Featured Post

Pinned Post, A Policy Note:

I have made a decision to keep this blog virus free from this point forward, at least until the smoke clears. This is not a judgement about ...

Monday, August 3, 2015


Is Ming just screwing with us here?


  1. If he was, how could we tell? I happen to really like Elliot Porter's work, perhaps because his photos are the end of an intellectual process rather than the beginning, as Thein's are.

    1. I really tried to like these, and there's a couple where there's something there that's present but not quite working for me.

      But most of them seem to be pretty much nothing, and several of them at basically the same nothing. Different trees, sure, but essentially the same arrangement.

      I half suspect he's testing to see how empty a picture he can make and still draw positive comments.

      But I'm gonna go pull my Porter off the shelf now because there is a similarity, isn't there? Good eye!

    2. Julian, do you mean to say that Ming's photos are the beginning of an intellectual process?

      I had read your remark as implying that Porter and Ming are both at the end, but I see now it could be read the other way.

      Ultimately I think Porter is just good at this sort of thing and Ming isn't :)

      I cannot find the 'interesting detail' in most of Ming's pictures though, of course, it's all very sharp. As web sized pictures go.

    3. I meant that it seems that Ming photographs something that appeals to him, and then AFTER he produces the image has to explain why it's so great; he has to justify his pictures.

      I imagine (allegorically), Porter out on a walk being suddenly struck by the beauty and complexity of nature, and saying to himself, "Tomorrow I'm going to bring a camera". Then he goes home and thinks and plans, and THEN he goes out and photographs, and produces an image that needs no further explanation.

      In contrast I suggest this fellow's work, most of which is "technically" bad, but often hauntingly beautiful:

  2. Mings photography is always technically flawless. The problem is that his work is just dreary and utterly artless. This is a particularly fine example of the dreary and artless genre.

    1. Yup. He would deny it with both hands, but he seems certain that if you just use expensive enough gear you can shoot pretty much anything and make great photos.