Swamp Forms, Noosa NP

Gelatin-silver photograph on Agfa MCC 111 VC FB photographic paper, image size 24.5cm X 19.6cm, from a 8x10 Tmax 400 negative exposed in a Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a Fujinon-W 300mm f5.6 lens.

Australia is a place of extremes and even a swamp can dry completely. Trees that spend years partially submerged can develop adventitious roots that proliferate like knotted veins and arteries; very organic but also carrying a premonition of threat. These specimens of Melaleuca quinquenervia fell years ago because their huge bulk could not be supported by waterlogged soil but they did not die. Their aggresive grasp for life enables them to grow in any position. M. quinquenervia now demonstrates this same aggression as an invasive species in southern Florida where it chokes sawgrass marshes and converts open space into dark swamps.

This is a wonderfully unusual print. Of course, it's technical prowess is important. I'm delighted to see this particular picture shown here in OPF. It's special in a number of ways. It has fine detail, great textures, impressive dimensionality and wonderful curvaceous gestures that the wooden forms make.

First, this is the real thing: a photograph made by the very photographer who planned the image and pressed the shutter release to allow light to work on a silver gelatin film. To those who may not realize the difference, in this process, the rays of light actually lead to the eventual precipitation of silver metal within the material of the film and then in the next stage, within the layers of the paper containing the silver gelatin.

What's important here, is that the methods of development of the negative and the print are controlled by the photographer, working in the dark, using careful adjustments in protocol to allow the full range of tones to appear. Once this is all fixed and finished, the print will last for ever.

To do this, all one needs is some space that can be made dark, some trays, inexpensive chemicals and commitment. No need for a computer, hard drives that fill up or crash or ink sets that cost more than the finest Scottish Malts!

I want to thanks Maris, Mike Shimwell, Wendy Thurman, Jim Galli, Jim Collum, Fahim, Cem, Ben, Dawid and so many others for continuing the art and craft of real film photography and sharing in OPF. It's a tradition from which we all can be enriched.

Asher

Maris Rusis said:

Australia is a place of extremes and even a swamp can dry completely. Trees that spend years partially submerged can develop adventitious roots that proliferate like knotted veins and arteries; very organic but also carrying a premonition of threat. These specimens of Melaleuca quinquenervia fell years ago because their huge bulk could not be supported by waterlogged soil but they did not die. Their aggresive grasp for life enables them to grow in any position. M. quinquenervia now demonstrates this same aggression as an invasive species in southern Florida where it chokes sawgrass marshes and converts open space into dark swamps.

Click to expand...

I'd offer to everyone, that these pictures allow us to experience much more than pictures of fallen trees that seem to defy death by thriving after being struck down. The've taken shapes that resemble the curves of the human form. However, there's also disorder. So what's going on? Maris just presents the picture as of what it is, the image of fallen trees in swampland. To go beyond that can be entertaining and fun. When a work of art allows us to bring our own minds to the experience of the work, there's a potentially rich opportunity for moving the envelope of reality to contain previously unthought of fantasies, we have, in a way, a space created for a kind of "gymnasium for the mind". While Maris' picture faithfully beings us the gesturing forms, from that point on, we are permitted to freely explore with our imagination. That, merely requires our brains to seize the opportunity to fill in the gaps! With so much artfully prepared and crafted by Maris in making his photograph, our own creativity requires no more than sitting back and relaxing, perhaps at most one glass of one's favorite wine, to bring these figures to life. To me, at the very least, these are lithe sensuous forms, reclining, bending over one another and more.

So take it in, populate the swamps with your own mind's fantastic scenarios. So, what do you see?

Asher

Hi Maris,

To be honest, this is such an excellent photograph that I don’t really dare offer any C&C as I am afraid that it will be totally inadequate. Based on that premise, please accept my apologies in advance as I will comment anyway. I think this piece of art deserves to get our comments, however insignificant they might be.

As Asher also noted, the content/subject of the photo is clear and it can be understood by the majority of lookers regardless of their cultural background. If I may quote your own words from another thread, “the potential hazard of the lookers disliking the picture due to a lack of mental common ground with the picture-maker” is unlikely to happen here. Besides, you have provided us with generous background information on these trees, which makes it even easier to understand the subject. The composition of the subject in the frame is top notch. I think you have created a very successful photograph which does great justice to your subject.

