No - not that sort of Slough, this is a proper, no-holds-barred, desolate landscape lacking in any creativity whatsoever (actually maybe it IS that Slough after all!)
It seems that, in keeping other people bouyed up, I've hit a very quiet patch indeed.
I am normally happy, beavering away with my camera at all times, taking pictures of all sorts of crap in the hope that I can print something interesting. I've often been very lucky and at times have surprised myself.
As it happens, last year I took three pictures that I was truly delighted with - so much so that my enthusiasm tailed off after our holiday and I have neither picked up a camera nor been in the darkroom properly since mid-December.
This is very unusual for me and was last encountered some 17 years ago when 6 months went by without a glimmer of hope.
I've known quite a few creative types for whom this is nothing unusual - it does seem commonplace actually and I can't really get my head around why it happens.
You've got all the gear (and I mean ALL the gear) and you know you can produce something you're really happy with and yet . . . you get to a point and think wtf am I going to do now?
You will surely recognise it.
I was as adrift as a rudderless and mastless boat on a becalmed sea - a proper Sargasso Moment!
That is until last week.
 |
| HP5 And Ilfospeed |
My friend and fellow-forumite Neil asked me if I fancied meeting him for a pint in my local boozery as he was in this neck of the woods with his cameras a takin' photees.
A Holga 6x12 and Nikon FM2 with 20mm UD Nikkor were his weapons of choice. I asked him if he didn't mind me tagging along and I ended up taking the SWC/M.
I was trying to think about well-known SW users and how they approached things and the only two that came to mind were Lee Friedlander and Harry Callahan, so I looked out my copy of Lustrum Press' 'Landscape Theory' and had a look at what Harry had to say and I found this:
" . . . (Ansel) gave a short lecture series in Detroit in 1941, and when I saw his closeup landscapes (made from 10 to 25 feet away) I felt I could photograph walls or whatever was available in the midwest. I didn't care about photographing mountains and Ansel freed me to photograph the non-spectacular. I thought I could make a footprint in the sand that would stand as an abstraction of a sand dune in the west."
and also this:
" . . . (people like Gary Winogrand) . . . go out with a certain concept. A picture comes out of their feeling for the situation and their viewpoint in doing it. I think that happens with a view camera on a tripod too. Limitations make for a kind of freedom."
I don't know about you, but these resonated with me.
I like the idea of limitations - I guess that's why I am so entrenched in film photography - it is the limitations that sort of scratch that it-is-hard-to-do-so-it-must-be-artistic itch.
I know, I can hear the guffaws from the back - it is a stupid concept isn't it, but limitations no matter what their form really bring out my creative urges.
I once bought a Paul Reed Smith guitar back in the days of the original factory - it was custom-ordered too and was heaven - easy to play, sounded wonderful, looked incredible, and yet, it all seemed too easy and I actually ended up not playing the guitar AT ALL for about 12 years!
That's madness.
That's as mad as Harry Albright reading the end of a book before he starts, just in case he dies.
Anyway, no matter the madness and personal quirks - I almost have always felt that if EVERYTHING is on a plate for you it's not so great for MY creative juices.
Certainly Bruce from the Online Lightroom would probably disagree with me in his new-found digital evangelist mode (Hi Bruce!) but he is himself and I am myself - for two friends we're as different as Coke and Pepsi.
Anyway, where does that lead us in today's post?
Ah yes, the slough of despond.
It's a feeling that has been all over me for a couple of months - I've even stopped looking at lenses on Ebay, it is that bad.
And the walk with Neil, whilst great fun, great company and ending up in the pub, proved an old adage of mine - you can't force yourself to take pictures.
My slough was cemented into place by the fresh roll of Tri-X that didn't play ball (even with some thinking I'd done [box speed and Zone II shadows]) and the whole rigmarole was as bad a dog's dinner that had been eaten, brought up and eaten again.
In other words and to coin a phrase: Shite.
And yet strangely, I didn't let that deter me.
