« Black Holes & Bright Lights, by Jim Hughes | Main | I Know It's Here Somewhere.... »

Wednesday, 23 August 2017

Comments

I enjoy playing my Norman acoustic guitar, purchased circa 1990, more than ever these days. Like your Martin, it may well sound better too. It has a beautiful 'light' sound -interesting that a synaesthetic description came to mind- and I reckon its about right for my skill level. I've never thought of looking for a replacement. And, yes, I agree with you about the pleasure of playing music with someone compatible.

I also love the solitary nature of photography though. One of my old Spotmatics lasted me about 40 years, but its been digital cameras that have really opened up photography for me. I suspect that they're now reaching a point where we will want to hold on to a favourite rather than constantly looking for 'better' specifications and gimmicks, thankfully.

I would suggest that one of the big differences between music and photography is that its quite possible for a novice to produce a memorable image, because of the laws of chance and/or because they have access, whereas a raw beginner is unlikely to be able to do much with a musical instrument. Have you ever had to listen to a beginner violinist!?! Unlike musical instruments modern cameras can be set up to do much of the technical work for us, so photography is more 'democratic' in that sense, I suppose.

Let's see, there are six guitars (all acoustic), an acoustic bass guitar, a new-ish fiddle, a 55 year old viola, and a mid-70s mandolin in my living room right now. My wife and I play mostly Old Time with a little bluegrass and some Americana thrown in, by ourselves and with friends.

The odd thing for me is that this is all pretty recent. I played classical viola and piano from elementary school through college, then photography basically replaced music for me and I didn't touch an instrument for more than thirty years. My wife played folk guitar with friends in high school, then stopped - I never once saw her play. Then a few years ago we started to hang out with friends who play, and she got a nice little Martin OM, and I made the mistake of picking it up one day and trying to figure out how it worked.....

So now I can kinda sorta play guitar and sing a little, but last summer we went to an Old Time music camp and I came home with a head full of fiddle tunes. So then I went out and got a nice little fiddle and I've been totally obsessed ever since.

I'm not sure how or why photography replaced music for me, but these days the two happily co-exist, and I'm a lot happier for it.

An interesting topic. I have 3 functional cameras (1 that I actually use regularly), and 2 guitars (0 that I actually use regularly right now).

I think there is a symbiotic relationship between the cameras and instruments. They are both avenues for my creative expression. Sometimes when I'm not feeling one I turn to the other, other times they feed each other. Right now though they have a somewhat antagonistic relationship due to life/time constraints.

The question of how to allocate time to the pursuits I find meaningful is the ongoing challenges of my life at this point. Any suggestions?

I don't play an instrument, but I do spend a good amount of time listening to
music from the Baroque, Classical and Romantic periods. I read that music lights up more brain centers than any other art experience, so I tell myself that I want my work to affect me as strongly as, say, Vaughan Williams' Thomas Tallis fantasia does. It's a high standard that emphasizes what it's all about and that makes complacency easier to avoid.

At 6, I started playing piano, then brass, then guitar, then bass. Shortly after that, I started taking pictures with my sister's old Pentax. Currently at 57, both pursuits have been vying for my time for the last 40 plus years.

What I do know for a fact is the less time I spend obsessing about my camera/instrument, the better my photography/music is.

It’s easy to get hung up on tools, especially guitars and cameras, but really they are more or less typewriters for inputting what’s in the artist’s heart, mind, and soul. Different flavors and colors can be added with different tools, like your wonderful old Martin, or even Mike’s Exacta 66, but essentially, and the symbiosis between artistic tools, is that they are used to express the person using them.

I was a guitarist in a few bands back in the early 70s, among other musical pursuits (and other nonmusical pursuits like writing and painting). What's interesting to me is that I seem to have room for just one major artistic passion at a time. I throw myself into taking pictures these days and leave the other arts to my kids.

I've also got a Martin 000-18 which I bought in the late 80s, so it must be very similar to yours. I love that my old guitars take on the instrument version of brassing -- they wear out beautifully. I think that the sound of an acoustic guitar must change over the years not just because of age but because of use.

