Influential Artists

June 08, 2013  •  Leave a Comment

It has been my custom for many years to collect books on art & photography, and on occasion prints, from artists who for one reason or another move me.  The practice has proven to be a source of inspiration, and provides case studies in style, lighting, and composition which in many cases finds its way into my own photography.  

One of the more illusive facets of photography is finding one's sense of style, "voice" if you will.  I think that is because style is somewhat intangible.  Learning the nuts and bolts of photography is one thing; that is technical know how.  But figuring out how to apply that knowledge and bring an image to life is an entirely different thing.  It's something that is part of one's soul and develops over time with practice and a lot of trial and error.  Studying works by other artists and discerning what it is about them that makes them work, or not, can certainly be of help in bringing one's muse to the surface.  So I pay attention to what others are doing and have done, and while I don't do that with the intent to reinvent their work it is inevitable that techniques rub off.

Photographers who immediately come to mind as influential in my work are Ansel Adams, Galen Rowell, William Neill, Alain Briot, Kennan Ward, Tony Sweet, and David Muench, to name just a few.  This is a widely divergent group of artists but all have something to teach.  Adams, of course, is the standard for many modern photographers.  His excellence of technique and artistry is without peer.  Who hasn't looked at his gorgeous black and white landscapes and marveled?  From rich blacks to bright whites, and every tone in between, his landscapes blossom better than if in full color.  And to think, he did that without aid of today's digital darkroom technology.  He, more than anyone I think, inspires landscape photographers to work in black and white and to perfect technique.  Galen Rowell was a master too of landscape photography while working mostly in color.  But he was also a noted mountaineer and writer.  His landscapes were marked by incredible lighting achieved by his uncanny tendency to be in the right place at the right time.  William Neill is noted for his "spiritual" landscapes of Yosemite.  Many of his images portray an almost impressionistic quality.  Alain Briot is not as widely known as either Adams or Rowell but had a huge impact on my thinking and approach to photography as art.  In one book authored by him he spoke of photography as if standing in front of his subject with palette and brush.  He discussed color as if a painter and perhaps for the first time I looked upon photography as a true art and my camera nothing more than a brush, and that it was my decision as an artist how to render the scene before me.  Ward is primarily a wildlife photographer with stunning photographs from Alaska; Muench, like his father before him, a stunning landscape photographer of the southwest.  Tony Sweet is to me the epitome of an artist with a camera.  He uses a wide variety of techniques to produce stunning images in the camera.    

All this being said, it is perhaps painters who have influenced me even more.  I am a great fan of the impressionists and often seek to render an impressionistic quality to my own work.  Georgia O'Keeffe's modernistic paintings of flowers and southwest landscapes inspired me greatly as I was photographing in New Mexico; and the wildly colorful abstract expressionist paintings of Joan Mitchell, John Paul Riopelle and Jackson Pollock inspired me to seek similar abstracts in nature, a few of which appear on this site.  But perhaps the most inspiring to me are the incredible landscapes, particularly western landscapes, of the Hudson River artists, specifically Thomas Moran, Frederic Church, Sanford Gifford, Thomas Cole and Albert Bierstadt.  They portrayed a country still being discovered and explored and perhaps best conveyed the spirit of the ideal, the vast untarnished splendor of the North American continent.  They brought the wilderness to the American audience and usually portrayed a lone viewer standing in a remote spot within the composition surveying the magnificence before him.  The standout quality of these images was the use of lighting to highlight the most important part of the scene and draw the viewer's eye to that being viewed by the onlooker in the composition.  And isn't that the essence of photography?  Perhaps it is this sense of discovery and awe that inspired Ansel Adams and today's artists to photograph and paint the little wilderness we have left, to at least preserve it in our minds.  Another trait of the "Hudson River" paintings is that they were not necessarily real in the sense that they accurately portrayed the scene painted.  Often they were approximations of the real thing; and while the locale could be easily identified they were figments of the imagination.  So, what is the difference if a photographer takes some artistic liberties on occasion?  It is not necessarily the photographer's intent to portray exactitude, rather it is to convey a feeling or an idea, and in that context I have reason to differ with those who insist photography must be true to the subject being photographed.  We are talking about art, not documentation.  

