Ansel Adams was known for his skill in capturing monumental landscapes in massive detail. But he was well aware that sharpness for its own sake is sterile: “There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.” What would he think of this fuzzy image of a fuzzy concept?
Though this photograph appears blurred, the camera was actually quite well focused on the subject. Which was my shadow cast by the rising sun on the off-white wall of the hallway outside my office. Not period.
Despite the blur, this image may beat any of my others in conceptual edge, at least according to some who shall remain nameless. At the same time, it seems to fit my recent protestation of edgelessness (see comment 52 of last week’s post). I swear that the image, the poem(??), and the Adams quote were entirely unacquainted with each other in my conscious mind before I started writing this post. Nor, until this very moment, had any of them met William Henry Fox Talbot’s (love the names!) description of his 1839 photographic invention as “the art of fixing a shadow.” Photography and writing are sometimes parallel paths of discovery.
By the way, this picture reminds me of Leslie’s painting from a previous post, though mine does not have the richness of visual clues.
Steve,
Before I saw your comment comparing your image to mine I was thinking how easily I connect to this image in a sort of immediate way. Not having the usual trouble with the “distancing surface” of photography. Maybe because it doesn’t even look like a photograph but a painting, a la the pictorialist tradition. I find it fascinating that it was not manipulated, however, and the process by which you made it was as straightforward as some of your landscapes. Same clarity, different result. Very interesting.
Edge? Yes it does seem to have more of an edge because of the mystery, the fuzziness perhaps. The mystery does not feel artificial either, as it could so easily with this kind of image. Does that “edge” make it a better line of work and ideas for you to pursue? Who knows. You need to folow your instincts on that. But like some of you other experiemental threads, I think it is worth exploring and seeing where it takes you. I could see a series of cast shadows in some of your landscapes or even on some of your rusty surfaces. How would that dead rabbit photo change if it had a shadow cast over it? Good stuff. Thanks for the comparison to my painting. I’m flattered.
Steve,
You are saying this a technically well made photograph (in focus, etc) of a fuzzy thing. Okay, that sounds like conceptual art to me. It would be neat if you could get the rabbit up there with you.
What I find interesting is that the shadow gives me a strong feeling of character, personality. Would you say that it is a good self-portrait, in the sense of being reflective of you?
for me with shadow there is usually mystery and intrigue. I love the warm yet erie tones.
This would make a good painting.
Really edgy stuff, Steve. Not to put too fine an edge on it. You are clearly on the edge of the wedge….
Is it a good self-portrait? Hmmm, hard to say… What attracted me initially were the warm tones from the early light, as Ginger mentioned, and the rich, deep shadow with interesting shadow edges. That’s enough to introduce ideas that might at least fit some aspects of me. My aura is the shadow of a distant tree, which is appropriate because I was deep into my Sourdough Trail series at the time — but of course nobody will get that. And I’m not sure having a dark aura is too flattering, though that’s surely not the point. But if I can manage to flatter Leslie, it’s worth it.
It is a frontal rather than dorsal view?
The Shadow asks: what do you think? And would it matter? I’ll tell you if you tell me.
Steve,
Aside from my punning attempts (fostered by your own) I would like to add another comment that’s been brewing in my mind.
Like Leslie, I think you will and should follow your instincts. But I also think as you go along you need to be checking for ideas about your work that resonate with you. That will allow you to deepen and make intentional the great accidents of good photos. I see relationships between this photo and your haunted houses, for example. Even the brushy trees could be seen as part of the veil that you see between the viewer and reality (should i quote Plato here?)
I would urge you to keep thinking about the “content” of your work, and when an idea strikes you as just right, pursue it visually, pushing past the hard middle parts until you’ve captured the fullest vision of the idea that you can.
It’s the dratted and oft-dummied down notion of the series that I think can lead to insights not gained elsewhere.
Embrace the edgelessness …
There is nothing worse than a fussy image of a fuzzy concept.