From film to digital, I do own more cameras than I thought I ever would. Coincidentally, I was just contemplating the fact that cameras were very much like guitars, at least for me, in that I own several of those too. From acoustic to electric and a few basses. Some are from my days as a luthier, building and repairing stringed instruments, some from my career spent in the MI industry, manufacturing & distribution. For me, it is a symbiotic relationship.
And I find that cameras, like guitars, each have a personality, although guitars do develop refinements to tone etc, as they age. Cameras, not so much.

I'm a flyfisher and one thing that really strikes me how many of us fly anglers are also interested in the art of photography. I guess flyfishing in a way is also a very visual art and I can see the relation between the two.
The other twist is I'm also a photographer by profession and I find people from my similar field of work are also interested in flyfishing because it's visually beautiful.

I am afraid I am not a good example for you. Plenty of cameras but as I used to answer tourers at the piano factory where I used to work, my only musical instrument is the radio.

Guitarist/photographer here as well, and about as (in)competent in either field. If I counted up the instruments and cameras around here, they'd probably tally pretty evenly. I've long had the habit of visualizing music, and my favorite images have a musical quality (though I'd probably have a hard time explaining what that means).

A musician friend of mine is a synesthete--she perceives musical tones as both sound and color. Quite a talented visual designer and artist, too, though so far she hasn't pursued photography.

Gordon,
I think you answered your own question with the hypothesis :
If you have a passion for one type of creative expression, why wouldn’t you have an equal passion for another?
People with a creative bent, often find outlet for it in multiple ways.
With regard to music, I am more a listener than a player (although I do have a 50 year old Gibson J-50 (Jazz neck, adjustable bridge, later replaced with a solid one from Gibson). I have also built furniture and other woodworking projects. I built a proper digital recording studio in our home with my son, (Piano , guitar , Bass , accordion) who went on to become a recording engineer with some major credits.
So I think it is quite common for creative people to be creative in multiple ways.

Mike,

I have been in both the photo and music industry for years. Worked for Framus Music in Germany in the early to mid-seventies, played in bands and still play today. Combined with my photo passion (working as a pro in underwater photo since the late seventies to the present) I find the relationship is quite symbiotic. Both serve to feed my spirit and provide balance in my life.

BTW, born and raised in the Finger Lakes area (Ithaca)

Budd


To me, photography is more like poetry in that both are about secrets. The link between music and photography may be more about tools, or more accurately, our attachment to them. Still, I enjoy picking up my student level violin and scratching out (literally) an Appalachian old time fiddle tune or two, at least when my left elbow allows it.

Wonderful photo of your Telecaster.

Great photographs allow you to wander around in someone else' imagination. How is that not Charlie Parker?

It's classical guitar for me, loving guitar since a very early age.

It's been found that alzheimer's patients respond to music when they can't to speech, and strokes can take away speech but leave musical abilities. Somehow music must use different or more parts of the brain. As does vision. Maybe - I wonder if anyone knows - musical and creative parts of the brain are close together and can sometimes overlap, much like what apparently happens in synesthesia.

This post got me thinking. Six photographers, is like six guitarists, just meshing the samething with possibly different timing. But mixing sounds creates music. I wonder if a future photo project would be to have one photographer capture an image, then send it off to following photographers to blend in or add other elements. The resulting final photo after many photographers would be very different than the original image and be photographers composition.

I've owned more cameras than guitars in my lifetime, but now the ratio is 7 cameras to 20 guitars. I use all of them; the guitars mostly to keep my hand/mind coordination supple, the cameras have the same function for my eye/mind. I'm more creative with the cameras, but the guitars are more fun to "play" with:

http://anokaguitarworks.blogspot.com/

I do think that there is some kind of connection between different creative endeavors for the practitioner and often for the consumer.
And then there is equipment acquisition. While photographers are often looking for the newest*, musicians are often looking for the oldest. Check out the prices on 300 year old violins or Martin guitars from the 30's or 40's. If anyone has a da Salo or Maggini viola or a 1929 Gibson L-5 archtop I would gladly pay the shipping :-).

