not 1000% sure about the camera-computer dynamic thing, just kind of remembering how i use my camera. i know that if i was a printer then printing would be as much what taking photographs was about for me as the taking photographs part. you know? like the people who are invested in that plain of how the images present have this whole other responsibility & perspective. & with a camera so much of the satisfaction for me is still its weird internal processing; i don't really shoot slide film anymore but it feels kinda alchemic, the apparatus having some sort of integrity in re-scrambling together outdoor textures into the emulsion & plastic you feed it. & i don't know, i can't think any further than the camera i'd buy giving me immediately satisfying images, even if they're satisfying in different ways, like i said, flawed or weirdly glowing or whatever. it is cool thinking about this stuff, maybe i will post some cellphone snaps i like sometime.

totally feeling michaellambert's post - I love my RAW/Lightroom workflow for making my architecture photos look as good as I can try and make 'em... but then somehow even quickie snapshots become projects deferred over months in the to-do list. Maybe I should switch to "RAW+Jpeg" so I have the option of just taking what the camera gives me and not fucking around as much. Or look into presets for approximating the camera JPEG, anyway.

I gave up on RAW+jpeg, all I ended up with was loads of unused jpegs as I couldn't leave the RAW files alone.

Well, I’m not an actual photographer and don’t aspire to be one, but I started putting some effort into photography last year to make sure what I posted to Instagram didn’t suck. I had to delete a lot of crappy pictures from my account to get to a place where I was satisifed, to a degree at least, with what I had out there, but: http://shoutkey.com/pageantry

Mostly VSCO Cam + time in the woods and on location at other places, taking a bunch of photos and deleting most of them. I’d like to take more this year and maybe try out some of the other mobile photo software out there too.

(Sorry if this isn’t the right photography thread for this post btw.)

I really like VSCO Cam.

Yeah, it makes my stuff look way better.

that photo you posted yesterday was excellent

Thank you nakh!!

(Lake in my town btw.)

http://internethistory.tumblr.com/post/108858003173

ha, my gf's roommate has this

Seems like a bad time to develop some weird ganglion or bone spur on the distal inter-phalangeal joint of my right middle finger. Can barely hold a bloody camera! Obv not mentioning this to folks from whom I'm trying to get photo gigs. Ibuprofen, I guess.

http://i.imgur.com/EcqCrF2.png

IH

schlump i feel you on your reasons for sticking with what you stick with. weird historic DSLR is maybe appropriate. it doesn't feel like a weird historic dslr to me but i have a canon eos 300d, grey plastic, came out in 2003 and i bought it for $50 i think at don's photo in suburban vancouver. you can go to best buy and buy a lens that fits on it and it makes beautiful pictures but the viewscreen is really low res and doesn't show you any flaws but lets you check basic framing and isn't distracting and all controls are on dials and buttons up top and it's easy to use and it doesn't use sd or modern storage (i forget what it uses, some big chip thing) so it slows you down from taking a billion shots on a card and it has okay autofocus so i can use it like i'd use a film point&shoot.

http://barnacleisland.tumblr.com/

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7550/16282160905_5dfe0aa8a6_o.jpg

from the historic dslr

http://i.imgur.com/ZTCXmOq.jpg

it doesn't use sd or modern storage (i forget what it uses, some big chip thing)

Compact Flash. Probably more robust than SD and still used in the pro models, but sadly about twice the price of SD these days (was the other way around 8-9 years ago).

300D was my first DSLR; it was great. This is the last photo I ever took with it, on my daughter's 4th birthday. The shutter mech died minutes later.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3614/3289178910_702e20ff56.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL0MvHpieaE

Stoked

dude just straight wiping down that negative huh

damn

oh my god can these negatives please surface please

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/02/23/jeb-bush-releases-his-only-wedding-photo-that-wasnt-destroyed-by-a-frank-zappa-concert/

lol
imagining a kind of rauschenbergian collage

http://i.imgur.com/YhLFLgt.jpg

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/books/tiananmen-square-negatives-an-art-book-or-a-protest.html?_r=0#

I did the invert colors trick and it's cool as heck

kinda in the same zone, aesthetically, at least-

http://veralutter.net/images/works/maria_laach/full/maria_laach_1.jpg
http://veralutter.net/images/works/met_museum/full/met_museum_9.jpg

http://veralutter.net

http://i.imgur.com/M1VHoTQ.jpg

http://barnacleisland.tumblr.com/

Used to follow Talking Barnacles; so nice to follow Tsai again.

http://www.vice.com/read/too-hard-to-keep-0000599-v22n3?utm_source=vicetwitterus

ILP crew get in here (last 2 days of posts especially):

