Paul Caponigro Retrospective/CA

[Merg Ross]

A retrospective of Paul's work will open at Smith Andersen North in San Anselmo, CA. on September 14, 2013. Excellent gallery space and lighting, should be a stunning exhibit, as always.

http://www.smithandersennorth.com/exhibits/upcoming_exhibits.html

Video:

http://www.wcsh6.com/video/2176606498001/49452227001/207-Paul-Caponigro

[karl french]

Looks interesting. Thanks for the announcement.

[Bill_1856]

Any new work, or the same old stuff from 40 years ago?

[Kirk Gittings]

It would be a treat to see the 40 year old "stuff" again. I don't often get to see his originals and his old "stuff" is some of the best "stuff" ever created in the history of photography "stuff".

[Merg Ross]

Any new work, or the same old stuff from 40 years ago?

Bill, the announcement indicates work from 1957 to 2013. His latest work that I am familiar with was done in 2008. He was very busy during the period of 1999 to 2008, mostly producing still life arrangements at his home. However, I still prefer "the same old stuff" from late 1950's and early 1960's. Are you a Caponigro fan? Let me guess! I'll report back after the show is up.

[Drew Wiley]

Hmmm ... I'll still be out of town the 14th, but pretty easy for me to slide in there a bit later....

[frotog]

Is it just me or do Caponigro's photos appear more and more kitschy as time goes on? Maybe it's because he came to the rocks and trees party too late or maybe it's because he took the crazy stuff coming out of the mouth of minor white too seriously. I mean come on, running white deer? Doubtful it will stand the test of time.

[Frank_E]

….. I mean come on, running white deer? Doubtful it will stand the test of time.

and some of us think it already has and will continue to do so….

[Kirk Gittings]

and some of us think it already has and will continue to do so….
ditto

[tgtaylor]

Is it just me or do Caponigro's photos appear more and more kitschy as time goes on? Maybe it's because he came to the rocks and trees party too late or maybe it's because he took the crazy stuff coming out of the mouth of minor white too seriously. I mean come on, running white deer? Doubtful it will stand the test of time.

LOL...but I actually saw one of those white deer one night when hiking back to the car from Chimney Rock at Pt. Reyes after photographing the sunset. Approaching the parking lot I heard something to my right rear and turned but didn't see anything and continued on only to hear something again and again stopped and turned. This time I saw it - a white deer about 30 meters away to my right and slowly walking in the same direction that I was. Was he tailing me? I never knew white deer existed until then!

Recently I attended a lecture given by his son, John Paul, that was hosted by the Palo Alto Camera Club. It was a good presentation and after pondering how to duplicate the shafts of light beaming down from the sky in this terrific desert landscape shot, I saw that I could achieve the same effect with a deft application of Kodak crocein scarlet of which I have a bottle.

So I'm definitely going!

[dasBlute]

For myself, I'm always looking for something without a clue where's it's going to come from
especially when I've loaded the film holders and headed out to say, Taos or wherever with *great* expectations.

I say if you're lucky enough to find some white deer and image them with the camera...
then you're awake and working. Others get to decide whether our work will 'stand the test of time'.

Some of his work resonates with me, and I like his darkroom work alot. I never felt his
work was disingenuous, frilly, 'hey-look-at-me-I'm-making-art', it feels genuine to me -
something that 'kitsch' [though it's your word] probably wouldn't...


Is it just me or do Caponigro's photos appear more and more kitschy as time goes on? Maybe it's because he came to the rocks and trees party too late or maybe it's because he took the crazy stuff coming out of the mouth of minor white too seriously. I mean come on, running white deer? Doubtful it will stand the test of time.

[jp]

Is it just me or do Caponigro's photos appear more and more kitschy as time goes on? Maybe it's because he came to the rocks and trees party too late or maybe it's because he took the crazy stuff coming out of the mouth of minor white too seriously. I mean come on, running white deer? Doubtful it will stand the test of time.

The rocks and trees stuff is timeless. Calling that a fad is like calling freedom a fad, or nudes is a fad.

That said, I don't get excited about the running deer photo. I like the rock and trees on polaroid 55 more.

[Eric Biggerstaff]

One of my all time favorite artists, wish I could see it. He, along with Brett Weaston and William Clift, is a constant source of inspiration.

[Vaughn]

and some of us think it already has and will continue to do so….

