A Transient Rumination

All visual artists need words. The word, whether written or spoken is the conduit that brings understanding in a deeper, more conscious way. We put photographs on the crit rail and what do we do? We talk about them. Occasionally we write about our work, in stumbling, jumbled prose we attempt to convey to others what our work means to us. Shouldn’t it be enough to let the photograph speak for itself? Do we not believe that our work has a voice of it’s own without adding ‘traditional’ language to the mix? I cannot deny that words do indeed help us clarify our own intention, but I still wonder why the photograph isn’t enough. Part of me wants to believe that there is work out there that does not require words to validate it’s existence. Some may point out the work of the great masters-that those works stand on their own, but our understanding of these works come from what has been written by others, so the question remains; is there intrinsic power inside a photograph that can negate the need for words?

Here is some work that was in the 2008 Spring Show at the Academy of Art University.

I’ve been busy spreading around my most recent work. Here is a breakdown of the work that will be either in galleries or publications. 

• The Art In Nature Exhibition at the Center for Fine Art Photography
• Award: Directors Selection
• Juror: George Lepp

• Issue 67 of BW Magazine: 4 page portfolio with 1 page bio
• Award: Spotlight Winner

• Idea of Self Exhibition at the Center for Fine Art Photography
• Juror: Susan A Zadeh, editor in chief and artistic director of Eyemazing magazine

• Artists Showcase Portfolio, Second Edition. Published in March 2009. 12 image portfolio.
• Juror: Rixon Reed, founder of Photo-eye

I’m working on producing a substantial body of work in the palladium process as well that I intend to show in a regional gallery. We’ll see how it progresses over the next few months. Overall I’m stoked about the direction and recognition that has come my way after all these long years of working. 

The set of tools that photographer’s use today is rapidly removing the limitations that have traditionally molded the visual possibilities within the medium. What does this expansion of possibilities and the ease at which these variations can be realized do to the process of making images? I wonder why I see so many artists impose upon themselves limitations, whether conscious or unconscious, by choosing materials with defined boundaries. Why have so many people chosen a specific type of paint to work in? Why are there photographers putting the brakes on so to speak and saying “I just want to make pictures” not shoot video, not work on 3D models in Photoshop CS4? When did Photoshop become about 3D wire meshes and editing video? And of course where does the decisive moment fit when your camera can shoot 30 fps in HD-any of which are suitable for publication in many newspapers and websites around the world? Where does the still image fit into this ever changing set of photographic tools?