However, there is also the matter of emotions this picture invokes in the lookers. Furthermore, does the picture contain some secondary messages which you wanted to communicate? Quoting you again, “I may be looking for something that you have never included in your picture. It could be that I am culturally imbued with values that identify good art and the picture on show offers alternative values. Truly innovative art is always mistrusted on first look.” Well, in this case I can tell you that I have no feelings of mistrust or rejection upon seeing this picture, on the contrary! To me, there is no doubt that it is a great work of art. If we would stick to your definition, it may not be truly innovative but I doubt that you have meant this to be an innovative piece, did you? My personal reaction to this picture is one of awe and respect. The scenery demands my full attention. I associate it with cultural memes such as the old forests from the books of Tolkien. I like the quality of the light and my eyes travel easily from the foreground to the trees in the background. The distribution of the elements around the frame is well balanced and does not distract my gaze. Except for the horizontal trunk in the foreground which divides the picture plane into two and I briefly feel the urge to follow the trunk to outside of the frame to the left and the right. However, the second tree’s shape/presence is demanding enough to re-direct my gaze back into the picture again. All in all, I enjoy this photograph immensely and would definitely hang it on my wall. Thanks a lot for sharing!

Hi Asher,

Asher Kelman said:

...First, this is the real thing: a photograph made by the very photographer who planned the image and pressed the shutter release to allow light to work on a silver gelatin film. To those who may not realize the difference, in this process, the rays of light actually lead to the eventual precipitation of silver metal within the material of the film and then in the next stage, within the layers of the paper containing the silver gelatin.

Click to expand...

This is one area where we not in full agreement. Despite my full respect for Maris and his knowledge on photography which far exceeds mine, I have always found Maris' exclusive definition of what real photography is (i.e. photography or the application of the chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation...". Photography, the word, coined and first uttered by Sir John Herschel at the Royal Society, Somerset House, London; 14 March, 1839.) to be too limiting. If we take that as a given, the kind of photography I do (i.e. using a digital camera, a computer and a digital printer) is not real photography. Now I don't want to split hairs on definitions but I consider myself to be practicing photography. Please don't try to convince me that I am living in an illusion after all.

Asher Kelman said:

....I want to thanks Maris, Mike Shimwell, Wendy Thurman, Jim Galli, Jim Collum, Fahim, Cem, Ben, Dawid and so many others for continuing the art and craft of real film photography and sharing in OPF. It's a tradition from which we all can be enriched...

Click to expand...

Thanks but no thanks needed as I am by far not as deeply involved/invested in analog/film photography as the others you have mentioned. But this may still change. As Mike said elsewhere, in an other life I could have been spending my days under the cloth of a view camera. I may still end up being there after all, especially after seeing the great work done by the likes of Maris and Jim .

Now I don't want to split hairs on definitions but I consider myself to be practicing photography. Please don't try to convince me that I am living in an illusion after all. [/quote]

Cem,

I offer Maris' pont of view as a challenge to us to look at the nature of the medium used to record the light as another aspect of making a picture. By looking at what has been achieved and can be made using classical photography, al our own work can be better informed and challenged in the final presentation. I personally respect your own photography. After all that's most of my work too! To reach the standard of Maris work, the costly investments in hardware, software and post processing time we need for digital photography are not needed.

Cem_Usakligil said:

.......... As Mike said elsewhere, in an other life I could have been spending my days under the cloth of a view camera. I may still end up being there after all, especially after seeing the great work done by the likes of Maris and Jim .

Click to expand...

Cem,

That's what I'm hoping for; at least some analog work to test us in a different domain. In fact I have come to respect those who are combining analog photography with digital post processing to get stellar results. Look at the tree by Harley Goldman here. Others then return to analog, such as carbon printing for the final definitive print.

Asher

Hi,Hi

are there more or is this just a one-off?

surly the focus was an accident - next time use 5.6 and focus on what really interests you.

nice start ..

cheers

Mark Hampton said:

..
surly the focus was an accident - next time use 5.6 and focus on what really interests you.

nice start ..

cheers

Click to expand...

Ouch!!!! Intentional??

Cem_Usakligil said:

As Asher also noted, the content/subject of the photo is clear and it can be understood by the majority of lookers regardless of their cultural background. If I may quote your own words from another thread, “the potential hazard of the lookers disliking the picture due to a lack of mental common ground with the picture-maker” is unlikely to happen here.

Click to expand...

Maybe more so than you would believe. People perception of nature is cultural. It is not so long ago that wilderness was almost universally perceived as frightening and horrendous in Europe, see e.g. the letters that madame de Maintenon wrote of her trip over the alps.

As to my perception of the picture itself, I am ambiguous. I am amazed by the technique: the tonality and perceived sharpness. I see the point of the front tree resembling the human form, but I am rather lost in the construction of the picture. I am not saying that the picture is bad, just that it does not talk to me.