Me, too. Actually the way I heard it, the deer were on a deer farm and herded by the farmer for the image. Still a wonderful image.

[Robert Langham]

I've actually got a copy of White Deer which I got for a song. It's loaned out currently in exchange for a Caponigro shot in a French stone church.

Funny thing about White Deer- if you ask two folks to count the deer and tell you how many they never seem to come up with the same number. I don't even come up with the same number twice in a row!

Nice print to have around the house.

[Merg Ross]

An earlier remark about "standing the test of time" caught my attention. I have been a bit ambivalent about Paul's work over the years, a natural response as his career evolved.

We first met in Boston in 1959 through a mutual friend; Paul was twenty-six and had just returned from a cross-country photo trip with Minor, and I was eighteen. We spent some time together, a day in the field, and when I headed south on my trip, he gave me a print made that year. It was of the Hartford Wall, however not the much published horizontal version; it was a vertical rendition, mystical, well composed, and beautifully printed. It has adorned the entry wall of our home for twenty-five years, and I still marvel at its subtle impact; it defines Paul Caponigro --- no need for the words and poetry; this photograph has stood the test of time, and will continue to do so.

[JMB]

I think that Paul Caponigro's early work is quiet powerful. But his son seems determined to ruin his legacy.

[frotog]

Some of his work resonates with me, and I like his darkroom work alot. I never felt his
work was disingenuous, frilly, 'hey-look-at-me-I'm-making-art', it feels genuine to me -
something that 'kitsch' [though it's your word] probably wouldn't...

Who said kitsch had to be intentional?

This following excerpt from wikipedia best describes it for me -
"Hermann Broch argues that the essence of kitsch is imitation: kitsch mimics its immediate predecessor with no regard to ethics—it aims to copy the beautiful, not the good.[3] According to Walter Benjamin, kitsch is, unlike art, a utilitarian object lacking all critical distance between object and observer; it "offers instantaneous emotional gratification without intellectual effort, without the requirement of distance, without sublimation".[4]

[Kirk Gittings]

I think that Paul Caponigro's early work is quiet powerful. But his son seems determined to ruin his legacy.

Who would judge the father's work based on the sons? That strikes me as ludicrous.

[Michael Graves]

I had the chance to see an exhibition of Caponigro's work in New Hampshire. A few of the images seemed a bit contrived, but you can say that about anybody's work. The vast majority of the images were worth second and third passes. Several of them took my breath away. If you can get there...go.

[Brian Ellis]

Me, too. Actually the way I heard it, the deer were on a deer farm and herded by the farmer for the image. Still a wonderful image.

That's basically it. If you watch the video that's linked in Merg's first post in this thread you'll see him explain exactly how he did it.

[Brian Ellis]

I think it was Ansel Adams who in talking about Minor White said something to the effect that he was a great photographer but he should forget all the mumbo jumbo. I feel the same way about Paul Caponigro. I remember reading an interview conducted by his son John Paul that appeared in Photo Techniques magazine (I think) years ago. I read and re-read the interview several times and still had difficulty understanding what he was talking about. I admire his photography and if the "mumbo jumbo" helps him make those photographs then that's great - for him.

The other photographer who IMHO falls in the same category - interesting photographs, could do without the philosophy - is Wynn Bullock. I understood little of anything he wrote. When I read that even Minor White couldn't understand him I felt a lot better.

I freely admit that just because I can't understand these three photographers doesn't mean nobody else can. It may very well be my own ignorance and if their words help others make the photographs they want to make that's fine. It just doesn't resonate with me.

[frotog]

I would not call the "mumbo jumbo" philosophy. I rather see it as proto-new-age babble not unlike something you'd read in a Carlos Casteneda novel...

"When you approach something to photograph it, first be still with yourself until the object of your attention affirms your presence. Then don't leave until you have captured its essence." -Minor White

Maybe he approached his crush on P. Caponigro on that long cross country drive in a similar fashion;).

[Kirk Gittings]

If the "mumbo jumbo" describes what motivates an artist I like then I definitely want to hear it. I don't have to agree with it but why wouldn't I want to know the motivations and philosophies of someone who's work I admire?

Here is another example of current "mumbo jumbo"-ideas that have currency in many circles.


