rosewatergoats – cramps (2017)

There are so many things that are extraordinary about this, I really don’t even know where to start.

I guess you really have to start with the lighting. I’m not fond of the glut of photographers & image makers who pose models right next to the freaking windows.

Yes, it contributes about an extra ¾ of a stop to your exposure. And if you’re shooting handheld, that can mean the difference between a usable shot and something ruined by motion blur.

Frequently, that light is rather hard and unflattering–plus: there’s rarely any sense of the context. Like why this room? Why is this person in the room? What’s the motivation? It’s all just so lazy. It’s like if you want to shoot studio-esque shit, set up a daylight studio or rent studio space. Doing it like you’re doing it is just inexcusably unimaginative and lazy.

This differs greatly from that tendency. First of all the light is at least somewhat diffuse. We see the curtain not the window. The frame is a bit over-exposed but on a partly sunny day with high, rapidly drifting clouds, the exposure can shift drastically in several seconds. This is clearly within an impressively controlled range.

And the richness of detail: the radiator with the shelf topper (I did not know such things existed! this new awareness will almost certain inform further nesting endeavors), the dried flowers, the armchair demonstrating heavy wear, the faux antique lamp, the table and the ottoman. (Note also: the textured wall; yes, I’m a sucker for texture but you can’t look at this and argue that it adds a captivating extra layer of visual intrigue.)

The light comes left to right, after the Dutch tradition. (I’d wager the author is familiar with Vermeer–in this case, this photo suggests a hybridization of The Procuress and A Girl Asleep.)

Initially, I didn’t like the fact that the subjects left leg is amputated by the frame edge. I’m still not 100% convinced it was the best decision but I can’t posit a better alternative.

And the way that it is presented–i.e. a 35mm negative has eight perforations per frame. The image we’re presented includes 8 frames, but with 2 from the leading frame and then two perf are amputated from the primary frame the viewer is show. It’s self-consciously preoccupied with truncation. But what I think is interesting is the mise-en-scene suggests an implicit continuation between the boundary of the frame edge; what we’re shown speaks not only explicitly but implicitly–there’s a feeling of being more that the viewer can probably guess reasonably accurately at given the available contextual clues.

I’m generally against cropping. Primarily because precious few people add anything interesting to the work by doing it. But this? This is freaking ingenious. Definitely, check out this woman’s blog. A lot of it is grimy and lo-fi but her conceptual chops are mad on point.

EDIT: Apparently, she’s been accepted to the ultra prestigious photography program at FAMU in Prague and is trying to crowd fund her tuition. If you can consider donating to her GoFundMe campaign.