So, any work of art that inspires shows us a fresh approach to a particular subject.  It is a means of communication and a means to elevate the human soul to a higher plane.


Abstract Expressionism in Nature

April 05, 2013  •  Leave a Comment

Whenever my wife, Jean, and I travel to a major destination we look for art galleries to visit.  This has been a habit for me at least since many of my photographic ideas originate from painters as well as other photographers.  In the process this habit has taken us to some pretty amazing places like the Metropolitan Museum in New York, the National Gallery, the Georgia O'Keeffe Gallery, the Louvre, and the Uffizi Gallery to name but a few.  One of my more serendipitous finds was at the Art Gallery of Calgary a few years back where I was introduced to the work of Jean Paul Riopelle, one of Canada's most celebrated artist.  Riopelle painted from about 1946 until his death in 2002, much of that time while living in Paris.  I was immediately taken by his work.  I don't know how to describe Abstract Expressionism other than with those words, it's abstract and certainly expressive.  It looks like blobs of multicolored paint hurled at the canvas wily nily, except that order and purpose is evident.  One writer described Riopelle's work thus:  "Lucious, lavishly generous dollops of exquisite impasto paint applied in dazzling configurations of form and colour."  

Then just recently a poetry magazine to which I subscribe (poetry and photography are close cousins) featured a few paintings of the American Abstract Expressionist, Jean Mitchell, a contemporary and close friend of Riopelle.  Wow, I was blown away!  Did she influence him, or he her? Their styles differed but their paintings were very similar.  I have since read her biography and spent time looking at her work in more detail.  I think everything said of Riopelle can be said of her.  While I can't say I understand what these artists are trying to express in their painting I can say that I like it.  Maybe it's the wild color, or maybe the free wheeling nature of this genre.  I wish I could provide a sample here, but to do so would violate copyright laws, so the best I can suggest is that if you want to see their work just "Google" their names and bingo.  

But what I can do is show you a sample from my own portfolio; the artist is Nature.  A few years ago Jean and I were at Petrified Forest National Park in Arizona.  This is a rather obscure park, overshadowed by Arizona's many other attractions, but certainly worth a visit. If you go there look very carefully because the real attraction will not just jump out at you.  It is one if the most wildly colorful places we've ever visited, but I fear many people don't see that color.  It's in the broken logs of petrified wood.  I hadn't "met" either Riopelle or Mitchell at that point, but if I had I would have immediately thought of them.  Those log ends are Nature's version of Abstract Expressionism.  I spent most of a morning looking for these works of art and photographing them.  I was the only one doing so.  Either no one cared, or more likely they just didn't see what I saw.  I like to think that the hours I've spent in galleries and studying photography have influenced my ability to see just a bit.

Here's just a sample of what I saw, and this might be a good preview for what you might see if you look up Jean Paul Riopelle and Joan Mitchell.  You will find other images like this one in my gallery, ABSTRACT EXPRESSIONISM IN NATURE in this site.


Hawaii, Paradise in the Pacific

April 02, 2013  •  Leave a Comment

With this entry I launch a new portfolio of images of Hawaii.  The eleven images of this first group have been in my portfolio about ten years and all originate from the island of Kaua'i, the garden isle.  Although old images they have been re-edited in accordance with my current post production workflow.  Because that workflow has evolved dramatically these are like new images even to me.  My intent is to make numerous additions to this web portfolio in coming weeks as this but scratches the surface.  Having just returned from two weeks in Maui and Oahu I have much new work to add.

Looking at the gorgeous natural scenery of Hawaii I never cease to be amazed at the magnitude and diversity of landscape we enjoy in the United States.  Each of our States has its own special charm and Hawaii takes a back seat to none.  From tropical rain forest, to mountains, to seashore, to volcanic plains, and even desert, Hawaii has it all.  While not an expert by any means on Hawaiian topography and landscape I know magnificent scenery when I see it, and Hawaii has enough of it to keep any photographer enthralled a long time.