These images are unique, not only because of their technical approach, but for the fact that they are from rare moments of creation showcasing its amazing natural light and beauty. I did not do this… Nature, the Creator is the greatest artist!
Fatali

FWIW, I've got a video interview coming up that (based on the comments above) is full of my own personal "mumbo jumbo". I don't usually talk about such thoughts but when someone asks me what my motivation is out it comes. If someone really want to know............I'll be sure to post a link to it here when it gets published online-should be interesting.


"When you approach something to photograph it, first be still with yourself until the object of your attention affirms your presence. Then don't leave until you have captured its essence." -Minor White

As a "practice" that kind of approach is highly useful. I practice exactly such when photographing, because it helps me focus my full attention on the subject and find what it was in the subject that initially drew my attention. It helps me cut through all the noise in my head from my busy crazy life and actually see and feel what is in front of me. IE It helps me become mentally present in the moment with the subject. It is a practice akin to mindful meditation. I think my photographs benefit by such an approach.

[frotog]

"When you approach something to photograph it, first be still with yourself until the object of your attention affirms your presence. Then don't leave until you have captured its essence."
Silly me, I just assumed that Mr. White was referring to the art of seducing young men as a closeted homosexual male. All kidding aside, when you read his writings through this lens it makes sense of what otherwise reads as treacly new-age nonsense. But if those rocks you're photographing are actually talking, nodding and gesticulating or "affirming your presence" somehow then perhaps you should consider shooting some video in addition to the stills for your "practice".

[Mark Sampson]

Caponigro (or was it A. Adams?) is said to have told Minor White "Head for the cosmos, Minor, they'll never corner you there!" Mr. Caponigro's work is as good as it gets; go to the show, look at the photographs, ignore the words. Or gossip about the words and what they 'really' mean, just like you were on talk radio or TMZ. Your choice.

[Brian Ellis]

If the "mumbo jumbo" describes what motivates an artist I like then I definitely want to hear it. I don't have to agree with it but why wouldn't I want to know the motivations and philosophies of someone who's work I admire? . . .

It's not a matter of agreeing with anything, it's a question of ability to understand. If you can read some of Paul Caponigro's writing or writings about him, or Minor White's or Wynn Bullock's, and understand and use their "motivations and philosophies," that's certainly fine as I said in my earlier message. I just had a lot of trouble figuring out what any of the three were talking about much of the time and therefore couldn't use it.

From one of my favorite photography books, "Minor White: Rites and Passages:"

"For all the writing and talking that he did, for all his reputation as an intellectual and as a spokesman, even as a poet, he was not articulate. Many people were often impatient with what has been called, many times, his 'mumbo jumbo.' "

[Doug Howk]

Another helpful video on Caponigro (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQYeKmmJA4k)
I'm reminded of viewing Gothic Cathedrals. If what you see is a mass of stone & glass, then you are not really seeing/photographing what it is. Quoting from Philip Ball in "Universe of Stone":
The stone armature of the cathedral is a conduit for the power surging through the stones: 'there is no inert matter' says von Simson, 'only active energy'
I think its a matter of how Caponigro approaches his subject

[Kirk Gittings]

It's not a matter of agreeing with anything, it's a question of ability to understand. If you can read some of Paul Caponigro's writing or writings about him, or Minor White's or Wynn Bullock's, and understand and use their "motivations and philosophies," that's certainly fine as I said in my earlier message. I just had a lot of trouble figuring out what any of the three were talking about muc
h of the time and therefore couldn't use it.

From one of my favorite photography books, "Minor White: Rites and Passages:"
"For all the writing and talking that he did, for all his reputation as an intellectual and as a spokesman, even as a poet, he was not articulate. Many people were often impatient with what has been called, many times, his 'mumbo jumbo.' "

I believe part of it is the Gurdjieff influence. Very difficult and sometimes impenetrable, but an interesting way of thinking if you can find your way through it to what he is trying to say. But back to MW-to find usefullness in his "mumbo jumbo" doesn't actually require belief or complete understanding. It is much like Buddist meditation-the mere practice of meditation with or without belief or understanding, has benefits.

[Ken Lee]

I'm one of many indebted to Minor White for introducing me in my youth (through his books) to a greater depth in photography, in both its technical and contemplative aspects.

He may not have been the most articulate spokesperson for either, but he served well as a "herald". Once alerted, I was able to investigate further with other teachers but it was Minor who pointed the way.

