Only In America!

"We are an institute in a powerful death penalty."         Photo: © Stan Banos

Haven't written much on Herr Trump of late, sometimes I just get tired of repeatedly and voluntarily ramming my head into a Trumpian wall. For years he mixed his plethora of outright lies with a convenient dollop of half truths. Now he just makes it up whole cloth 24/7, no holds barred! And why not? His cult eagerly swallows and follows whatever falls out his donut shaped pie hole unto his accordion playing hands. 

Everyone knows Biden is hovering on senility, but Trump supporters are NEVER exposed to Trump's equally egregious and numerous verbal gaffes, not to mention his habitual slurring. And that said, one particularly tumultuous Biden gaffe in Sept/Oct, one more precipitous tumble down Air Force One's stairs, and kiss the Dems goodbye this Nov! Unlike the Trump maniacs, no one is exactly enthused to- Vote Biden! The Dems are once again setting themselves up, just like they did with the aging Ginsberg; there's still time to get someone out there in front of the public that's near half a century younger, but they never learn...

Meanwhile, while everyone complains about our soaring national debt no one seems to remember cheering its leading cause, just like no one seems to remember the on again off again deficit blame game Repubs pull every Presidential election cycle...

ADDENDUM: Then there's this... no Michigan, no Dem win!

B&W & Color

Mention the masters of color photography, and you always get the usual names: Eggleston, Parr, Shore, Graham, Meyerowitz along with a handful of others. The name Mitch Epstein doesn't usually show up on the A team, and I'm not sure why that is. Perhaps because unlike Eggleston, he undertook a greater variety of subject matter, but then, so did Meyerowitz. And Epstein's quality rivals his productivity as well. So yeah, I dunno...

Paulie B. Hits The Streets

If you haven't seen Paulie B's videos on You Tube, you really should take a gander. And this is from someone who long ago gave up on viewing just about anything bearing what in my mind has become that near kiss of death terminology... "street photography." Countless videos from everyone and their mama telling you and yours about: the right camera, the right lens, the right presets and why you need to do it this way, that way, their way... occasionally accompanied with their own 'original' photos buttressing their sage and proven advice. Like, share and subscribe. 

Paulie B. is refreshingly free of that, someone with a genuine love and respect for the medium that wants to share that enthusiasm with anyone who wants to share the ride. And he does that not by pontificating but by asking, interviewing and seeking whatever bits of wisdom and knowledge he can from the street photographers he accompanies and videos as they do their thing live, traversing various NYC neighborhoods. The photographers are a diverse bunch, of all different skill levels, from novices to recognized image makers. Most of them are young, just starting to figure things out and every bit as enthusiastic as he, and it's interesting to see how they contrast and complement their more seasoned counterparts. For those interested in practicing and learning more about the craft, these videos are head and shoulders above someone lecturing on their computer. Shop talk is discussed, but the focus is on the philosophy, attitude and inspiration that gets one walking the street, camera in hand and taking successful images. Life may have other plans for some of these photographers, others may just become future image masters of their realm.

You'll no doubt like the work and style of some photographers more than others, enjoy some of the topics, approaches and discussions over others. Point is, he brings his infectious enthusiasm and youthful curiosity to all his working, on site interviews; the love of craft, the sincerity in learning, the respect to all involved is real and palpable...

Passing Time- Sage Sohier

Photo: © Sage Sohier

One of the things I enjoy most is 'discovering' a photographer I knew nothing about, a photographer whose work is exemplary, the kind that makes you say "Wow, just... Wow!" It's an unlikely occurrence for sure, exactly why it's such a rare and treasured occasion- like when I first saw Sage Sohier's work.*

I've seen the subject matter portrayed in Passing Time before, very well executed before, photographers such as: Shelby Lee Adams, Mark Steinmetz, Milton Rogovin, Larry Fink, Thomas Roma and several others come to mind. And yet, anyone who's actually tried to photograph these (very) common day, yet surprisingly intimate moments, and make them look as graphically and visually interesting, knows just how hard (and perplexing) that can be. There's even a shade of Martin Parr's Last Resort in Passing Time, that story within a story within each section of the frame, the complexity of which not even he could maintain after that particular body of work. And that's just part of what makes these particular images so intriguing, the other being the myriad of social interactions that help connect, contrast and energize those pictured throughout the composition. If I could take a picture as good as the boom box suitor and the contemplative apple of his eye, I could hang up my camera with the realization that I had indeed put it to some good use. 

*Actually, I had seen her work some time before, and just happened to (most ashamedly) forget her name; fortunately, I was recently reintroduced to her upon first seeing Passing Time on  Lenscratch.

