The groove of images

Yes, I'm mixing here a bit photography and music:

I have to explain to someone with a scientific background that images have a sound, even better:
a groove. In science, the cipher 5 means alwith the cipher 5, not even 4 1/2 - but with images, its' different, cause we have that hard to describe **** - yes that special image thing, image inherent and comparable to what's called groove in music.

It's not rhythm, nor mood.... well, I didn't found a word for that in terms of image, so you might help me with words, or post pictures, that have that °groove°. Thanks

Michael Fontana said:

Yes, I'm mixing here a bit photography and music:

I have to explain to someone with a scientific background that images have a sound, even better:
a groove. In science, the cipher 5 means alwith the cipher 5, not even 4 1/2 - but with images, its' different, cause we have that hard to describe **** - yes that special image thing, image inherent and comparable to what's called groove in music.

It's not rhythm, nor mood.... well, I didn't found a word for that in terms of image, so you might help me with words, or post pictures, that have that °groove°. Thanks

Click to expand...

Michael,

What of the words, character, theme or motif?

Asher

I suppose that images of any kind -- paintings, photos, drawings -- can sometimes invoke certain cross-sensory sensations in much the same way that scents and sounds sometimes invoke images to the blind. I'm not confident that I get your meaning but I can say that I have seen a lot of photography that stinks.

I am lost Michael. I realise English might not be your mother tongue, but I am not sure I understand what you are trying to say. If, like music, you mean that an image has a 'groove' when all the elements just click and it seems effortless and completely congruent, I agree since I see a lot of photography which just seems to be trying too hard to work. It either works or it doesn't and if it does there's really no need for haughty analysis. It's like an actor: if you can't tell they are acting then they are good. Likewise, if you are struck by the congruency of the image without 'seeing' the technique then the picture works or has a 'groove'...at least that would be my interpretation what what I think you are saying

To bad, my english, sorry
thanks for helping. anyway....

yes Ken, I know these photos, too.
So what would be the opposite of stinking - you can't say that photo smell well, don't you?

A comparison with sciene might help:

In science we have axiom, numbers, formulae, equations.... etc - all scientist accept it und understand it in the same way, because there are some °definitions° since Adam Ries said 1+1 = 1.

In images though, there's no defined vocabulary, no alphabet in scientific terms.

Let's remember the term image - in latin imago - derivates from the magicien.

There's a "secret" life in images, that you can't describe because it's just there, it works in images only, and the language, beeing a different media, is not really able to name it - even you can analyse it, und describe it. Off course, it's not in all images, the stinking ones don't have that magic....

Within music there's a similar magic, direct and instantaneous. It's a expression full of energy, you feel immediatly the power in it, whithout beeing loud or crying.

Okay, I might overdrawing a bit ..... ;-)

Well, not all the people can see that magic... for them.... a photo of a pipe is a pipe
So how to make them aware?

-----------
Groove is a expression that we use, when a blues is rolling (kinda in the guts), but it can't be reduced on rhyhtm.

Asher
words, character, theme or motif
is to general, and it doesn't implies the specific of "with the funds of the image" or "inherent in images"

okay, a closer look at groove, as I used spontaneously that word:

"While some musicians have called the concept of "groove" a subjective and elusive notion, they acknowledge that the concept is well-understood by experienced musicians at a practical, intuitive level. Funk and Latin musicians refer to "groove" as the sense of being "in the pocket", and jazz players refer to groove as the sense that a jam session is really "cooking" or "swinging."

Musicologists and other scholars began to analyse the concept of "groove" in the 1990s. They have argued that a "groove" is an "understanding of rhythmic patterning" or "feel" and "an intuitive sense" of "a cycle in motion" that emerges from "carefully aligned concurrent rhythmic patterns" that sets in motion dancing or foot-tapping on the part of listeners."
source

and

"Similarly, a bass educator states that while "groove is an elusive thing" it can be defined as "what makes the music breathe" and the "sense of motion in the context of a song."

That 2nd quote is taken from here.

And yes, this is interesting, for us photographers as well. I quite like that "what makes the music breathe" -analogy.

Hello Michael, I think this is a fascinating way to appreciate photography. I remember NPR (a US public radio) has sponsored sort of experiments where musicians create a composition inspired by photographs. While looking up for this info as a probable reference, I found this article about
photographer Roy DeCarava who actually conceived his work in musical terms. Here´s a quote from the cited article:

"I improvise," he said. "Whatever's there, I use it. Whether a C sharp or B flat or E sharp, I use it."

Click to expand...

So, with such a jazzy approach to photography, I guess we should feel the groove in DeCarava´s photography.

ArtGroove:When artwork has enough energy not just to breathe but to argue for itself.

Michael Fontana said:

That 2nd quote is taken from here.

And yes, this is interesting, for us photographers as well. I quite like that "what makes the music breathe" -analogy.

Click to expand...

I think that "breathing" is just a measure of the energy of the work that can allow it to stand on it's own, separate from its creator.

