Music as analogy for LF photography

[Heroique]

An old entertaining thread titled “Rock Music” (LF images of rocks) inspired me with this question for you:

Do you "hear" music when you see well composed LF images? If so, what type of music?

Or maybe you sense the math that some say is intrinsic to both. I’ve heard a similar claim about music and architecture. I’m pretty sure that was Frank Lloyd Wright.

Sometimes I catch myself humming in the field in response to a scene I like while composing it, but usually not when I’m working in the darkroom, holding prints in my hand, or seeing famous photos in books or on the computer screen.

Please share your experiences, and if it’s possible, can you explain it? Even better, can you show an example?

[Michael R]

Music is my primary thing but I don’t really ever mix artforms in that way. I’ve always found that sort of thing artificial/forced. It’s easy to draw whatever parallels one wants, but I don’t see much of a point. If something like that happens to occur honestly, without effort/thought, that’s nice I guess.

[Ethan]

For me, there's definitely a connection between music and my photography. I think I make the strongest connections with symphonic music, definitely partly because that's what I grew up listening to a lot of, but also because when there aren't human voices speaking to me in a song, it leaves my imagination more room to wander and think of what the musical passages could be describing. For me, when listening to a lot of symphonic works my imagination will conjure up a scene which changes as the music changes... somewhat like a reverse film soundtrack, where I imagine images to match music rather then the other way around. My latest project has been about taking pieces of music which create strong imagery for me, and trying to photograph what the music describes to me.

There are definitely some works which are more evocative for me. As a general rule I imagine the most when listening to music from the late romantic period and onwards. Respighi's Pines of Rome and Fountains of Rome come to mind, which are interesting since Respighi named each movement after certain locations within Rome, but for me the music doesn't always describe the scenes he based it off of. There are some earlier works which still inspire images for me, Beethoven's 6th symphony definitely evokes a lot of rural mountainscapes, but I haven't seen much of a visual element with earlier classical work. I find tone poems fun, since they seem more ambiguous with what they are describing, which makes it more interesting for me to figure out. Though Beethoven's work is undoubtedly brilliant, most of it is very overt in what emotions he is trying to convey, so there isn't as much room for my creative expression.

The current series of photographs I am working on is based on the Aaron Copland's suite Appalachian Spring, for me it is possibly the most quintessentially New England music, so since that's where I live It's easy for me to photograph what it describes. I'd love to go to Europe and photograph the Austrian Alps for a series inspired by Beethoven, or Eastern Europe for images inspired by Smetana and Dvorak, but I don't feel like travelling much given the current state of the world, so this made sense for a series I can shoot close to home. Winter did come along annoyingly and knock the leaves off all the trees, and as you can imagine given the name of the piece (Appalachian Spring) I've got to wait for warmer weather before I can continue shooting again, but in the meantime I plan on working on some of the more technical aspects, finishing my enlarger build, and deciding what process to use for the prints.

[John Kasaian]

This one reminds me of when I waste a sheet of 8x10

https://youtu.be/ZAAKPJEq1Ew

[John Kasaian]

This one when I'm out shooting and the light changes for the worse.

https://youtu.be/wFTY9Vd_uLQ

[Heroique]

Music is my primary thing but I don’t really ever mix art forms in that way.

I’m also curious if your experience of art ever mixes your senses of sight and sound, as the psychologists say happens during synesthesia? That condition might help explain why some LFers “hear” landscapes when they compose on their GG, or “see” landscapes when they hear music in their living room.


For me, when listening to a lot of symphonic works my imagination will conjure up a scene which changes as the music changes...

What an interesting post about music bringing imaginary landscapes to mind. (And timely for me, since just this morning I was listening to Chopin’s Barcarolle, thinking how those delicate but dramatic key changes evoked in me cloud shadows falling quietly on a sunny landscape.) Like you, I think I’m more likely to perceive music inspiring imaginary landscapes, than to perceive real landscapes, such as those I see in the field or on the GG, evoking music that I’ve heard in the past – though that humming I mentioned does occasionally happen.


This one reminds me of when I waste a sheet of 8x10.
Reminds me when I forget to close the shutter before pulling the dark slide – more Hee-Haw than Chopin! :D

[LabRat]

For me, when the planets and stars align, when shooting in a complex environment, sometimes I go into what I call the "zone" where all elements come "alive", compositions flow into each other, where I can aim the camera anywhere, and "music" starts playing in my head...

This is why I try to keep my set-up as simple as possible, so I can "go with the flow" as quickly as possible... (It almost becomes like a dance...)

A concern more with smaller formats (as I have more material to burn), but one of the reasons I went back to larger formats was the "one shot" mentality to get everything into the one frame/one sheet space...

Steve K

[Bernice Loui]

Be it photography_music_literature_painting_sculpture_circuit design_optics design_ cooking_math_mechanical design_furniture making_machine tool work producing parts_astro physicis_biology_genetics_motor car design and nearly every aspect of human endeavor..

they are ALL Connected in ways not often easily apparent. They are all aspects of human expression based on and driven by the human condition and human experiences. Having been involved with music since childhood that has spilled over into nearly every endeavor no aspect of self can be separated from any other aspects of self including image making aka Photography.


Bernice

[Tin Can]

Some critters seem smarter than human

I have long thought Flipper chose to remain in the Sea.... smart!

We walked out and look at us now!

We could move underground and under our Sea

But no, we want to get off Earth!

bad idea

[Bruce Watson]

Do you "hear" music when you see well composed LF images? If so, what type of music?

I do. But only with LF. I've never heard any music while working with smaller formats. I don't know why, but it probably has to do with how fully engaged I am with the process.

I was never able to figure out the specific connection however -- I got different music for different scenes. A lot of classical, but also a fair amount of jazz. Oddly, no blues. No country. No rock. One of my favorite photographs reinforced that idea for me that I had a one-to-one relationship between the scene I was trying to capture and a single musical composition. This particular photograph I went back to four days in a row at dawn to get exactly what I wanted from it. And each morning while working the ground glass I got a particular Duke Ellington tune, it's been so long now I don't remember which one. I don't hear it when I look at the finished print, but only heard it when working the scene.

I actually asked the late great Oliver Sacks what it was. I thought it might be a version of synesthesia, but he disabused me of that notion. Still don't know the cause, but I thought it was great whenever it happened.

[Bernice Loui]

Photography by method is a sympathetic medium driven by light or Photo (light) graphy (record). Without light, there would be no image recorded.

Light be it shades of monochrome or tied with color has emotional value as does shapes related to way light-shadow interacts with shapes (composition). In ways identical to music, basic aspects of music pitch, harmony, chords, rhythm are some basic structures that are what makes music (most any kind of music) ... music in ways no different than photography or any other means of human expression.

It is much about emotions, memory and passage of time being in the human condition.


Bernice

[Vaughn]

Like when that guy that sat at a piano for a minute or so without playing...an incredible musical silence. All part of the light-created space recorded onto a sheet of film.

[Tin Can]

On the spectrum

i am

[Michael R]

Like when that guy that sat at a piano for a minute or so without playing...an incredible musical silence. All part of the light-created space recorded onto a sheet of film.

Seriously?

[Tin Can]

Very seriously

4′33″ by John Cage

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3


Seriously?

[j.e.simmons]

Back when a poor woman was trying to put up with me as my wife, I had no fancy timer for printing. I dug out my metronome, set it at 60bpm, and counted out my exposures. As a musician, a ticking metronome was no bother at all - even when ticking for a two hour print session. Not so my wife. Now ex.

[Heroique]

In ways identical to music, basic aspects of music pitch, harmony, chords, rhythm are some basic structures that are what makes music (most any kind of music) ... music in ways no different than photography or any other means of human expression. It is much about emotions, memory and passage of time being in the human condition.

This triggered my memory about an old thread titled “Johsel Namkung: a retrospective - book review.”

Here’s the photographer:

221934

I remembered that Namkung strongly associated photography with the experience of music.

Just take a look at this, his web site’s general artistic statement:


I spend a lot of time looking for subjects. Oftentimes, I make a scouting trip, hiking for instance, going up a trail to a certain point. I usually leave my camera equipment behind, and hike and scout and come back, and if it’s worthwhile, I then take my camera up, and spend a long time adjusting, setting up, digesting or looking at it, and from different angles, distances, and so forth. And finally, when I find something, there always has to be a unifying, kinetic force. Which means the rhythm, and in musical terms the melodic lines. And polyphonic melodic lines especially, like Bach, for instance, or Handel and Mozart. Linear structures. And then its juxtaposition, its counterbalancing, which is called counterpoint in musical terms. And I find almost every time, when I see something, I always see melodic lines, and counterbalancing forces, and weight, and harmony. And that becomes the skeletal form of my photographs. So my photographs could always be interpreted through musical forms.

A case study of synesthesia?

I think the statement sounds (pun intended) very similar to Ethan’s post #3 above, except in exact reverse. That is, Namkung sees a landscape and “hears” it; Ethan hears some music and “sees” a landscape. What I find especially interesting is that Namkung mentions only Baroque and Classical-era composes, and Ethan Romantic and Modern-era composers. Any psychologists around here? ;^)

[Merg Ross]

Edward Weston could "feel" music in a well composed image.

From his Daybooks, 1930.

"Whenever I can feel a Bach fugue in my work I know I have arrived. I never hear Bach without deep enrichment --- I almost feel he has been my greatest influence."

[Michael R]

That’s not what synesthesia is. It’s just an artist statement, which is BS and/or marketing.

Honestly reading this thread, basically every response you’ve received is what I referred to. Just forced, almost random parallels (depending on how much music the photographer is familiar with, but it’s often name dropping the usual suspects) for the sake of adding some sort of additional dimension or gravitas.

Sorry for raining on the parade. :)


This triggered my memory about an old thread titled “Johsel Namkung: a retrospective - book review.”

Here’s the photographer:

221934

I remembered that Namkung strongly associated photography with the experience of music.

Just take a look at this, his web site’s general artistic statement:


I spend a lot of time looking for subjects. Oftentimes, I make a scouting trip, hiking for instance, going up a trail to a certain point. I usually leave my camera equipment behind, and hike and scout and come back, and if it’s worthwhile, I then take my camera up, and spend a long time adjusting, setting up, digesting or looking at it, and from different angles, distances, and so forth. And finally, when I find something, there always has to be a unifying, kinetic force. Which means the rhythm, and in musical terms the melodic lines. And polyphonic melodic lines especially, like Bach, for instance, or Handel and Mozart. Linear structures. And then its juxtaposition, its counterbalancing, which is called counterpoint in musical terms. And I find almost every time, when I see something, I always see melodic lines, and counterbalancing forces, and weight, and harmony. And that becomes the skeletal form of my photographs. So my photographs could always be interpreted through musical forms.

A case study of synesthesia?

I think the statement sounds (pun intended) very similar to Ethan’s post #3 above, except in exact reverse. That is, Namkung sees a landscape and “hears” it; Ethan hears some music and “sees” a landscape. What I find especially interesting is that Namkung mentions only Baroque and Classical-era composes, and Ethan Romantic and Modern-era composers. Any psychologists around here? ;^)

[h2oman]

I often hear Bach when photographing, then some awful pop band from the 1980s when I see the developed negative!

[Bernice Loui]

Synesthesia:

"Synesthesia is a neurological condition in which stimulation of one sensory or cognitive pathway (for example, hearing) leads to automatic, involuntary experiences in a second sensory or cognitive pathway (such as vision). Simply put, when one sense is activated, another unrelated sense is activated at the same time. This may, for instance, take the form of hearing music and simultaneously sensing the sound as swirls or patterns of color."

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/synesthesia

~There is an entire body of Intellectual/Academia work done on this specific topic.


Bernice




That’s not what synesthesia is. It’s just an artist statement, which is BS and/or marketing.

Honestly reading this thread, basically every response you’ve received is what I referred to. Just forced, almost random parallels (depending on how much music the photographer is familiar with, but it’s often name dropping the usual suspects) for the sake of adding some sort of additional dimension or gravitas.

Sorry for raining on the parade. :)

[Bernice Loui]

Rooted in the mind-brain's extreme ability for pattern recognition. Some mind/brains are extremely able and sensitive to their environments, emotions of others (mirror neurons)and more, as a group this neurological variation is known as Highly Sensitivity Personality.

Music is in most every way identical to images and countless other seemingly random patterns for some individuals have the ability to decipher their inner order.

Rosalind Franklin's X-ray crystallography work on DNA was instrumental to the discovery of DNA double helix structure. Key to this discovery by Rosalind's IS her remarkable ability for pattern recognition.

In countless ways no different than patterns in music and extreme more.

Given the number of Ansel Adams fans on LFF, this 1958 documentary film about AA, notes the connection between Music and Photographic images:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-BhJQqHXfQ&t=404s


~Discuss,
Bernice

[Heroique]

…Honestly reading this thread, basically every response you’ve received is what I referred to. Just forced, almost random parallels (depending on how much music the photographer is familiar with, but it’s often name dropping the usual suspects) for the sake of adding some sort of additional dimension or gravitas…

You’ve raised an interesting counterpoint (sorry again about the intended puns). I remember you said music is your primary thing, and don’t associate LF imagery with it. I believe you. Other posters say they do indeed “hear” music. I believe them too. But I think you’re also going beyond these claims. That is, it seems you’re saying that since you don’t “hear” music in landscape imagery, then no one else does either. Or if they think they do, it's “artificial,” “forced, “BS,” “marketing,” or merely adds “gravitas.” Is this a fair summary? More telling, is there a way someone might describe this experience and convince you it really does happen to them, even if it never does to you? I’m also curious if you agree with the definition of synesthesia offered in Bernice’s post #21 just above, or how it might be improved.

[LabRat]

For me, when the planets and stars align, when shooting in a complex environment, sometimes I go into what I call the "zone" where all elements come "alive", compositions flow into each other, where I can aim the camera anywhere, and "music" starts playing in my head...

This is why I try to keep my set-up as simple as possible, so I can "go with the flow" as quickly as possible... (It almost becomes like a dance...)

A concern more with smaller formats (as I have more material to burn), but one of the reasons I went back to larger formats was the "one shot" mentality to get everything into the one frame/one sheet space...

Steve K

I think my response starts with sensory "overload"... When too much information starts bombarding me, my mental "framelines" open up to allow the out of frame "lines" to expand so I can process more information, but I tend to start seeing everything as more "line oriented" (which is great for composition)... This grows into the other adjacent scenes (almost like vines), so my task is to isolate to "growth" to put framelines where the composition begins and ends, so I spend most all of my composition time just watching the edges so other compositions don't intrude...

While this happens, I guess my brain gets "noisy" and "music" starts to smooth it out (like when mental "multitasking" and too many dialogs are loud, and one may mumble or talk to oneself to have a louder voice over the "noise")... The music is usually rhythmic with bass lines prominent, probably to provide a "foundation" to the din... But other times (when not nervous), my mind can completely clear and there is a silence (like a blank canvas) to work within and observe... Camera operations become a reflex, and I just respond quietly... Other (bad) days I just set-up and try to make sense of a possible scene...

