bert_denda

I just had a phone call from Ian, who as Geraldine Allen has already reported, is vacationing in Southampton, Ontario, on the east coast of Lake Huron in Canada. I know I shouldnt make light of this but Ian too has been in left in the dark even though he is within a stones throw of the Bruce nuclear power plant. Unfortunately he cant get on line as the library from which he intended to access the Internet has been closed since the power blackout to conserve electricity.

I know that he wishes he could have interacted in the POW discussion

Ian never called this art. Nor did anyone else. Ian says that this is industrial photojournalism.

Someone else commented that this photo fits right into the American tradition. Ian is Canadian and lives in London, Ontario.

This photo and much of Ians industrial work has been exhibited a number of times.Ian will be commenting here in the middle of next week. Those interested should check back at that time.

I will only add the following; if you like the on-line image you should see a real print of this.

I finally agree with Vuk on something. :))

This photo really is a marvel. It's abstract quality reminds me of a Turner painting. Far, far

better then this weeks POW.

The photgrapher himself, in his posting titled "Thanks for your comments", exactly three entries above your first posting here, cited both the lens and the film speed data.

I believe that "cum Musis deditus non sim, nosco quod amo" translates more or less to "I don't know much about art, but I know what I like"

I couldnt agree with you more regarding your comments about the monochromatic work of Leonardo and Rembrandt. (In fact, I am a huge admirer of Durers etchings and have had the pleasure of holding some of his original works in my own hand in the archives of a museum in Berlin in 1977)

 

However, the stark intensity and detail you justly ascribe to the works you cited doesnt make them any more valid or meaningful. It just makes them different.

 

The thrust of your observations here run parallel to something you submitted earlier in this forum:

 

There is a very widespread inclination, beyond photography and even beyond the arts, to hold that anything achieved with sparser means is purer, loftier, more refined. This is obviously a wild generalization, but sometimes there might be some truth in that principle

 

Simplicity is not, as I see it , exclusively the domain of the b/w photograph. A b/w photo can be just as cluttered as a cluttered colour work. If youre attributing simplicity exclusively to the use of b/w (or lack of colour) I think youre oversimplifying simplicity :) I believe that simplicity is achieved more by cropping and view point (and subject) then by the photographers choice of a gray scale or a colour palette. I do agree though - strongly - that simplicity is a virtue in either mode. Many photos fail because they show too much.

The sweet innocence of this little girl is utterly charming. I particularly like the rich hues you've achieved here.

This is my favourite in your colour folder. I admire your capturing of the vibrant colours.

Ians photo as POW has once again raised the BW/Colour and the b/w is more worthy debate.

 

I think that each generation of photographers is confronted with these issues and has to deal with them again on an individual basis. What troubles me is that the BW or Colour choice seems to be seen as a confrontational/adversarial relationship by many. For me that is not - nor should it be - the case.

 

I cant help sidetracking into the issue of realism in the BW/Colour controversy. The instant you press the shutter release and allow light to pass through the camera lens all reality flies out the window. Reality is not subject to lens artifacts and distortions, emulsion or CCD aberrations, compressed dynamic range or selective (or limited) depth of field. Reality is three dimensional and is viewed from perverse perspectives and angles that we ignore (or adjust for) in reality, which would be unacceptable in a photographic composition. Photography allows us to selectively view our world by isolating/editing away the visual noise that clutters our wide angle vision into a focussed composition It traps in 1/30 of a second a static instant from the dynamic flow of time. To my mind any discussion of reality when it comes to photography borders on pointless.

 

Photographs arent reality. Theyre pictures. I think many forget that photography is an interpretive medium. It is a means of communication. It is story telling. It is a visual art which transcends reality and in that transcendence gives each of us the chance to interpret our emotions (or our view of reality) to others. It can span - albeit feebly - the epistemological gap that divides us.

 

Oh, and did I mention that reality is in colour? As such, black and white is by far the more unrealistic. Its images are far more abstract. The real world of colour is shown in gradations of gray tones. The often radical changes in contrast that would result in abhorrence in colour photography (unless one is purposefully after abstraction) provide the interpretive tones that make b/w speak as eloquently as it does. Thus to my mind, b/ws further distance from reality allows a far greater interpretive result. Does that make it better then colour? I think not. Do I mean that colour is incapable of interpreting emotion? Of course not. Social documentary work seems to work best in b/w while more pictorial or decorative efforts are often enhanced by the use of colour. Yet these dogmas are often ignored - as they should be - with great success. Both are tools that need to be appropriately applied.

