Analog photography is still alive and does not want to go away. The latest analog news is the resurgence of old-time photo booths that still use developing chemicals and provide a black-and-white photo strip of four different poses. A company in New York called Classic Photo Booth salvages old booths and restores them. There is also a different company in Europe that refurbishes them.
Apparently, they are a big hit and people are lining up to use them. It is another sign that people are looking for other options besides digital. I am certainly trying to do my best to keep analog alive. I still use 35mm, medium format and 8×10 large format film in my photographic work.
There are now digital “photo booths” that mimic the old-time booths. I attended a wedding where a digital “photo booth” was in operation. Actually, there is no booth involved but just a table, a backdrop, a camera, a printer, some props and an operator. A photo strip of three poses was provided. The digital booth lacked some of the spontaneity of the old-time booth where there was no operator and you enter the booth and close a curtain for some privacy. The photos took minutes to develop, wash, and dry before a strip of images dropped into a slot for pick up.
Photo booths were also used by artists in their creations. Probably the most famous was Andy Warhol and his work with portraits and self-portraits in the 1960’s which he used to produce silk screen prints.
In 2025, the photo booth is 100 years old. Let’s hope analog photography can survive another century.
Photo shot with black and white film using a vintage Olympus Stylus Epic camera. All images are copyrighted.
“he, too, was one of those who pursue life as it flees, a hunter of the unattainable, like the takers of snapshots.”
From the short story “Adventures of a Photographer” by Italo Calvino
I am not sure why photography was so associated with hunting where words such as, photo shoot, snapshot, and capture, are part of the language of photography. Historically (1800’s), the snapshot was a term used in hunting to describe a quick shot. It may have also been the sound that hunting rifles made when fired. Personally, I do not like the word “hunter” which makes me think of killing. I think most photographers are harmless. Why not just use the word photographer. In a previous post “Psychology and Photography” I stated: “I am not a hunter and I do not hunt with my camera but am constantly searching for new avenues for my photography.” The search for the unattainable is a valid characteristic of many photographers. Despite the many failures, the drive to keep looking and photographing seems to be instinctual.
I am a photographer in search of the unattainable. I am always searching for the next great photo. It is my hope that I will get one “exceptional” image during a photo session. Basic elements such as composition, lighting, exposure and focus must be satisfied but more important is whether the image visually excites me. Does it have unique visual qualities such as an interesting juxtaposition, a certain pose or look, a special element that is an unanticipated surprise. The image must make me want to look. Unfortunately, such photos are rare but that doesn’t stop me from my photo searching. The photograph must visually rise above my other images.
It is an innate obsessiveness to find something or someone worthy of photographing. Even when I do not have a camera with me, I still see life in photographic terms. For me, there are unlimited possibilities.
I continue to discover new words that I had never heard of. It makes me think that I should have put more effort into expanding my vocabulary over the years but then that may have detracted from my visual endeavors. So much of life is a balancing act. A set of scales that measure experiences might help to keep some equanimity and balance. But we usually have priorities and for me it has been to create photographs, although lately I have been reading more which has resulted in my collection of words that were unknown to me.
In addition to stereoblindness (not able to see in 3D), prosopagnosia (face blindness) and erlebniskunst (art of experience), my latest addition is the word ekphrasis which is defined as writing inspired by art. Art can be in the form of a painting, photograph, film, sculpture or even a dance performance. A good example is my previous post regarding my photograph “Repose” and the accompanying description written by a gallery curator. Another example is my post “Olympia by Manet” and my writing about how I reacted to seeing the painting in person.
I always gave my photography students an assignment to select a photograph that interests them and to write about it. They had to provide a description (what they see), an interpretation (what they thought it was about), and an evaluation (whether they liked it or not and why). I was always surprised how insightful they were about the image they selected and the project served as a great teaching tool about art appreciation.
The next time you visit a museum or art gallery and have a strong reaction to a work of art that is emotionally moving you would be experiencing erlebniskunst. And if you go home and write about it that would be ekphrasis.
Flo Fox died on March 2, 2025. I had never heard of her but she apparently was a prolific street photographer in New York City. What caught my attention in her obituary was the fact that she was born blind in one eye. She felt it was an advantage as a photographer because she didn’t have to close the blind eye when she took a photo and that she did not see three-dimensionally (3D) which meant she saw the scene as the image would appear as a photo print in two dimensions (2D).
I can relate. I was not born blind but beginning as a teenager I have lost most of my vision in one eye. Besides seeing the world in two dimensions, there is also a loss of depth perception. Like Flo Fox, despite the limitations to my vision, I see the positive side of the handicap. I do see the world as flat and my photographs look exactly as I saw the composition through the camera viewfinder.