The "complexity" thing will usually happen when doing 35mm telephotography (with 300-600mm lenses) where only a tiny bit of the view is visible (and complex), so I often go "fishing" to see what the camera "finds" and allow discovery in the finder, so sometimes just point camera in general direction... This has carried over to LF, where I initially point the camera, finally check GG, and just move camera very slightly to clean up the edges (often fully set-up/shot in less than a few minutes)... But "hear" less "music" as I'm faster shooting and leaving a scene... :-(

Pre-visualization??? Sounds too structured and controlling to do, but allowing scene to organically grow, and from experience can know where light values will fall on the final print... But I do use the camerafone sometimes now to "polaroid" a scene to see if any other element is missing from what I saw initially...

Steve K

[Vaughn]

Seriously?

Very.

As long as our hearts are working, we live with the sound of blood going through our veins -- as experienced by a friend who had his heart stopped and restarted to re-set its beat. He was warned, but still surprised by the (thankfully well controlled and brief) inner silence. But after that, it has always been the sounds around us that have influenced music. The 'musical silence' is just an appreciation of the soundscape, going to the source of music. When one is working alone, no phones or other distractions, and being aware of the slightest breeze and the changing light, one has a chance to listen. One listens for the sound of leaves rustling down creek during a long exposure (hoping the finish before an afternoon up-canyon breeze comes up), or listens to the sound of the creek and considers putting the source of that sound into the image.

Doing trail work in the 80s I had a chance to take two Dutch forestry students out into the wilderness for a 10-day stint. After dinner, we walked above camp to a rock out-cropping over-looking the river valley. No wind and we were far from the creek and river. I looked over to the two Dutch fellows and they both had looks of wonder. One explained it was the first time they had experienced complete silence (it was amazingly quiet -- no bird or insect sounds).

How does one capture a silence (or its opposite) of a place in a photograph? How much weight is it to be given? By being aware of it is a good start.

[Michael R]

Well, I think several very different things are being mixed up here.

While the brain is still relatively poorly understood (and also, I’m not a neuroscientist), synesthesia is roughly understood as a neurological condition of crossed psychophysical responses to stimuli. For example, a sound wave may be interpreted by the brain as more than sound (auditory) but also responses normally associated with other stimuli. Perhaps visual responses such as colour or pattern or shape.

This is a totally different thing than associations between artforms (music and photography in this case). All artforms are essentially organizations of stimuli, so to some extent it is normal for people to relate them, draw parallels between elements, and intermingle them in various ways. This happens in a variety of ways. One is analysis (academic/intellectual discussion etc.). Perhaps we can call that bucket “cognitive”. Other associations are less concrete. For example, one may be inspired by one artform in the practice of another. Or, a work (or some element thereof) of one artform might be evocative in some way (mental imagery, memory etc.). That sort of thing.

The responses you’ve received so far are associations, mostly analysis after the fact. The artist statement you referenced is also associative, except in that case you have an example of the kind of stuff I just roll my eyes at. Of course you can believe what people say, or not. But I think the more important point in any case is the difference between any of it and something like synesthesia. It seems to me synesthesia would be largely, if not entirely disorganized in terms of elements. Some hue and/or value might trigger the experience of some sound, or vice versa. But it would require some artificial, extremely organized construction for some visual stimulus to elicit a sonic response the person would recognize as music (for example), let alone a work of Beethoven. I can imagine a possible exception being something vaguely rhythmic, and then of course we can also argue to death about what constitutes music.

As for people saying they hear Bach when they are making a photograph, you’re right, I don’t think it is anything profound. Stuff reminds people of other stuff all the time. Thats normal. What I suggest watching out for is when someone says “the light in the clouds was polyphony”, or “my images are double fugues”...



You’ve raised an interesting counterpoint (sorry again about the intended puns). I remember you said music is your primary thing, and don’t associate LF imagery with it. I believe you. Other posters say they do indeed “hear” music. I believe them too. But I think you’re also going beyond these claims. That is, it seems you’re saying that since you don’t “hear” music in landscape imagery, then no one else does either. Or if they think they do, it's “artificial,” “forced, “BS,” “marketing,” or merely adds “gravitas.” Is this a fair summary? More telling, is there a way someone might describe this experience and convince you it really does happen to them, even if it never does to you? I’m also curious if you agree with the definition of synesthesia offered in Bernice’s post #21 just above, or how it might be improved.

[Alan Klein]

The closest I get to associating music to photos is when I make a slide show as a video presentation and choose particular music to fit the slides. So if it's from a vacation where I travelled to the Southwest, for example, shooting the national parks there like Monument Valley, I'll include Native Indian or Western music. It' makes the show more interesting to me and I believe to other viewers as well.

[Tin Can]

I usually add a personal voice over

[Bruce Watson]

~There is an entire body of Intellectual/Academia work done on this specific topic.

There is. Dr. Oliver Sacks contributed more than a little. And more than a little to the understanding of how the brain hears and interprets music. He was also interested in amusia and it's causes.

If Dr. Sacks tells me that hearing music while working the ground glass is not synesthesia, I believe him.

Sacks wrote Musicophilia (https://www.amazon.com/Musicophilia-Tales-Music-Revised-Expanded/dp/1400033535/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=oliver+sacks&qid=1638716545&s=books&sr=1-4), an interesting and enlightening book that touches on this topic, if peripherally. If anyone here is interested in how the brain and music work, I highly recommend it.

[ic-racer]

My music is pretty remote from my photography. I don't even have my own CDs playing in the darkroom.
This is the stuff I come up with in my music studio: https://valco.bandcamp.com

221971

[Tin Can]

I hear words from running water in my kitchen sink only

Something new

[Michael R]

I hear words from running water in my kitchen sink only

Something new

I’d have that looked at :D

[Vaughn]

I hear words from running water in my kitchen sink only

Something new

Or something old. There have been a few times I have been presented with loud, over-powering, random noise. In such cases my brain tries to interpret the randomness into reconizable patterns. It is a very interesting experience. Quite different from 'white noise', such as a waterfall. Solo backpacking in the Grand Canyon, I was off trail up a side canyon, camping by a small creek. The noise from the frogs was over-whelming and random enough that I heard, tires screeching, people yelling, horns honking, and all sorts of phantom noises (after all it was Phantom Canyon that I was in). I had no idea how I was to sleep that night, but they all went silent at dark. A more recent event, I was under a tree filled with starlings -- my brain tried to interpret the wall of noise as a bad pop music station.

[Heroique]

I hear … a fair amount of jazz … while working the ground glass, I heard a particular Duke Ellington tune, it's been so long now I don't remember which one. I don't hear it when I look at the finished print, but only heard it when working the scene.

While working the GG, were you visualizing a sepia-toned print?

If yes, I’d say you were hearing his early tune, “Sepia Panorama.” :D

Chances are you’d heard it before – it spent time as Duke’s theme song for his orchestra, back in the 1930s.


I actually asked the late great Oliver Sacks what it was. I thought it might be a version of synesthesia, but he disabused me of that notion. Still don't know the cause, but I thought it was great whenever it happened.

Please tell us more!

If you report what Dr. Sacks told you (I almost said diagnosed), LFers who “hear” landscapes not caused by synesthesia might better understand their experience.

For example, the music they hear might be triggered by associative links we haven’t discussed yet.

[Heroique]

Solo backpacking in the Grand Canyon, I was off trail up a side canyon, camping by a small creek. The noise from the frogs was over-whelming and random enough that I heard, tires screeching, people yelling, horns honking, and all sorts of phantom noises (after all it was Phantom Canyon that I was in).

Yep, I totally get this. Often when I pitch my tent near a river whose strong current is moving sub-surface rocks so they knock and click against each other, I think I’m hearing human voices – like a group of people speaking a little too far away for their words to be intelligible. Quite unsettling. Especially when you’re alone at night in the middle of a wilderness. Helps me appreciate Native American myths about river spirits.

[Tin Can]

Critters sometimes do speak. Beautiful woman, remote farm pond, one male Duck was 'dominating' every female duck, we sat and watched

The woman was transcendent, no we did not, yet I was in lust

Frogs can be very interesting, I was hiking solo in deep woods, came upon a puddle full of happy frogs

We communed on some level for hours, fun!

I have walked right into a rangale of deer at dusk about to bed, many times

I just think about where I would sleep

[Bernice Loui]

The human and brains of other sentient beings is better understood then most would know today due to advances in:

~Technology, Functional MRI, Diffusion Tensor Imaging MRI, EEG, Brain chemistry analysis, Active neuron analysis and LOTs more. If you're curious about this and ok with admin to discuss, it can be done in great detail_as it is FAR off topic and not directly related to LFF, yet is directly related to LFF and much more.

~Study Methodology that follows many of the Scientific study protocols (how studies are created and why), statistical analysis and methodology, peer reviewed analysis before publication and these publications are still subject to critique by others.

~What must be understood, during Sigmund Freud's era and time, his theories and methodologies would never pass peer review today... and more than a few of Sigmund Freud's theories have been strongly dis-proven.

~Psychology and Psychiatry has changed LOTs since them "lay on the couch_Sigmund Freud_shrinkologist" analysis days.

For one who toots of not being a neuroscientist, then toot the brain is poorly understood is NOT good at all.
Before tooting synesthesia as being defined by your limited understanding, do some study and research into this specific topic of Academia.

Facts and reality do not change minds, it is a evolutionary survival tool and it can be easily exploited in many, many, many ways.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mind-reviews-denial/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Image "previsualization" comes up often in the world of view camera image making and other visual creative art forms. Previsualization is related to Intuition an how intuition works in the mind/brain. Based on current studies and research on this topic about 25% of the population is capable of intuitive thinking. It is also related to how an individual learns, watch this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=YH9Zn7Glf3E


Bernice








While the brain is still relatively poorly understood (and also, I’m not a neuroscientist), synesthesia is roughly understood as a neurological condition of crossed psychophysical responses to stimuli. For example, a sound wave may be interpreted by the brain as more than sound (auditory) but also responses normally associated with other stimuli. Perhaps visual responses such as colour or pattern or shape.

[Doremus Scudder]

For the Greek academics in the Classical period, "music" was much more than sound. Sonic music was a subset and a physical manifestation of the real music, which was the mathematical organization of the heavens: the Music of the Spheres. Furthermore, the "real" musicians at that time were not the performers, but the mathematicians who were exploring, explaining and better understanding the sonic world of overtones, scales, intervals and their numeric relationships. The monochord was a favorite experimental instrument used to explore the overtone series.

So, in the broader sense of music as divine (or artistic) organization, I often have similar experiences when appreciating and comprehending things as dissimilar on the surface as Picasso's "Guernica" or David's "Oath of Horatio," Beethoven's "Emperor" piano concerto, a short story by Hermann Hesse or Steven Crane, and walking the length of St. Peter's in Rome; or even enjoying a well-prepared meal. The joy and elation in the recognition and understanding of the organization realized through the hard-wired and visceral human response to shapes, sounds, sights, smells and tastes, which are all tentacles of the same central processing hub, and the intellectual connections derived from societal content and reference, are at the heart of artistic experiences.

There are, however, fundamental differences in artistic media that cannot be ignored, so we should be careful equating or conflating them. Literature and theater depend on language, which is processed much differently in the brain than the basic senses. Music, dance (and literature/theater/film) have a temporal organization that painting, architecture and sculpture do not. Sight and hearing are different pathways, even though those with synesthesia get those tentacles tangled up, and are processed different parts of the brain, etc.

Still, the comprehension and grasp of the organization, logic and "meaning," if you will, of works of art in different media, and the associated emotional and intellectual responses, seem to me to come from a common, central and "deeper" place in our beings, despite the varied sensory pathways that are employed to perceive a given thing.

In this sense, then, I can understand equating the organization of the shapes, tones and content in a photograph with the organization of a Bach fugue. Similarly, I can find parallels in musical virtuosity, skill in crafting a sentence and dexterity in wielding a hammer and chisel or brush.

I am a trained classical musician; I hear music in my head (or being played) almost all my waking hours. Strangely, though, my mind is soundless when I am intently engaged photographing or printing. I cannot have music in my darkroom; it is too distracting. I can't listen passively; there's no such thing as "background music" for me (we all know how bad multitasking is). Nevertheless, my gut feeling when photographing is often quite comparable to that of performing. Likewise, my experiences listening, viewing, reading, etc. often seem very similar on an underlying level.

Somewhere, down deep, there is a commonality. I think this is what people refer to when they profess to hear music in an image, and so forth. In this sense, so do I.

Best,

Doremus

[Heroique]

...Shapes, sounds, sights, smells and tastes, are all tentacles of the same central processing hub ... those with synesthesia get those tentacles tangled up.

I’m beginning to feel like an octopus. :D

Nonetheless, my tentacles wrap around and sense a splendid post, even if its discussion of music and the arts leans very heavily toward the Apollonian rational (and mimetic) side of classical Greek thought, and almost not at all toward its Dionysian irrational side (and sub-conscious side to use a more modern term). Your post is a fantastic discussion of the former which I think will help posters who are hearing music on their GG. Thank you!

I hope you have time to elaborate on one surprising claim: namely, that painting, architecture, and sculpture (and presumably LF images) don’t have the temporal organization of the other arts. Are you saying, for example, that the rationally spaced columns of the Parthenon or the regular ripples in a sand dune or a pond have no temporal organization for the viewer? The photographer Namkung back in post #17 might disagree: “When I find [a composition], there always has to be a unifying, kinetic force. Which means the rhythm.” The temporal organization which I think exists both in music and photography is the associative link – I’d say the supreme one in my case – that causes one to evoke the other, whether or not synesthesia plays a role.

[Joe O'Hara]

Doremus said: "...my mind is soundless when I am intently engaged photographing or printing. I cannot have music in my darkroom; it is too distracting. I can't listen passively; there's no such thing as "background music" for me..."

Exactly the same here. For me music is to be listened to, actively, not bathed in. I am listening to the ambient sounds though when I photograph, and noticing the smells and the way the ground feels. I often do best when my conscious mind seemingly shuts down but the sensory channels are all open.

Music happens in time. To a great extent, it depends on our memory while we are listening to recognize musical ideas recurring, changing, often simultaneously (the final bars of Mozart's Symphony No. 41 in C Major K. 551 are a mind-blowing example of this). Photographs in contrast freeze time: We select one instant, and one arrangement of subject matter, and that becomes the picture. We can then examine it later for as long as we like, but the image doesn't change. It is all there on the paper, right now. We decide what parts of the image to fix on, and in which order. It is not that way with music. The composer is driving.

I can't imagine two art forms more different, but that may be just me.

[Doremus Scudder]

Heroique,

I'm not sure I agree with you about my post leaning heavily toward the Apollonian. I really believe that many of the basic elements of composition and colors of an image along with elements of melody, harmony timbre and rhythm (in the basic metric sense) in music, movement, gesture and pose in dance and vocal timbre in recited poetry and acting are things we respond to instinctively, at the level of the limbic system or even at a more visceral level with untempered emotional responses that are hard-wired into our brains by years of evolution. These responses are common to all humanity, as opposed to the intellectual and cultural elements of "higher" thought. Example: I read the fear, anger or warning in the tone of someone's voice, whether or not I understand the language. Much in music and the visual arts and dance is "wordless" and often relies heavily on our common instinctive responses to things as a means of communication. True, the organization of an image leans toward the Apollonian, as does form in music, but that element in a work of art that causes us to immediately catch our breath and gives us a thrill (say the monumental sweep of St. Peter's, or Beethoven's "three Gs and an E-flat" or the leap through the window at the beginning of Nijinsky's "Invitation to the Dance" choreography) has to be straight from Dionysus. Things like songs, program music, images with specific cultural and literary references, etc. incorporate even more Apollonian elements. Sure, Schubert songs have moving melodies, but one doesn't really get "Gretchen am Spinnrade" or "Erlkönig" until one understands the words.

