september - december 2009

[hool]

twelve photos from the past four months

http://inconduit.com/image/sep_dec_2009/

feedback enjoyed.

[eenixon]

Hool, looks like a funky link over photo number 11: I'm seeing 12 twice in the sequencing and not able to bring up eleven from the thumbs.

Nice with the light. And the pigeon thing... is appropriate for those estimable birds.

[jlehmus]

the cardboard box pic is still my favourite one...

[H.Arche]

quibble quibble

I'd ditch #11 and move #3 to it's place; that makes a nice segue in the three 'door' pictures (2,5,& 6 - maybe flip-flop 5&6) and beefs up the 'lying down' trio with a more lively centerpiece. I like starting with the leap-frogging kids.

[H.Arche]

Whoops - why can't I count?

the door sequence I meant would be 2, 4, and 5; or 2, 5, and 4 flip-flopping the last pair (I'm a sucker for childhood-midlife-death arcs).

[noll lluma]

hool,
Maybe you've been doing this all along and I didn't notice? Or maybe you've hit your full stride? Or is it a fluke? Whatever, this is an amazing set. Each pic is an elusive prayer.

(ps: fix #11 in the 1024 set)

[hool]

thanks a lot noll. i think it's a combination of experience and less frequent editing. the latter seems to help a lot.

have you been shooting much? and where has your site gone? i used to visit it semi regularly for inspiration.

[noll lluma]

have you been shooting much? and where has your site gone? i used to visit it semi regularly for inspiration.

haven't shot street for ages, but starting to feel a vague itch. We'll see.
If you have broadband, you can click on these golden oldies:
http://nolllluma.blogspot.com/
(yeah, it sucks, but the price is right)

[eenixon]

Nice to be looking at these again, Noll. Out of curiosity, there are quite a few... sequential dips, in the sense there is a crop and then the, presumably, full frame version of the same shot. I imagine this was part of the discussion at the time they were originally posted, but I've forgotten the context and the rationale. In the light of the recent exchange around cropping, can you please refresh my memory? Thanks.

...edN

[pswango]

Lots of good stuff here, Noll. Too much to digest at one sitting but I'll come back. Also, I found the vertical scroll a really efficient way to peruse the sets (using the scroll wheel on the mouse), as opposed to the usual click-and-wait sequencing most of us use. I may have to try it myself.

[noll lluma]

there are quite a few... sequential dips, in the sense there is a crop and then the, presumably, full frame version of the same shot. I imagine this was part of the discussion at the time they were originally posted, but I've forgotten the context and the rationale. In the light of the recent exchange around cropping, can you please refresh my memory? Thanks.

hi ed,
those were all 'details' of full-frame pics, so I don't think it's relevant to my rant about cropping. The single-stream format does bungle the context, tho. You can download my old site in its entirety at:
http://www.adrive.com/public/f7060c138c ... bfb29.html
Just unzip it, click on index.htm, and relive the happy memories.
Warnings: this link is active for only 14 days, it's a 45MB zip, and I don't think you can use safari or chrome (but not positive about that).

[eenixon]

Thanks Noll. I think I can find some disk space for reminiscing; appreciate the opportunity.

I've admitted to having a crisis of faith around 'Street'. You seem to have slowed down if not stopped completely. I remember your saying something to the effect you hadn't taken a decent picture in months. I could certainly empathize with that feeling. Having looked at the single stream review, I have to say and I'm sure many would agree, that there are some wonderful images there. Certainly better than most of the attempts I've made recently.

So, the question: why'd you stop? or perhaps I should ask, why'd *you* stop? And, have you figured anything out about starting again? (I hope you sense that these are not in any way facetious questions; I'm totally serious about reading your answers. And looking forward.)

...edN

[noll lluma]

I haven't been ignoring you, ed, just trying to elaborate an honest/brief response. Couldn't do it -- so I'll stick to the official line:

sp is physically taxing (all the walking).
it's emotionally draining (maintaining a perpetual state of alertness).
it's a huge time sink.
it requires a professional's dedication without any professional compensation.
it's a lonely pursuit that's difficult to explain adequately to others (even to esthetes and sophisticates).
the successes (if any) are brief flashes surrounded by long stretches of colossal failure.
etc.

if you squint, these are also sp's main draws.

[mikepeters]

–Hool, I think this is a very well seen set that, aside from images 1, 3 & 8, manages to convey random sense of aloneness that one can feel in an urban environment.

–Noll & Ed, I too have wondered long and hard about why to shoot on the street. All that Noll stated is a perfectly valid argument to not do it. I think the key is to find something in what you do to make it more relevant to who you are, and maybe not feel the need to be so dogmatic with the undefined but clearly known strictures of street photography.

Aside from Winogrand, who seemed to be tireless, I think most photographers seem to wax and wane with their enthusiasm for the street, coming and going as the spirit moves them and filling their other time with other projects and work. It's good to take a break, and it's ok to come back to it, or not.

The wonderful thing about photography is that every photo you make informs every other photo you make after that, especially the failures which teach us more about who we are than any of the successful shots we make. As far as trying to explain it to others, well I've just given up on that.

[eenixon]

I love this list. I have to think it's one of the only places on the Internet where the ratio of sense to nonsense is astronomically high. Thank you, Noll. Thank you, Mike.

Not wanting to be particularly irreverent, but tar and feather me if you must: I wonder, if just about anyone shot as many rolls of film as Gary Winogrand did, whether there wouldn't be something like the same critical mass of hits, of the same or similar uniqueness & quality. I found it instructive to read Szarkowski's essay in one of the Winogrand books (can't recall the exact title, maybe "Gary Winogrand"), a posthumous retrospective; he wrote about the later days when Winogrand was in L.A., perhaps already dying with the cancer. You talk about energy and there's no denying its virtue and usefulness, but in that essay it is portrayed as a pathetic spasm of almost pointless dimensions. Of course, others say he absolutely knew what he was doing, but I still wonder if what he was doing had that much to do with the single frame, the individual image; maybe it was more about the state of mind, the wire, the buzz, or the state of bliss of just being out there. The camera was the pretext. I've certainly had similar experiences the few times I've thrown myself onto the streets of New York City; it picks you up and hustles you along at its own speed, not your own. There are few places where that happens which is why, to my way of thinking, NYC is still the centre of it all.

But my problem with Street seems to be that I just don't know what is good and what isn't in my own work. And I'm not sure I see it in others' work either. Winogrand in a sense is easy because he occupies so much of the definition of street photography. The other pioneers aren't far behind.

To me, one aspect of the problem is the impersonality of it, the tendency for it to be about stereotypes or formulaic situations, configurations and relationships. As a dedicated reader of good sci-fi and detective fiction, I guess I should be able to get over the genre aspect, but, try as I might, I really do like pictures that capture something unique and individualistic about the subject -- as opposed to formulaic clusters of people, buildings and streets.

I suppose all this is just another way of saying to myself there are more dues to be paid, that there haven't been enough soles worn through or enough callouses formed. But, on the other hand, you've got to see some point to it in terms that are acceptable or meaningful; not so much in the work of others, but in your own. There has to be a glimmer there, a little curl of smoke perhaps that makes you want to blow and fan to get a flame.