What appears to some as mumbo jumbo can be adequate instruction to others. After all, our photography is a reflection of our capacity to apprehend. We're all different, fortunately.

I would certainly attend that Paul Caponigro retrospective (http://www.smithandersennorth.com/ex..._exhibits.html) if I could.

[DennisD]

While there will always be those of us who may not not fully understand or accept another's spiritual approach to photography - it's unfortunate anyone would need to malign the source or inspiration.

If a photographer's philosophical or spiritual approach brings us the quality of work of those such as White, Caponigro, Bullock and many and other fine photographers, I'm all in favor. These photographers are overwhelmingly acknowledged among the finest.

Appreciate the work for whatever it is and be thankful for whatever helped create it. Despite any lack of understanding on our part, who are we to disparage the artist or the diminish the work based upon criticism of the creative force behind the artistry ?

[jp]

What appears to some as mumbo jumbo can be adequate instruction to others. After all, our photography is a reflection of our capacity to apprehend.

I would certainly attend that Paul Caponigro retrospective (http://www.smithandersennorth.com/ex..._exhibits.html) if I could.

I'll go listen to the "mumbo jumbo" for ya on the 17th in Thomaston ME. I like some forms of mumbo jumbo.

His son John is well spoken too and makes many video interviews. It's possible too that the producer or interviewer coaxed or primed that style of communication out of the photographer, just like some people can do here.

[Brian Ellis]

While there will always be those of us who may not not fully understand or accept another's spiritual approach to photography - it's unfortunate anyone would need to malign the source or inspiration.

If a photographer's philosophical or spiritual approach brings us the quality of work of those such as White, Caponigro, Bullock and many and other fine photographers, I'm all in favor. These photographers are overwhelmingly acknowledged among the finest.

Appreciate the work for whatever it is and be thankful for whatever helped create it. Despite any lack of understanding on our part, who are we to disparage the artist or the diminish the work based upon criticism of the creative force behind the artistry ?

Since I was the one who mentioned Caponigro, White, and Bullock I assume this is directed at my message. If you read it again I think you'll see that I didn't malign any of the three. I said I admired Caponigro's photography, I just didn't understand his words. I also said that might have been due to my own ignorance and that if others understood the words and that helped them make the photographs they wanted to make, that was great. I'm not sure why saying I couldn't understand what someone is talking or writing about is "maligning" them, especially when I made it clear - I thought - that my lack of understanding could be due to my own ignorance.

[Kirk Gittings]

When I first got serious about photography was in 1970. The big three in LP in my world at UNM were AA, Weston, Minor White and secondarily people like Bullock, Brett Weston etc. So the Mumbo Jumbo Faction was pretty evident. The first real photo show I ever saw was Wynn Bullock at the Museum in Santa Fe and it knocked me out-I never really got over it. Newhall in his history of photography classes spent many hours on each of these people always giving great importance to their ideologies with never a disparaging comment calmly explaining what they intended as he knew them all well. I only started to hear criticisms about MW and his ideologies after he was dead and always coupled with snide innuendos about his sexual demons and struggles (never once before he died which I always thought was pretty chicken shit).

I always thought MW, Bullock and Caponigro were fascinating (still do AAMOF). At least they had more to talk about than film developers and lenses.

[Bill_1856]

Bill, the announcement indicates work from 1957 to 2013. His latest work that I am familiar with was done in 2008. He was very busy during the period of 1999 to 2008, mostly producing still life arrangements at his home. However, I still prefer "the same old stuff" from late 1950's and early 1960's. Are you a Caponigro fan? Let me guess! I'll report back after the show is up.

Merg, I'm definitely a fan!
I have one of his large Stonehenge prints, and several of his books, but prefer his very early "woods and water" work. Personally, I've never thought much of the "running white deer" image.
I really hope that his newer work is something special, but he wouldn't be the first artist to fail living up to his early promise. I look forward to your review.

[DennisD]

Since I was the one who mentioned Caponigro, White, and Bullock I assume this is directed at my message. If you read it again I think you'll see that I didn't malign any of the three. I said I admired Caponigro's photography, I just didn't understand his words. I also said that might have been due to my own ignorance and that if others understood the words and that helped them make the photographs they wanted to make, that was great. I'm not sure why saying I couldn't understand what someone is talking or writing about is "maligning" them, especially when I made it clear - I thought - that my lack of understanding could be due to my own ignorance.