Thus, a photograph can contain visual elements that immediately evoke a basic emotional response. These are not just things we recognize, but shapes, forms, repetitions of elements (aka "rhythm - more later), colors, etc. to which we instinctively respond. Overlaid on these are the more cultural, conscious and "intellectual" elements in the image: the things we recognize in societal and academic contexts, references to other art works or literature, the printed word, etc. The interplay can be extremely complex and also extremely rewarding.

I tend not to like dividing the world into polarities, however. For me, there are 50 shades of grey between Apollonian and Dionysian, not just a mix of the two pure elements in whatever proportions. We have complex responses that lie between the two extremes. Still, the concepts help us approach our complex responses and actions and are, therefore, useful - as long as we don't really believe that we or the world are really that simple (kind of like the Zone System...).

On to whether static art works have a temporal aspect.

Again, generalizations and oversimplifications make things easier to approach, but end up not being the whole picture. A piece of music, like a dance or a play, unfolds in time. It's elements are presented in a specified order in a calculated temporal juxtaposition to each other. Recapitulation in a symphony wouldn't be one without the exposition coming first; neither would the development be anything at all without the themes being elaborated on having been previously presented. And, that tonic chord at the end certainly doesn't belong anywhere else! The apprehension of musical form depends on our remembering what came before and only becomes perfectly clear when the repetition (or variation) occurs. One loves the opening themes of Beethoven's "Emperor" concerto, but isn't moved by the monumental architecture of the work until somewhere in the end of the last movement, when the whole construct becomes blazingly apparent in one instant of remembered themes from the previous movements. Time is thus an essential organizing element, upon which the composer relies for dramatic effect.

A painting, sculpture, structure or photograph exists in its entirety at a given instant. Sure, it takes time to view and appreciate all the elements in such a work, but, to an overwhelming extent, it is the viewer, not the artist, that is deciding on what to view when, in what order and for how long. We live in a temporal framework and our interaction with anything takes time. That's not really the same as structuring an artistic expression using time. Yes, there can be temporal elements in, say, architecture: you see the outside before the inside, the entrance before the back rooms, etc. but, for me at least, these elements are more spatially organized than temporally.

You ask, "are you saying, for example, that the rationally spaced columns of the Parthenon or the regular ripples in a sand dune or a pond have no temporal organization for the viewer?" I answer that you are confusing the analogous with the equivalent. "Rhythm" in visual art is simply the repetition of some same or similar visual element, be it columns, ripples or trees. But they really don't come one-after-the-other in time; they are all there all at the same time. It is just us that needs time to take them in and recognize the repetition. Music is different: Joe O'Hara said it more succinctly above: in music, "the composer is driving."

Nevertheless, the mere fact that we call such visual and spatial elements "rhythm" tends to support the cross-media connection that started this thread. There is, almost undoubtedly, some kind of connection deep in our minds. How far we want to carry the analogy is a matter of choice :)

Best,

Doremus

[Heroique]

True, the organization of an image leans toward the Apollonian, as does form in music, but that element in a work of art that causes us to immediately catch our breath and gives us a thrill … has to be straight from Dionysus.

Thanks for the Pulitzer Prize clarification on Apollo and Dionysus – in addition to how time plays a different type of role in plastic works of art, like sculpture, architecture, LF prints. Yes, I think you saw I was referring to the viewer’s existence in time as he or she views these works, which are, of course, static in time. And I think you addressed that very well and added some improving and effective distinctions. Thanks for the time it took enrich your ideas further. About music and the irrational, I have some disagreements, not too significant, so for now will save my breath to cool my porridge. BTW, this thread is giving me some ideas about a companion thread – how composing on the GG can evoke pure silence. I hope you show up for opening night.


And, that tonic chord at the end certainly doesn't belong anywhere else!

This triggered a memory from an introductory course on orchestral music from long, long ago. If memory serves, the teacher shared an anecdote about the child Mozart, who one night couldn’t get to sleep because he was very troubled. His concerned father Leopold, upon investigation, discovered it was because the last piece of music the child heard before bedtime had not ended on the tonic, but on the dominant. Makes one curious if some of the more modern music played down at Orchestral Hall deprives audiences of sleep when they return home. ;^)

[Vaughn]

...

A painting, sculpture, structure or photograph exists in its entirety at a given instant. Sure, it takes time to view and appreciate all the elements in such a work, but, to an overwhelming extent, it is the viewer, not the artist, that is deciding on what to view when, in what order and for how long...Doremus

This is where the art of the curator of a show of photographs or the designer of a book of photographs can step in (if they have the skills, it can be the photographer) and reclaim control of the viewing of a cohesive set of photographs -- creating a flow, visually connecting images, providing rests and stops to create a rhythm...which may or may not be based on any musical theory. One can restore time as an important part of one's photographic work, not unlike literature or a play.

Granted, while it is the job of the show curator or book designer to lead the viewer to water, both the images and the design have a lot of wrangling to do to keep the viewer from just getting a drink next door at the bar.


Makes one curious if some of the more modern music played down at Orchestral Hall deprives audiences of sleep when they return home. ;^

I would not be surprised. The ancient Chinese made a connection between the qualities of the music and the state of the State.

I wonder if any of us of the Euro-centric world view ever see images and 'hear', for example, höömii? (Mongolian throat singing -- I listened to some in Kyoto at a nightclub that had the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers painted on the outside.)

[Doremus Scudder]

... About music and the irrational, I have some disagreements, not too significant, so for now will save my breath to cool my porridge. ...

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

[Doremus Scudder]

... About music and the irrational, I have some disagreements, not too significant, so for now will save my breath to cool my porridge. ...

I'd love to hear your thoughts.


This is where the art of the curator of a show of photographs or the designer of a book of photographs can step in (if they have the skills, it can be the photographer) and reclaim control of the viewing of a cohesive set of photographs -- creating a flow, visually connecting images, providing rests and stops to create a rhythm...which may or may not be based on any musical theory. One can restore time as an important part of one's photographic work, not unlike literature or a play. ...

Indeed. Restoring the narrative sequence adds a temporal element.

Best,

Doremus

[Kirk Gittings]

I love many forms of music from Classical and Jazz to Grunge and Bluegrass. But when I am photographing I am fully present in the scene and everything else feels like a distraction. I want to feel the wind, the smells, the color, the sense of history, anything that puts me more present in the landscape. I guess I'm seeking a kind of hyper presence, something distinct from my everyday life.

[Drew Wiley]

I came to the conclusion long ago that certain responses to ordered pattern and rhythm are instinctive to our species, but differ in response somewhat, to that degree it might be visually versus audibly handled. No, I don't "hear" music in my head when doing photographic composition or printing; just the opposite. Often when hearing a particularly interesting piece of music, in my imagination I "map" it as if it were visual instead. For example, Jimi's remarkable talent for "filling up space" right to the edges with his guitar, yet with remarkable balance devoid of redundant clutter, causes me to plot the details in my head much like a Pollock painting; for he too efficiently filled space clear to the edges without clutter. Mere wannabees of either of those men can't, and just make overlapping noise, whether audible or visual.

So I made the right personal choice. My childhood music teacher still gave me dirty looks clear up till the year he died, when I myself was well into middle age. But even he liked my photographs.

[Alan Klein]

Heroique,
...

Thus, a photograph can contain visual elements that immediately evoke a basic emotional response. These are not just things we recognize, but shapes, forms, repetitions of elements (aka "rhythm - more later), colors, etc. to which we instinctively respond. Overlaid on these are the more cultural, conscious and "intellectual" elements in the image: the things we recognize in societal and academic contexts, references to other art works or literature, the printed word, etc. The interplay can be extremely complex and also extremely rewarding.

...

Best,

Doremus

This is why the "rules of photography" work. Because rather than rules, they reflect the aesthetics and organizational parameters that are already in our heads.

[Bernice Loui]

Which brings up Fibonacci, aka Leonardo Pisano and the Fibonacci Sequence that can be found in music, paintings (ala Foto images), sculpture, architecture and lots more. Fibonacci Sequence is based on observations of Nature and the way Nature IS. This is one of the many not always apparent ways humanity and MUCH more is directly connected to Nature or why these patterns in Nature have a persistent appeal in many ways.

https://www.classicfm.com/discover-music/fibonacci-sequence-in-music/

In the process of creative / expressive image making or music, practitioners make choices in their work. They can choose to learn about the ways Nature really is then work with the ways Nature IS (the "rules") in their work as a symbiotic relationship or choose to impose entirely self-centric ego as their work ignoring the ways Nature really is.

~Which of these approaches tend to produce works that endure the passage of time?


One of the many ways it's all connected.
Bernice





This is why the "rules of photography" work. Because rather than rules, they reflect the aesthetics and organizational parameters that are already in our heads.

[Michael R]

This is going exactly as I predicted lol. Sorry for trolling but you people should exchange artist statements for christmas.

[Bernice Loui]

Previously discussed on LFF.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?118181-Are-Photographer-s-Obsessed-With-Sharpness-but-blind-to-the-bigger-picture

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?152860-Basic-Landscape-Composition-Formulas

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?105246-How-Did-We-learn-To-Look-At-Images

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?109051-What-Are-Users-Expectations-From-A-Lens

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?161257-DOF-Lighting-Composition-or-all-three

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?164720-%93Good-composition-is-merely-the-strongest-way-of-seeing-%94



How are these previous discussion related to "Music as analogy for LF photography"

Bernice

[Tin Can]

Outliers are a necessary variable, if we are all in 'tune' we don't mutate and evolve

A General Model of Dissonance Reduction: Unifying Past Accounts via an Emotion Regulation Perspective (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.540081/full)

[Heroique]

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Please, if I may ask for just a moment of your patience, I just might be able to organize a few more thoughts. :cool:

I’d say I’m close to 95% agreement with your beautifully clarifying post above, so I don’t think my thoughts below qualify as a significant disagreement with them. In fact, some of it echoes what you say, even while stating differences, concerning mainly temporal organization of art, cognition, psychology.

I’ll start with a simple claim: If viewers need a period of time to perceive art, then it is impossible for any viewer to experience an art that exists, as you say, only in a static moment (such as architecture, sculpture, painting, LF prints). I’m sure you noticed your ideas slightly straining, eloquently, and with a nice summersault thrown in, to have it both ways. For example, “a painting, sculpture, structure or photograph exists in its entirety at a given instant,” and then later, “We need time to take them in and recognize [rhythm].” In a phrase, I think if a work can exist “entirely” in a given instant (and maybe it can), then the work, as such, is beyond our comprehension. We won’t perceive it because, I agree with you, we need time. The time necessary, for example, for our eyes simply to take it in. You say columns when looking at the Parthenon and dune ripples when looking at a print “really don't come one-after-the-other in time,” but I hope you might consider that they really do come one-after-the-other (yes, literally) as our scanning eyes take advantage of the requirements of time – looking left to right, up and down, sideways, jumping from point A to point B – whether we’re attending a show of LF prints, visiting Athens, or standing on Maui watching real waves. To be sure, even a work associated with perfect physical stillness, let’s say Rodin’s “The Thinker,” will offer-up rhythm, movement, and other elements of time as we stand before it and admire its contemplative tranquility. Our mind can do no other. I will quickly add that I know this isn’t an iron-clad argument. For example, I’m aware that I’ve left out any mention of Plato’s cave and the eternal, timeless forms just outside the entrance which is at my back.

And I didn’t even get to music and the irrational. Euripides, Dionysus, and Oliver Sacks will all have to wait. BTW, do you remember that old thread about how the eye works? Maybe it's one of the links above by Bernice. Also reminds me of Paulr. This is beginning to remind me of those fun times.

[Vaughn]

Excellent points, Heroique.

One of the uses of composition is to guide the viewers' eyes within the image...to draw the eyes in and then keep them interested in taking in the whole piece...to break the slow stride of those who otherwise walk along a gallery wall, nodding their heads down to the label and up to the print, a few steps, down to the label and up to the print, a few steps, down to the label and up to the print. To get them to spend some time with an image. Not always easy to do with pictures of dirt, bushes, rocks, trees, and that sort of otherwise boring stuff...especially with subject-centered viewers. I like to reward those who do with small minor things hidden in the image if possible (such as the mist in the image below -- what is hidden is not the mist, but the depths the mist is rising from).

I just posted this in the Alt processes thread. It took me a long time to fall in love with the print and to finally mat and frame it up. Taken at the top of a waterfall, this is definitely a high-volume soundscape. Too loud for rock and roll. Not shown directly is the tall drop -- semi-represented, along with the sound, by the rising mist above the fall and the turbulence of the water exiting stage left. The glacial sourced light-blue water is flowing between two lakes in Parque Nacional Torres del Paine in Chile.

5x7 FP4+, f16/ at 1/60 second, 180 or 210mm lens. 5x7 platinum/palladium print, taken 26 December 2018

[Doremus Scudder]

Heroique,

I agree with everything you say. My only point, and the only substantial difference between a viewer scanning through a photograph in time and a listener experiencing a piece of music in time, is that in the latter, the temporal organization, i.e., the order and speed of presentation, is determined by the composer/performers and the listener experiences the piece in that way only. When scanning a photograph or painting, etc., the viewer decides the order, the speed, if something gets left out, revisited, etc. In this latter case, scanning with one's eye, the brain is really working to get an impression of the object as it exists as a whole; it's instinctive and basic to visual perception. When listening to music, the brain has to be trained to recognize form, repetitions, variations, etc. as they are presented in time, using tools are aren't simply instinctive, but which require a higher order of processing; something learned.

The difference is not huge, but important. However, so are the similarities you point out, which lead to the myriad comparisons of two-dimensional, plastic and architectural art to music. Again, I'll posit that these comparisons are by way of analogy - i.e., extended meaning of those musical terms used for comparison, and are not really equivalent. They are nevertheless similar enough to make the analogy valid.

Sure, the artist often has tools to direct the viewer's attention in a certain order, but I really think that the experience of a static work of art is fundamentally different from that of one dependent on temporal organization.

I've got Oliver Sacks' book on the way. We can discuss that when I've read it (and digested it :) ).

Best,

Doremus

[Bernice Loui]

Yes, indeediee.. Nice print and example of how composition serves as one of the foundational elements to an expressive print.

Previously posted example.
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?163638-Once-upon-a-LF-wedding

Where to do the eyes go in this image of the bride, bride/groom and why?

Both music and images can be considered as forms of language, more and deeper understanding/comprehension of the language allows extracting more and deeper meaning to what is being expressed within a given language. As with any language or means of human expression, there is effort required to learn any language or means of communication.


Bernice





Excellent points, Heroique.

One of the uses of composition is to guide the viewers' eyes within the image...to draw the eyes in and then keep them interested in taking in the whole piece...to break the slow stride of those who otherwise walk along a gallery wall, nodding their heads down to the label and up to the print, a few steps, down to the label and up to the print, a few steps, down to the label and up to the print. To get them to spend some time with an image. Not always easy to do with pictures of dirt, bushes, rocks, trees, and that sort of otherwise boring stuff...especially with subject-centered viewers. I like to reward those who do with small minor things hidden in the image if possible (such as the mist in the image below -- what is hidden is not the mist, but the depths the mist is rising from).