WE'RE GETTING MARRIED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

photo-cheezin'

I've been a long-time (if silent) admirer of that thread, gr8080. Especially as I have three potential wedding shoots lined up and the thing I *never* do (and this is a failing, really) is to get the couple to *do* anything. There's a lot to be said for being an ideas-y, proactive event photographer, rather than the "you won't even know I'm here, in fact most of the time you'll be looking the wrong way" sort of snapper. But some ideas should never be pursued...

true but weddings & engagement shoots are totally different animals

this is probably very pretentious of me but if i were to get engaged to a like-minded woman i'd try and book someone who shoots large format b&w in a studio with a white canvas backdrop, maybe 12 photos & call it a day

if ppl wanna see us looking cute in public they can follow my instagram

Ha ha. Gr, if you could fly me in, I would buy the necessary gear and even teach myself how to use it. Polaroid proofs FOC.

True about engagement vs wedding. I didn't even know about the existence of the former until that thread.

Wedding/lifestyle/engagement photography is so weird - it all looks the same, thanks to VSCO filters and I'm surprised that wedding photographers aren't routinely throwing a shit-fit online about being underbid by bored stay-at-home parents (a big chunk of the wedding biz around here).

#yes #please: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/21/nyregion/reaching-into-the-past-the-police-dust-off-a-photographic-trove-to-rival-weegees.html?_r=0

#yes #please

!
really look forward to that

the archive of early 20th c. sydney police photographs, for example, is stunning
the mug shots include some of my favorite portraits ever
the forensic photographs (e.g. of bodies or empty rooms) are chilling, eerie, haunting, fascinating, moving, horrifying, uncanny, yet beautiful (sic— not happy with that word but can’t think of a better offhand)

http://blogs.hht.net.au/cityofshadows/

http://sydneylivingmuseums.com.au/justice-police-museum/forensic-archive

http://collection.hht.net.au/firsthhtpictures/resbyfield.jsp?term=New+South+Wales.+Police+Dept.+&field=AUTHOR&searchtable=CATALOGUE_SEARCH_PICTURES&displayFormat=TABLE

also, enrique metinides

it’s hard to discern/ untangle/ express what some of those crime photographs make one (me) feel, to really accurately describe it. ironically too easy to do some sontagian superego self-scolding critique.

e.g. of bodies or empty rooms

or of evidence ("still life") or simply of a place-- a street, a building, hallway, a park (often with no crime specified)

Yeah I saw a metinides exhibition @ aperture, stellar work

http://media.virbcdn.com/cdn_images/resize_1600x1600/7d/c2c46d39d8970f54-Kuo_120208_9994-Edit.jpg

just came here to post that nytimes link. great pictures there, including evidence of a defunct streetcar line nearby my apartment!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/megane_wakui/

IDK how this guy is doing this but I like it

And it's digital!

Nice. Seems to be doing something interesting with the color correction and tonal range, which gives the night shots something of a film feel. Leaning to pink/ blue over green/ yellow? And minimizing contrast, so instead of the harsh blown out highlights you often see in digital photos, there's the mellow glowy lights more redolent of film.

NB I do film not digital and am less than a neophyte at digital post-processing, so don't really know what I'm talking about.

its... all the things that I try to correct for when scanning and editing negatives

Half film and half video gamey

http://www.mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/jojakim-cortis-adrian-sonderegger-icons

Elizabeth Huey just posted a bunch of new pics on her tumblr

http://i.imgur.com/p267n4q.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/DteuVpE.jpg

https://medium.com/gone/surreal-photos-from-inside-the-fake-vacation-industry-f50ad4ff30c7

http://i.imgur.com/hNukPti.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/7sF4zwG.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/RRKlzxJ.jpg

enjoyed those; good choice imo not to take condescending view of the people in them

they remind me of luigi ghirri, also fascinated with simulacra, juxtaposition of real & represented landscapes, how humans inhabit them

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/themoment/posts/081105_infocus5.jpg
http://www.theblogazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/20120315-luigi-ghirri-02-2dmblogazine.jpg
http://mycontradiction.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/LuigiGhirriCapri1981.jpg

so then “real” sites & landscapes visited by tourists appear like simulacra, representations, copies of themselves, as well

http://mycontradiction.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/10.jpg
http://mycontradiction.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/luigi_ghirri_foto_02.jpg

i went to window of the world a few weeks ago! https://www.flickr.com/photos/kdfo/sets/72157650740712860/

i was aware of the danger of condescension but also wanted to get the chaotic feel of the place...it's kind of hard to avoid ironic juxtaposition completely. but in the case of woow there's really not much room for condescension in that it's really well done. and it's just nice that something like that exists for families who aren't able to travel the world.

i went to a bar tonite called Weegee's and it was adorned with lots of... You guessed it

rent, like those! great flickr in general

would like to drink one day at the sagamore hotel in miami, with complete set of winogrand's women are beautiful on the walls

http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqadck8T1a1qz8977o1_500.jpg

thanks drash! (sorry to pop in just to link to my own photos. love reading these threads but just so rarely feel like i have anything to say. will try harder.)