I will never forget my first visit the the Hawaiian archipelago.  I was in the Navy and my ship stopped off at Pearl Harbor for refueling enroute a six month deployment to the western Pacific.  We were to be at Pearl for only two days and I was excited to finally see a place I had heard so much about but never had opportunity to see in person.  I sure did want to see those Hula girls perform!  Much to my chagrin I drew the duty the first day in and couldn't leave the ship.  The second day was pretty much a quick look at Honolulu.  I thought I could make up for that on the way back but we refueled at sea and skipped Hawaii completely.  A second deployment to the western Pacific two years later was much the same, except on that occasion we refueled at sea both coming and going.  So much for a tour of Hawaii courtesy of Uncle Sam!

But I made up for it on my own.  I have now made four or five trips to the islands and visited Oahu, Maui, Kaua'i, and the Big Island of Hawaii.   Each is a bit different and makes its own claim for attention.  For the photographer in us one cannot go wrong with any of them.  Oahu is everyone's introduction to the State, but if one stops there he will have missed the essence of the islands.  Maui is a great place to experience one of the world's highest volcanoes, Haleakala.  It rises over 10,000' above sea level where one will likely find his head in the clouds, or if you're very clever you can make your way to the top in darkness and just maybe see the sunrise of your life.  The east coast of Maui is one of the wettest on earth, and the barren coast line along the north shore reminds me so much of the west coast of Ireland. The Big Island is really two, the rainy Hilo coast on the windward side, and the desert like Kona coast on the lee side.  AND, if one is adventuresome he can visit the active Kilauea volcano, the highest sea mountain in the world, Mauna Kea, 33,000', or the most massive mountain in the world, Mauna Loa.  In between these two mountains lies the world's largest cattle ranch.  Whew!  Hey, I haven't done all this yet; I need to go back!  Kaua'i is the smallest of these four but has one one of the world's deepest canyons, Waimea, which makes one think he is perched on the rim of Arizona's Grand Canyon.  OR, if none of this entices you there are miles of pristine beaches and endless waves to surf.  Heck, you might just sit by the pool and sip a Mai Tai.  Whatever you do you can be sure to be surrounded by ample natural beauty.

Hopefully my images will conjure up feelings of a relaxed life style, warm sands, gentle trade winds, and if you haven't experienced this Pacific paradise, a place to add to your "bucket list".

 

 

 

 


Why Post Production?

March 03, 2013  •  Leave a Comment

 

If you read my earlier blog on "process" you will recall my mentioning post production.  What do I mean by that?  
 
Simply stated it is what happens to a photograph after you've uploaded it from your camera to the computer.  It could also include what happens in your camera after you've pressed the shutter release if you're shooting JPEGs.  In that case the camera is compressing and processing the image in the camera so that when uploaded to the computer it's supposedly ready for viewing.  I say supposedly because I for one do not think any image that comes out of a camera is ready for viewing.  I'll even take it a step further.  Back in my film days I shot transparency film (slides).  Nothing was done to those slides in the way of editing unless enlargements were made when there might be cropping or color correction employed prior to printing.  Yet when I look at those slides today there isn't a one of them that I can't improve today in post processing.  Indeed, many of the images seen on this website started life as slides.  The mantra was "get it right in the camera", and we assumed we could do that, and indeed we tried-and still do-BUT...
 
In today's digital world a photographer has so many more up front options than in the days of film.  Having the camera process images according to certain presets are some of those options.  One can set the white balance, tell the camera how much contrast to employ, what degree of color saturation, etc., all the things I prefer to do myself in post production on my computer where I have precise control over the process.  I do this by shooting RAW format images which is the format where the maximum file information that your camera sensor and lens combination are capable of producing.  For example, my camera is rated at 12.3 megapixels.  When I shoot RAW that is approximately the size of file I transfer to the computer.  Were I to shoot JPEG I might wind up with a file of approximately 3-4 megapixels; the rest is lost!  Initially the JPEG is going to look better than the RAW image because the former has whatever processing that took place in the camera, but I guarantee you that after I process my RAW file I'll have the better image.  The downside?  The RAW file takes up more computer space.  But, if it's quality your striving for there simply is no comparison.
 