[Tin Can]

Right now watching VOIR 'The Duality of Appeal' on Netflix

https://www.rogerebert.com/streaming/voir-netflix-tv-review-david-fincher-2021

They are showing exactly what most members love

and why

[Heroique]

Taken at the top of a waterfall, this is definitely a high-volume soundscape. Too loud for rock and roll.

Was it loud enough for bass-heavy, industrial dance music?

BTW, looks like you’re inches from a fall into the abyss!

Viewers sensing danger might stand an extra foot or two from the frame, squinting to see the label – and be quite happy to do so.

[Vaughn]

Was it loud enough for bass-heavy, industrial dance music?

BTW, looks like you’re inches from a fall into the abyss!

Viewers sensing danger might stand an extra foot or two from the frame, squinting to see the label – and be quite happy to do so.

My son sent me a short video he captured at a rave in the middle of Tokyo's airport...so I think the answer to your first question is, "I can't hear you! What did you say?!"

On the second part -- yes, I was being a bad example to the children of the tourists behind me. But it is all 'grand landscape' down there and I was drawn to this rushing of water. The two 5x7 panorama below was what was the backdrop for the waterfall image above. The waterfall would be dropping into this lake way back there directly under the tallest 'horn' of the mountain in the right frame.

I worked at the Grand Canyon (South Rim) for a long summer in 1977. I would see tourists arrive at Mather Point, walk up to the railing, start to comprehend the vastness and depth of the Canyon, and back away from the railing for a bit. It leaves an impression...

[Alan Klein]

Please, if I may ask for just a moment of your patience, I just might be able to organize a few more thoughts. :cool:

I’d say I’m close to 95% agreement with your beautifully clarifying post above, so I don’t think my thoughts below qualify as a significant disagreement with them. In fact, some of it echoes what you say, even while stating differences, concerning mainly temporal organization of art, cognition, psychology.

I’ll start with a simple claim: If viewers need a period of time to perceive art, then it is impossible for any viewer to experience an art that exists, as you say, only in a static moment (such as architecture, sculpture, painting, LF prints). I’m sure you noticed your ideas slightly straining, eloquently, and with a nice summersault thrown in, to have it both ways. For example, “a painting, sculpture, structure or photograph exists in its entirety at a given instant,” and then later, “We need time to take them in and recognize [rhythm].” In a phrase, I think if a work can exist “entirely” in a given instant (and maybe it can), then the work, as such, is beyond our comprehension. We won’t perceive it because, I agree with you, we need time. The time necessary, for example, for our eyes simply to take it in. You say columns when looking at the Parthenon and dune ripples when looking at a print “really don't come one-after-the-other in time,” but I hope you might consider that they really do come one-after-the-other (yes, literally) as our scanning eyes take advantage of the requirements of time – looking left to right, up and down, sideways, jumping from point A to point B – whether we’re attending a show of LF prints, visiting Athens, or standing on Maui watching real waves. To be sure, even a work associated with perfect physical stillness, let’s say Rodin’s “The Thinker,” will offer-up rhythm, movement, and other elements of time as we stand before it and admire its contemplative tranquility. Our mind can do no other. I will quickly add that I know this isn’t an iron-clad argument. For example, I’m aware that I’ve left out any mention of Plato’s cave and the eternal, timeless forms just outside the entrance which is at my back.

And I didn’t even get to music and the irrational. Euripides, Dionysus, and Oliver Sacks will all have to wait. BTW, do you remember that old thread about how the eye works? Maybe it's one of the links above by Bernice. Also reminds me of Paulr. This is beginning to remind me of those fun times.

I think it takes about two seconds to figure out if you're physically attracted to a woman, a car, a shirt, or a photo. Our brain assesses it pretty quickly and we move on. If you have to think about it too much, you're really looking for intellectual reasons to like it or not. The brain's desires and aesthetics work quicker than that.

[Alan Klein]

Heroique,

I agree with everything you say. My only point, and the only substantial difference between a viewer scanning through a photograph in time and a listener experiencing a piece of music in time, is that in the latter, the temporal organization, i.e., the order and speed of presentation, is determined by the composer/performers and the listener experiences the piece in that way only. When scanning a photograph or painting, etc., the viewer decides the order, the speed, if something gets left out, revisited, etc. In this latter case, scanning with one's eye, the brain is really working to get an impression of the object as it exists as a whole; it's instinctive and basic to visual perception. When listening to music, the brain has to be trained to recognize form, repetitions, variations, etc. as they are presented in time, using tools are aren't simply instinctive, but which require a higher order of processing; something learned.

The difference is not huge, but important. However, so are the similarities you point out, which lead to the myriad comparisons of two-dimensional, plastic and architectural art to music. Again, I'll posit that these comparisons are by way of analogy - i.e., extended meaning of those musical terms used for comparison, and are not really equivalent. They are nevertheless similar enough to make the analogy valid.

Sure, the artist often has tools to direct the viewer's attention in a certain order, but I really think that the experience of a static work of art is fundamentally different from that of one dependent on temporal organization.

I've got Oliver Sacks' book on the way. We can discuss that when I've read it (and digested it :) ).

Best,

Doremus

Just like we don't have to take courses on English and grammar to speak and appreciate a good speaker, we don't have to understand music as a musician might have to. The brain has a natural affinity to appreciate music without knowing how to read a note. The same with photos and art in general. The ability of people to have art inspire feelings within them is in-born.

[Vaughn]

...

Sure, the artist often has tools to direct the viewer's attention in a certain order, but I really think that the experience of a static work of art is fundamentally different from that of one dependent on temporal organization.
...

Doremus

Some work survives as individual stand-alone photographs, but most artists tend to work in groups of photographs that are linked together by a common theme, look, and feel. Yes, we can separate a piece out of the show and enjoy it on its own, just like we can listen to and enjoy just one movement of a Bach piece...but we can also experience the show (or book) as an experience through time in an expressed order determined by the artist/curator...and as I mentioned before, with visual rests, crescendos, and other music-like characteristics.

My point being that in photography, the single image is not necessarily the measure. It is more often the collection of work, presented with a specific timing and pattern...just like classical music...that we appreciate and is the measure of an artist.


Just like we don't have to take courses on English and grammar to speak and appreciate a good speaker, we don't have to understand music as a musician might have to. The brain has a natural affinity to appreciate music without knowing how to read a note. The same with photos and art in general. The ability of people to have art inspire feelings within them is in-born.

That is not how it works. A society trains its members in the appreciation of its art. How we see and how we hear has been trained into us since birth. One measure of an artist is how far they can break away from that training and still reach their audience. And one measure of a person experiencing a work of art is their use of their knowledge and experience to pull everything out of the work that the artist put into it.

PS -- I love the meme that says "Everything I know about classical music I learned watching Bugs Bunny."

[Doremus Scudder]

Some work survives as individual stand-alone photographs, but most artists tend to work in groups of photographs that are linked together by a common theme, look, and feel. Yes, we can separate a piece out of the show and enjoy it on its own, just like we can listen to and enjoy just one movement of a Bach piece...but we can also experience the show (or book) as an experience through time in an expressed order determined by the artist/curator...and as I mentioned before, with visual rests, crescendos, and other music-like characteristics.

My point being that in photography, the single image is not necessarily the measure. It is more often the collection of work, presented with a specific timing and pattern...just like classical music...that we appreciate and is the measure of an artist.

That is not how it works. A society trains its members in the appreciation of its art. How we see and how we hear has been trained into us since birth. One measure of an artist is how far they can break away from that training and still reach their audience. And one measure of a person experiencing an work of art is their use of their knowledge and experience to pull everything out of the work that the artist put into it.

The narrative sequence again. Although I really think the viewer determines the timing. Still, the order is decided by the artist/curator and thus there is a temporal element. Get the number of images up to 24 per second, and you've got a film :)

Doremus

[Doremus Scudder]

Just like we don't have to take courses on English and grammar to speak and appreciate a good speaker, we don't have to understand music as a musician might have to. The brain has a natural affinity to appreciate music without knowing how to read a note. The same with photos and art in general. The ability of people to have art inspire feelings within them is in-born.

I don't know Alan... I regularly decry the lack of literacy, both in the written word and in the appreciation of art and music. What you get out of a work of art, piece of music, novel, play, dance performance, etc. is completely dependent on what you bring to it.

How do we expect people who can't conjugate verbs, use the subjunctive mood correctly and only have a rudimentary vocabulary of mostly slang to get anything out of King Lear? These people have learned to speak, and likely to read, but not at a high enough level to understand Shakespeare's expression.

Similarly, those that only know music as four-beats-per-measure, three-chord harmony, diatonic melodies that span no more than an octave and simple three-minute AABA song forms will never get a handle on Strauß' "Der Rosenkavalier," not to mention Berg's "Wozzeck" or even Thelonius Monk, unless their understanding is expanded somehow. I don't think that comes automatically.

There is an analogous visual and spatial vocabulary that needs to be learned and then brought to visual art and dance (add knowledge of gesture and conventional mimicry to this latter). All that talk of golden mean, leading lines, proportion, figure-ground relationships, tonality, graphic organization, iconography, symbolism, allusion, etc., etc. isn't for nothing. They are parts the basic lexicon needed to understand the art works.

We may have a "natural affinity" for many things, but that is only potential. Without it being developed, we really end up without the basic tools and vocabulary to appreciate greatness.

It has ever been thus: the more culturally and artistically educated are able to understand more deeply and get more out of every aspect of art and culture. The fact that such education is now practically absent from our elementary schools only means that more people will be ill-equipped to benefit from the enjoyment of great works of art in any medium. I find that unfortunate.

Best,

Doremus

[Vaughn]

The narrative sequence again. ...
Doremus

Non-narrative sequenceing also. Not every piece of music tells a story.

[Bernice Loui]

How does one begin to learn about music, by extension in this discussion learn about expressive images be they photographs or paintings or similar images?

Musicians often begin by learning the basics of playing scales and numerous other related exercises_studies on their chosen musical instrument or similar with Voice lessons. This must included knowledge and skills in music theory. Technical proficiency with the chosen musical instrument often comes with massive amounts of practice, dedication and passion for mastery of the chosen musical instrument. Yet, there comes a time when the musician moves on from sheer technical proficiency of their musical instrument and develop their personal interpretation of any given piece of music.

Going back to a time before the Musical Staff, music was often written in Tablature for lute or passed on in much the same way as stories being told-shared. Think John Dowland and others for songs and melodies. Eventually, songs and melodies evolved into groups of musicians playing together increasing the complexity of melodies, harmony, rhythms, dynamics, timbre, texture, tonality and form. With more passage of time music developed into works like the Concerto, symphony to solo pieces for Piano, Jazz, Blues, Rock and much more.

Similarities of these examples carried over to photography can be found in learning how to use a camera and the technical aspects of making a photographic image using these technology tools. Then comes the often neglected and more difficult part of understanding this means of creative artistic expression. IMO, this is one of the reasons why photographers can be divided into Gear Centric then those who are creative-artistic expressive centric. To excel as a photographer demands mastery of both in many ways no different than an accomplished musician with excellent technique/technical mastery of their musical instrument and ability to personalize a given piece of music.

In both examples of accomplished musician or photographer demands massive amounts of work, passion, study, commitment and more to accomplish these life goals.

As for Bugs Bunny and Looney Toons/Merrie Melodies, Carl Stalling gets the thanks for setting-arranging so many classical pieces of music to those cartoons.


Bernice



Some work survives as individual stand-alone photographs, but most artists tend to work in groups of photographs that are linked together by a common theme, look, and feel. Yes, we can separate a piece out of the show and enjoy it on its own, just like we can listen to and enjoy just one movement of a Bach piece...but we can also experience the show (or book) as an experience through time in an expressed order determined by the artist/curator...and as I mentioned before, with visual rests, crescendos, and other music-like characteristics.

My point being that in photography, the single image is not necessarily the measure. It is more often the collection of work, presented with a specific timing and pattern...just like classical music...that we appreciate and is the measure of an artist.



That is not how it works. A society trains its members in the appreciation of its art. How we see and how we hear has been trained into us since birth. One measure of an artist is how far they can break away from that training and still reach their audience. And one measure of a person experiencing a work of art is their use of their knowledge and experience to pull everything out of the work that the artist put into it.

PS -- I love the meme that says "Everything I know about classical music I learned watching Bugs Bunny."

[Michael R]

I don't know Alan... I regularly decry the lack of literacy, both in the written word and in the appreciation of art and music. What you get out of a work of art, piece of music, novel, play, dance performance, etc. is completely dependent on what you bring to it.

How do we expect people who can't conjugate verbs, use the subjunctive mood correctly and only have a rudimentary vocabulary of mostly slang to get anything out of King Lear? These people have learned to speak, and likely to read, but not at a high enough level to understand Shakespeare's expression.

Similarly, those that only know music as four-beats-per-measure, three-chord harmony, diatonic melodies that span no more than an octave and simple three-minute AABA song forms will never get a handle on Strauß' "Der Rosenkavalier," not to mention Berg's "Wozzeck" or even Thelonius Monk, unless their understanding is expanded somehow. I don't think that comes automatically.

There is an analogous visual and spatial vocabulary that needs to be learned and then brought to visual art and dance (add knowledge of gesture and conventional mimicry to this latter). All that talk of golden mean, leading lines, proportion, figure-ground relationships, tonality, graphic organization, iconography, symbolism, allusion, etc., etc. isn't for nothing. They are parts the basic lexicon needed to understand the art works.

We may have a "natural affinity" for many things, but that is only potential. Without it being developed, we really end up without the basic tools and vocabulary to appreciate greatness.

It has ever been thus: the more culturally and artistically educated are able to understand more deeply and get more out of every aspect of art and culture. The fact that such education is now practically absent from our elementary schools only means that more people will be ill-equipped to benefit from the enjoyment of great works of art in any medium. I find that unfortunate.

Best,

Doremus

Wow. I don't think much of this holds up at all under scrutiny, nor has it been my experience in a life of music and art. Seems extremely elitist, not to mention likely leading to little more than a fairly vacuous technical appreciation rather than anything genuine.

[Vaughn]

Wow. I don't think much of this holds up at all under scrutiny, nor has it been my experience in a life of music and art. Seems extremely elitist, not to mention likely leading to little more than a fairly vacuous technical appreciation rather than anything genuine.

To move this into sports, my experience with sport indicates that a sport is much more enjoyable to view and better understanding can be had of the activities being viewed if one has a decent understanding of the rules, strategies, and athletes of the sport. Or is Joe Blow at the end of the bar being an elitist for knowing the batting averages of the major players in the National League? :cool:

[Heroique]

Doremus’ post is magnificent and I’m sure he knows how potentially explosive it is.

He can count me among his generals.

Sadly, our hieratic armies will be no match for the demotic gangs on the way. :cool:

[Tin Can]

Vienna...?

I joined team Demon long ago, with all losers

I smell Dark Age....... again

maybe next life we all sing a happy song

after the feast

[Alan Klein]

I don't know Alan... I regularly decry the lack of literacy, both in the written word and in the appreciation of art and music. What you get out of a work of art, piece of music, novel, play, dance performance, etc. is completely dependent on what you bring to it.

How do we expect people who can't conjugate verbs, use the subjunctive mood correctly and only have a rudimentary vocabulary of mostly slang to get anything out of King Lear? These people have learned to speak, and likely to read, but not at a high enough level to understand Shakespeare's expression.