* Yes, I am aware of old camera collecting and use. I do think about getting a Leica M-2 and a Nikon F-2, and I know there are people out there who use wet plate cameras.

I'm not sure whether I have more guitars than cameras, but I have quite a few of both. The guitars are mostly electric and amplified (my baby is a Collings Eastside hollowbody.) I don't find much congruence between the production of photography and music, though; they seem to appeal to very different sides of the brain. For me, photography is usually walking along, looking for striking images; it's a bit like hunting, and I often come back empty-handed. The guitar is more like mathematics -- I'm quite interested in the theory of it all, along with the technique. Photography feels freer, and my images are often slap-dash; music feels tighter, more precise and practiced. I greatly enjoy both.

There is, of course, a "machinery" aspect to both hobbies. In 2015, Gibson made a disastrous decision to put robo-tuners on many of its classic-style electric guitars, along with brass nuts that quickly eroded under the constant wear of the robo-tuners. They didn't sell. At all. The tuners didn't seem to work very well, either. The result was, a lot of guitars got dumped -- I jut bought a guitar (an SG) with a list price of ~$1700 for $549 from Sam Ash. I'll put new standard tuning machines on it, and replace the nut with a Tusq, and have a great SG. For people who like to fool with machinery, I guess there is some cross-over.

I used to be a bass player until the age of 25 or so. Was in the studios at the age of 19, later gave it up because I was literally starving. Now, after a 35 year hiatus, I've got a bass again.

Oh yeah, and I took some pictures in between.

While I own a variety of cameras, my only musical(?) instrument was a comb and tissue paper.

There are lots of photos of the various Beatles and their cameras. It seemed that George and Ringo never left the house without their Pentaxes. Frank Sinatra was good enough to photograph one of Muhammad Ali's fights for LIFE magazine.

As for myself, I've got a Telecaster clone, a Fender Precision Bass clone, and a Yamaha acoustic. Played in casual cover bands in high school and college. Realized I was not going to make a living doing music or photography, and went into computers instead.

Speaking of which, I also notice a high correlation between computer programmers and photography, going back long before digital cameras. And a lot of the programmers I know can also play a musical instrument.

You might say that I'm one of those folks...

Tele-Gib, December 23, 2016

Harmony Stratotone, Elvis Costello Jazzmaster, Johnny Marr Jaguar, Septmeber 26, 2015

1981 Hamer Special, September 20, 2015

Godin Radiator, August 15, 2015

Three Woody Guitars, May 07, 2015

Kelly Tele Corner, July 13, 2012

Casio VL-1 & Teenage Engineering OP-1, April, 2011

Quine Telecaster Switches And Knobs, January, 2010

TeleStar Mona Body, November, 2009

Le Domino, July 03, 2017

Fano Alt de Facto TC6 and Rick Kelly Bowery Pine Tele, August 10, 2017

I like photographing my gear almost as much as I like playing it.

Good lord, I love musical instruments, especially guitars.

Well, several DSLRs (1 primary, 2 backups that were once primaries), a P&S that travels, and an iPhone that goes everywhere. Two guitars--both acoustic electric arch tops. One is played semi-regularly and I'm working more playing time into my schedule. The other requires some TLC to refinish the neck and a new set of strings. I played piano as a child; correction: I took lessons for several years as a child but can't claim to be able to actually play piano! I find the connection among music playing and listening, photography, and IT systems analysis interesting and the abilities seem to be correlated: if you can do one of them well, you seem likely to be able to either of the others well.

I own a guitar but have never learned to play it well. One of the reasons I took up photography was that I was a little frustrated that I couldn't create "art" in any other way. I can't draw or sculpt, can't sing or write, but I can take/make photographs. When I say "can take" I mean to my own satisfaction.
Anthony

Nice axe. I also have a Tele with a Broadcaster pickup (bridge). It's a great sound. I haven't thought much about the connection between music and photography other than to observe that when you get deep into one it's hard to keep the other going.

Don't forget Ansel Adams who was a classical trained pianist. For myself, it's all about the rhythm, which is why I play the drums. Ultimately, melody is what gets my mind all squishy and emotional. But I love the physicality of the drums, nothing like pounding away in sync with a group of good musicians. It's the one of the few things that lets me be totally in the moment.

