What We Photograph July 09 2013

There are hallowed traditions of nature photography mostly based in a vision of the world as either grand landscape or close-up “macro”. We take a different approach. We have nothing against tradition but our predilection is a close examination of form and texture and outline in series, where pictures often work together in juxtaposition.

We like to look at the sky and capture our amazement at the beauty of clouds. We look even closer than the entirety of trees, at their surface, their skin, their bark. Sand on a beach turns into a magical assortment of beautiful grains, some transparent like glass, others having their own unique color, not one the same as any other. And different beaches have their own cut of sand and stone, from fine to very thick. Other shores have no sand at all and are shelves of prehistoric layers of sediment turned to stone over millions of years and thrust up by the living planet and exposed at oceans edge.

When the beauty of something is better revealed simply and directly we do it that way. Often as a field study without particular emphasis on only one thing. But not always. We enjoy looking closely at things that might be overlooked. Sand is a good example. Who photographs sand? Who has pictures of sand in their home? A closer look, however, reveals it to be amazingly beautiful, a creation of this earth as beautiful as any other. And a photograph of it can be deceptively dramatic with surprising elegance and unexpectedness that brings it fully into the sphere of contemporary art and photography. It’s not that we are trying to accomplish that. it just happens. And without the cynicism that says that the beauty of nature is not somehow significant enough. It is.