I read the above quotes again and on another invite, took myself off to Dollar Glen, a place made all the more magical by really misty conditions.
It can often be hard for the solo photographer to be in company with other photographers, simply because you'll often end up taking the same views, when in reality, landscape is more about your own personal reaction to your surroundings.
However the company was really good - four good photographers and an artist and I felt confident enough to do things I never normally do . . pictures with people in them.
Also, being the "mountain goat" . . I don't know about that - I certainly have a goat-like quality (eats anything and beard) . . I was able to get ahead of the pack and dash around cradling the SW on a monopod to my heart's content.
And that contentment was vast with the most wonderfully imposing surroundings and mist.
Whoever decided to build a castle (now Castle Campbell - originally Castle Gloom) in this setting knew exactly what they were doing - it's a big uphill all the way and its defensive position is really quite, er, impenetrable.
I loved it and chided myself on how I've never been there or even heard of it.
You see, already my spirits were lifted by thinking about Harry's comments and being in awe-inspiring countryside with people of a mind to do the same thing.
When the day was over we drove back through an incredible late-winter landscape of mist and low sun - the slough was still gone.
Next day I developed the film. I'd used some HP5 I had hanging around and developed it in 1+75 Fomadon R09, a developer I like a lot.
The negatives looked good - a tad thin perhaps, but on the whole alright and surprisingly sharp considering I was using a monopod.
So, Thursday, after a very long break indeed, I printed and was very pleased with the results, until I noticed something that appeared to be snow on a misty pic.
FCECKING BTARDINOUS FCKECKERS - it was only Ilford Mottle!
Fortunately it wasn't too obtrusive, however it is there, so now I am of the conclusion (as this is my THIRD Mottle Incident) that I am getting rid of my stock of Ilford 120 film. Radical I know and there's a fair bit including 13 rolls of SFX, but I just cannot trust them any longer.
I know they say they have worked stuff through the system, but I can't risk it.
It's nearly 50 rolls in total.
 |
| HP5 And Tetenal |
 |
| HP5 And Tetenal |
 |
| HP5 And Tetenal |
 |
| HP5 And Tetenal |
 |
| Tri-X And Ilfospeed |
My day out had involved time, petrol (not mine I hasten to add), more time, physical effort and perhaps most importantly, unrepeatable light. Why risk those things?
If they ditched the paper style backing paper and switched to more plasticky a la Kodak I'd be happy, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
True, it must be a nightmare, however they're swift to blame things like storage conditions
But remember, 120 film is hermetically sealed, so wtf are they on about?
All my film is kept cool or frozen in air-tight Sistema boxes, and the film within the boxes is covered in thick layers of clingfilm.
Humidity is another blame factor - is that when the film is actually in the camera?
I open and load my films just before I start taking pictures and seal them tight right after - it is highly unlikely that say Frame 4 would be affected by an airborne incident.
Also notice how there's no mottling at all on the rebates.
So that's it.
Anyway, despite the mottle, the slough has still gone - I feel enthused again and it is maybe because Harry Callahan set my mind adrift on different paths, realising that even with a modicum of gear (albeit GREAT gear) you can achieve something you love if you set your mind to it.
The prints btw were printed on ancient (30-ish years old) Tetenal TT Vario - superb paper, but only printable from Grade 4 up and I now only have 3 sheets left.
There's a few other prints I made though . . this time Grade 3 Ilfospeed - a genuinely wonderful paper with an emulsion that to my eye looks different to MG.
The tonality is extraordinarily smooth, however Ilford have discontinued it . . so in the printing world, pretty much all we have left is Ilford MG in its variations, Art 300, Kentmere, Fotospeed, sometimes Adox, or old stock.
That's incredibly sad.
And also might well dictate how I do things in the future.
Anyway, hope you have enjoyed today's post - it was a herculean effort to get it out here with days left to spare in January.
If you feel like you're going through the slough yourself, remember, there are ways out of it, just start thinking a little differently.
Take care and remember to stop picking your nose.
H xx
