EAST RIVER WATERFRONT, NYC   [black & white photograph 1988 / photoshop 2008 



 * No modeling fees ever expended.  All beautiful females included are either sweetly indulgent former wives or girlfriends.  But it must be said that neither wife was all that "indulgent". This may have something to do with the nature of marriage itself, I will never know --

   " For me, photography is first & foremost a "craft".  And the lack of blinking L.E.D.s and extraneous computerized dealy-bobs
demanding attention enhance this most humanizing personal notion.

   So being this non-digital "Luddite", I get all queasy when shown a menu-screen. And when "Digitalistas"  inevitably condescend, I just say to look @ what a one dollar camera is actually capable of:
http://www.zonezero.com/exposiciones/... And just how cool would it be to hand-build a Non-SLR, 0 MP, fully theft-proof, guaranteed non-waterproof, re-cyclingly hip, magical memory-capture device?: http://users.rcn.com/stewoody/makecam... 

    Now having spent a total of $434 on cameras in 42 years that comprise 2 splendid Mamiya Twin Lens Reflexes, nothing will ever pry me away from my bulletproof, sharp as a tack, reliable as gravity "Mammary C220" [w/ 4 lenses] all gotten for $275  thru a miracle private party newspaper ad in '84.  

  My heart races @ the very thought of her supple form: http://www.schnittbildindikator.de/Kameras/Mamiya_
Mama Mamiya!
    Plus I got an inexpensive piece-of-junk 35mm Yashica rangefinder new for $34 in '67. It quickly sold itself as it had this HUGE f1.8 lens on it, but alas, phooey on just "size". *See Vietnam gallery.       

   Deeply indebted to my Brother - Yenta that he is - for taking one look at the 35mm when I got home and said; "ditch that crap, & maybe get a good medium format TLR like this Mamiyaflex C30". *damn glad he didn't say Deardorff View Camera, or I'd probably have a bad back or hernia by now. Done - gotta used "C3" in '70 for $125.

   I also have experience with Gum Dichromate and Platinum/Palladium printing. Check my brother's site: http://www.bostick-sullivan.com about elegant and timeless handcrafted photochemistry and supplies. Click on "gallery"; "artist's websites"; "Terry King" for a fine mini-primer on several disciplines. Mr. King is the "Historian" of the Royal Photographic Society, U.K. *now >150 years old [the Society - not King]. Another master platinum printer: http://danburkholder.com/. 
   But briefly back to brother Richard & Dan Burkholder's stunning and "nearly lost" hand coated photographic disciplines - which always produce unique one-off creations, and are blessedly w/o any regard to all the dubious $$$ modern consumer gear about - they should be considered the "Original Photoshop". Just  ponder that a 1921 platinum print by Edward Weston sold in '07 at Sotheby's for $824,000. The seller bought it at auction in '79 for $2500! Details:  http://stateoftheart.popphoto.com/blo... 

   Ergo, I'm convinced photography is only about one's "personal eye" & "unique manner of working". Ansel Adams said that 50% of what he got from a shot was gotten in the darkroom. He claimed he didn't capture images of what "was there", but what he "saw there". A subtle, yet profound difference. And remarkedly, Adams got striking results w/  Kodak Brownie [his first camera,1916] reflecting this time-honored bromide: Michelangelo isn't immortal bcause he had the best stone chisels in Florence.  Face it; Micky could've worked w/ a bent Phillips screwdriver & ball-peen hammer. Plus writers don't sit around arguing about which typewriter, word-processor, Mac vs. PC is best for "fine" writing. *I prefer a Remington Rand by candlelight

   Photography is as wide as all imagination and has such an incredibly rich history that any careful study + some applied artistic talent will serve one more in serious pitcher-takin' than some "photo guru's" dictates, or a rigid "by-the-numbers" approach will. 
A great start: 

   And while realizing film cameras are now, and will forever remain, a "niche" passion, I was struck that when Annie Liebovitz was recently asked about a good camera for newbies, her "unsnooty" response was; "many cell phones have a good basic camera already built-in". Go, Annie!! They're not just for kids to take shots of each other stoned @ parties & then uploading them to Facebook pages. *sounds like fun, tho... But I still have no earthly idea how you'd ever load film in one.  Am I missing something?

   Excuse my long festering, "tin-foil-hat-wearing" rant-zilla. I'm off my meds...
                                                                                                                               -- Go In Peace --

 Brief concise user-critiques from  Camera Review:





All Photographs ©2007, 2008 Gary M. Sullivan

Questions or comments? Call 770 853-1216 or e-mail garymsullivan@comcast.net