Why do so many writers have a pun affectation? I see way to much of "pardon my obviously contrived pun." 8-)

You didn't feel the need to say "pardon my super-market tabloid reference" when you wrote An inquiring mind wants to know. 8-)

Now back to your inquiry. No I don't play any musical instrument, tho not for lack of piano lessons, etc. I like music, and have over 2000 songs on my iPod Touch. Everything from Bob Wills to Daft Punk to Tom Morello.

I don't think of photography as creative, but a craft, like being a cobbler. A craft that kept bread on my table for many years.

One can certainly have a musical approach to photographic composition, something that may naturally evolve from musical involvement. The question then becomes, what kind of music? For me, the answer is Classical, and a Classical approach to photographic composition as well. I would make a further argument for the coherence of art and science. This, of course, is practically heresy in some circles, and thereon hangs a tale—an intriguing one on my view, with a fascinating history extending well into our photographic origins.
My preference for Classical has to do with seeking enduring values concerned with what is most truly creative in the human make-up and what it has to offer future generations as they find themselves challenged by paradoxes of which we are not yet even aware.

A good comparison, and I can think of a few more. My early digital days compared to my early electric guitar days--I learned a ton in short order, played all the time, annoyed others, and generally thought I was better than I really was.

Also, as with photography, in the guitar world there are the noodlers and the songplayers (and songwriters). I, alas, was mostly a noodler, someone content to learn scales and chords, partial bits of songs, and invent (or re-invent) new licks, and to sometimes participate in unorganized jam sessions with like-minded friends.

I suppose in the photography world, the analogy is the hobbyist with thousands and thousands of individual photos, some excellent, mostly unorganized, few printed, and even fewer collected into books or other edited presentations. You learn one end of the art but not the other. While I've mostly given up on the guitar, I'm still working on the photography, and I'm slowly getting better at the "songwriting" and "album making" side of it.

Me? No. I played the guitar as a teen but it fell away as life became more complex.

But some years back a portion of a photo exhibit at the Art Institute of Chicago was devoted to works by (relatively) brand-name old-school photographers who claimed that music was the primary dial tone for their works. The labels even listed the music the photographer claimed to be hearing or contemplating when the accompanying image was made. I was not impressed...or convinced of the relationship. (And I was not alone.)

Still, that music has powerful influence on the mind is well-established. So I don't doubt that it can comb-smooth an otherwise noisy mind to help some people concentrate on, say, photography. But in my case music tends to distract me. I need to remain completely tuned directly into what I'm doing when photographing anything. And not being a musician myself... -shrug-.

Lots of electric guitars and basses, lots of cameras. Been that way for over 40 years, but I didn't get serious about photography until digital allowed instant feedback. I never wanted to write music on paper, then wait a week to hear it.

So, where does this leave blind musicians like Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder?

Or deaf photographers like Maggie Lee Sayre and Tate Tullier?

Rats! I've owned many film and digital cameras and used them all, making multiple prints from everyone. However, I am in no way "musical." I often say I can't even play the radio. (Yeah I get the eye-roll response when I say that.)

But I'll tell you right now, I won't go quietly into the non-photographing world. You'll have to pry my camera from cold, dead fingers. (insert eye-roll, again)

I will say that I find listening to music enhances the photographing experience. There seems to be, for me, a connection between listening to creativity while visualizing creatively.

Cheers

This is a relevant topic for me right now. On Friday I am picking up one of these: http://www.freshmanguitars.net/products/600-series/, and of course I have reverted to 'excited teen' mode waiting for it.

With acoustic guitars the difference in quality of sound is far greater than the difference in quality of images with digital cameras. This guitar cost about twice as much as my current one, and as much as I love my current one it just sounds like a plank in comparison. If I upgraded from a 700 pound digital camera kit to a 1500 pound one the difference in image quality would be far less. Also as you say, obsolescence doesn't exist for guitars and in fact acoustic guitars just get better with age. A good acoustic guitar is a joy for life.