It is believed that the artist Rembrandt may have been stereoblind which would have aided him in flattening what he saw for the production of 2D works. Scientists have suggested that more artists seem to have stereoblindness when compared with a sample of people with stereo acuteness (normal stereo vision).
Stereoblindness is defined as the inability to see in 3D using stereopsis, or stereo vision, resulting in an inability to perceive stereoscopic depth by combining and comparing images from the two eyes. Individuals with only one functioning eye have this condition by definition since the visual input from the second eye does not exist.
I have had extremely limited vision in one eye for so long that I cannot remember what a 3D world looks like. I don’t know whether this has made me a better photographer or is it something that I had to adjust to and my photographic output would have been the same.
Erlebniskunst or “experience art” in German, is a philosophical concept that emphasizes the importance of the viewer’s experience in the appreciation of art. It was first developed by the philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer in the 20th century. Gadamer argued that art is not simply an object to be contemplated, but rather a dynamic process of interaction between the work and the viewer.
From the Philosophy Dictionary of Arguments
Certain words peak my interest. I recently encountered the word Erlebniskunst in an article about art. I related to the concept behind it and wondered if and how it applies to photography.
All the research information that I was able to find came from philosophy articles that stem from the original concept developed by Hans-Georg Gadamer who wrote:
“the power of the work of art suddenly tears the person experiencing it out of the context of his life, yet relates him back to the whole of his existence.”
I noted in a previous post titled “Creators and Observers” that I believed that we need more observers who are sensitive to aesthetic qualities in photographs and that there should be a visual/emotional relationship between the creator and the observer. A photograph that connects with a viewer should be able to create a spell on the observer. Sometimes an image will leave the observer speechless and stir emotions and aesthetic senses.
I feel the “art of experience” can apply to viewers of both photographs and the other arts. The observer must feel the emotional connection which has primacy over what is seen. Unfortunately, many viewers only see what is on the surface of the image. Some pictures will speak to you if you are receptive and allow them to do so.
“Art is only through feeling, so alive and sensitive that the picture is as the breath out of the mouth, but coming from the heart.”—Abraham Walkowitz
My photograph “Repose” was part of a gallery show. A viewer was having an emotional connection with the work and started telling me what she was feeling. I asked Rachel if she could write down the thoughts that she was experiencing.
“At first glance, “Repose” appears almost apocalyptic – the nude woman, staring blankly off into the distance, her partially curled body laying in a dormant cornfield, the sepia tones of the photograph adding to the eeriness. A quick assumption could be that the figure is dead, a simple conclusion placed together by the drained color palette and lifeless cornstalks. The composition of the picture plane with it’s single point perspective makes the viewer feel as though he/she is physically in the space. The viewer is no longer only an observer, but now also a participant. It’s this play with composition that signals the viewer to take pause, and examine the photograph longer. The figure, and older woman, lays in a pose reminiscent of a relaxed fetal position — a posture associated with new life. However, everything else in this photograph recalls aging, or nearing a state of hibernation, dormancy or death. The field the figure lays in has clearly been harvested, indicating an end to the growing season and an approach toward winter. Winter is often thought of as ‘the end’ of the cycle of seasons: plants fade, animals hibernate, and humans retreat in their own ways, waiting for spring to come when life will re-emerge and be re-born. Winter brings stillness. This stillness is expressed in “Repose.” It’s the stillness that allows the viewer to reflect. While, “Repose” is clearly a photographic commentary on aging, it’s not one of hopelessness. Like the seasons, the figure has lived through seasons of her own life; and in the stillness the viewer recognizes the beauty in her age and the life that she still has left. Moreover, “Repose” causes the viewer to think about his or her own mortality and life. It works as a memento mori of sorts — but a reminder that life continues, rather than a reminder of death.”
I keep coming back to the topic of digital technology and its relationship to photography. I believe technology has had more of a negative impact than a positive one on the quality of fine art photographs made today and going back to the beginning of this century. I refer to this period of time as the “age of digital interruption”. In the photography historical timeline, I believe this period will be viewed as a step backward or at best a period of stagnation.
Part of the problem is technology itself and how it has affected concentration that is needed to create photographs that rise above the mundane. I also blame social media for dumbing down the quality of images. Visual acuity has been dampened by the impersonal “likes” and “thumbs up” given by viewers which then give a false sense of importance to the image maker and the quality of their photographs. The inability to focus attention and the lack of concentration may also be major contributors to the uninspired output of photographs. Today’s digital mind doesn’t want to spend time looking, thinking and interpreting images. It wants a steady stream of information and the ability to make a cursory comment. Volume is more important than quality and personal introspection.
