2point8

1. admin Apr 24 2006 / 4pm

   I’d love to see other examples of editing like this. If you have links, share ‘em!
2. Matt Apr 25 2006 / 7pm

   I had noticed what you were doing a couple of weeks ago and agree that since it works in books, it should also work on a computer screen…
3. John Apr 26 2006 / 6pm

   Michael:

   I like this editing style - but more for print. I think on the web, I would love to have t least some kind of navigation back to another photo set or archive without having to mouse around.

   Looking at the shots, I clicked back so much, I ran through the set again. I love that shot of th ring girl’s feet, btw. Shots like that are inspiring, and I wanted to see more and investigate.

   I like the fact that, say, on blogger.com blogs- you can navigate from the right or left to another day or set easily in one click.

   ps - Waiting for my Nikon coolpix L3 to arrive from NY, NY. I’ll be shooting again soon! Learned on a Nikon F SLR and a Leica M rangefinder.
4. mark alor Apr 29 2006 / 9pm

   I agree, I really would love to see or make a picture pools where I throw my images in somewhere, but then I or the computer could decide when to bring them to the surface. Instead of sets or tags, the photo could lead backward or forward through a random or preset path, there could be many paths or destinies the photos would move depending on the “surface” photograph. There could be newborn pictures or well established series and would allow for playfulness relying on how you feel like ordering photographs or just let the computer play linear games with pictures. editing accidents can be fun.
5. rion Jun 21 2006 / 7am

   Ah, you’ve hit upon one of my favorite techniques!

   This is actually a long-lived concept in print design… sequencing photography by common visual elements, ideas or themes over many pages. It’s something that I like to play with in my own site’s photo sequences per set (sometimes more successfully than most other times), and it’s one of the elements that I’ve commented about here: Multiple or Single Photo Entry — “…the context of how you view each image is influenced by its relationship to the previous (or following) images. Sometimes one photo included within different combinations of imagery can completely alter the impression of that one photo. Editing, rhythm, order, visual and content juxtaposition is the key there…”

   I have a few favorite examples of the art at its best:

   — A lot of Paul Rand’s old design books do this well, but one in particular (I *think* it’s Design, Form & Chaos) is a good example. it helps that much of Paul’s aesthetic ran along the same visual lines, but he really thought about those visual relationships.

   — A more recent book is a Phaidon publication called Minimum. The entire book has photography that is visually placed to connect with its previous and following page neighbors. Nicely done stuff. (To really see the visual themes, the big book is better than the miniature version.)

   — In storytelling and sequencing, be sure to get Larry Clark’s Tulsa, and then flip through it slowly. It’s a well-choreographed journey.

   — My favorite example is an out-of-print book (or was in 1996 when I bought it second-hand): Observations, a 1959 book of portraits by Richard Avedon that was designed by Alexey Brodovitch. Alexey was a brilliant visual sequencer. He was the Art Editor for Harper’s Bazaar from 1934-1958, and used to lay out all of his photos on the floor — adding, subtracting, and moving them around to make strong visual and thematic associations. Observations was designed that way and is a stunning example, page by page, creating a rhythm and flow that doesn’t happen as often in current publications. I wish more of today’s designers and photographers studied Brodovitch’s work.

   It’s definitely a quieter and more introspective way to present — sequencing images with more in mind — and understanding the before and after within the presentation can impart so much more meaning to each photo. But the Web changes things. While sequencing is not a difficult practice to pursue (tho perhaps difficult to do well), the nature of the Web is to be checked often, so people expect to see new content immediately. In publishing more of a curated set, it can be hard for readers to tell what is new, unless it is published very clearly. Photographers’ portfolios will sequence shots, but they are often not updated regularly like photoblogs are.

   Perhaps it is a general lack of patience in Web audiences, or a lack of strength in our presentations as publishers. Perhaps the click and the scroll have changed our relationships to content. Maybe the date-based bloggy style is just far too pervasive for anyone to have questioned it much.

   But I’m glad to see the conversation here. There is a definite need to bring a stronger awareness and practice of editing onto the Web.
6. admin Jun 22 2006 / 4pm

   A public thanks for the thoughts and the links on that, Rion. Your second-to-last para boils it down. Publishing is so easy on the web, and editing is hard work, so there’s a big gap between the two that few try bridge.

   I like thinking about the difference between editing out the bad (to publish the good) versus editing with an arc or theme in mind. The latter’s an extension of the former. But yes, at the moment, the “date-based bloggy style” rules.

   We’ll see… I think this kind of editing can only be done in hindsight, after you’ve sat with the material for awhile and thought about how it might connect-up in new ways with older work. Part of me remembers that Erwitt’s “Snapshots” book succeeds at this; in there (if I recall correctly) he thematically links images that were taken more than 20 years apart. He must’ve played “concentration” a lot, as a kid.
7. 1 Jul 09 2006 / 3pm

   1…

   …