And yet and yet...I have lusted far more over cameras and thought far longer over what camera/lens I should get next. And looking at the forums about acoustic guitars, compared to camera forums there is far less debate, bias, and in fact content at all about the quality of them, despite there being endless potential areas of discussion, e.g. the sound of various wood types, advantages of different body shapes etc.

So what is it that drives us mad about cameras and lenses, that makes our choices in them feel so personal and precious?

I have at last count 5 guitars. All I can say about my musicianship is that I play a mean stereo. I think I have around 10 cameras but only use on a regular basis 3 of them. One digi and 2 film. As far as my photographic abilities, well I have a nice TV.

I played piano and tenor sax in high school. I think there is a gene involved, as my daughter picked up both instruments successfully at an early age, but other interests overtook them. But I never felt able to improvise or "speak" comfortably with either. Maybe, as Mike J has claimed for himself, I have just enough musical circuits to be a good listener, and I do a lot of that. In college I wrote for the campus newspaper. As a physics grad student, I got involved in stage design and set construction, lighting, and theater more generally. 25 or so shows later, as my thesis drew inexorably to a close, I shifted into photography as something I could take with me out into the real world. The real world of science has proved fascinating, stimulating and rewarding with real opportunities for innovation and discovery. So the photography fell into second place, and I packed up the darkroom, but returned to it when digital came along.

I think I get much of my satisfaction from the craftsmanship involved in things that I can do (which includes flying). While I admire the work of the Beethovens of photography, like Gene Smith, I wouldn't want to be one. The stories that I enjoy telling are smaller. If you know the movie "Paterson," the poet and the cupcake-maker in that are people that I really resonate with.

The tool does not make the person behind. I don't completely understand the post, frankly. It starts with capabilities and ends with the tools. The meaningful thing I get is on the firstish paragraph. Talented photographers happen to be talented musicians. The importance of music (contacts not withstanding) is related to brain plasticity.

Since we're showing off our Telecasters, I should include a photo I took of my beloved (and long lost) Tele.

I shot it at a gig in 1977 with my Yashica rangefinder and Tri-X.

Gorgeous sound. I got it for a steal in a trade because the finish on the neck had been melted in a fire. I had to strip and refinish the neck.

Now if I could only remember how to post photos here...

Gordon, I knew that I liked you!!!

My Tele is an American Standard (Natural with a tortoise pickguard and a Lollar Imperial Humbucker in the neck position). I play in a little Jazz duo.

My Olympi (plural of Olympus?) are an E-M5 which I have had since they came out, and an E-M1 that I just picked up. The E-M1 was a store display model (it arrived with a shutter count of around 300 for a little over $600).

There are other guitars and other cameras in the herd, but these are my consistent favorites.

I think that the connection is the need for a creative outlet. When the creative juices aren't flowing in one outlet, you can switch to another.

CRM

Let's see, in current use: a French fiddle, Martin 000-21 guitar, Gibson A4 mandolin, Laskin octave mandolin, Bacon & Day tenor banjo, Peter Noy 6-hole wooden flute, Pentax K5D.

The photos I'm most happy with tend to be of musicians. Probably a coincidence...

30 or so guitars: Taylors, Martins, Collings, SCGC, MacPherson, ... . Electrics: LP, Strat, 335, Collings I35, Carvin, two Fender Jazz basses, my childhood Vox Cougar bass.

They don't wear out or become obsolete. All are useable in public performance.

Three cameras I use regularly, none over three years old. A bunch of old film and digital cameras that I display but will never use.

I find the creative aspects of making photographs and creating music (I write & record) satisfy similar urges. But the process is completely different. Photographs are found and then sculpted, while music is designed from scratch.

I learned to play guitar in the 60's and doodled with it for several years thereafter. I still have an early 70's Gibson J50 Deluxe that I bought new but I haven't touched it for about 20 years now. I expect my fingers would scream bloody murder should I attempt a simple 3-chord tune.
Photography came a bit later but it eventually overshadowed my playing. But music has always been important to me and I continue to enjoy listening to many different types and styles from classical to country, jazz to bluegrass, rock to rhythm and blues.