To process RAW files one needs computer software such as Adobe's Camera RAW.  RAW processors are incorporated into such programs as Photoshop, Lightroom, Aperture, Nikon's NX2, and Nikon Capture.  For some time I did most of my processing and edits in Lightroom.  In the develop module things like white balance, exposure, contrast, fine tuning of highlights and shadows, clarity, vibrancy, saturation, cropping, and many other basic edits can be addressed.  This can be done on single images or in batch.  The adjustments take but little time.  I now tend to use Photoshop as my central hub for editing and move back and forth between that and several plug in software programs that I employ on a regular basis to perform certain functions.  Lightroom is my center piece, however, because it serves as my organizer and platform for printing.  I access my entire portfolio of near 200,000 images through Lightroom.
 
If Ansel Adams were around today he'd be doing something similar.  He's not a true comparison because he started with an 8x10 negative as opposed to the relatively small digital file most of us employ today, but it is true that he did not produce the astounding black and white images we all admire by simply making a print directly from his negative.  No, he spent hours in his darkroom manipulating, dodging and burning to get the results he did.  That's why he is considered such an artist because he did it the old fashioned way, and he did it with a master's touch!  That's post production.
 
So, "get it right in the camera" is a goal we all strive for, and that is why I spent so much time and effort to understand what it is I do when I am out with my camera.  We all want to start with the very best image possible.  But, I have yet to see the perfect image, and never one that didn't require post production work.  As sophisticated as cameras are today they still require the human touch and images require individual interpretation.  That is what makes photography an art.
 
Software I use in post-production:
 
Photoshop, Lightroom, NIK Photo Suite, OnONE Perfect Photo Suite, ArcSoft Panorama Maker, Photomatix Pro, Alien Skin Photo Suite, NIK Snapseed

My Approach to the Photographic Process

February 28, 2013  •  Leave a Comment

 

"I think I need to get a better camera". 
 
Those words were spoken to me by a friend who felt his photography needed a bit of improvement and thought a new, more technically modern camera was the answer.  Well, I thought, maybe that would help some, but unfortunately it's not that easy.  There is so much more that goes into making successful photographs than the camera.  I've been photographing most of my life, seriously for the past ten to fifteen years, and I'm still learning; indeed, when I pick up a book by a well known professional, attend seminars, or peruse some of the many excellent websites available I realize how much I have yet to learn.  Maybe I need a new camera too, but I think the approach to photography which I've adopted as a general practice is a better answer.  
 
Let's first get the equipment thing behind us.  Yes, you do need a camera, preferably a decent one, lenses with a fair range of focal distances, a tripod, a few filters perhaps, etc.  Think of these things simply as tools, much as a painter thinks of his brushes, paint, easle, thinner, etc, as tools of his trade, but the best of materials will not put a thing on canvas; the artist has to supply the talent.  So it is with photography.  One can be shooting a $6,000. Nikon, but if he doesn't know the basics of photography or how to use the controls the results will be no better than what can be achieved with a standard point and shoot.  No, photography is like anything else, it requires training and practice.  There is just no magic button.  I discovered that not only does one need to know and understand the tools, but photographers are artists and they need to concern themselves with composition, color palettes, isolation techniques, lighting, design basics, perspective, etc., all the same stuff that a painter is concerned with.  
 
Fortunately there are numerous sources of training available from formal schools to self training materials.  I have utilized a wide range of sources over time which ultimately led to my current approach to a photographic assignment. I spent a lot of hours in classroom settings with professionals like George Lepp, Rod Planck, John Shaw, the folks at Rocky Mountain and Nikon Schools of Photography.  I've poured through books authored by well known photographers, and studied the works of both photographers and painters to see how they handled certain situations.  In the course of all that one begins to develop a style or approach to photography that matures the more one gets out and practices.  As professional photographer Vincent Versace insists one must not just practice, he must practice at practicing.
 
So having some basic understanding and proficiency one is ready to take that equipment out and "practice". Here are the things I habitually do whenever I'm headed off to a major, or even a minor "assignment".
 