Hi Brian,

I'm very sorry you thought my mention of the 3 photographers was referring to your comment. That was not at all intended. You were indeed very clear that your lack of understanding was your own issue. I thought your comments were very honest and in no way derogatory - which I certainly respect.

Your mention of the 3 names did stick in my mind in relation to those photographers who could easily be singled out for their "speak" as i was writing my post.

I was bothered by an earlier post and flip remarks that seemed to me inappropriate and mocking. There were other comments in the thread that also seemed dismissive of the philosophical or spiritual side of White's and Caponigro's approach.

While i can appreciate Caponigro's spiritual attitude about his photography, I'm the first to admit I certainly don't understand it the way he does. However, I greatly appreciate that it brought him and his work to where it is today. The same for all the others who fall into this category.

Thanks for understanding.

Dennis

P.S. I've always enjoyed your quote - great advice !

[Merg Ross]

Merg, I'm definitely a fan!
I have one of his large Stonehenge prints, and several of his books, but prefer his very early "woods and water" work. Personally, I've never thought much of the "running white deer" image.
I really hope that his newer work is something special, but he wouldn't be the first artist to fail living up to his early promise. I look forward to your review.

Bill, interesting to hear that you are a fan, and that we share the same appreciation for Paul's early work. I would say the same of Minor, the early work was his strongest. Somewhere along the way words began to dominate the visual language.

I'll leave it at that before I get into trouble.

[Frank_E]

I never cease to be amazed at how disparaging some individuals are of the work of other renown photographers who have generally been recognized as people who have produced commendable work. That is not to say that it may be to everyone's taste. Art after all is something which appeals to a varying extent to different people. Some like it others don't that is ok. But to bad mouth it speaks more about the individual doing the criticism than the one being criticized.

My instant personal reaction always tends to be "so let's see your work if you are so smart". Rarely is it shown...

On the issue of all of this "mumbo jumbo" I am again amazed how intolerant certain individuals are about other people's views. We are all wired differently. Our motivations come from different places. What works for some doesn't work for others. If you are interested in learning then you have a natural curiosity for what works for others. That mumbo jumbo can be articulated in different ways. I personally have to be in a very "neutral" mental state, in other words not preoccupied by other thought or worries, or my photographic efforts don't amount to much. That may or may not be true for others. When I read about this "mumbo jumbo" I understand where they are coming from. They are simply expressing it in different ways then I would. But to then try and characterize that photographer as a kook again says more about the person doing the bad mouthing.

just saying...

[JMB]

Who would judge the father's work based on the sons? That strikes me as ludicrous.


Who wrote anything about judging the father by the work of the son? My comment judges the son.

[Doug Howk]

In the spirit of Freud, one can re-contextualize a Minor White saying: admire a work of art for what it is and for what it might mean.
Sex, food, shelter/safety motivates us all, but knowing that doesn't really help us to appreciate works of art. So lets drop freudian analysis from our critique tools kit.

[Ken Lee]

Please be mindful of Forum rules about courtesy. We can disagree without being insulting.

[Brian Ellis]

Hi Brian,

I'm very sorry you thought my mention of the 3 photographers was referring to your comment. That was not at all intended. You were indeed very clear that your lack of understanding was your own issue. I thought your comments were very honest and in no way derogatory - which I certainly respect.

Your mention of the 3 names did stick in my mind in relation to those photographers who could easily be singled out for their "speak" as i was writing my post.

I was bothered by an earlier post and flip remarks that seemed to me inappropriate and mocking. There were other comments in the thread that also seemed dismissive of the philosophical or spiritual side of White's and Caponigro's approach.

While i can appreciate Caponigro's spiritual attitude about his photography, I'm the first to admit I certainly don't understand it the way he does. However, I greatly appreciate that it brought him and his work to where it is today. The same for all the others who fall into this category.

Thanks for understanding.

Dennis

P.S. I've always enjoyed your quote - great advice !

Hi Dennis - Thanks, no problem.

[chuck461]

For those on the East Coast...http://www.puckergallery.com/. Until Oct 6.
I was in there a few years ago when they had their first PC show. Very friendly folks excited about the work. Ask to see other works they have by Caponigro.

[tgtaylor]

Well I went.

