Work's been keeping me busy this past week. Not that I have much wonderful news to share here on my blog! Funny how 2 little slides from a presentation could keep me busy for hours on end... 3D pie charts and 'animated' workflow, oh joy! Therefore, I had little time reading the manual of my camera. It seems really complicated, these days, dSLR are like hi-tech computers. I guess it all boils down to knowing exactly which combination of buttons to press, where and when to press, what gadget to use and, well, having a good eye wouldn't hurt either. But hasn't everything been done before?
Maybe I'm jaded. I look on Flickr and I see so many good photos, and yet there are so so many of them... They make my eyes and brain hurt like a mutha! I also look at photo books and magazines and I get overwhelmed. Everything's been done, hasn't it? Is photography still art I wonder? I go to bookstores and they're categorized separately, it makes me chuckle. Is art/photography more about the idea on how the piece came about? The process behind it? The actual making of the piece or the final product itself? Or maybe it's all in the mind. Your mind makes the art - complete.
I've only been shooting a few shots in my room late at night, right before I go to sleep. Shooting my alarm clock, water bottles on my night stand, and the door knob! bleh! See, everything has been done! :-) I've come to realized that these days, photography isn't quite what it used to be. These days, does anyone put up 'unretouched' photographs anymore I wonder? Seems like every picture these days have been enhanced one way or another... photochop'd. I work with Photoshop everyday at work and it's a fantastic application, but when I go to a gallery and see photos being displayed, I wonder if they were ever slightly or even heavily manipulated by these photo editing programs. Have we grown too reliant? It sure is a step up, way up, from the old days when I had to develop my own prints in the darkroom. These days, you can print your archival prints right in your own home! Su-weet innit?
At any rate, this weekend I'll attempt to spend more time with the camera rather than the manual. I really dislike shooting self-portraits yet I think that's one really great reason why I should start doing it more intensively. Does that make any sense?
Happy Friday everyone. May you all have a glorious weekend! Now go out and make something 'beautiful'! :-)
--
Currently listening:
Pale Saints - A Thousand Stars Burst Open
Comments (6)
You bring up some interesting thoughts on the manipulation of photography. I usually manipulate if the person in the pictures wants some sort of manipulation, sometimes I lighten the eyes or fade the background, stuff like that, but whatever I do I still feel good because I still created the finished piece whether I manipulate it or decide not too. I'm looking forward to see your photography. You are creative you'll do great.
Posted by Derek | February 6, 2008 6:28 PM
Posted on February 6, 2008 18:28
Simply no. Life, in a ll it's beauty and craziness has an infinite number of combinations of elements that can all be captured in an equally infinite number 0f artistic methods.
Posted by D-Man | February 3, 2008 8:41 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 20:41
I havn't been able to concentrate much on anything lately, not sure what it is. My mind seems scattered. Keep me in your thoughts, huggerz
Posted by Derek | February 2, 2008 1:47 PM
Posted on February 2, 2008 13:47
I think questions like this become more pronounced when there are moments of acute transition in media forms. Can you imagine what painters and portraitists said in the 19th century as cameras became more and more popular for capturing images of everyday life? They complained about the vulgarity of photography. The lack of artistry.
This is what I hear when film based photographers complain about digital processing. Sometimes I feel that in their complaints such photographers forget that they have lost nothing. Their medium and their darkrooms are still environments of creativity. If that's their choice to attach themselves to an older technology, then why not? People still paint. Or sketch with charcoal.
I use Photoshop heavily when I shoot pictures. I essential use the camera to capture raw images that I can relight, recast, and transform. I can spend hours making a photograph become something vastly more interesting than a flat shot on an overcast day,
I love this.
What I love even more is taking a snapshot that mirrors the real and processing the hell out of it until it because something abstract, surreal, but absolutely compelling.
Not sure if you spotted my last post but here's a Flickr link to some pictures I recently put up:
http://flickr.com/photos/m00nchild/sets/72157603829687196/show/
Hope you're well.
Posted by m00nchild | February 2, 2008 3:37 AM
Posted on February 2, 2008 03:37
It's become incredibly easy to take a good picture - and those that are already good then become SUPERB! How have you been, handsome one? I've been not reading as many blogs lately...my bad.
Posted by Jeffrey Zacko-Smith | February 1, 2008 3:49 PM
Posted on February 1, 2008 15:49
You've touched on something that many out there are thinking about I'm sure, Robert!
I've just completed a Photoshop elements course and couldn't think of anything other than those comments I heard in whispers when I showed my stuff... "oh, why would I pay that kind of money when I can just do something similar on photoshop." I'm sure you can imagine how devastating something like that considering that I don't even work in digital. The whole darkroom thing is becoming so passe that I just cannot find the ambition to go out and shoot film anymore. I won't give up though. I know that my talent behind the lens is a much more rare and beautiful thing than sitting behind the computer and "correcting" things. There is a certain charm in the imperfection of it all.
I think that digital is great for the graphic artist. When you need to create a certain work and need to have ease in "tweaking" it for whatever statement you're trying to make, it's an amazing medium to work in.
That said, however, art photography is really what you want it to be. I think that maybe they just need to develop new terminology for the digitally manipulated stuff. Especially if it's for doing something more than masking the occasional pimple.
Art is art. I just think we need more definition when it comes to this relatively new medium...
Posted by lola | February 1, 2008 1:44 PM
Posted on February 1, 2008 13:44