Answering your question “is there a creative link between Sight and Sound?” - no, not for me, when regarding how I make each.

I have several guitars (mostly electric) and several cameras. I’ve played guitar since my early teens, and same time frame with photography.

When photographing, I utilize a restrained, deliberate approach. Careful thinking is my main process, although I am aware of, and use, accident, instinct and error. I have a Fine Art degree and worked a career utilizing these skills.

When playing guitar, I engage the sense of motion found in blues and folk music’s components of rhythm and trance. For me, playing music is more emotional than what happens with visual art.

I played violin in high school orchestra and so the practice of scales, etc., is ingrained. A few years ago I took classical guitar lessons, because I wished to learn to play guitar from sheet music. I enjoyed playing scales as a meditative exercise, but I found my strongest interest was still using electric guitar sounds.

The thrill of success, i.e. “getting there,” feels the same with each endeavor. But, I think different parts of the brain, or kinds of thought, are involved in these different areas.

I know others who have the opposite tendencies: some for whom music is mathematics, and others who approach visual art as mostly emotion.

Music and photography share some common appeals as hobbies (or even professions.) Creating visually or musically is a release many seek. A lot of us "of a certain age" were raised on icons of coolness that revolved around music or art.

Personally, I have more instruments than cameras (but maybe not lenses... ) The guitars and basses are living things to me, and like your Triple O, they all have improved with age!

I hope you've had a chance to plug that Tele into a Tweed Deluxe amp. Heaven. I have a partscaster Tele I built. Swamp body, maple V-neck and "Danocaster pickups from Budz. www.tweeddeluxe.com
He's the ticket. Play often and play loud.

Neil

There are people who excel in more than one field, be it music, photography, sports, fine arts, medicine, writing, programming, fashion, etc. I wouldn't read too much into it.

I do like that I never have to worry if my horn is going to become obsolete or no longer be supported by my computer setup.

This is would be well known among Bowie fans in our TOP community here:

He said in a couple of interviews that when he would get stuck in his music making process he would turn to his painting and paint (for a few days?)... and thus 'solve his problem'. His paintings, that I've seen, are fine (technically), innovative and full of life.

Can't play an instrument to save my life, but I do love writing song lyrics. It's maybe the only one of my hobbies that doesn't involve buying expensive crap.

They complement each other nicely. Photography (Canon 50D) for me is by and large a solitary pursuit, gets me outdoors alot, and an image can be created in the blink of an eye. My music, on the other hand (Martin D35), is usually quite social, often indoors or on the front porch, and a song expands over time. Both can be incredibly meditative. Both go off into the wider world - an audience completes the circle.

Might not the role of gear in these two different artistic endeavours be what unites them? That would also explain the profusion of electric guitars in the posts sofar. I for one feel the same excitement when trying out and subsequently buying a new Tele, as I do when unpacking a new camera body or lens. Lutes, violins, clarinets, oboes or recorders are built, acquired and loved in a different way, it seems.

Might not the role of gear in these two different artistic endeavours be what unites them? That would also explain the profusion of electric guitars in the posts sofar. I for one feel the same excitement when trying out and subsequently buying a new Tele, as I do when unpacking a new camera body or lens. Lutes, violins, clarinets, oboes or recorders are built, acquired and loved in a different way, it seems.

I started playing guitar (telecaster) @ age 74- no questions please......

Paul Caponigro is a classically trained pianist, not was!

1. Oh! Telecasters are my favorites!

2. Allow me to show off the Tele I've had the longest; Syd, the CIJ:

Syd The Paisley Tele And A Madcap Amp, September 21, 2014

3. I think there's a similarity between my photography and music in that both require improvisation and a sense of rhythm & swing, along with a being able to connect and collaborate with your subjects or bandmates.

I would imagine that landscape photographers, like Adams, have the meticulous preparation and execution of classical musicians.

4. Oh, and there's that whole thing about making records. Sound & Vision, y'all.

Ohhh, it seems at least I have to buy a guitar now :-)

But the only thing I could do with it is to hang on a wall like a special decoration...or sometimes invite friends who are able to play it!

