Thanks for the feedback. Yes, I have been accused of being a 'technician', and I won't deny that I like my photos to have a certain 'quality' about them (and as a commercial photographer, my clients expect it). And yes, people do buy 'art' for all kinds of reasons -- for some, it has an emotional response; for others, it matches their couch. I wouldn't be surprised if a few Rothkos sold for the latter reason.
As far as picking a subject and working on it for years before exhibiting, I personally don't think the creative process always works that way (at least for me). Sometimes things happen consciously, sometimes unconsciously. And as I mentioned in an earlier post, if I were to consciously 'decide' on a subject, then I'd be saying to myself "today I'm going to go out and photograph 'x' and nothing else, because that's what I told myself that's what I should do". Unfortunately I don't think I consciously work that way (at least in my personal work). Maybe it's ADD 🙂. I think there is an 'essential' part to anyone's personality that remains even as the years go by, and knowingly or unknowingly, we all tend to gravitate towards similar things, and (I'm hoping) they're reflected in the photos. Looking back on my work from the last 35+ years, I think this 'vein' of work started in 1993 after my first trip to France. It opened something up in me (can't say for sure what it was), but I'm pretty sure that it led me down this path - however circuitous it's gone.
So a theme? Well I seem to see one, looking at them together. Isolation, remoteness, lonliness, solitude, melancholy and moodiness - perhaps a touch of sadness. There's also a bit of being left behind and/or imprisonment that I like to think comes through. Just look at the situations and how the subjects are resigned to their place in the world. The elk. The fan. The popcorn vendor. The group of seniors who have been left behind ("Where's that damned tour bus? Did they forget us?"). I hope the qualities of the black and white only enhances these concepts. But here again, that's not necessarily for me to tell you what you should be seeing. We all bring different things to our perception of an image, and some things will resonate with some people, some not at all. And I'm fine with that. I mean, I think Cy Twombly's work is ridiculous, but other people like it, see meaning, and it sells for millions (not that $$$ necessarily implies quality/goodness).
As far as working on a subject for years, and THEN approaching a gallery, that probably does make sense. Of course, galleries are usually only exhibiting recent work, not things you did 20 years ago. But I get your point - over that long period of time you'll have refined your 'message' and will hopefully be reflected in the more recent work (Neil Peart of Rush has said that he wishes Rush started with Moving Pictures - their 8th album). But you know, I'm at a point in my life now (48) in which I'd like this work to breathe beyond my four walls. And if it's showing a 'working through' something, then that's fine. Here again, everyone's going to get something (or nothing) out of my work. I'm okay with that. But unless I give it a shot and see for myself - good or bad - then I'll never know.