Date With Irony

No humans were harmed in the taking of this photo.                 Photo: © Stan Banos

So I'm headed out to the semiannual Naked Bicycle Ride for a possible photo op. I've been to these before, and unfortunately, it's not a very big affair, a small handful of guys, ummm... mostly around my age. It is what it is. But these days, with downtown San Francisco a ghost town, and photo ops of any kind slim-pickins, off I went. As expected, didn't get a damn thing before they rode off on their merry way, and being such a gorgeous day after weeks of water clogging rain, I was happy to amble on myself.  

A block or so down the line, I encountered my first real opportunity, and camera in hand took three quick exposures as I stealthily made my way past the romantic duo. I doubted I had gotten anything worthwhile cause of all the hair (not unlike my own back in the day) and shadow that blocked any meaningful facial interaction between the two. So I was encouraged to discover that one exposure revealed just enough facial highlight and eye detail to crack the void.

Anyway, I made it down to the end of the wall bordering a public plaza (pictured above to the right) when two Security Guards, looking all the world like they graduated HS a year ago, approached and proclaimed: 

SG: You can't do that!
SB:  Do what?
SG: Go around taking pictures of people.
SB:  Why not?
SG:  It's against the law.
SB:  No, it's not. The law is: if you're on public property and it's in public view-
        you can take a picture. That's the law.
SG:  We don't care about the law- you have to ask permission first.
SB:  (Well, so much for the concern of law.)
SG:  Look how upset you've made them!
SB:  What are you talking about? 

At this point I turn around and the couple who were oblivious when I had passed were now yelling some indiscernible shit in our direction- the two asshats before me had actually gone up to them and told them god knows what about the unspeakable horrors I had visited upon them.

SB: I didn't upset them, they didn't even know I took their picture- you were the ones who went completely outta your way to upset them!

Now this is when the 'conversation' went from thoroughly annoying to something way more bonkers than... a bunch of old guys riding their bicycles completely jaybird naked in public. One of the security guards proceeds to tell me, "Dude, I was only kidding when I told you to take a picture of them!" Wait, wha...??? "I can't believe you actually took the picture!" I then recalled that walking past them, my failing ears had heard the word "picture," not knowing exactly what was being said or even if they were addressing me, someone else or just talking amongst themselves- I just smiled, attentive to the task at hand: checking my exposure, angle of approach, etc. 

So, it turns out that the dumberer part of Dumb and Dumber had actually dared me to take the photo- and were now actively scolding me for doing it? What the!?! Did I really hear that? Did he really say that? I kinda phased out temporarily at the sheer irony lunacy of the situation; meanwhile, they're continuing to admonish me for my sins against humanity. Attempting some basic return to sanity, I desperately attempted an ever so brief history of logic, law and photography which abruptly ends when the bigger one proclaims, "He's crazy." Exasperated (you can't cure stupid), I turn about to leave, notice they're following, stop to take a quick (insurance) exposure of them before I again resume walking and disappear into the crowd. 

Too damn nice a day for them to spoil- and I got the picture. 

PS- An aside to non-photographers: most photographs do not turn out well, even if technically 'perfect' (ie- exposure, focus, etc). There can be problems with composition, distance, angle, lighting, timing, etc. Sometimes I do ask permission of a subject- if I sense there is something there that might be better brought out if I engage the person's active cooperation. But usually, asking permission just utterly destroys the initial spontaneity and composition, the original 'magic' of the totality of the scene that attracted you to the possibility in the first place- and you end up with something highly contrived, unoriginal and unimaginative. People put on their mask, we all do. Sometimes, those asked agree to be photographed (which is no guarantee of success), sometimes they refuse and you wish them a nice day.

A photographer is like a cod, which produces a million eggs in order that one may reach maturity.   
 -George Bernard Shaw  

PPS- Below is the letter I sent to management at the SF Ferry Building where these security guards appear to be based...

Dear Sir or Madam,

It would be of service to the general public if you instructed your security guards as to the law(s) concerning photography in a public setting, and as how to deal with the public in general. This is in regard to an incident that occurred outdoors, adjacent to the Ferry Building (check photo enclosed in link for exact location) at approx 12:30pm on Saturday, 2/10/2024. 

I'm assuming this event occurred on public property since there were no discernible private property borders or designations and it happened on a public waterfront on a public walkway bordering the farthest side of a public plaza adjacent to said building. Furthermore, the issue of private property was never raised by the security guards in question. I've included details of said conversation in the link containing my post...

Basically, the law in the US states that anyone on public property can photograph anyone or anything in public view- save for national security concerns, and I think we can both agree that was not a concern here. Nor does anyone have to ask permission of the person(s) being photographed (unless for commercial purposes, which this most assuredly is not); this permission myth is a fallacy which has metastasized throughout the general public. Security guards dealing with tourists, residents and the public at large however should have some perfunctory knowledge of the aforementioned. Common sense itself dictates... just think if you first had to ask permission of any and every recognizable person pictured in any photo taken by any tourist at any tourist destination!