I still make what I think are very creative photographs using digital photography but I sometimes feel that my film and darkroom work was better. The question is why. What is the impact of digital versus film photography? Here are a few thoughts.
With digital you can expose hundreds of frames in a very short time whereas with film photography you were limited by the number of frames on a roll. I believe film required more thought and care because of the cost of each roll and the cost of processing. Visual care was important when working with film. A photographer did not want to waste film. With a digital camera the only limit is the capacity of the memory card. Expose many frames and hope there is one good image.
In film days, I think it was more important to get the exposure correct. There was limited latitude in making corrections in the darkroom to a print. In digital, a photographer can be a little lazy knowing substantial changes can be made during the processing stage.
When using film there was no choice but to pay attention to what was in front of the camera. You could keep your eye on the subject. Concentration was not interrupted. I find that digital photographers like to take a peek at the screen to see what they got. They will even show the subject. This detracts from the actual picture making. That quick peep shifts the photographers’ vision from the subject to the screen and then the attention has to shift back to the subject. I have seen photographers doing this frequently. Continuity is lost.
A digital camera is overly complicated and the processing software is even worse. My current digital camera manual is 500 pages thick. My film camera manual is much simpler.
One of the things that I like about many of my older black and white film images is the play of light areas against dark areas. Sometimes the shadows are devoid of detail and the highlights can be a little washed out. This kind of chiaroscuro is missing from my digital work. It is also missing from most of the digital work of others that I have seen.
Digital is easy to blame but blame can also be placed on photographers and how they use the technology. One of the things that digital has done is to make image exposures almost perfect (even in very dim light) and if not perfect at the time of capture then this can easily be refined during the development phase. There is a sameness and a visual monotony to the photos. The latest digital sensors open up the shadows and tame the highlights. The other aspect of digital where the photographer can be blamed is the use of software that alters the way an image looks. Digital images can be made to look like film or textures can be added to add a painterly touch. Unfortunately, if an image is bland to start with, adding a special effect won’t make it better.
It is up to photographers to keep technology under control. Just because a programmer can write code to make a razzle-dazzle photo feature does not mean a photographer has to use it. Use only the essential digital tools needed to make a finished print. One that shows your personal expression.
Balthus, the artist, was a fascinating character. Nicholas Fox Weber, the writer, wrote an excellent biography on the amazing life of Balthus. The book “Balthus-A Biography” was published in 1999 when Balthus was still alive and Weber was able to interview him over a number of years.
I find that the paintings by Balthus are evocative, provocative, erotic and dreamlike. I felt an immediate connection with his work. Even though his paintings and my photographs are very different, they both elicit similar responses from viewers especially concerning the nudes.
Balthus and I react to probing questions about our work with similar responses. When questioned about the meaning or message of a particular painting, a Balthus response was: “It’s absolutely not symbolic. The meaning of the painting is the painting.”
When Weber asked him about the painting “The Room” Balthus replied that “The Room” is simply a painting of a nude in a room with a girl at the window.
Another Balthus response when questioned about eroticism in his paintings was: “The problem is that everyone sees eroticism. My pictures aren’t erotic. The problem is psychoanalysis.”
Quotes from my writings reflect similar reactions to criticisms of my photographs. In 1997, I wrote a “Personal Statement” as an introduction to a book featuring my early nude work where I wrote: “A common reaction to my work is that the images are disturbing. The images are not disturbing to me. They are simply expressions.”
Another quote which is from my “Artist Statement” is: “I make my work without a social or political agenda. There is no message or hidden purpose. The photograph is the photograph. What the viewer sees and interprets is out of my control.”
While reading the book on Balthus, I found the similarities between our responses and thinking processes to be uncanny. Also, the relentless questioning of Balthus’s artistic intent by Weber reminded me of my graduate school professor, John Weiss, and his agitation with my responses regarding my work. His normal reaction was that I should take more responsibility for my photographs instead of denying intent. Neither Weber or Weiss could accept either of our simplistic responses to our work. They both pushed for more information in an accusatory manner as if we were taking the easy way out instead of searching for meanings in our work. For me the information that was wanted was neither available nor important to me.
An observation made by Claus von Bülow, a friend of Balthus, was that he felt Balthus more as a perpetual voyeur of women that as an active lover. When I photograph a model, I view it as a business relationship and not a chance for a romantic relationship. But I would say that I am a voyeur of women. The difference between Balthus and myself is that he preferred young girls where my preference is to photograph older mature women.