Similarly, those that only know music as four-beats-per-measure, three-chord harmony, diatonic melodies that span no more than an octave and simple three-minute AABA song forms will never get a handle on Strauß' "Der Rosenkavalier," not to mention Berg's "Wozzeck" or even Thelonius Monk, unless their understanding is expanded somehow. I don't think that comes automatically.

There is an analogous visual and spatial vocabulary that needs to be learned and then brought to visual art and dance (add knowledge of gesture and conventional mimicry to this latter). All that talk of golden mean, leading lines, proportion, figure-ground relationships, tonality, graphic organization, iconography, symbolism, allusion, etc., etc. isn't for nothing. They are parts the basic lexicon needed to understand the art works.

We may have a "natural affinity" for many things, but that is only potential. Without it being developed, we really end up without the basic tools and vocabulary to appreciate greatness.

It has ever been thus: the more culturally and artistically educated are able to understand more deeply and get more out of every aspect of art and culture. The fact that such education is now practically absent from our elementary schools only means that more people will be ill-equipped to benefit from the enjoyment of great works of art in any medium. I find that unfortunate.

Best,

Doremus

Reading is not the same as listening to speech. The first must be learned while the latter comes naturally. The same with music. A person without any music experience or playing an instrument can hum a song or whistle it and tap a beat. They automatically understand timbre, beat, melody. Of course, they might not understand the complexities of an orchestral piece. But the redimentaries are there. It's the same with photographs. People tend to pick the same photos as the best. Why? There has to be something inborn that is in all of us.

[Alan Klein]

How does one begin to learn about music, by extension in this discussion learn about expressive images be they photographs or paintings or similar images?

Musicians often begin by learning the basics of playing scales and numerous other related exercises_studies on their chosen musical instrument or similar with Voice lessons. This must included knowledge and skills in music theory. Technical proficiency with the chosen musical instrument often comes with massive amounts of practice, dedication and passion for mastery of the chosen musical instrument. Yet, there comes a time when the musician moves on from sheer technical proficiency of their musical instrument and develop their personal interpretation of any given piece of music.

Going back to a time before the Musical Staff, music was often written in Tablature for lute or passed on in much the same way as stories being told-shared. Think John Dowland and others for songs and melodies. Eventually, songs and melodies evolved into groups of musicians playing together increasing the complexity of melodies, harmony, rhythms, dynamics, timbre, texture, tonality and form. With more passage of time music developed into works like the Concerto, symphony to solo pieces for Piano, Jazz, Blues, Rock and much more.

Similarities of these examples carried over to photography can be found in learning how to use a camera and the technical aspects of making a photographic image using these technology tools. Then comes the often neglected and more difficult part of understanding this means of creative artistic expression. IMO, this is one of the reasons why photographers can be divided into Gear Centric then those who are creative-artistic expressive centric. To excel as a photographer demands mastery of both in many ways no different than an accomplished musician with excellent technique/technical mastery of their musical instrument and ability to personalize a given piece of music.

In both examples of accomplished musician or photographer demands massive amounts of work, passion, study, commitment and more to accomplish these life goals.

As for Bugs Bunny and Looney Toons/Merrie Melodies, Carl Stalling gets the thanks for setting-arranging so many classical pieces of music to those cartoons.


Bernice

My late friend was a graphic artist all his life and never took an art course until he retired. There are accomplished musicians who don't know how to read music. Art and aesthetic ability can be improved. But it is inborn to varying degrees in all of us.

[Alan Klein]

To move this into sports, my experience with sport indicates that a sport is much more enjoyable to view and better understanding can be had of the activities being viewed if one has a decent understanding of the rules, strategies, and athletes of the sport. Or is Joe Blow at the end of the bar being an elitist for knowing the batting averages of the major players in the National League? :cool:

95% of people enjoy music without knowing a bar from a chord. Do you really have to know Depth of Field to appreciate a photograph? Knowing statistics in sports, in-field rules on baseball, chords, DOF, etc are intellectual experiences that often have to be learned to be appreciated. But aesthetic experiences and enjoyment are inborn. WAtching Mike Tyson knock an opponent t to the mat requires no understanding of the rules to be enjoyed and to get the adrenalin flowing.

[Vaughn]

95% of people enjoy music without knowing a bar from a chord. Do you really have to know Depth of Field to appreciate a photograph? Knowing statistics in sports, in-field rules on baseball, chords, DOF, etc are intellectual experiences that often have to be learned to be appreciated. But aesthetic experiences and enjoyment are inborn. WAtching Mike Tyson knock an opponent t to the mat requires no understanding of the rules to be enjoyed and to get the adrenalin flowing.

"aesthetic experiences and enjoyment are inborn" -- correct, we all born with these abilities, but how those abilities are developed and grown are learned through shared cultural experiences and/or study. We are not born preferring western classical (or country-western) music over Indian or Chinese classical music, but as westerners, we are taught that western classical music is the height of human musical composition so far...at least for cartoons and Westerns.

I will agree with your last point -- watching violence and getting excited about it takes very little knowledge of martial arts.

[Michael R]

To move this into sports, my experience with sport indicates that a sport is much more enjoyable to view and better understanding can be had of the activities being viewed if one has a decent understanding of the rules, strategies, and athletes of the sport. Or is Joe Blow at the end of the bar being an elitist for knowing the batting averages of the major players in the National League? :cool:

Nice try.

[Michael R]

The more you know intellectually, the more you can appreciate the technical and/or contextual aspects of an artform. The visceral experience is something different. As one listens to more and more music, the range of things which he finds truly meaningful *might* broaden. The same generally applies to other artforms, which would include photography.


95% of people enjoy music without knowing a bar from a chord. Do you really have to know Depth of Field to appreciate a photograph? Knowing statistics in sports, in-field rules on baseball, chords, DOF, etc are intellectual experiences that often have to be learned to be appreciated. But aesthetic experiences and enjoyment are inborn. WAtching Mike Tyson knock an opponent t to the mat requires no understanding of the rules to be enjoyed and to get the adrenalin flowing.

[Vaughn]

Nice try.

Thanks! Five points for my team! :cool:

But it sounds like you, Doremus, and I are saying the same thing...so I'll give everyone 5 points...

[Michael R]

Quite the opposite, I think.


Thanks! Five points for my team! :cool:

But it sounds like you, Doremus, and I are saying the same thing...so I'll give everyone 5 points...

[Tin Can]

Human appreciation of music is in our genes, evoked over extreme time

Birdsong emulation may have helped us long ago

A whistle may carry great distance with code

Evolution is not done with Earth

[Jim Worthington]

Listening to jazz on the way to photograph seems to open my senses up. I don't know if it's cause or just correlation, but my best photography is when I see something that really catches my eye. To me, it's like a live jazz performance where the artists just respond to each other.

[LabRat]

Another interesting correlation is the "disco" bass line is also the same tempo as a slightly elevated heartbeat, and the pace of fast walking in a big city...

Steve K

[Doremus Scudder]

Doremus’ post is magnificent and I’m sure he knows how potentially explosive it is.
He can count me among his generals.
Sadly, our hieratic armies will be no match for the demotic gangs on the way. :cool:


Wow. I don't think much of this holds up at all under scrutiny, nor has it been my experience in a life of music and art. Seems extremely elitist, not to mention likely leading to little more than a fairly vacuous technical appreciation rather than anything genuine.

Heroique,
Let's not bet bellicose here :) But thanks for the compliement (but not for the dismal prophecy...).

Michael,
I knew I was risking sounding elitist, but really, I don't think it's all that far-fetched to aver that education and training are essential to excellence in just about any endeavor. Every good musician I know didn't get where they are by instinct, innate ability or pure talent; they study and they practice their asses off. Visual arts, on the other hand, seems to currently have a less-practiced bunch of practitioners, but I truly believe that the art that really lasts and has deep cultural meaning is that which has been informed by knowledge and created with consummate craft. (Mind you, that does not exclude modern and conceptual art in the least).

No one would even entertain the idea that one could become a physicist, mathematician, or even a competent plumber or house painter without proper training and mastery of their craft. Why on earth should one then surmise that becoming an excellent photographer, painter, sculptor, etc. requires only a desire to express and whatever native skills we are born with?

Knowing, practicing and refining your craft and knowing the history of the medium you work in are just the beginning of becoming an artist. Knowing attendant disciplines that bear on your field as well as having a good cultural education in the arts and sciences enrich and cross-pollinate the expression of said artistic endeavor. Then all you need is to have something to add to the discussion.

How many times have I heard a jazz pianist or saxophonist quote Mahler or Chopin in their improvisations? How many direct references are there in music and the visual arts to history, mythology, philosophy, etc. The artists involved knew their stuff; they studied and thought. Only after all that work liberates and informs their expression does it really approach excellence. The result is a richer and more intense expression; kind of the opposite of vacuous.

The same goes for the consumer of art. If you don't something about ancient history, Greek/Roman mythology and Christian iconography how are you ever going to get the most out of Michelangelo or Picasso or Shakespeare or Camus or Bach or Bartok or Sondheim or Bela Fleck or...? There's a reason that there are music/art appreciation classes at the universities, pre-concert/exhibition talks and outreach programs from your local symphony or art gallery.

I don't think it is elitist to thirst for knowledge and strive for excellence; to know things on a deep and intricate level, to be an expert, or to recognize such in others. I don't really think you do either, judging from you past posts and obvious knowledge and expertise. I'd say we are more in agreement on things than your last post might indicate.

Best,

Doremus

[Alan Klein]

Heroique,
Let's not bet bellicose here :) But thanks for the compliement (but not for the dismal prophecy...).

Michael,
I knew I was risking sounding elitist, but really, I don't think it's all that far-fetched to aver that education and training are essential to excellence in just about any endeavor. Every good musician I know didn't get where they are by instinct, innate ability or pure talent; they study and they practice their asses off. Visual arts, on the other hand, seems to currently have a less-practiced bunch of practitioners, but I truly believe that the art that really lasts and has deep cultural meaning is that which has been informed by knowledge and created with consummate craft. (Mind you, that does not exclude modern and conceptual art in the least).

No one would even entertain the idea that one could become a physicist, mathematician, or even a competent plumber or house painter without proper training and mastery of their craft. Why on earth should one then surmise that becoming an excellent photographer, painter, sculptor, etc. requires only a desire to express and whatever native skills we are born with?

Knowing, practicing and refining your craft and knowing the history of the medium you work in are just the beginning of becoming an artist. Knowing attendant disciplines that bear on your field as well as having a good cultural education in the arts and sciences enrich and cross-pollinate the expression of said artistic endeavor. Then all you need is to have something to add to the discussion.

How many times have I heard a jazz pianist or saxophonist quote Mahler or Chopin in their improvisations? How many direct references are there in music and the visual arts to history, mythology, philosophy, etc. The artists involved knew their stuff; they studied and thought. Only after all that work liberates and informs their expression does it really approach excellence. The result is a richer and more intense expression; kind of the opposite of vacuous.

The same goes for the consumer of art. If you don't something about ancient history, Greek/Roman mythology and Christian iconography how are you ever going to get the most out of Michelangelo or Picasso or Shakespeare or Camus or Bach or Bartok or Sondheim or Bela Fleck or...? There's a reason that there are music/art appreciation classes at the universities, pre-concert/exhibition talks and outreach programs from your local symphony or art gallery.

I don't think it is elitist to thirst for knowledge and strive for excellence; to know things on a deep and intricate level, to be an expert, or to recognize such in others. I don't really think you do either, judging from you past posts and obvious knowledge and expertise. I'd say we are more in agreement on things than your last post might indicate.

Best,

Doremus

You don't have to become a master plumber to enjoy a toilet. :) You're conflating the artist with the viewer. You don't have to be able to draw or snap pictures to enjoy a beautiful painting or inspiring photograph.

[Vaughn]

That is not what Doremus is talking about -- he is talking about increasing the depth of one's enjoyment through knowledge.

One still has to know how to use a toilet to get satisfaction from it. And NO! We do not have the innate knowledge and ability to use a modern toilet. That is why it is called toilet training,.

[lab black]

I do believe that Mr. Adams and Mr. Caponigro would be interesting examples regarding how their backgrounds in music influenced their photographic images.

[Mark Sampson]

Adams and Caponigro both trained as classical musicians; Adams wrote about music and photography many times. I don't know what, if anything, Caponigro has written on the subject, but I'm sure that it would be worth looking up.
As for myself, I agree with Mr. Gittings.

[Alan Klein]

That is not what Doremus is talking about -- he is talking about increasing the depth of one's enjoyment through knowledge.

One still has to know how to use a toilet to get satisfaction from it. And NO! We do not have the innate knowledge and ability to use a modern toilet. That is why it is called toilet training,.

If the art doesn't grab in in the first two seconds, it's just conversation after that.

[LabRat]

If the art doesn't grab in in the first two seconds, it's just conversation after that.

But there's those times you have been somewhere many times, but one time the place feels more "magic" than others... Then the next time, the "magic" is gone...

Explain that away, folks...

Steve K

[Bernice Loui]

As previously mentioned be it music or images, there is a language these two forms of human expression. More fluent an individual is the language of music or images, the more content an individual can receive from these languages.

~If an individual was only fluent in English then went to Asia fluent in none of the native Asian languages, how much communication can be shared via language ?

There is work and effort involved in becoming fluent in any means of communications be it language, music, visual arts..
Folks once concert pianist Dudley Moore made a education series with Sir George Solti titled Orchestra to aid in understanding the Orchestra and music.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8Caqo7nYiw&list=PLi8IURjJmajAB9SZjRXicMU8dPt4p4_Qn

This series was successful which prompted Dudley to do more with the Concerto Series with Michael Tilson Thomas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BdJg54PChc&t=2603s

After Dudley Moore's death Michael Tilson Thomas went on to produce the Keeping Score series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5DfYcT5icY

~Ponder why were these films and videos done_?_

Much the same applies to the visual arts, learning about art history and all related to visual arts can further fluency and deepen an individuals understanding of what visual works of art is trying to say and share with the observer.

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gr5KKbD5OxU

2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gvLEjp7B30

3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29KsPUZUSPk


For those who are interested in increasing their fluency in these languages of human expression does this need for learning_understanding brand them as "elitist" ?

Yet, one does not need to be greatly fluent in these languages of human expression to greatly enjoy them or be greatly skilled at the craft, technology, skill, methods and all related to creating them.

This is not a battle over Human Expression -vs- Human Perfection.


Bernice

[Bernice Loui]

That would be a ~no~ as initial appearance tends to be superficial, what might be the deeper meaning with any work of art that does not come from the superficial initial appearance?


Bernice



If the art doesn't grab in in the first two seconds, it's just conversation after that.

[John Layton]

Classical or jazz in the darkroom...but definitely rocking it out on location! :cool:

[Michael R]

For those who are interested in increasing their fluency in these languages of human expression does this need for learning_understanding brand them as "elitist" ?

I’ve already explained this. Learning is not elitist. I’ve been practicing and studying music my entire life, but study is not why I truly love the pieces of music I do.

[Tin Can]

Our leaders changed school from STEAM to STEM a critical error that will yield rotten fruit

Even in 60's I was not allowed to take my prefered HS classes of art, shop, theater, forced into my 'talent' with science, I test high

I quit Physics and college quickly as I didn't want the job or work

I promised myself I would resume college one day

1995 very nervous, I started over, Junior college and CLEP showed me Art, 6 years later earned MFA

I am at peace and wake each dawn eagerly

even now








I’ve already explained this. Learning is not elitist. I’ve been practicing and studying music my entire life, but study is not why I truly love the pieces of music I do.

