Friday, September 24, 2010
In the past, before the dawn of the digital age, the powers that be in the world of criticism and aesthetics had clamped a set of definitions and rules, which in hindsight, seem to be more related to the difficulty of manipulating images than about pure aesthetics.
I'm not going anywhere near the realm of editorial or journalistic ethics, this is about imagery as art.
Shooting with film sets certain limits on what can be accomplished reasonably quickly and at reasonable cost. It is then, far easier to work within the limits, and let the limits start to define the medium.
A photograph can now be manipulated in a staggering number of ways, any one of which, and possibly all, are as valid, and powerful as the "pure" photograph. Whatever that might be...
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
One light at a time...
I've never managed to do the multiple lighting set ups that I've read about - even when I followed directions to the letter I'd end up with all sorts of extra shadows and blown highlights.
So, for years and years and years I've used one light, and done just fine.
Most of the time the complex multi light/reflector set ups are for advertising.
Intense levels of freak-out panic, worry and perfectionism, and all for something that will be seen for a week - maybe - and forgotten - rapidly.
No, I don't like advertising. Dislike it at best, mostly detest it.
The few friends I've had who have ventured into advertising got caught up in the ad itself - completely forgetting the subject. And I've seen too many promising artists foul up their talent.