First, I research my intended subject.  I try to learn something about where I'm going, what opportunities I might encounter, what kind of photos I will be shooting (and by extension what hardware I might need).  If I'm going to be shooting at sunrise or sunset I want to know the exact time it will occur and from what angle it will appear (yes, I carry a compass).  I check all my gear and make sure batteries are charged.  A good example of this regimen was my 2011 trip to Churchill, Manitoba to photograph Polar Bears.  If one waits until he is actually there to begin thinking about the shoot it is unlikely anything good will result.  I read books about the Arctic, its natural history, current issues about the region, and of course, about the bear.  I wanted to learn as much as I could about the Arctic environment, anticipated weather and temperatures, and as much as I could about the bear that was to be my subject.
 
Second, I selected my gear based on the above.  This was crucial because I'd be traveling by air and be limited in number of bags and weight.  I chose my equipment carefully, taking only what I'd be likely to use, gear that might serve several purposes.  For instance, I knew I'd need a camera capable of enduring low temperatures, extra batteries, cards, etc., a good zoom telephoto lense, and because there would be opportunity for landscapes a wide angle lense.  I took one filter, a polarizer.  I took a lightweight carbon fiber tripod, and an external hard drive to store my images.  I also took a second backup camera body because if anything happened to my prime camera an expensive trip would go up in smoke.  That's pretty much it.
 
Third, for major trips such as Churchill, I develop a photo plan, a list of the types of images I want to come home with, techniques I want to use, etc.  I take notes regarding what I photograph, lenses used, lighting, etc.  Each night after a day's shoot I compare what I did that day with my plan.  If I haven't completed the plan I have a goal for the next day to concentrate on the missing elements.  When I arrived in Churchill I hit the ground ready to go; when I left I had gotten what I wanted.  This is perhaps an exaggerated example because it was a big deal, but I pretty much follow that process even if I'm going out for a morning's shoot up the coast.  I generally have a very broad plan with few details, but I can then very easily take advantage of that rare opportunity that comes along.
 
Fourth, when actually shooting I shoot in the RAW format.  Without getting into a lot of technical stuff RAW is simply a digital file format, just as is TIFF and JPEG.  Most shoot JPEGs because the camera does the processing for you and relieves you of further thought.  It might also be the case that if your shooting a simple point and shoot you don't have the option to shoot RAW.  That's OK if your only a casual shooter. The problem is that the photographer loses control the second he exposes the image.  You can preset the camera to do certain things, but one really has no idea what is going to happen inside once the image is exposed.  Also, JPEG is a compressed format so that much file information is necessarily lost in the camera.  RAW format eliminates these problems.  No image processing takes place in the camera; no compression takes place.  This is the format where all the information the camera sensor and lens are capable of recording indeed winds being included in the file.  It is left then for the photographer to develop the file in the computer.  To do this dedicated software is required.  While the thought of processing discourages some it is really not complicated.  The process is non-destructive and the photographer maintains full control over how the file is processed.  This includes things like white balance rendering, color correction, cropping, exposure adjustment, etc.
 
Finally, we come to "post production".  While RAW processing is considered post production other things can be accomplished as well toward realizing the photographer's vision.  It can be simple or complex and an art in itself.  Edits can be done in software such as Photoshop, Aperture, Lightroom, etc.  There are also some cool "plug in" software programs such as NIK's and OnOne's software suites that nicely mesh with the above to enable virtually unlimited flexibility in rendering a photograph.  Is this cheating?  Not at all, but this is a subject for another time.
 
This is a condensed and simplified summary of several subjects in which books have been written.  I hope it will serve as a guide for those thinking of getting involved in a great hobby or avocation.
 
So, did my friend really need a new camera?  Perhaps, but more than likely what he really needed was a bit of understanding of the scope of the issue, then think about that new camera. 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Archive
January February (2) March (1) April (2) May June (3) July (1) August September October (1) November December (1)
January (1) February March (1) April May (1) June July August September October November December (1)
January (1) February March (1) April (1) May June July August September October November December
January February March April May June July August September October November December
January February March April May June July August September October November December
January February March April May June July August September October November December
January February March (1) April May June July August September October November December
January February March April May June July August September October November December
January February March April May June July August September October November December
January February March April May June July August September October November December
January February March April May June July August September October November December
January February March April May June July August September October November December