[Michael R]

I entered high school in the late 80s but it was similar to what you describe. Anyone who was half decent or better at math/science was strongly discouraged from taking anything arts-related - even for electives. High school. “Keep your doors open” was the phrase. I loved math and the sciences so it worked ok for me since luckily my music and art studies were outside of school at the time.


Our leaders changed school from STEAM to STEM a critical error that will yield rotten fruit

Even in 60's I was not allowed to take my prefered HS classes of art, shop, theater, forced into my 'talent' with science, I test high

I quit Physics and college quickly as I didn't want the job or work

I promised myself I would resume college one day

1995 very nervous, I started over, Junior college and CLEP showed me Art, 6 years later earned MFA

I am at peace and wake each dawn eagerly

even now

[Tin Can]

Just before the Junior College, I took all advice and aptitude tests they had, then took a wide range of courses as experiment

I took a psychology course first, I sat by the door ready to run. I calmed. Fascinating instructor. I was the only student who didn't need to take the final exam, her reward and a test for others. Very good first course

Soon I took Oceanography, the instructor pressed I major in that. I almost regret that decision

[Ethan]

If the art doesn't grab in in the first two seconds, it's just conversation after that.

I have to disagree with you on this I think.

There definitely is an immediate reaction we have to a piece of art, however I would argue that is not innate. Not all learning is formal, I might even say most learning isn't formal. I don't think an infant would have an instant reaction to a piece of art as soon it opens it's eyes, rather over a child's growth they will see the world around them and slowly form opinions on what they like and don't like. In the nature versus nurture debate, I think appreciation of art falls in the nurture category.

Earlier in this thread you said "reading is not the same as listening to speech. The first must be learned while the latter comes naturally." I would have to disagree with this. Again, an infant does not understand anything when they listen to speech, that is why an infant cries, they do not have the language to articulate what they need. Both reading and listening are learned, it just happens that infants learn to listen on their own, but usually need instruction when learning to read.

Back to this latest point you made, I think much can be gained from looking at a piece of art or reading a piece of literature after first seeing it. There are many books I have re read and gained new appreciation for the second time around because in the second reading I am not distracted by the instant reactions I had the first time, and notice more hidden themes I didn't pick up on at first. The same definitely applies to a photograph or painting for me. The first time I see it I have an instant reaction to what it is, but often after going away and learning about the artist or the techniques used I can come back to it and find a deeper understanding of it after knowing the context which surrounds it.

[Ethan]

I haven't been on the forum in a few days, and I enjoyed coming back to this thread and reading all which you folks have said. Photography, music, and philosophy are all passions of mine, so it has been a lot of fun reading how they are interconnected for all of you.

Thanks guys!

[Bernice Loui]

Yes :)

Consider a ilfordchrome/Cibachrome print made from a Fujifilm Velva, no contrast mask, modern uber contrast "sharp" multi-coated view camera lens -vs- a ilfordchrome/Cibachrome print made from a Fujifilm Astia, as many contrast mask as needed to moderate print contrast, moderate single coated Kodak Ektar or similar view camera lens. What would the differences in two prints be and why would the response from the viewer be different?


Bernice




I have to disagree with you on this I think.

There definitely is an immediate reaction we have to a piece of art, however I would argue that is not innate. Not all learning is formal, I might even say most learning isn't formal. I don't think an infant would have an instant reaction to a piece of art as soon it opens it's eyes, rather over a child's growth they will see the world around them and slowly form opinions on what they like and don't like. In the nature versus nurture debate, I think appreciation of art falls in the nurture category.

Earlier in this thread you said "reading is not the same as listening to speech. The first must be learned while the latter comes naturally." I would have to disagree with this. Again, an infant does not understand anything when they listen to speech, that is why an infant cries, they do not have the language to articulate what they need. Both reading and listening are learned, it just happens that infants learn to listen on their own, but usually need instruction when learning to read.

Back to this latest point you made, I think much can be gained from looking at a piece of art or reading a piece of literature after first seeing it. There are many books I have re read and gained new appreciation for the second time around because in the second reading I am not distracted by the instant reactions I had the first time, and notice more hidden themes I didn't pick up on at first. The same definitely applies to a photograph or painting for me. The first time I see it I have an instant reaction to what it is, but often after going away and learning about the artist or the techniques used I can come back to it and find a deeper understanding of it after knowing the context which surrounds it.

[Vaughn]

...Earlier in this thread you said "reading is not the same as listening to speech. The first must be learned while the latter comes naturally." I would have to disagree with this. Again, an infant does not understand anything when they listen to speech, that is why an infant cries, they do not have the language to articulate what they need. ...

Just an aside before I cook breakfast and get outside. Raising triplets gave me an interesting insight on language development (non-peer reviewed, and certainly anecdotal). I saw plenty examples of pre-verbal and verbal communication before they were able to 'speak'. How much their own 'language' was modeled on and/or mimicing what their parents were doing (speaking to them and to each other, reading books out loud, etc) before they were able to form English words is an interesting question. And they spent 8 weeks in intensive care after birth, so while in their incubators they had conversations going on around them and their mother there everyday for most of the day caring for them and talking to them -- but this was starting at 10 weeks before they were suppose to have been born. Too bad I was too busy with diapers, feedings, and such for those first couple of years to be just an observer!

Ahhhh, but to finally be able to say 'use your words, not your mouth' (biting)!

[Bernice Loui]

Education or Indoctrination ?

What does it mean to be "Educated" ?

We begin to touch into the history and why of "Public Education" in America. It's reason for coming into being has little to do with Educating Students, the American "Education" system was originally designed and intended to convert folks living in an agriculture based way of life to operating the then growing industrial factory_zation of America and else where. Public "Education" was much about child-processing them into pegs to fit into the cogs of factory machinery for the vast benefit of the elite few. ~Indoctrination~

Traditional Liberal Arts Education was intentionally limited to the elite few. Original Liberal Arts Education meant:
~Grammar, Rhetoric, Logic _ trivium.
~Geometry, Arithmetic, Music, Astronomy _ Quadrivium.

They are ALL connected in identical ways music is inseparable to art (in this case photography).

Science is the result or product of the Scientific Method.

Practitioners of the Scientific Method face near identical difficulties as Artist, from struggling to find support for their work and endeavors to publications to getting others to understand what they are trying to share.. from their observations of Nature and the Human Condition.

Richard Feynman noted Physicist was also an artist, he made drawings and painted.
https://www.themarginalian.org/2013/01/17/richard-feynman-ofey-sketches-drawings/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbFM3rn4ldo

When the math was unable to provide a proper expression, Richard invented Feynman diagrams or "drew a picture"..
https://www.quantamagazine.org/why-feynman-diagrams-are-so-important-20160705/

Richard Feynman had a passion for playing the Bongos (music):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKTSaezB4p8


Engineering is NOT Science, Engineering is much about the Monetization of Science.


~Music_Art and more are absolutely connected and inseparable... and Art has often been the heart, soul and identity of a Nation and Individuals in too many ways.



Bernice

[Doremus Scudder]

If the art doesn't grab in in the first two seconds, it's just conversation after that.


Aside from agreeing or disagreeing with your statement, I might submit that what grabs me in the first two seconds might be entirely different than what grabs you. I really love a lot of modern atonal music. When I first heard the Berg violin concerto, I was smitten. I was similarly smitten by my first real-life encounter with a Jackson Pollack painting. The Whistler exhibit at the Tate Gallery knocked me cold. Sweeny Todd did too, as did a book of Robert Rauschenberg photos that I only got to look at for a few minutes. I know lots of people that would have had negative reactions to those things; you probably do too.

My point still being: What you get out of something depends on what you bring to it. If you're not prepared to appreciate something, there's no way it's going to grab you; in two seconds or two hours.

When I was in elementary school a local radio station had a telephone poll: Who's better, The Monkeys or The Beatles. I was really rooting for The Monkeys then... I know better now :)

As for art having to grab you in the first few moments... I remember finding Strauß' "Der Rosenkavalier" tedious and confusing. The truth is, is was just over my head when I first heard it. After growing in to it and learning enough to appreciate it, it is now one of my favorites.

I make a point of never negatively commenting on a work of art I don't think I understand fully. Sure, I'll give a bad review to something I'm sure was done poorly, but anything that might still be over my head, I leave for others to comment on.

Best,

Doremus

[Doremus Scudder]

I’ve already explained this. Learning is not elitist. I’ve been practicing and studying music my entire life, but study is not why I truly love the pieces of music I do.

I'm not saying what I espouse is elitist either :)

I don't know if I could love the pieces of music I do as much as I do without study, however. It seems the more I learn, the more I get out of things.

Best,

Doremus

[Tin Can]

Agree

I was poor at English, until I had 2 years of Latin, grade 6, 7 in a one room classroom, not religious, with the amazing Mrs Wolfe, she teamed me with a 4th grade, actual genius. He was fascinating, we each had something the other needed

Our bubble burst with JFK assassination

Then I went to a horrible Factory Training school, I have totally blocked that entire year, Fight Club

[Tin Can]

I love Shakespeare, preferably outside on stage at dusk

I am usually one of a few actually laughing at the jokes

I cannot remember stage lines, but I can analyze a script and characterizations

I have performed solo stage acts, yet prefer firepit tales as embers wane, each story created on the spot for the audience

I call them Bar Stories, never written, each custom

[Heroique]

When I was in elementary school a local radio station had a telephone poll: Who's better, The Monkeys or The Beatles. I was really rooting for The Monkeys then... I know better now :)

News just now breaking that Michael Nesmith has died. :(

The Monkey with the knit cap. Age 78. RIP.

Just one Monkey left (Micky), and two Beatles (Paul and Ringo).

[Alan Klein]

But there's those times you have been somewhere many times, but one time the place feels more "magic" than others... Then the next time, the "magic" is gone...

Explain that away, folks...

Steve K

It's never as good as the first time. :)

[Alan Klein]

That would be a ~no~ as initial appearance tends to be superficial, what might be the deeper meaning with any work of art that does not come from the superficial initial appearance?


Bernice

Not necessarily. Did you ever meet someone you were immediately attracted to physically? And then they opened their mouth. :)

[Alan Klein]

I have to disagree with you on this I think.

There definitely is an immediate reaction we have to a piece of art, however I would argue that is not innate. Not all learning is formal, I might even say most learning isn't formal. I don't think an infant would have an instant reaction to a piece of art as soon it opens it's eyes, rather over a child's growth they will see the world around them and slowly form opinions on what they like and don't like. In the nature versus nurture debate, I think appreciation of art falls in the nurture category.

Earlier in this thread you said "reading is not the same as listening to speech. The first must be learned while the latter comes naturally." I would have to disagree with this. Again, an infant does not understand anything when they listen to speech, that is why an infant cries, they do not have the language to articulate what they need. Both reading and listening are learned, it just happens that infants learn to listen on their own, but usually need instruction when learning to read.

Back to this latest point you made, I think much can be gained from looking at a piece of art or reading a piece of literature after first seeing it. There are many books I have re read and gained new appreciation for the second time around because in the second reading I am not distracted by the instant reactions I had the first time, and notice more hidden themes I didn't pick up on at first. The same definitely applies to a photograph or painting for me. The first time I see it I have an instant reaction to what it is, but often after going away and learning about the artist or the techniques used I can come back to it and find a deeper understanding of it after knowing the context which surrounds it.

Intellectualizing art after the 2 second "wow" period is like explaining the punchline to a joke. Either you get it or you don't. I'm not saying it's not interesting to look at the things in a photo that makes it work or not. But that's post-effect. Either the photo works for you or it doesn't. Either you get the joke or you don't.

[Alan Klein]

Aside from agreeing or disagreeing with your statement, I might submit that what grabs me in the first two seconds might be entirely different than what grabs you. I really love a lot of modern atonal music. When I first heard the Berg violin concerto, I was smitten. I was similarly smitten by my first real-life encounter with a Jackson Pollack painting. The Whistler exhibit at the Tate Gallery knocked me cold. Sweeny Todd did too, as did a book of Robert Rauschenberg photos that I only got to look at for a few minutes. I know lots of people that would have had negative reactions to those things; you probably do too.

My point still being: What you get out of something depends on what you bring to it. If you're not prepared to appreciate something, there's no way it's going to grab you; in two seconds or two hours.

When I was in elementary school a local radio station had a telephone poll: Who's better, The Monkeys or The Beatles. I was really rooting for The Monkeys then... I know better now :)

As for art having to grab you in the first few moments... I remember finding Strauß' "Der Rosenkavalier" tedious and confusing. The truth is, is was just over my head when I first heard it. After growing in to it and learning enough to appreciate it, it is now one of my favorites.

I make a point of never negatively commenting on a work of art I don't think I understand fully. Sure, I'll give a bad review to something I'm sure was done poorly, but anything that might still be over my head, I leave for others to comment on.

Best,

Doremus
Well, I wouldn't put a picture in the same league as Strauß' "Der Rosenkavalier". First off a picture is an instant in time. A musical piece is serial and extends and caries throughout its length. There could be parts you like and others you don't. Pictures don't operate that way.

I also think you're wrong about The Monkees vs. The Beatles. Inspirations and aesthetics have nothing or very little to do with technique or intellectualizing the pieces. A simple "I love you." heard from someone close to you can change that person's life a lot more than reading some complex analysis by Freud on self-esteem. When you admired the Monkees, it created the most inspiration and aesthetic power for you. So it was better. Also, intellectualizing things often take the power out of them. Often, I think I pixel peep things a little too much.

[Doremus Scudder]

... a picture is an instant in time. A musical piece is serial and extends and caries throughout its length. There could be parts you like and others you don't. Pictures don't operate that way.

Sure they do. There are often elements I like about an image and those I don't; things I think could be improved, things I think are perfect as they are, and so on.



... Inspirations and aesthetics have nothing or very little to do with technique or intellectualizing the pieces.

I would take issue here as well. The study of aesthetics (an intellectual branch of philosophy already) has at its heart the ability of a person to sense and perceive at a level above that of the average human (Hume's "delicate taste"). The admiration of expertise and virtuosity (not only musical!) are first on the list of Denis Duttons six universals in aesthetics. Also on the list are Criticism (in the sense of judging and interpreting art) and Style (meaning satisfying or interacting with rules of composition and form). For Kant, for something to be "beautiful" it had to give rise to pleasure by engaging "reflective contemplation," i.e., judgments of beauty are sensory, emotional and intellectual all at once. That's just scratching the surface of the subject...



A simple "I love you." heard from someone close to you can change that person's life a lot more than reading some complex analysis by Freud on self-esteem.

Agreed, but irrelevant.


When you admired the Monkees, it created the most inspiration and aesthetic power for you. So it was better. Also, intellectualizing things often take the power out of them. ...

Maybe the "most inspiration and aesthetic power" I was capable of the time. But it doesn't mean it was "better" in any universal, objective sense. Fortunately, by growing in awareness and understanding, I can now forget about The Monkees entirely and spend my time with the much richer fare I'm able to digest now. This doesn't mean I don't like simple things; it means that I see more of the spectrum of artistic and am able to get my head and heart around greater things than "Last Train to Clarksville." Yes we all have to start somewhere, but we don't have to remain there, especially when there are so many more rewarding things to spend our time on. But, you have to pay your dues and learn the "language of the arts" (as Bernice so eloquently analogizes).

