In a recent post about Tim Atherton’s blog and work, I complained that I was unable to select my favorites from his portfolio due to the fact that the site was done in Flash. Tim was nice enough to point out a feature I missed that allowed me to pull up jpeg’s of his images, so here’s a recap of what in my humble opinion are some of his best:

From “Traces” 

 From “Immersive Landscapes”:

I received my portfolio back from the Museum of Contemporary Photography, as well as a letter explaining that they were not able to use my work at this time. Bummer. I certainly hadn’t expected to end up on their walls, but I thought I might at least be competitive for the Midwest Photographer’s Project, a program that requires applicants live in the midwest and be willing to loan a portfolio of their work out for a year. The letter stated that “we felt that with more time and closer editing your project might develop more fully.”  Not much to go on (it’s understandable that they can’t offer more feedback, and I don’t expect it), but in my desperate state for feedback I’m sure I will analyze it to death.

On a brighter note, they invited me to submit work in another year, and by then they will be looking at my work having already seen it once before. 

I also got my packet sent back from Blue Sky Gallery. Living half way across the country and having had no contact with them before, I wasn’t the least bit surprised. Still, they show great work, and with a name like Blue Sky how could you go wrong? 

My sincere thanks to whomever nominated me for PDN30. What a great opportunity. While I have some suspicions as to who might be responsible (it almost certainly wasn’t the staff at PDN), I have nothing concrete to go on, so I am posting a open thank you. I’ll will of course post any news I hear relating to the competition. I have several posts in the works, so look an increase in activity this week on my blog. 

This news is about 10 days old, which is almost an eternity in blog time, but is still worth mentioning. I’m talking about Tim Atherton’s post about my work on his blog Muse-ings.I’ve been reading Tim’s blog for a while now and have been really enjoying it. His posts are thoughtful and well written, and he tackles interesting ideas.His work is worth checking out as well- he’s got a good eye for the “banal,” and his compositions are quite enjoyable. I’ve included a few here, though wasn’t able to post some of my favorites due to the fact that his site is done in Flash.

Soon after I wrote a post on conceptual photography I finally got my copy of the most recent Blind Spot. Between looking for a replacement for Rodinal (any suggestions?) and fixing plumbing problems at my house, I’ve spent more than a bit of time with it. I really applaud Blind Spot for showcasing experimental work like this (they are at least one venue that manages to work in some “conceptual” artist form time to time). However, I have a couple of beefs, one with Blind Spot and one with conceptual photography in general:
1. Let me start by saying, I am a big fan of Blind Spot. I really think it is one of the more interesting contemporary fine art photo magazines out there, and I really look forward to each new edition. However, there are at least one or two photographers in each edition that I look at and just flat out don’t get. I feel like I am reasonably sophisticated when it comes to the language of photography and looking at photographs in general, but I’m missing something. I have a feeling there is usually a back story or a description of the process of making the work that explains the content, but Blind Spot provides no textual hints. Is it because I am supposed to be doing leg work on all these artist to get the back story (which is not always so easy) or I should already be in the know if I’m reading the publication?
2. There are a few beautiful images in Blind Spot (I’ve included a few in this post). However, why is it that so much idea based photography has to be visually uninteresting? A good rule of thumb for me that a lot of idea based work falls short of it this: it needs to hold my interest visually for at least as long as it takes for my mind to latch on to the ideas.

Tim Atherton has a great post on his blog in which he pairs some of the Blind Spot images with quotes from David Hockney et al combined with his own thoughts on the current state of art.

I participated in a group show that opened last Firday at the Detroit Industrial Project. Doing so much of my exhibiting (so much is of course a relative term) long distance, it is really nice to participate in a local show with other close artist friends. The comraderie reminds of why I became an artist in the first place- the bonding that happens as we all try to put finishing touches on things with minutes to go before the opening is priceless.

I was showing my digital work (including 2 new pieces) that is always a favorite of my painter/scultor friends but hasn’t generated much interest in the photo world.

I read Wright Morris’s article “In Our Image” for the first time this week. There were a lot of points in it that got me thinking, but one in particular has motivated me to further exploration. Morris argues that often the vernacular photograph, devoid of the things that cocern us artist such as form and style, carries a weight that is lacking in the “fine art” photograph. The vernacular phtoograph remains a photograph, while the fine art photograph becomes an image, and ultimately an image of the photographer as much as of the subject.

Above is my first paring for an ongoing thread. I think vernacular wins hands down in this case in terms of raw impact.

Two Disclaimers:
1. OK, the photograph on the left is probably not vernacular in the strictest sense, but it was certainly not done for purposes of fine art, so it is still a fair comparison. There will be more strictly vernacular work in future posts.
2. I have a significant prejudice against Serrano’s work. Jorg Colberg nails it for me when on his Conscientious blog he describes Serrano’s photographs as “the kind of stuff you’d expect from a toddler who has just entered the phase where he or she is saying ‘dirty’ words to get reactions out of people and for some reason knows how to take photos.”

If this all is true, where does it leave us fine art photographers? I was briefly troubled by this question, but have realized there are plenty of good reasons for us to do what we do. I just haven’t thought of how to articulate them yet…

Brian Widdis wrote a nice review of my work on his blog The Way hings Are. Thanks Brian!

You can also check out some of Brian’s work here.