 

Why are paintings in colour? Would they be ennobled if they were rendered via the gray scale? How about de Vincis Lady with an Ermine in black and white; lets desaturate Hoppers Nighthawks; lets remove the color palette from Wyeths Christinas World or drain all those golds and browns from Rembrandts The Night Watch. Why has the world of painting not embraced the gray scale?

 

Photography is important to me. I dont care whether the images are produced using the colour or the black and white mode. I only care that the right mode is used.

 

Thats what Ian stamps on the back of his prints, and oh my, what a photographer he is. I have been a fan of his since I was a teenager, long before I met him although I have known him for over 25 years (but thats another story) and now call him a true friend. It is not because he is my friend though that I admire his photographic skills. It is because he has produced some of the best photographs that I have seen.

 

Ian works in the social documentary style. When I asked him once what he thought his particular genre was he replied that he had once been called a social realist - and he seems to like that term - although I take exception to it. Ians photographs are not realistic but they are the most real that I have ever seen. What Ian does is to strip away all that is not required to tell the story. To quote Ian directly; As much as neccessary, but as little as posible. Ians photographs are uncluttered and clean. He has stripped away by his precise in camera cropping all the noisy crud that would be in our peripheral vision and focuses (no pun intended) us onto the story line. The fact that he does this with articulate compositional balance elevates what is already so beautifully observed onto an even higher plane.

 

I am a great admirer of Tony Dummet, Jo Voet (whatever sex Jo may be), Maurice Depestre and

Rienk Jiskoot (and many others - I list these photographers because much of their work is in the same milieu as Ians ). To my mind, what sets Ians work somewhat above these is Ians ability to capture counterpoint in his compositions; that is some element that is a surprise or a twist or a wry observation or a poignant instance or a juxtaposition of people or events in their environment that makes us smile. There is always familiarity in what he shows us - and we relate instantly to this - yet this familiarity never leads to our contempt or descends to triteness and his vision stays with us long after we have finished looking at his work.

 

In and of itself viewing photographs is an extremely passive act and only when we can recognize and react to either an aesthetic arrangement and palette that pleases, or are drawn into an emotional circumstance - tragic or ironic or even pedestrian if wryly observed (all of which can be found in Ians work ) - does a photo take on meaning for us. (I fail miserably at this on a regular basis but take pleasure in the pursuit) It is then that we stare and analyse to try and understand what we are drawn to. Ians work rewards us many times over with our effort and no doubt many of us assign unique back stories to the people in Ians photographic world.

 

I am so pleased for Ian that his photographs are now being seen and appreciated by such a broad audience. The work - and he - deserves no less.

Dennis, I have seen an original print of this and assure you that there is no photoshopping involved. The only coincidence with the position of the arms is Ian knowing exactly when to press the shutter release. BTW - this photo is also not cropped. It was all done pre PhotoShop and in camera.

Ratings and/or comments are appreciated.

Tony asked you direct a question; how do you rationalize your initial 1/1 ratings for many of his photos with your subsequent positive ratings/comments? Please answer this simple question.

There is nothing mirrored about this image, if you're suggesting it was cobbled together in Photo Shop. You see precisely what my camera captured. This delightfully compressed car sits some 30 or so feet up on a post outside an automobile wreckers yard.

Ratings and or comments are appreciated.

I've looked at this photo a number of times and enjoy it more on each visit. Even with the kid tethered to his father, it is a striking image with a wonderful dynamic, particularly the way the little fellow appears distraught at the distance between him and his parents. I think your choice of DOF to be perfect here as it augments the tots isolation and contributes to the narrative of the image. It also blesses us with a glorious painterly background. I like this a lot.

Intriguing in its simplicity.

What are these poles doing here?

Where are the wires coming from/going to?

A delightful mystery, well observed.

I would have given you even more points for aesthetics if you had moved over just a bit to place the delightfully illuminated people closer to the 1/3 position instead of so close to the left. I find the graphic nature of the photo very appealing,particularly that brazen slash of light blue in the silver of the ocean. Well done.

Ratings and/or comments are appreciated.

Comments and/or ratings are appreciated.

Comments and/or ratings are appreciated.

Comments and/or ratings are appreciated.

I'm about as typically Canadian as you are, Vuk, and I find that sort of stereotyping offensive.

If you'd notice the exposure location you would have seen that the photo was taken in St. George and since I do not have a skate sharpener in my garage (or even a pair of skates), would have to take a rather long step for a re-shoot.

The photo was taken for a client who was not interested in "high art" and is pleased enough with the shot to use it in an advertisement.

Comments and/or ratings are requested and will be appreciated.

Ian, thanks for the suggestion.

 

Any comments and/or ratings are appreciated.