Guy Tal Photography Web Journal

This article first appeared in my July, 2008 Newsletter

Not yet a subscriber? Sign up now.

It seems common these days to hear that we live in turbulent times but,
indeed, what time in history wasn’t turbulent in some way or another? With
such  topics  at  stake  as  climate change, renewable energy, nuclear
proliferation, and what may be the beginning of a global food crisis, we are
no longer talking about the fates of distinct individuals or even nations -
what we do today may play a critical role in the survival and welfare of all
humanity.

I don’t mention these things to arouse a political discussion, but rather to
examine a less-obvious aspect of them: the role of art, and the role of
creative individuals in such times, and particularly the role of those of us
whose  art is directly derived from natural subjects and who aspire to
witness, experience, and share those times and places humanity has yet to
significantly alter.It’s easy to dismiss images of pristine beauty, glimpses of rare moments,
and  extraordinary  appearances of life or natural elements as “pretty
pictures.” And, indeed, to many that’s all they are. Such images are often
considered  for their decorative value alone and some people, let’s be
honest, are simply too bitter or cynical to appreciate them even for that.
But there is another, far more powerful meaning to these works - for many of
us who go to great length and effort to seek them, they are more than just
trophies or wall coverings; they are a bold statement in defiance of very
real forces at play. Every “oh” and “wow” and “is that real?” and “can you
take me there?” that our works elicit is yet another little vote in favor of
conservation, another second thought about sprawl and logging and mining and
drilling, another yearning for far away places and the spiritual treasures
they hold, or another moment of self-examination of personal priorities.

Grand canyons are not carved in a day, mountains don’t erupt out of the
earth overnight, and deeply-held opinions may not be swayed by a single
image, but persistent powers prevail over time. I encourage you, fellow
wilderness lovers and creative photographers to keep doing what you do and
to keep working harder and harder at it. You may never see a revolution in
your lifetime, and any change you may witness may be small and feel minute
in the face of immense odds. But, one image at a time, we are are expressing
our defiance, we are educating the skeptical, we are making a difference,
and in the grand scheme of things what we do matters. It matters a lot.

“With the pride of the artist, you must blow against the walls of every
power that exists the small trumpet of your defiance.” –Norman Mailer

New images added on September 21, 2008:

New Additions

Guy

On a recent trip to a lesser-visited part of the Great Salt Lake, I found a complete living room set dumped along the scenic salty shores. Whoever brought it here then proceeded to pump the furniture full of bullets before leaving the scene.

I’m a “live and let live” kind of person. Those who know me can probably tell you I am not shy about expressing my views, some of which may be contentious, but I do so in closed forums and friendly discussions. I’m a firm believer that politics and faith are topics of significant enough gravity that they deserve to be discussed in depth, among willing participants, and should not be reduced to grandstanding and salesmanship. I respect fellow people, and their rights to their ideas and beliefs which may be very different from my own.

This, however, is something I wanted to share with the world. This is not an act of a juvenile prankster. This is a shameful act of vandalism and disrespect for others - an act of hubris and social degeneration. I hope readers of this journal can join me in condemning it.

Guy

First, a hearty thank you to everyone who contacted me recently with comments and questions regarding my Long-Lens Landscapes article in Outdoor Photographer Magazine. I’ve been traveling for the past couple of weeks and have not had much time to catch up on email. I’m about to board my last flight home this morning, and will make every effort to respond in the next few days.

Guy

Maybe it’s just the effects of “airport fatigue,” but after staring at some photo magazines during a mind-numbing wait at the terminal, something occurred to me. At least half the content in these publications seems to come from non-pros. This ratio is significantly greater on the Internet where an incredible volume of spectacular work from amateurs is posted every single day. Purely professional venues, on the other hand, don’t always emphasize image quality or artistic intent. A quick scan of some forums and article shows that many users of high-end gear don’t use it professionally. Why is it, then, that marketing departments (and even common vernacular) refers to it as “pro”-grade?

I am certainly not privy to sales data from any of the major manufacturers, but I do wonder. So-called “serious amateurs” appear to make a significant part of the market for top-of-the-line equipment, yet it seems practically all marketing effort is aimed at professionals. New products are announced at trade shows, not generally attended by  non-pros. Marketing literature seems to emphasize professional use. Discounts and other incentives are generally offered to pros-only

Given my purely empirical survey of photography magazines and Internet forums, I do wonder; are the marketing execs for major manufacturers missing something obvious? Should high-end equipment be targeted at non-pros?