I was out hiking the Brushy Peak area yesterday afternoon scouting interesting terrain for future images and made it back to the car in just enough time, I thought, to drive to the venue by 6pm. The plan was to fill-up on ice-cold water at a McDonald's next to the 580 freeway entrance on the way out and to take 580 all the way to 880 in Oakland and then across the San Rafael bridge to San Anselmo instead the 680 route which looked a little longer. Once past the 580/680 junction and thus committed to the 580 route, I had the brilliant idea to tune the radio to the current traffic conditions and discovered that an accident on 880 in Richmond had traffic backed up all the way to the “maze” in Oakland. Taking the 680 route would have went around that and I thought about just heading back home. But I pressed on and after lane swapping my way on 880 to the Richmond/San Rafael bridge I pulled up in front of the Gallery at 5:53pm – just in time, I thought, to get a seat inside before the lecture.

But all of the parking spots outside on the street were vacant and only a couple of cars were parked in the Gallery's private lot. Did I get the dates wrong or was the event canceled? I walked into the lot and saw a door slightly ajar that led into the Gallery's back entrance and walked through. “They're all inside,” a server said from behind what looked like a 30-foot table loaded with food for the art connoisseur and I continued into the gallery to be greeted by Lynn, the owners wife, a very pleasant and friendly woman who informed me that Paul Caponigro wouldn't be in attendance. Apparently he had an accident where he had fallen down a hill some years back and had gotten tangled-up with poison oak and was now mobility impaired and didn't travel much or do landscape photography with the large format camera as he once did. Recalling that he was a student of Ansel Adams at The California School of Fine Art right after WWII, that would easily put him in his eighties. Falling off a hill and becoming tangled with poison oak would surely result in mobility issues at that age. I can't speak about falling of the hill, but in recent years I stepped into poison oak twice and both occasions I had to apply
Calamine Lotion whereas in my earlier days poison oak or poison ivy didn't have an effect. Of course I always avoided contact with it then as I do now.

SO NO MUMBO JUMBO yesterday, which was a disappointment. But the images were both inspiring and a real treat to see in person. Outside of occasional reproductions in books or other media, this is the first time that I had seen Caponigro's work in person or on this scale and I was mighty impressed with it. The print quality was excellent although many images appeared to be ink rather than silver gelatin as branded. A special treat was awaiting in the back room where a gigantic Phillip Hyde B&W print dated 1951 was mounted on the walls. This is an excellent exhibition of Paul Caponigro's work and I highly recommend it if you can make it. You will not be disappointed!

Finally, a regular edition of Photography: The Golden Decade: Photography at the California School of Fine Arts, 1945 – 1955 will be published soon. I briefly browsed through a display copy at the Gallery and this is must have.

Thomas

[jp]

I saw his prints at the Farnsworth Art Museum last year. My adventure was less exciting. There was a lull in work, and I was walking past the museum to the bank or post office and stopped in and viewed the exhibit. Even if someone is not a fan of his styles, it's good to see top quality silver printing and photography once in a while. I happen to like some of his styles. If it's in your area, I'd also suggest checking it out.

I won't venture a guess at the medical issue, but something as simple as cellulitis from getting scuffed up in a bad fall can turn into a serious health problem for older people or those with weak immune system if it's not dealt with quickly.

[Merg Ross]

I won't venture a guess at the medical issue, but something as simple as cellulitis from getting scuffed up in a bad fall can turn into a serious health problem for older people or those with weak immune system if it's not dealt with quickly.

Some of Paul's current health problems stem from a serious fall off of a residential deck in 1993. He was in California at the time, and a very long recovery period followed. In fact, he did not photograph over a period of six years after the accident.

[al olson]

Several years ago the Open Shutter Gallery in Durango hosted an exhibit of Caponigro's work. Not only was I impressed with the selection of photographs, but I was stunned at the quality of his darkroom work. I would love to see it again.

[Bill_1856]

FYI: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/09/the-caponigro-print-offer.html

[Merg Ross]

Merg, I'm definitely a fan!
I have one of his large Stonehenge prints, and several of his books, but prefer his very early "woods and water" work. Personally, I've never thought much of the "running white deer" image.
I really hope that his newer work is something special, but he wouldn't be the first artist to fail living up to his early promise. I look forward to your review.

