“You have some very strong work in your submission. I wish to first commend you on seeking out new subject matter and also a new photographic process-this is something that is vital for photographers at all levels of experience. I can clearly sense your passion and zeal for this new manner of making pictures. Interestingly, this newfound vigor is viewed through the lens of the movie Manhatta so you arguably are conflating old and new in a quite meaningful matter. As detailed in your statement, you are using a relatively long focal length lens to produce compressed architectural studies of Manhattan. You wisely photograph in various atmospheric conditions and this lends a palpable degree of vibrancy and rhythm to the pictures. I enjoy how you juxtapose the near and far in the images such as in numbers two through four, six and nine. You also produced quite compressed and flattened depictions of space in images one, seven, eight and ten. These two poles of looking at and assessing architecture vibrate against each other in a compelling manner. As the choice of subject matter and your overall manner of looking are quite consistent, it is necessary that you include these sorts of variances across the series. That being said, my eyes continually return to image five. Here you conflate the interior and exteriors spaces in a wholly satisfying manner, and I think this is the key to creating a successful series. The reason has to do with the information included in your project statement. While I applaud your thorough and thoughtful words, I suggest you more clearly make a connection between the subject matter and your manner of looking with the personal details of your various positions and employment locations over the years. Currently, you could exclude such information and instead only reference your interest in the film Manhatta and your preference of street photography and the series would read very much the same. More precisely correlate and make necessary the information related to your changing occupations. Including more images similar to number five can help in this regard, as the personal and the subjective, and arguably also the mundane, make an engaging appearance along with the cityscape. In addition, this image very much has more of a cinematic and film aesthetic to it due to what appears to be the inclusion of reflection. Your series is extremely commendable overall – my main suggestion is to more carefully correlate your occupational information with the subject matter and your approach to the same.
Thank you for submitting your work to LensCulture.”
My submission statement;
“Homage to Manhatta”
Every job I have ever had, has never offered vantage points to view the city much differently than ground level. It wasn’t until I accepted a position in a company that was located in the upper floors of a huge building in the financial district that I began to view things anew. What was more intriguing than the view, was watching the ever changing play of light and shadow on the urban landscape through the day and the seasons.
This series took further meaning when the company I work for, move uptown into a famous iconic building. I am now more than twenty floors up, looking out on views and light that I have never experienced from street level. The work I mostly concentrate on is at street level where I document closeup interactions with people using a wide angle lens. This new view has me as a witness to atmosphere, light, shadow, and geometry I’ve only dreamed about. I now utilize a long telephoto lens to compress space. To pick out slices of geometry and light. In this “Homage to Manhatta”, inspired by the film of Paul Strand and Charles Sheeler, I let myself not be bound by the technical qualities of optics. I let myself interject my own feelings on a somewhat pictorialist view.