Who is more likely to purchase an expensive piece of gear? a well-to-do amateur photographer with a passionate hobby, or a professional photographer looking to minimize their business expenses?

Just wondering…

Is the person eloquent in one language necessarily a better communicator than one who masters several? Is the person who specializes in playing the violin necessarily a better musician than one who can also play the piano and the clarinet?

Why is it, when art critics have nothing more constructive to say, they always fall back on the tired old “lack of focus” to the detriment of an artist’s body of work? And, more perplexing, why is such criticism never questioned and is so readily acceptable as inalienable truth?

If lack of focus was any kind of measure for the worth of an artist or their body of work, Leonardo Da Vinci would not make the cut. Neither would Michelangelo, Rafael, Beethoven, or Mozart. Edward Weston gets an “F” for photographing everything from nudes through bell peppers to dead pelicans. Ansel Adams should be relegated to amateur status for photographing just about anything with interesting tonality, not to mention being a pianist to boot.

When a critic tells you your work lacks focus, he is really telling you one of two things: A) he has a financial interest in selling  art (collectors prize consistency, not always personal expression), or B) he didn’t take the time to understand the roots of your art.

The former is pretty straightforward, so let me elaborate on the latter. Consider the “body of work” metaphor: your fingers, your eyes, and your hair are parts of the same body, but appear completely different. The commonality is not in the shape, size, color, or any other immediately-discernible characteristic. Yet, they are all the product of the same genetic blueprint - the same DNA that makes them parts of one unique  whole body. It is thus with art: the common roots of an artistic body of work are the sensibilities of the artist. The same artist can produce a color image of one subject, a B&W image of another, a wood carving, and a poem describing their morning walk, and still have all of them be one consistent body of work - consistent in the sense that all are coming from the same place, emanating from the same creative nucleus, and representing the same vision and ideas. Anyone who fails to see the focus is simply not looking hard enough.

A sad consequence of such narrow-minded criticism is that many would-be multi-talented artists end up crippling their own creative avenues under the dictum that they need “more focus”.

Can you imagine Beethoven avoiding symphonies because he was “just a concerto composer” or because he needed to focus on string quartets? How about Michelangelo refusing to paint the Sistine Chapel because he was focusing on sculptures, or Picasso never becoming a Cubist because he was forever focused and stuck in his Blue Period?

Come on, critics, do you honestly want to limit the growth of artists and to lock them into a repetitive, narrowly-focused churn for the rest of their careers? Give up this silly notion of looking for obvious similarities and dig deeper: look for the soul of an artist, not for their sales potential! Don’t be in the way of artists evolving and exploring and discovering! It’s time to let go of the old “lack of focus” crutch. It is not self-evident truth and, more often than not, is neither helpful to the artist nor to the art. How many artists came home depressed and defeated from a review after hearing such a blunt missive? How many of those may end up giving up on experimentation and discovering their true calling because of it? If there is even one such person - you are guilty; guilty of not giving them due consideration, and maybe guilty of hindering their growth or even the growth of art itself. Can you say with confidence that it wasn’t you who failed to see the proverbial DNA underlying a true and diverse body of work? Have you truly and honestly looked hard enough before dismissing a portfolio with a failsafe excuse?

Artists - look inside yourselves, pick whatever form of expression feels right. As long as you’re true to your own calling, your work - whatever it is, and in whatever media - will never lack focus. The focal point is YOU.

Guy

I spent the last three days backpacking in the Uinta Mountains, celebrating my birthday in the beautiful alpine basins below Red Castle Mountain, in the company of Dave Fantle and Steve Weaver.

More to come… as soon as I’ve had a chance to catch up.

Guy

I recently had the pleasure of spending some time with Jim Goldtsein, hiking and talking photography. Jim is the owner of the EXIF and Beyond podcast, as well as a prolific and insightful blogger with a special knack for discssing pertinent issues on art and photography that many of us struggle with. I wholeheartedly recommend his blog.  My interview with him is now featured on the EXIF and Beyond podcast.

Guy

Back from another stay at my little slice of heaven in Torrey, UT. And now, the mountains are calling. No rest for the wicked!

Another image and some photo tips can be seen at the Mountain Trail Photo Blog.

Guy

I’m happy to be the subject of the latest Photo Talk interview on Suprada Urval’s photoblog. Suprada asked some very interesting questions, which I greatly enjoyed thinking about.

Guy