Bill, I spent part of today at the gallery. In hard numbers there are 38 prints of varying size, one from 1957 and one from 2013. My guess is that you would be familiar with all of the photographs, with perhaps the exception of three prints from his Aluminum Foil series of 2008, and his photograph from 2013, reminiscent of his early work. There was one Stonehenge print and his photographs from the 1960's prevailed.

All of the prints were unmistakably gelatin silver, printed on a variety of papers. The gallery is situated with an abundance of available light on two sides, and the prints were a real feast for the eyes. If for nothing else, Paul will be remembered as one of the finest gelatin silver printers that worked in that medium; However, I doubt that his reputation will rest solely on that attribute. It was a wonderful experience!

[Drew Wiley]

Capronigro once wrote how, during lectures and diatribes, he wished Minor White would just shut up. I find the whole "photography as religion" thing of both of them
rather kooky, to say the least, not to mention Minor White's association of scales of gray on the Zone System with metaphysical meaning. Then Caponigro went on
to say how, once White got his head under the darkcloth, that was a true learning experience, just watching him and what he focused on! I feel the same way...
I can do without their esoteric explanations for why they took this or that ... but the prints themselves... those I can look at all day long!

[Bill_1856]

Is the "new" work anything out of the ordinary, or has he lost his MoJo and just coasting on his early fame?

[Sal Santamaura]

Is the "new" work anything out of the ordinary, or has he lost his MoJo and just coasting on his early fame?Bill, have you ever seen the British television series Doc Martin? :D

[Bill_1856]

Bill, have you ever seen the British television series Doc Martin? :D

No I haven't.
I'm really not trying to be snotty here about Caponigro, (although it may seem that way at times).

[Sal Santamaura]

Bill, have you ever seen the British television series Doc Martin? :D


No I haven't...It runs on PBS. Do look in on it if you get a chance. I've a deep appreciation for the title character's personality and uninhibited statements, which he makes in total honesty and without ill will. That you share a profession with him is another coincidence.

Never stop being you, Bill. :)

[Merg Ross]

Is the "new" work anything out of the ordinary, or has he lost his MoJo and just coasting on his early fame?

Aside from loss of MoJo or coasting on early fame, whatever the implication, this I will say about Paul. Very simply, he has been true to his vision over a sixty year career. I will say the same about three other photographers who presently are exhibiting locally - Richard Garrod, Mark Citret and George Tice. All of them, consistently true to their vision.

The sole print of Paul's in this exhibition from 2013, is of a single, small, dewy leaf amidst a field of grasses. Yes, he could have made a similar photograph in the 1960's. This is typical Paul, a vision that sets him apart. Granted, the vision may not have changed a great deal, but why should that be necessary. You either respond to the work, or you don't.

I lived through an era of photography where change for the sake of change was the trademark of some photographers, ungrounded and trying to be different. Very few of them survived the test of time. I think Paul has a place; again, time will tell.

[Kirk Gittings]

I lived through an era of photography where change for the sake of change was the trademark of some photographers, ungrounded and trying to be different. Very few of them survived the test of time. I think Paul has a place; again, time will tell.

[dasBlute]

I was able to see this show while on furlough :) I drove 2 hours to get there and it was totally worth it.

Absolutely stunning prints; some of the very the best I've ever seen. The '2 pears in a bowl' image alone, is staggering...

I'll also say that the people at Smith Andersen North - Steffan and Mette - were awesome: knowledgeable and
stoked about photography and art, great folks.

-Tim

[Merg Ross]

Absolutely stunning prints; some of the very the best I've ever seen. The '2 pears in a bowl' image alone, is staggering...

I'll also say that the people at Smith Andersen North - Steffan and Mette - were awesome: knowledgeable and
stoked about photography and art, great folks.

-Tim

Well said.

And to any local procrastinators, the show comes down after this Saturday, October 26, 2013.

[karl french]

I was in Smith Andersen the other day. Steffan mentioned that he was thinking about leaving the show up longer.

[Merg Ross]

I was in Smith Andersen the other day. Steffan mentioned that he was thinking about leaving the show up longer.

Thank you for that, Karl. I had the same thought while posting the announced closing --- Steffan has held shows over in the past. If I hear anything I'll post it here.

[Amedeus]

I was there on the 26th and Steffan indicated he would hold it over most likely for another two weeks. Very worthwhile seeing ...


Thank you for that, Karl. I had the same thought while posting the announced closing --- Steffan has held shows over in the past. If I hear anything I'll post it here.