In short, I (as well as two other people) were unnecessarily harassed by two of your security guards for taking a photo in public. The two people photographed had no idea I photographed them, and as an aside, I am a photographer who has been published and exhibited, and have been doing this for a good fifty years. Not only did the security guards in question upset the two individuals pictured by telling them god knows what- but they then proceeded to accuse me of being the person who went out of their way to upset them! They insisted that I had to ask permission first, and when I tried to inform them of what the law actually was, they replied that, "We don't care about the law" and for good measure added, "You're crazy!" Actually, the 'conversation' was considerably more disturbing than I allude to here- read details in post at link...

I don't wish these two individuals ill, they were both quite young and one was at least trying to remain polite, although their dogged aggressiveness and inexperience in an area they knew little about reflects a definite lack of training which needs to be addressed. 

Sincerely,
Stanley Banos

The Promised Land

 

What a joy it was to see this film! Bleak, barren, unforgiving... That is what we must endure throughout the vast majority of this film that depicts a life as unforgiving as the very soil that our protagonist must somehow tame and cultivate. And then there's Mads, the Nordic, thinking man's version of Charles Bronson. 

And, of course, you sit your butt down and wait for him to set things right- and wait, and wait, and wait... But every little particle of hope that is so meagerly vetted out is met with an avalanche of oppression and despair. You begin to doubt a decision making process that seems to yield only more pain and woe. Maybe he's just more stubborn, than wise.  But in the end, he finally does achieve what he originally dreamed- only to throw it all away to regain that which made the journey worthwhile... 

Origin

 

Origin is director Ava Duvernay's riff on Caste: The Origins Of Our Discontents by Isabel Wilkerson (played by Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor). It's not quite what I expected as a film, which is a pretty dumb thing to say since I had no idea what to expect going in. The film certainly does touch one emotionally,* but most of all, it challenges you to... think.

Isabel Wilkerson's thesis is that what we take for granted as racism in America is actually a system of caste. Not everyone buys in, but she makes quite the compelling case, and I think it has a lot going for it, even if, the end result is just a rose by any other name. Wow, that was the shortest summation dismissal possible- which is why you really have to read the book/see the movie!

Slavery, systematic racism, critical race theory, segregation, Anti-Semitism, Jim Crow, colorism, caste, class... all the aforementioned have their place in said discussion. But the movie also goes further, or perhaps I should say detours into... the writing process, life itself and how one perseveres through it all- while experiencing the loss of your: spouse, mother and best friend.

Wilkerson closely studies the caste system in India, the Holocaust in Nazi Germany along with racism in the good ol' US of A. And I do love the analogy she uses when confronting those who proclaim, Well I didn't own any slaves! No, you damn well didn't, and no one's saying you did. But it's like growing up in a house that shelters you, protects you, and also comes with its own faults: leaky plumbing, roof that needs mending, etc, etc. You might not even have been around when those problems started showing, but they're your problems now- and you acknowledge the good with the bad, and deal with the problems you may not have created, but nonetheless have to address. Yeah, damn good analogy- what should simply be called common sense, what so many Americans today actively refuse to even contemplate, let alone practice...

*if seeing that human beings have to clean out human refuse by going into pits unprotected and up to their very necks in it for a scant daily living in the very same year that we have assholes walking the streets donning $4,000 computer goggles doesn't affect you...

Yup, Pretty Much...

 

Photo: © Stan Banos

If I Was Starting Anew...

If I was starting anew in 2024 instead of 2016 when I first started shooting digital, what changes, if any would I make gear wise? Well, I'm quite satisfied at present with my: (all Used) Fujifilm X-T1 and X-T2, Ricoh GR and Leica Q. If I was to outfit myself today however, what I might very well choose is: a (Used) FF Sony of some particular number/letter designation for my modest needs, along with their 28mm Sony,* the new Viltrox 20mm, and a 40mm of some sort whenever the need would arise (ie- portraits), along with the GR, natch.

Advantages: use of one body only for all three lenses mentioned- and faster, more accurate, more reliable autofocus than my Fuji's! Disadvantages: the compact Viltrox would not quite match the IQ of the superior 14mm (21 equivalent) Fujinon- and that would be the deal breaker, all depending on how big the difference. Of course, one can not possibly complain about a $150 lens that punches well above it's weight, but it's optical performance would ultimately determine if I would go the Sony route. I would miss using the Q, but the 28 Sony should come through and make that relatively... irrelevant (and cost effective)!

As is, I'm good- with no right to complain!

*The Fuijinon f2 18mm pancake (28mm equivalent) is not very good optically save for the center, and their excellent premium 1.4 is just too damn big (and expensive) for my liking.