« The 40th Anniversary of Nancy Rexroth's 'Iowa' | Main | Photography Is Open To All Just as It Belongs to Everyone »

Friday, 22 September 2017

Comments

Good for Connecticut to protect us from soggy pickles. Some producers leave them in the formaldehyde far too long.

In Ohio, it is illegal to disrobe in front of a portrait of a man? I’m trying to imagine what set of circumstance led to such a strange law. What could have happened to cause a need for it?

But is it OK if the pickles taste like kerosene*?

I hope Utah has that law too, given those idiotic Boy Scout Leaders a few years back who knocked over the Hoodoos.

*Obscure Andy Griffith Show Reference

Wow! I'm impressed. It's not often you see something that you haven't seen before. I like to be amazed, not bored by the SSDD, 24/7/365.

Check-out the portraits on her site. No white seamless or white tileboard, how refreshing 8-)

BTW I'm listing to the Vince Guaraldi Trio — Cast Your Fate To The Wind, on Radio Paradise.

Caption or no caption? IMHO, photos should stand on their own, but sometimes, unfortunately, captions are needed. Viewers sometimes need a hint about the photographer's intent. With the images in the post (I haven't seen the book), the caption is the setup for the joke expressed in each image; the image is the punchline. So, no caption = confusion for viewers, at least for the images in the post. Neither is strong enough--again IMHO--to stand alone. With the captions even I see the humor. The photographer has chosen a very interesting subject!

I love the photo with Butters, though I know I'm going to spend the rest of the day wondering why you use your iPad upside down.

I don't know, Mike. This seems like pretty thin stuff to me. I am not sure I see much difference between this and the "memes" that show up on Facebook except that there no one thinks they are art. The CT pickle law is an interesting and amusing bit of trivia, but what does the picture of a presumably bouncing pickle add? It's a concept I suppose, and the art world loves concepts particularly if ... but excuse me--I need to go yell at those kids to get off my lawn.

Fresh ideas are very hard to come by. Every time I have one I make a point of running it past a Google search; if I ever have doubts about my own 'normality', this simple act assures me that I am in good company.

"In Ohio it is illegal to disrobe in front of a portrait of a man."

I take it that applies only to women?

Admit it, you needed a female photographer to round out your blog lest we start calling you the Nikonline Photographer....

In Ohio, it is illegal to disrobe in front of a portrait of a man? I’m trying to imagine what set of circumstance led to such a strange law. What could have happened to cause a need for it?

Robert Roaldi

The people who passed the law had caught an episode of Scooby-Doo in which Velma and Daphne were getting ready for bed in their room in the haunted house and the bad guy had cut the eyes out of a portrait so he could spy on them.

And thought it was a documentary...

[Apparently many of the "laws" illustrated in the book are urban (and rural?) legends, not actual laws. That's part of what fascinated her about the project. --Mike]

For Virginia it is illegal to spit on sea gulls. That is easy to avoid because there are no SEA gulls. That are many variants of gulls but none are called Sea. Also gulls can be found everywhere not just by the sea.

@Ben Rosengart. If Mike does use his iPad upside down it’s because it’s the right way up if you commonly use a power cord with it as I do. It could be one of the several disadvantages of face ID that Apple is introducing. iPads are happy to have finger sensors set up in that position but it does tend to interfere with the camera even if it is otherwise happy with upside down faces :~)

Hmmm. I googled for an hour and haven't found the citation for any of these laws--anyone else have better luck?

[Update]: as I was about ready to post this I found an article on Artsy ("America’s Most Absurd Laws, in Pictures") with this quote:

"Across the series, Locher doesn’t distinguish between fact and myth. The ambiguity is intentional “because these laws themselves are ambiguous,” she says. “It’s hard to find anything about them—their origins, whether or not there’s any truth to them—even in law books.”"

Well.

I now consider you an influencer. 'I Fought The Law' is featured on the back page of the Sunday LA Times Arts & Books section.

For me, the "disrobing in front of a portrait" photo works fine without a caption or explanation. My first thought was that it was like Cindy Sherman, except interesting.

The pickle pic, not so much. I wish she had done it as an homage to Muybridge; that would have at least been funny. But a project like that is going to have some misses.

I like the "portraits" section of her website better than the more "conceptual" projects, though.

This project reminded me of J. Sternfeld's "On This Site". No fun, but necessary and impecable. Great pictures.

The comments to this entry are closed.