Jerome Marot said:

Maybe more so than you would believe. People perception of nature is cultural. It is not so long ago that wilderness was almost universally perceived as frightening and horrendous in Europe, see e.g. the letters that madame de Maintenon wrote of her trip over the alps.

Click to expand...

Extreme, I admit. Still, she lived in times of strong religious antagonism and belief in the devil and his demons was common in Catholic and even Protestant culture.

Jerome Marot said:

As to my perception of the picture itself, I am ambiguous. I am amazed by the technique: the tonality and perceived sharpness.

Click to expand...

Yes, it's outstanding and so much so that Maris can freely look around without all the restraints of rigid balance you might expect. His detailed engraving of the matter of the swamps allows both reality and fantasy to coexist in some drunken paradox. The magnetic draw of individual elements surpasses the demands of some overall perfection of balance and that in itself adds energy, as in some witches brew: "bark of tree, eye of bat" etc, hardly elegant!

Jerome Marot said:

I see the point of the front tree resembling the human form, but I am rather lost in the construction of the picture. I am not saying that the picture is bad, just that it does not talk to me.

Click to expand...

Jerome, allow yourself to wander further from reality, on this occasion, in this private clearing in the swamps, where the curvaceous trees bend, pose, move and gesture.

If trees could have sex, then this would be an orgy!

Maybe, Jerome, just perhaps, you're not lascivious enough at these moments! So, IMHO, it's not so much about composition, Jerome, but rather the remarkable sensual forms that power the image.

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

Extreme, I admit. Still, she lived in times of strong religious antagonism and belief in the devil and his demons was common in Catholic and even Protestant culture.

Click to expand...

I don't think it has anything to do with that. I would rather think that, four or five hundred years ago, nature was rather perceived as a place where wolves roamed free and humans feared for their lives. This is reflected in the evolution of the gardens. It took the industrial revolution and the destruction of nature to invent the English garden: a place mimicking an unspoiled, idealized nature. Earlier gardens: the French garden, monastic gardens or in Asia Chinese or Zen gardens were rather the expression of man domination over nature: nature well organized, submitted to the will of Man and a place where man could grow edible plants. European monastic gardens added the dimension that they recreated lost paradise, gently organized around a fountain of water, water source of life just as lost paradise on earth was growing around the tree of life. In any case a definitely "unwild" nature.

But I digress away from photography.

Asher Kelman said:

Jerome, allow yourself to wander further from reality, on this occasion, in this private clearing in the swamps, where the curvaceous trees bend, pose, move and gesture.

If trees could have sex, then this would be an orgy!

Maybe, Jerome, just perhaps, you're not lascivious enough at these moments! So, IMHO, it's not so much about composition, Jerome, but rather the remarkable sensual forms that power the image.

Click to expand...

I can certainly see the forms. It is just that the picture does not talk to me, for some reason. I feel distracted by the vertical elements in the distance, for example. But I am not intending this comment as a criticism, I believe the picture is rather good. I just found it important to note that not all people will react the same. Maybe the reason is simply that I saw many swamps and forests growing up, I don't know.



Just a note en passant: trees can and do have sex, as I am sure you know. Just not in the same way as mammals.

Cem_Usakligil said:

Ouch!!!! Intentional??

Click to expand...

Cem,

yeh blunt with toung in creek!

like jerome i dont get this - it's not composition - it's a basic issue with, for me the subject of the image as described by the maker is not fully explored through the process. as a result it is the start of something - needing study - but start non the less.

on a side note i used to love toning Agfa FB. And i do understand that in real life this image should sparkle like a jewel - but that beauty and resolution are not enough for me.

just for me btw - and what i think is not important for I am neither a critic or real photographer anymore.

cheers

Mark Hampton said:

like jerome i dont get this - it's not composition - it's a basic issue with, for me the subject of the image as described by the maker is not fully explored through the process. as a result it is the start of something - needing study - but start non the less.

Click to expand...

This is not what I meant to say. I would rather think that the image is the result of a long process.

I am neither a critic or real photographer anymore.

Click to expand...

You are certainly a "real" photographer. That is not the question.

Jerome Marot said:

This is not what I meant to say. I would rather think that the image is the result of a long process.

Click to expand...

Jerome, I din not mean to infer that we agree on what we think - the results of what we think are similar - our process are entirely different to get to this result.

I am suggesting that the subject that the maker wants to explore needs more work to open up for me. not that the process is quick or simple - it is neither.

cheers