Another difference is that I believe my unconscious plays a role in my image making whereas Balthus vehemently denied any influence from the unconscious.
For me, the work of Balthus stimulated areas of my brain that connected with his paintings even though I cannot verbally say what this connection is. As Balthus said “the painting is the painting.” The visual elements of the painted canvas are all that mattered to him.
Here is an older photograph from my Collector Series. For me, it is simply a woman standing in back of a window behind a broken shard of glass. The viewer can make more out of it if they wish.
Here I am standing inside the Metropolitan Museum of Art in the gallery of the Manet/Degas show observing the painting “Olympia” by the artist Édouard Manet. It is a large painting measuring 51.1 inches by 74.8 inches. Completed in 1863, it is a picture of a naked red-headed lady with lilly-white skin lying on a rumpled bed with a black maid standing behind her holding a bouquet of flowers and a surprised looking black cat standing on the end of the bed.
A great deal of information has been written about how scandalous the painting was when it was exhibited at the 1865 Paris Salon and how it was instrumental in ushering in the age of modern art. In today’s world the idea of it being scandalous is at best quaint. But that is not what I want to write about.
I was standing in front of the painting when two ladies passed briskly in front of me giving a cursory glance at the painting with one saying to the other “that’s pretty” as they quickly moved on. Art appreciation at it best. For me, I could not stop looking at the painting. The scale of the painting along with the subject matter demanded attention. While closely observing every square inch of the canvas, I began to feel I was part of the scene as if I was traveling through time. I felt as if I was standing in the room depicted in the painting but I was a photographer working with the two models. I had asked Victorine to lay on the bed. She is naked except for a flower in her hair, a bracelet on her right wrist, a black ribbon around her neck, earrings and slip-on shoes. She came to the modeling session wearing these items and I could see no reason she should remove them. I usually go with serendipity. The other model, Laure, is wearing a pink dress with a white collar, a pink hair covering and holding a large bouquet of flowers wrapped with white paper. The thing that visually stands out on her are the red dangly earrings but since her head is turned only one is visibly hanging from her left ear. It definitely held my attention. I thought about having her remove it since it was distracting but again that is how she came to the modeling session and sometimes my meddling can detract from the composition.
When Victorine positioned herself on the bed, she just naturally posed in a comfortable position with legs crossed at the ankles and her hands finding positions that look natural and relaxed. It was just a coincidence that her left hand covered her pudendum. Her torso is propped up on the bed with pillows. The white sheets are messy and rumpled but again I don’t like to tamper with such details-I take it as it is. I asked both models to look at me which I thought would be best. Victorine looked at me but Laure made a questioning glance toward Victorine as if to ask a question. I liked the way she glanced and asked her to continue with that pose. Before freezing the image for posterity, a black cat unexpectedly appeared and jumped onto the bed looking directly at me. At first, I wanted to get the cat out of the picture but decided that it filled in that empty corner and proceeded to take the final picture. As I began fading away, I thought that Édouard would be happy with my photograph.
I slowly began to hear voices and saw people around me and realized I had returned to the museum looking at “Olympia”. Even though “Olympia” is a painting, I related to it as a photograph. First, it is a nude and a large portion of my photographic work is centered on the nude. Second, it is very naturalistic in appearance and has a relaxed demeanor. Third, there is a randomness to the composition including the models’ poses, the objects, the background, and the inclusion of the unexpected (the cat). These elements show up in some of my best work.
Of course, the above account is pure speculation on my part but there is some basis that these events could be rooted in photography. I believe photography’s role may have had some significance. The painting has a modern feel to it and although no photographs have been connected to “Olympia” it seems to have a genetic relationship to photography.
It is known that Manet did use photographs for some of his paintings and etchings including “The Execution of the Emperor Maximilian” and several portraits. Some of his paintings included photographic nuances associated with light and dark areas of compositions. Historically, film initially had difficulty recording middle tones which resulted in high contrast photos. Paintings using such photographs as guides emphasized such characteristics.
Manet was not a stranger to photography (I saw him referred to as an amateur photographer) and like other painters he used photographs to help in his artistic vision.
But does it matter. It really is about the painting. What you see and feel when viewing it. The painting pulled me right into it and I felt I was there in 1863 recording the scene on film. Perhaps I did and Édouard Manet used my image to help create “Olympia.”
References: The Artist and the Camera-Degas to Picasso
Sleeping Mind Photography 