math skills

Measuring and scaling and subtracting and adding and calculating and dividing and multiplying and repeating and replicating and mapping and defining and negating and indentifying and solving and translating the world.

I am realizing I have science and math on my mind when I look at the nature of our visual world and can't help but find it comical, cause I know barely anything about physics. So I am going to attempt to implement my math skills into the creation of my work to give it the believability and scientific foundation that it needs to be seen as real.

cut-out life

I think a lot of photoshop's misuse is due to bad compositing. Most things are cut out, and placed in new environments and are not done well, or look too studio slick for reality. Collages look like this alot, cause you have limited imagery and you can't alter them that easily.

Long exposures of television is a good thing. You can watch a whole scene in one glance, and figure out what's going on. And it is easier than editing. You don't have to choose the perfect exemplar image of a scene, you just take the whole thing. Like TiVo in TV dinner format, quick and straighforward (the picture of the food inside the TV dinner is on the cover, a hint at what you will be enjoying, minus quality of course).

make fake

I'm into some bad photoshop right now, or always actually. There is so much more bad than good, why not jump on and be the worst you can! But good.

I filmed some fake animals in a locals Vegas casino. They basically stand around and move slightly, like simple robots. Spontaneously they are accompanied by a small but emotionally charged water show in which hoses shoot water in a reverse waterfall. The music is inspirational americana, and the animals basically look regal all of a sudden when the music hits. The wolf atop a boulder surveys his kingdom, all day and night.

the Henry

The Viewfinder show was very interesting. Using photo myself, I can't help looking at photos as pictures taken with a concept to make them more than photos. A lot of photography utilizes the apparatus in very similar ways, even the output/final product is presented most often in a simple frame. Often, as in this show, the concept is intrinsically linked with the function of the camera. Examples in the show are blurred photos (Uta Barth), long exposure (Misrach), parallax (Gersht), and camera-less procedures of using enlargers and technical apparatus to get effects.

Can't really conceptualize this in short, but photo has a problem when it enters an object/image making art institution: mechanization. The curator acknowledges this point, but there still seems some illegitimate nature about it, even when it is addressed conceptually. Like people using photoshop effects, only to notice them in the future as a passed fad. It is like photo for photo's sake, patting itself on the back, making inside jokes, and art objects.

Sounds negative, but I don't mean it to be. Photo seems to me to be used outside of itself in much better ways, like documentation, cultural bookmarking, or portraits even. The idea of the camera as a super eye only lasts as long as you don't think about the camera itself.