When I was in my teens I studied classic guitar for two year but I couldn't "feel" the music. I could play if reading the notes (it was like a math exercise) but when my teacher said to play be ear I admit I was a disaster :-( so my musical career finished.

But even today, 50 years later I'm not able to walk in front of the window of a musical instrument shop without stopping and staring at these special toys...

robert

Interesting Topic! My musical bits are more with wind instruments. Guitars are too common, seems everybody can purchase same, to me a banjo is a far more likely candidate if I were to take up a stringed device.
That said got into first pipe organs as a result of being asked by a friend many years ago to see if I could repair his old Hammond B2, was an electrical circuit board glitch. One thing led to another, and for some years played (forfun both a classical and home-built theatre style organ, for fun, both at a friend's house. He expired and In turn acquired a used Allen theatre organ. It went out the door recently, along with all my digital Nikon camera gear as my physical abilities (one needs functioning legs to play the pedal board) have been greatly reduced due to illness.
I enjoy listening to both classical and theatre organ in real life or as a recorded sound, through a pair of older electrostatic speakers and Bryston amplifier.
At present i have a Thererim sitting on a desk, it requires no physical touching, and it provides a form of
entertainment as well. The sound produced "is" different, however it is also good for audio experimentation, think the original Moog machine

I once took piano lessons. It was a disaster. I totally lack any feeling for rhythm. I was a lousy sporter, I got chosen the last person in any team: "we had him (meaning: me) last week, nou you must choose him.
I hated dancing in my teens. Moreover I more than once embarrassed the unfortunate girl, that hadn't seen me dancing before.
I virtually stopped listening to music, after my car stereo was nicked, some 30 years ago. On an average I listen maybe one hour in a month.
Need I go on about my photography?

Lately I'm playing the trombone more than making photographs. My background is mostly classical and jazz, but I do all kinds of things--a couple of jazz big bands, a funk band, a salsa band, and ad hoc freelance gigs as they come up. My wife is a pianist, so music is something we can do together as well, and she can sympathize with my evening rehearsal/gig schedule. I've started posting gig announcements recently on twitter @GoldfarbTbone

This house contains three guitars, a drum kit, a tuba and a clarinet. Nowadays I spend my nights practicing guitar; I have touched a camera in a couple weeks. Everything comes and goes.

Also, compared to the world of digital photography guitars are so cheap! You can buy a good acoustic that'll last you years for the price of a lousy 50 1.4. For the price of a full frame camera you can buy a top of the line guitar that'll last you forever and never become obsolete. Plus they can make music!

I believe I am proof that music and visual arts are connected. I am shockingly mediocre at both!

I don't think I've ever seen a bad picture of any musical instrument. Stringed, woodwind, brass- they are extraordinarily photogenic.

Guitars galore. Generally inexpensive (as compared to a professional-level piano, for example). I know a number of classical musicians - some at the top of their profession - and they have zero visual sense - consider how common horrible web design and graphics are on their sites. Serious musicians are basically nerds, very introspective. Hours and hours of endless practicing. A camera is really nothing like a violin. You can't play Bach on a camera. More painters among musicians - Joni Mitchell, Tony Bennett, Bob Dylan, Arnold Schoenberg.

Well I can't stand the sound of green , so yes.

>>I'm curious as to why you don't use more than one tag.

As obvious as that might sound after the fact, when one is faced with the prospect of assigning multiple tags to more than 50 different images and having limited time to do it, it often doesn't get done. What I've learned from the accompanying comments (thanks, by the way) is that the more ways you have to find the images that are special to you and the easier it is to apply them, the better.

For me it's pretty close. I have a couple baby grand pianos, 2 acoustic guitars, 2 electric guitars, a drum set and a midi keyboard. I also have 4 digital cameras and 5 film cameras. At the end of the day though I pretty much only ever use 1 acoustic guitar and 1 digital camera. Both pianos and the drum set are on loan to friends and family at the moment but if I had space and an easy way of retrieving them I'd have a pretty awesome setup.

The comments to this entry are closed.