Continuing on this metaphorical track, the breathing is not perhaps sufficient to get the work in the equivalent status of "being in the "groove". When it's there, the energy is sufficient to make the esthetic expression and creative experience self-sustaining. Certainly that is the sense that one would take from the music world. In art then, the work has reached a point in its interaction with people where it command it's own place and territory as an individual with a voice, personality, references, history and character.

That for the moment, until you provide more enlightenment and or critique, is how I'd transfer the concept of "groove" of music to the world of physical art.

Asher

Hi Ruben

yes, I think we should not only think in terms of photography, but other human's expressions - and speaking about myself I have studied photography in contex of all other art, painting, sculpture, video etc. I listen to music, Archie Shepp, etc or african music since beeing 20.

Thanks for pointing me to Roy DeCarava, I didn't knew him - and that Graduation has some groove, while The Sweet Flypaper of Life - in your link - has less groove , IMO, but both have a good expression.

I also find interesting, Ron Carter told NPR in 1996 about Roy DeCarava:

"My impression of his photographs is that he sees the music."

Asher Kelman said:

I think that "breathing" is just a measure of the energy of the work that can allow it to stand on it's own, separate from its creator.

Click to expand...

Can you think music that does not breath?
To me, music is direct and instantaneous, °living the moment° - take that expression with a prise of salt, please..... as it lives - it is breathing.

Continuing on this metaphorical track, the breathing is not perhaps sufficient to get the work in the equivalent status of "being in the "groove". When it's there, the energy is sufficient to make the esthetic expression and creative experience self-sustaining. Certainly that is the sense that one would take from the music world.

Click to expand...

I agree breathing is not enough, but I struggle to find a start.....
so how sounds: a self-sustaining quality, specific to a media?

In art then, the work has reached a point in its interaction with people where it command it's own place and territory as an individual with a voice, personality, references, history and character.

Click to expand...

hmm, is that not to vague - for groove??
I mean you can say that for a rock, too....

That for the moment, until you provide more enlightenment and or critique, is how I'd transfer the concept of "groove" of music to the world of physical art. Asher

Click to expand...

I'd like to point a bit towards the specificity of a medium an its resources, potential, etc; a groove, while not beeing the rhyhtm itself is influenced by it - and rhythm is a pretty basic but important cornerstone of a lot of musics, and they say it derives from the heartbeat....

We can have a rhythm in a sculpture, but would we ever say a sculpture has a groove?
I think a painting, a photo might have one....

Asher, would you say - you're qualified ;-) - that classical music has a groove?

I fear a bit run in circles: I think that I can feel that groove - not alwith at the same level - while it's hard to find words for it, it's even harder to show groove to someone coming from a world where groove has not that much place.

Michael,

I like Nigel's use of the word congruent. It does not describe your phenomenon completely but might explain what's going on in our brains. The facets of the different components of a composition become congruent to such an extent that one part supports and helps makes sense and realize the full sensory experience of another.

Nigel Allan said:

If, like music, you mean that an image has a 'groove' when all the elements just click and it seems effortless and completely congruent, I agree since I see a lot of photography which just seems to be trying too hard to work. It either works or it doesn't and if it does there's really no need for haughty analysis. It's like an actor: if you can't tell they are acting then they are good. Likewise, if you are struck by the congruency of the image without 'seeing' the technique then the picture works or has a 'groove'...at least that would be my interpretation what what I think you are saying

Click to expand...

To that, I add my own ideas of self-sustaining energy until the work has it's own independence and voice as one unique individual that can survive separate from the maker.

Asher Kelman said:

I think that "breathing" is just a measure of the energy of the work that can allow it to stand on it's own, separate from its creator.

Continuing on this metaphorical track, the breathing is not perhaps sufficient to get the work in the equivalent status of "being in the "groove". When it's there, the energy is sufficient to make the esthetic expression and creative experience self-sustaining. Certainly that is the sense that one would take from the music world. In art then, the work has reached a point in its interaction with people where it command it's own place and territory as an individual with a voice, personality, references, history and character.

Click to expand...

I think we are on the right track and in a way, almost providing one of the definitions one might use for art. After all, if it is not in the "groove" as you suggest it might be, then is it art? My answer, is that it's not art that has reached it's full potential or that it's full potential does not reach the level of the art likely to survive.

Asher

okay, I dont try to translate the groove into the image-language 1:1, but perimetric is fine too and might be the better approach:

I' ve been talking to musicians to get a more precise idea of groove in that regard; while groove isn't a °sharp° word, and used today in a inflational manner, it has a more and less distinct meaning:

the interplay of speed, rhythm, phrasing, intensity and concentration/density (maybe other things as well) is the raw materials of the groove - but it still needs that "special thing" to make it really groovy. That special thing might be a superior ability of "Microtiming", which could be, a example:

" as if his voice were the lead instrument in the ensemble, sometimes locked into the rhythm, sometimes in counterpoint, sometimes somewhere in between . . . "