I realize that most, if not all, people (myself included) never get to the point of artistic fluency in all areas (the classical violinist who thinks comic books are the height of literature, or the painter who's never been exposed to a Beethoven symphony). Still, it galls somewhat when modern "critics" speak of pop music or TV sitcoms as if they were the height of human achievement. That doesn't really change things; it just means that they don't understand those richer, more-complicated things. We should at least be aware that there are wonders and magnificence beyond our ken and not disparage those who are able to comprehend and practice them as "elite snobs" and therefore somehow to be censured. They are the ones that are getting a larger portion of the joys of this all-to-brief passage on this earth.

Best,

Doremus

[Alan Klein]

To paraphrase a saying about success, creating art is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. Viewing art is 90% inspiration and 10% intellectualization.

[Michael R]

To paraphrase a saying about success, creating art is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. Viewing art is 90% inspiration and 10% intellectualization.

In my experience there are sometimes exceptions to the case of liking something in two seconds or not liking it. There are works that are kind of a “slower burn” - ie you don’t fall all over yourself immediately but it somehow plants a seed of sorts. Note I’m not talking about learning to appreciate something on an intellectual level, but genuine feelings. I’ll also differentiate this type of experience from a changing taste, which of course can also change how we really feel about something over time.

Another thing that can sometimes make a difference in whether or not one is genuinely attracted to a work is the execution. Not just the technical continuum (assume a range from competent to masterful) but “artistry” (lousy word for it but I can’t think of anything better right now). I would say there are more layers to this, or at least it is more obviously involved, in the case of music versus other artforms.

[Vaughn]

...
Another thing that can sometimes make a difference in whether or not one is genuinely attracted to a work is the execution. Not just the technical continuum (assume a range from competent to masterful) but “artistry” (lousy word for it but I can’t think of anything better right now). I would say there are more layers to this, or at least it is more obviously involved, in the case of music versus other artforms.

I would say more obviously involved, especially as Doremus mentioned about time, the 'artistry' of the musician's performance is carried over through time for the audience to follow. And of course, many other factors.

artistry -- agreed, not the best word. A full physical, intellectual, and emotional response to the spirit of work performed? The French must have a word for it...:cool:

[Tin Can]

When viewing museum art, which I have done extensively in EU, Pre-EU, Canada, Hawaii, USA, Mexico

I try to actively judge for myself and don't read the little or big signs

Nor do I use a computer, cell phone or 'the thing' to listen to idiotic verbiage inside a gallery/museum

If I 'Like!' an artwork I use books or now my home computer for research and return

I also go to Cathedrals, take Mass, so I can hear the organ, free and they chase out tourists

Afternoon organ practice is also free, but the room needs bodies to temper the sounds

Now retired since 2008, I go slow, everywhere

and soak

[Alan Klein]

To paraphrase a saying about success, creating art is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. Viewing art is 90% inspiration and 10% intellectualization.

Here's the Italian metaphor for the two-second rule:

"When the moon hits-a your eye like-a big-a pizza pie, that's amore."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69O4PXzAQ5Y

[Vaughn]

For that true Italian metaphoric feeling, I prefer:

"Pay Up or Next Time We'll Rearrange More Than Just Your Furniture." by the Soprano Brothers

[h2oman]

In my experience there are sometimes exceptions to the case of liking something in two seconds or not liking it. There are works that are kind of a “slower burn” - ie you don’t fall all over yourself immediately but it somehow plants a seed of sorts. Note I’m not talking about learning to appreciate something on an intellectual level, but genuine feelings. I’ll also differentiate this type of experience from a changing taste, which of course can also change how we really feel about something over time.

Another thing that can sometimes make a difference in whether or not one is genuinely attracted to a work is the execution. Not just the technical continuum (assume a range from competent to masterful) but “artistry” (lousy word for it but I can’t think of anything better right now). I would say there are more layers to this, or at least it is more obviously involved, in the case of music versus other artforms.

I fully agree with the gist of your first paragraph, and find that even applies to me with my own work.

Regarding your second paragraph, there are many ways to put our ideas into words, but an approach I ran across recently, that I like, is to think of an artistic trinity consisting of conceptual, aesthetic, and technical. I think the aesthetic part is what you are trying to put your finger on. In my limited musical knowledge, the technical part would be the right notes at the right times, the aesthetic would be the voicing and tone. I suppose conceptual would be maybe the overall "feel" imparted by the musician(s) to the piece of music.

[h2oman]

For that true Italian metaphoric feeling, I prefer:

"Pay Up or Next Time We'll Rearrange More Than Just Your Furniture." by the Soprano Brothers

A bit off topic, but my brother-in-law lived in Sicily for a few years. He and his family rented a place from a guy who had paid the local Mafia for protection. At some point someone came in and stole most of the brother-in-law's family's stuff. He reported it to the landlord, who asked them to find something to do for a few hours. They did, and when they returned, everything was back exactly where it had come from!

[lab black]

Some time ago, I sat down with Paul Caponigro. He asked me what I thought of his images. Reviewing the totality of my language repository, unable to find a proper response, I resisted the temptation to clench my fist with my thumb pointing skyward while responding with "Like it!" In my wide-eyed, poorly stocked, left hemisphere silence, he then took me over to the piano and played. That completely changed how I now interpret his prints. To be completely transparent, it wasn't only the mood and feeling that he created in his music, it is the memory of the elegant fluidity of his hands that I remember when I now experience his photographs.

[Alan Klein]

A bit off topic, but my brother-in-law lived in Sicily for a few years. He and his family rented a place from a guy who had paid the local Mafia for protection. At some point someone came in and stole most of the brother-in-law's family's stuff. He reported it to the landlord, who asked them to find something to do for a few hours. They did, and when they returned, everything was back exactly where it had come from!

Could you find out if my camera's there?

[Alan Klein]

Some time ago, I sat down with Paul Caponigro. He asked me what I thought of his images. Reviewing the totality of my language repository, unable to find a proper response, I resisted the temptation to clench my fist with my thumb pointing skyward while responding with "Like it!" In my wide-eyed, poorly stocked, left hemisphere silence, he then took me over to the piano and played. That completely changed how I now interpret his prints. To be completely transparent, it wasn't only the mood and feeling that he created in his music, it is the memory of the elegant fluidity of his hands that I remember when I now experience his photographs.

What a wonderful idea for a new invention. A picture frame that plays an appropriate song when someone approaches. It's sort of like my video slide shows I play from Youtube or on my Tv or monitor when I add a musical background to the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MogdCeRNqBM

[Dugan]

I don't generally associate music with my images...with a few exceptions.
However, I NEED music when I'm in the darkroom processing film....and even more so when printing.

[Tin Can]

movies

[Heroique]

Some time ago, I sat down with Paul Caponigro. He asked me what I thought of his images. Reviewing the totality of my language repository, unable to find a proper response, I resisted the temptation to clench my fist with my thumb pointing skyward while responding with "Like it!" In my wide-eyed, poorly stocked, left hemisphere silence, he then took me over to the piano and played. That completely changed how I now interpret his prints. To be completely transparent, it wasn't only the mood and feeling that he created in his music, it is the memory of the elegant fluidity of his hands that I remember when I now experience his photographs.

That’s a fun story.

And it raises a curious question.

If Caponigro next asked what you thought about his piano piece, would you once again experience a loss of words, and would he then walk you right back to the same print – and would the print become the means by which you interpret his piano music?

(Also curious if you recall what Caponigro played! Robert Schumann? Fats Waller? Elton John? His own original music?)

[Bernice Loui]

What would cinema or videos be like if they had no sound track?


Bernice

[Michael R]

Maybe Caponigro just wanted to know if the guy liked his pictures or not, and when he sensed the guy was instead trying to conjure a paragraph of random analogies he decided to entertain himself at the piano while he waited.

[Alan Klein]

What would cinema or videos be like if they had no sound track?


Bernice

That's the "fat lady" who was singing or someone playing a piano live in the theatre.

[LabRat]

What would cinema or videos be like if they had no sound track?


Bernice

Without mixed media and motion, they would be in a jam... Freezing one moment in time, in few shots and other devices to keep the "story" moving along until conclusion...

We, on the other hand have to visualize a scene within a moment, hope it connects to a viewer, provides some rationale in the information we search for, sits alone without being bolstered by other media to elaborate, and shown to an audience with short attention spans who's receptors have been dulled from input overload...

Interesting challenge!!!

Steve K

[lab black]

Heroique

I cannot remember the exact piece that Paul played. I will have to go back and check my Liszt ...

[Vaughn]

That made the whole thread worthwhile...:cool:

[Bernice Loui]

Silent films and theater organs...
~Why?

Then came Edison "talkies".
~Why?


Bernice

[Tin Can]

Technology progression

Stills, to silent movie to talkies

Alway better tech

Soon all data will just enter our minds

My dreams already seem like a movie, I fall asleep easily to see the show

I wake with new ideas

Elon says we only have 12 years to Grok

[Vaughn]

Grok -- I have not heard that for awhile...Heinlein eventually was embarassed by that book. Too afar in left field for his conservative soul. I loved it -- I'll re-read it (again) one of these days.

[Tin Can]

I like the word 'Grok' as it is self descriptive, simple and unforgettable

also a 4 letter word/curse


Grok -- I have not heard that for awhile...Heinlein eventually was embarassed by that book. Too afar in left field for his conservative soul. I loved it -- I'll re-read it (again) one of these days.

[Michael R]

Technology progression

Stills, to silent movie to talkies

Alway better tech

Soon all data will just enter our minds

My dreams already seem like a movie, I fall asleep easily to see the show

I wake with new ideas

Elon says we only have 12 years to Grok

I’m sick and tired of that ghoul and his pearls of “wisdom”.

[Vaughn]

I’m sick and tired of that ghoul and his pearls of “wisdom”.

'Elon" and "Grok" go together like loons and Canucks! :cool:

[Mark Sampson]

"Elon" was once Kodak's trade name for metol, the developer ingredient. Just staying on-topic, sort of.

[LabRat]

Anyone who believes the old saying "there's no such thing as bad publicity" will run out of luck someday... ;-)

Steve K

[Michael R]

"Elon" was once Kodak's trade name for metol, the developer ingredient. Just staying on-topic, sort of.

Yes indeed, and this jerk gives the Kodak Elon a bad name! :)

[pdmoylan]

Yep, I totally get this. Often when I pitch my tent near a river whose strong current is moving sub-surface rocks so they knock and click against each other, I think I’m hearing human voices – like a group of people speaking a little too far away for their words to be intelligible. Quite unsettling. Especially when you’re alone at night in the middle of a wilderness. Helps me appreciate Native American myths about river spirits.

I am prone to being opened minded about the spirit in nature, having used meditation throughout my adult life (where you learn to shed fear of aloneness), and studied nature's music in all of its variety, "the winds among the reeds".

There is a kinship I have with Barry Lopez (met him in Princeton in the 80s), having read most of his works (Arctic Dreams and Horizons the most well known), and with his words he explores and attempts to bridge an understanding of the human mind with a complete awareness of the natural landscape and its inhabitants. A favorite poet, Yeats, explored throughout his lifetime, the world of the human imagination in the natural world (The Wandering Song of Aengus, for example). Indeed, there are many sounds in nature that I have attuned to, being a trained musician and with innate awareness of intervals. You learn the bird songs, then their chips, habits, and you find yourself in the midst of a completely unimaginable world of sounds and colors, something one can experience with meditation (noone needs psilocybin etc). I have had what no longer friends have laughingly quipped as "paranormal" events related directly to nature. One should be cautious to whom one shares these extraordinary awarnesses. One need only place their ear near flowing water, and hear the voices of the river speaking.

Along with these musical events, I found further evidence of why indigenous peoples are so secure in their beliefs systems in a spirit world. I attach one photo taken where faces, animals, devils, human forms appear to those who are tuned in (this is one of many). One might dismiss them as innocuous coincidences, but one might equally embrace them as symbols of truth and beauty, and the ineluctable capacity of human awareness amid what might otherwise be considered chaos to a rational mind.

222424

[pdmoylan]

On another note, we have become so accustomed these days to tear down visionaries, those high risk takers within the construct of capitalism who venture to go beyond imagination to realize in tangible form what we didn't know we wanted or needed. So on paper Elon is the richest individual in the world. Why do we care? Jeolousy? For one person to have the vision, tenacity, perseverence, energy, and intelligence to pull off this "coup" is quite astonishing. I don't recall Steve Jobs being criticized to such an extent as Elon, and yet we mostly own Apple products now thanks to him, and many will eventually be in Tesla electric cars, playing computer games while AI controls the automobile. I guess the anticulture trend will eventually find a reason to mock Einstein for his creative mind and world changing mathematics. We ARE NOT all equal, but we have the right to pursue happiness, but that shouldn't mean making ourselves feel better by underming foundational leaders with crass comments. Likely thier critics have invested in bitcoin rather than Tesla stock, to "be different", counter culture nonsense.

[Tin Can]

pd

All very good and comprehensible even to me

I have to ask you, please reconsider this from your post #140 '(noone needs psilocybin etc)'

We are curing some PTSD with LSD legally and quickly

I do think if Doctor prescribed very small amounts in Nature with a sober guide results would be better, babbling brook under trees is ideal

Yes, I have, long ago, I have no desire to use it again, nor need

[Michael R]

Nice try with the “anti-culture” bit and throwing someone like Einstein in with Musk, which is preposterous. Sad.


On another note, we have become so accustomed these days to tear down visionaries, those high risk takers within the construct of capitalism who venture to go beyond imagination to realize in tangible form what we didn't know we wanted or needed. So on paper Elon is the richest individual in the world. Why do we care? Jeolousy? For one person to have the vision, tenacity, perseverence, energy, and intelligence to pull off this "coup" is quite astonishing. I don't recall Steve Jobs being criticized to such an extent as Elon, and yet we mostly own Apple products now thanks to him, and many will eventually be in Tesla electric cars, playing computer games while AI controls the automobile. I guess the anticulture trend will eventually find a reason to mock Einstein for his creative mind and world changing mathematics. We ARE NOT all equal, but we have the right to pursue happiness, but that shouldn't mean making ourselves feel better by underming foundational leaders with crass comments. Likely thier critics have invested in bitcoin rather than Tesla stock, to "be different", counter culture nonsense.

[Alan Klein]

Unfortunately, my tinnitus has eliminated the quietness I used to find from a hike in the woods.

[pdmoylan]

And here it was my informed impression that tinnitus was an “excuse” to avoid listening to a nagging spouse :).

[Vaughn]

On another note, we have become so accustomed these days to tear down visionaries...

Ahhhh, the cult of the ordinary. Nasty....

[pdmoylan]

Your choice of words is awkward, potentially offensive and unintended, clearly baiting and unsympathetic to the “working class hero” (thanks JL), Vaughn.

There is a sense of entitlement among many including the media at large that any highly successful person is fair game to be pulled down from their “high horse”. They must be squeaky clean, have an amiable personality, and offend no one during their climb to success to avoid criticism. Musk has been called many noxious names for his public persona, and and yet if you look squarely at what he is accomplishing including remaining “profitable” by exchange of carbon credits and bitcoin, I see no reason to belittle the man. The market has clearly bought into his vision and are showing that with fresh equity. But it’s the sense of equanimity brought on by perhaps Sanders and others that we are all equal and to hell with meritorious recognition; that is the underbelly of the counter culture set.