Hah rent I'm just getting around to pictures I took at the Beijing World Park

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/beijingworld.jpg

that’s a graceful photo. on the one hand, it’s amusing, exposing artifice (though like rent’s photos, doesn’t feel condescending). on the other hand, the gentle black & white tones, and the way the the bodies and the white train harmonize with the landscape, also make it look in a way like a real fairytale: a magical realm inhabited by princesses, princes, and photographers.

ha yeah that is excellent. i want to see more!

Ty dudes

I'm slowly making my way through but here's a preview

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/wuhan.jpg

(Not taken at the Beijing world park btw. Very far away actually)

a+

i mean the guy's stance

& sleeve rolling

a+

beautiful - there's a lot going on in the expressions on those guys' faces!

schlump & bizarro otm; love all the poses & attitudes, coordinated in space

dan those are both great

Superb.

http://www.bjp-online.com/2015/04/hip-hop-revolution-museum-of-the-city-of-new-york/

I'm gonna go

Ty all btw. Editing is slow work!

Confession: I do a lot of editing while drunk. That is how you get True feeling.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/truefeeling.jpg

i love this photo

also

sometimes editing is fast sometimes it is slow

very confusing

yeah that pic is gr8 m8

Ty

I'm going through my outtakes and I might publish em - only on ILP

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/outtakes1.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/outtakes2.jpg

But of course I will share what I shot last year. The trick is to get drunk and listen to Tinashe

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9627011/pphotos/changsha.jpg

龜, love your photographs

been in something of a depressive/ lazy period lately re period re photography (one of the only things in life that makes me truly happy); you inspire me back to the scanning & editing board

i have great affection for outtakes

hi there. just stopping by since I've seen our blogs linked here a couple of times: Modes Vu and Modes China. umm... i guess that's it.

Hi eee! I buy a lot of your books ^_^ I think #heartbreakclub is my fav series in idk how long? Just resonated and reminded me a lot of my own time in China that a lot of other China photography didn't

drash tyvm, I think I'm the same way - never feel as happy as when I'm editing and a good picture clarifies itself

You can check out my previous work here

Thanks Daniel! I'd like to make a heartbreakclub book eventually. I found him on Weibo and the funny thing is that his personal, somewhat random photos are a lot more interesting than his professional work. I find that to be the case with photography generally: photos shot with phones are more spontaneous and personal. It has nothing to do with image quality but how you use the respective devices.

Yeah they remind me a lot of pics I used to take on a Motorola V300

The image quality adds to it. I get frustrated that the iPhone's camera is too good (lol)

I saw that you're working with Rian Dundon (I have his book Changsha)

What other good China photogs are out there?

modes china lookin real good, eee

also hey who is good on instagram
out of everybody in the whole world i mean
i feel like it should be home of the fresh-feeling digi-snap

i like shen li

I'm working on a new book by Rian Dundon actually. Should be out pretty soon. As for other photographers.. I'm way too insular and focused on my own work so I can only talk about those we've published. Check out Jeff Yiu's JAM maybe.

The best living photographer on Instagram: @pinkhassov.

Haha pinkhassov has been much praised before on this board

Unfortunately his photoboks seem to be either OOP or unobtainable in the US

We all saw this link https://pavelkosenko.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/a-set-of-photographs-by-gueorgui-pinkhassov/

And said, well let's just quit taking pictures. Why bother?

shouldn't approach it that way. rather, be inspired by seeing that you can support yourself and gain recognition without doing fashion photography or other types of commercial work.

nuh-uh, it doesn't work, you get the pictures back after getting all inspired & it turns out they are of a lower quality than those taken by pinkhassov

i'd forgotten he was on instagram, though, so ty.

i really love hilton als' pictures

https://igcdn-photos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t51.2885-15/1799799_719334848179466_552372376_n.jpg

(thank you for the link 龜; great stuff; dig your eye & sensibility)

Ty for that schlump, reminds me I need to pick up White Girls

Ty drash, basically I'm an old bore who still only worships Frank so I'm glad you like it!

somebody else can slam dunk ^this^ into the ilx out of context thread BUT fwiw i loved white girls, its first long essay especially

I just ordered White Girls. I live a lush life 8-)