Back on track to the OP’s initial thoughts on music: if in an isolated space away from human induced noise, having all senses in tune with the surroundings, can be intoxicating enough. Otherwise Samuel Barber or JS Bach (St Anne’s Fugue, Goldberg Variations etc), or classical Indian music can contribute to an initial mood. I am not sure how one connects the dots in viewing images inspired by Copland’s Appalachian Spring for instance, but I am anxious to learn.

[Heroique]

I attach one photo taken where faces, animals, devils, human forms appear to those who are tuned in (this is one of many).
I enjoyed reading your entire post. Very thoughtful. Might one argue, however, that this experience happens to each and every human to some degree (conscious or not), whenever they examine anything with abstract patterning, whether they’re “tuned-in” or not?


Unfortunately, my tinnitus has eliminated the quietness I used to find from a hike in the woods.

I suffer from very mild Tinnitus, but only in a very quiet wilderness where no city (or home-dwelling) noise deactivates it. When I first noticed it in the woods, I thought it was the faint hum of timbering machinery from a few miles away. I identified it for what it was when I noticed that any momentary, local sound made it disappear, followed by 1-2 seconds of blissful silence, followed by its return. For example, I might clap my hands once and it disappears, but 1-2 seconds later it’s back. If it were merely the sound of blood circulation in my ears (which most people can hear when it’s quiet), it wouldn’t disappear like that. The good news is it hasn’t grown beyond its faint level as I grow older – but I fear the moment when it starts on that path, and tremble that it might start sounding less like a hum, and more like a nagging spouse! I can’t imagine a worse Hell on earth: eternal henpecking in a quiet wilderness. It might even drown out the music I occasionally hear when I compose on the GG.

[Michael R]

Ahhhh, the cult of the ordinary. Nasty....

Don’t forget the myth of the meritocracy, not to mention terribly low standards for what constitutes exceptionalism. Nasty...

[Vaughn]

Your choice of words is awkward, potentially offensive and unintended, clearly baiting and unsympathetic to the “working class hero” (thanks JL), Vaughn.
...

Actually, I was agreeing with you -- the cult of the ordinary tends to dislike the visionaries, the outliers, and the voices of change...and can be quite nasty about it. Much easier to throw stones than gather understanding. It is a human condition, not a political one. And there is as much danger in worshiping them, also. But Elon is a strange kettle of fish. I have a close relative who worked for Tesla in the East Bay. He tried hard not to be around when Elon showed up. Too much uncertainty to want to deal with.

[pdmoylan]

Heroique, not to go too far with this, but if you read Finding The Mother Tree, for instance, the communication and interconnectedness in the root systems of trees in an area speaks volumes of how we have lost that same sense of connection with the earth. With meditation and calm observation without distraction, I am saying that these patterns are a matter of awareness more than anything. All senses and an open mind, serendipity. But to paraphrase Berkeley, do they exist if not observed. Ultimately they are a phenomena which we may or may not be in tune to experience.

If I can divert to the evolution of Miles Davis as a composer for a moment, he once observed a man limping and told Wayne Shorter after observing it, “play that”. Unfortunately we don’t have the facility with photography to express these things post facto, but are limited to capturing the moment as it occurs. But like the Davis quartets, one listens to the sounds and reacts accordingly, perhaps in many ways unrecognizable to those who are blocked, limited in interests, or who find the resulting chaos it akin to “nightmares”.

And I guess the nastiness of a meritocracy is that new ideas don’t languish, unique creativity doesn’t go unsupported, otherwise we all acclimate to a mundane sameness. Sad.

[Bernice Loui]

Take the time to watch this documentary about Arron Copland's music by MTT. What is presented and discussed is directly related to this discussion and lots more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix2xIl2XVro&t=213s


Bernice



I am not sure how one connects the dots in viewing images inspired by Copland’s Appalachian Spring for instance, but I am anxious to learn.

[pdmoylan]

Will do, thank you, however with the caveat that I refuse to sit through the harassment of the insipid, omnipresent Liberty Mutual ads. Tasteless, mundane sameness. Nasty.

[Tin Can]

Elon is autistic as I am

I love watching him walk and talk, as his face, pace and grace appear then

Runs in my family, and they won't face it

Hiding doesn't work




Actually, I was agreeing with you -- the cult of the ordinary tends to dislike the visionaries, the outliers, and the voices of change...and can be quite nasty about it. Much easier to throw stones than gather understanding. It is a human condition, not a political one. And there is as much danger in worshiping them, also. But Elon is a strange kettle of fish. I have a close relative who worked for Tesla in the East Bay. He tried hard not to be around when Elon showed up. Too much uncertainty to want to deal with.

[Bernice Loui]

Some of the most gifted and creative individuals this world has ever know are Autistic.


Bernice



Elon is autistic as I am

I love watching him walk and talk, as his face, pace and grace appear then

Runs in my family, and they won't face it

Hiding doesn't work

[pdmoylan]

[QUOTE=Bernice Loui;1626066]Take the time to watch this documentary about Arron Copland's music by MTT. What is presented and discussed is directly related to this discussion and lots more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix2xIl2XVro&t=213s

So, very fascinating and so much of Copland’s beautiful work. When I was taking a minor in music at Crane, Tilson Thomas visited for a master class in conducting, early 70s. Martha Graham and troupe performed several times as well, but unfortunately not to Appalachian Spring.

At the time Thomas was assistant conductor at Boston Symphony. I read Thomas has returned to the podium from brain surgery last month. An energetic and compelling educator. At church during the early 2000s played Simple Gifts on classical guitar with various singers including my spouse. Wonderful American “sonnets” based upon American folk music in part, with a wisp of hope and adventure throughout.

How to capture that simplicity and hope on film, now the quest begins. Actually, why not have a series of images shown on Vimeo/YouTube as the music is playing seems logical enough. With or without people in the images is key question to answer. B&W predominately, preferably 8x10? Obtaining permission for the music recording to be used along with syncing photos with the music in a video seem the greatest hurtles, of course after you have all the images printed. Much work ahead but a worthy endeavor.

[Tin Can]

I am a big fan of outdoor music and theater

This young woman plays Harp, a few Deer approve and 120,000 humans

'Naomi SV' https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCND6a0H56zHL4YuY226ZOQ

[Bernice Loui]

IMO, Arron Copeland tried to give America some sense of identity via his artist work. Copeland remains one of the fave composers to this date.
Over two decades ago got a chance to meet and chat with MTT during a local pre-Grammy award party in San Francisco.
222467

That is me with MTT circa 2000.


That project of B&W images set to music would be more than a worthy project and wonderful that can prove meaningful in SO many ways.


:)
Bernice



[QUOTE=Bernice Loui;1626066]Take the time to watch this documentary about Arron Copland's music by MTT. What is presented and discussed is directly related to this discussion and lots more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix2xIl2XVro&t=213s

So, very fascinating and so much of Copland’s beautiful work. When I was taking a minor in music at Crane, Tilson Thomas visited for a master class in conducting, early 70s. Martha Graham and troupe performed several times as well, but unfortunately not to Appalachian Spring.

At the time Thomas was assistant conductor at Boston Symphony. I read Thomas has returned to the podium from brain surgery last month. An energetic and compelling educator. At church during the early 2000s played Simple Gifts on classical guitar with various singers including my spouse. Wonderful American “sonnets” based upon American folk music in part, with a wisp of hope and adventure throughout.

How to capture that simplicity and hope on film, now the quest begins. Actually, why not have a series of images shown on Vimeo/YouTube as the music is playing seems logical enough. With or without people in the images is key question to answer. B&W predominately, preferably 8x10? Obtaining permission for the music recording to be used along with syncing photos with the music in a video seem the greatest hurtles, of course after you have all the images printed. Much work ahead but a worthy endeavor.

[Bernice Loui]

Aaron Copeland, A self Portrait.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WDYa8T83A4


Bernice

[LabRat]

The environment can play into works of art, take Terry Reilly's pieces of him composing watching/listening to trees on a hilltop swaying in the wind, or 60's Detroit bands mimicking the industrial noise in the factory...

But I also think we maybe are drawn to the frequencies of the external or internal cosmos, it's just getting harder with the other background "noise" (internal & external) combined with the clarity to "hear" or feel beyond our mental dialogs...

Steve K

[John Layton]

Years ago at Chaco Canyon...saw a guy wearing some very expensive looking headphones, attached to some even more expensive looking recording equipment, and two leads taped to a rock - part of a stone structure (Chetro Kettle I think). Nobody else around...he motions me to come over, and hands me the headphones - saying "you've got to listen to this!" It was amazing...the rocks were making a sound that I still cannot describe - there was resonance, friction, movement. Turns out this guy was an environmental sound engineer/artist of some sort, and had just received a huge grant to travel the earth and listen to (and record) its sounds. How cool is that?!

[Doremus Scudder]

Years ago at Chaco Canyon...saw a guy wearing some very expensive looking headphones, attached to some even more expensive looking recording equipment, and two leads taped to a rock - part of a stone structure (Chetro Kettle I think). Nobody else around...he motions me to come over, and hands me the headphones - saying "you've got to listen to this!" It was amazing...the rocks were making a sound that I still cannot describe - there was resonance, friction, movement. Turns out this guy was an environmental sound engineer/artist of some sort, and had just received a huge grant to travel the earth and listen to (and record) its sounds. How cool is that?!

Way cool!

In 2001 I spent 3-4 months driving the Yukon and Alaska. I worked a lot on the glaciers. Standing on the ice in the stillness, the glaciers sang to me; cracks and zings and creaks and moans; resonances and harmonies I had not expected. It was as if the ice were alive. I feel the stones in the Southwest to be alive as well; they just don't sing as loudly.

Doremus

[Willie]

So many LF answers with classical and jazz and smilar. Much contemplative music - must be to match the zen like experience of the LF process.

Thought maybe I would throw in one to match Minox users. ;-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gc4QTqslN4

[pdmoylan]

Hilarious. Good example of a 21st century schizoid man. Love the drum interlude.

At least then they weren’t denying the existence of birds as drones etc. counter reality as a temporary antidote to existential stress.

Two LFer colorists who displayed primal beauty in Appalachia, E. Porter, and a much lesser known but friend from the west coast, Pat O’Hara, no relation to Joe on this forum to the best of my knowledge. Are there others of prominence I missed. Can we exceed their efforts?

I still photograph real birds, hundreds times easier than LF, but the latter is usually more satisfying.

[Alan Klein]

Years ago at Chaco Canyon...saw a guy wearing some very expensive looking headphones, attached to some even more expensive looking recording equipment, and two leads taped to a rock - part of a stone structure (Chetro Kettle I think). Nobody else around...he motions me to come over, and hands me the headphones - saying "you've got to listen to this!" It was amazing...the rocks were making a sound that I still cannot describe - there was resonance, friction, movement. Turns out this guy was an environmental sound engineer/artist of some sort, and had just received a huge grant to travel the earth and listen to (and record) its sounds. How cool is that?!

3/4 or 4/4 time?

[pdmoylan]

"Cosmos" music from the 70s was often times 7/4, 11/8 etc, and chromatic sequencing (as opposed to CA).

[Tin Can]

As practicing mystic

I read birds and weather as music, to guide my course

on a map only I see, hear, feel, taste, smell

Sin Eater, one time...

[Heroique]

Heroique, not to go too far with this, but if you read Finding The Mother Tree, for instance, the communication and interconnectedness in the root systems of trees in an area speaks volumes of how we have lost that same sense of connection with the earth...

Suzanne Simard, the author or your book “The Mother Tree,” is pretty well known in my PNW region, receiving her PhD in Forest Services in Oregon and working now with Univ. of BC. Her book needs to be on the shelf of every visitor to this thread – or even better, checked out from the local library. Same with her predecessor’s book, Peter Wohlleben’s “The Secret Life of Trees.” One should be wary, however, of their sentimentality about nature and especially trees. To help moderate their frequent human projections onto the Plantae kingdom, one should keep nearby, say, any number of books by Richard Dawkins, perhaps “The Selfish Gene” to recommend just one (again, at the local library). Trees (he would correctly argue) really aren’t full of human-like “caring” for each other or “communicating” through a means we can “understand” or respond to as a tree, no matter how much these well-meaning and highly trained authors would like us to believe. To be sure, Simard and Wohlleben might listen more closely to Dawkins who eternally reminds his readers that genes aren’t really “selfish,” though the consequences of their chemical/evolutionary processes make it appear that they are (including the genes of trees, which behave just as “selfishly” as ours, even though they’re not really feeling that way). But Simard and Wohlleben’s books can go a long way at reinvigorating our perceptions of the wild in a positive way and suggest potentially new, fruitful directions in strictly scientific research.

Long story short: all three books above are excellent.


I feel the stones in the Southwest to be alive as well; they just don't sing as loudly.

Yes, well, until you start hearing the porous and crumbly sandstone rock falls (and spalls), both loud and faint, that sing every hour of the day and every hour of the night. Still (sorry for the intended pun), no other place I’ve ever visited has offered me purer silence. My mild tinnitus loves this place; I treat the malady to a vacation here at least once every 2-3 years! Only in the Hoh River Rain Forest (Olympic Peninsula, Wash. state) have I personally discovered a place with longer periods free of the sounds of civilization (such as airliners). High Desert canyons and Wash. state rain forests are splendid places for an LFer to hear music on the GG. :D

[Tin Can]

I thought fungi among all tree roots carried communication very wide

https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/exploring-the-underground-network-of-trees-the-nervous-system-of-the-forest/

[Heroique]

I thought fungi among all tree roots carried communication very wide.

The communication is indeed real, and potentially increases the chance that others on the receiving end will survive if the communication has beneficial Darwinian consequences. Call it natural selection working on random genetic variation. It works automatically – not because the fungi or the trees feel the milk of human kindness, like one of us might feel who decides to help an old lady across a busy street. (The giraffe’s neck didn’t grow longer because the giraffe kept wishing that it would, and kept stretching so that it could; it happened automatically.) I might quickly add that understanding nature in terms of Darwinian evolution can still offer lessons about how we might better help each other on levels that have little to do with science. Truth in the service of goodness. Myths have an important role too. That is, more important than the ability to distinguish truth from myth is the ability to be good to each other and the earth.

[Tin Can]

I think plants have feelings

Yell at them and watch

Everything under our Sun is interactive

perhaps everything we see in sky too

[Vaughn]

"Watch those negative vibes, man..."

There have been a few fun sci fi stories playing off the idea of aliens arriving to this planet and contacting the most intelligent species they find -- which ends up not being Man.

[Joe O'Hara]

[snip] ...and a much lesser known but friend from the west coast, Pat O’Hara, no relation to Joe on this forum to the best of my knowledge. [snip]

No relation to my knowledge either. I knew a (female) of that name when I was working-- but a tech writer, not a photographer.

[Heroique]

"Watch those negative vibes, man..."

There have been a few fun sci fi stories playing off the idea of aliens arriving to this planet and contacting the most intelligent species they find -- which ends up not being Man.


The Ents? :D

[Vaughn]

The Ents? :D

Humans wonder why they don't see Bigfoot and his relatives much these days.

I forgot to mark my calander...