Blog Prompt #27

I am interested in photography in the common sense of the medium - portraits, candids, still lifes, etc taken on a recognizable camera, hung on the wall as prints. Sarah, my professor, encouraged us to think of photography differently than this. Before her class, I would never have thought to turn in what I ended up doing. I used photography as textures to create scenes within a collaged world. I used Photoshop - my favorite medium - to collage different layers together and create the perception of depth to my images.
I taught myself After Effects because I'm very interested in motion graphics and how motion can use depth in an entirely new way, such as parallax (the effect that occurs when, say, you are driving past a farm and the near corn stalks move much more quickly past your window than the distant farmhouse), which is impossible with still graphics.
My goal is to work in the entertainment industry, so I created a poster, a book cover, and a logo slate. All existed as still graphics and as motion graphics, so it was quite interesting to figure out the best way to design both and have them stay consistent with each other.

Blog Prompt #25 & #26

I would hope that my work would be displayed mostly outside a gallery setting, as most of it is posters advertising one thing or another. If they only exist within a gallery, they are probably not reaching the intended audience. I would love to see my work out in the open. In the public for anybody to walk by and ignore. Preferably not ignore, but in public spaces, people have that option to ignore if it they want to. In a gallery, people feel obligated to look at something. At least for me. I feel obligated to look at everything, even if I'm only interested in half of it. When I do skip over something, I feel the artists eyes on the back of my neck, judging me for not understanding.
But in the open, you can easily ignore the ads on the side of a bus stop or in a movie theatre. Yes, these are supposed to be eye-catching, that's sort of the whole point. But they're supposed to be eye-catching because people don't feel obligated to look!
The art I am making for my thesis relates to different things, because each piece is for a different client, so they weren't treated with the same concepts in mind. However, the process for each was similar. I wanted to use texture that derived from outside the computer (although I scanned it in and compiled everything in Photoshop and After Effects).

Blog Prompt #24

1. Which of the presenters’ work did you most relate to or were most inspired by?
I can't remember her name, but the painter had beautiful paintings. The colors were so random, but worked so well together nonetheless. It seems like it shouldn't work, and yet it does.

2. Which of the presenters’ ideas did you most relate to or were you most inspired by?
I personally liked the graphic designers work. Again, I can't remember her name, but I found it incredibly interesting that she had about Tiananmen Square and how in China, she had never been taught what had happened. Coming to America and learning about what the Chinese government had done was a huge shock to her.

3. Describe how one of the presenters revealed new layers of meaning in her/his work through their talk. How did your understanding of the work change or what did you learn that you were not aware of when viewing/experiencing the work prior to hearing the talks?
I learned that many artists simply do things because they enjoy it, and a concept can often form later. Because I feel that my concepts change over time, this was comforting.

4. What would you have wished to hear more about through their talks?
I would have wished to hear more about the process and how long it took them to come up with this final piece.

5. Did you find that the ideas discussed were clearly represented in the formal/visual/sensory aspects of work? Did you find that the work revealed other ideas beyond what the artist discussed? Did you find that there were disconnects or that the words and visual elements of the works connected?
Yes, I did feel what they were saying was well-represented in their respective artwork.

Blog Prompt #23

The video among is a behind the scenes look at a very complicated photoshoot that combines computer animation with photography. I know a few people who might feel sad that photography is going in this direction. I happen to not feel that way. I think this is an exciting new art medium that might include photography, but I don't think it necessarily IS photography. It's a new type of medium, and I love what they're doing with it.

Computer graphics are fake things, but in my opinion, to make a computer graphic any good, it must look as real as possible. Maybe other people will disagree, but I would rather do as much as I can outside of CGI and then when I want something totally fantastical and surreal that can't exist or would be very difficult to create, that's when I go into photoshop and that's when I would use CGI, not a minute before.

Blog Prompts #20-21

Describe some common aesthetic/formal qualities, content, and conceptual threads in “snapshot” photography.

Snapshot photography tends to be less purposefully composed. Parts of the subject are not within the frame. Also, the lighting tends to be less purposeful, using ambient lighting or flash most of the time. The low-lighting can mean a longer shutter speed or a higher ISO, which means the images might be blurry or grainy. Many times snapshots are taken by folks who do not know how to photograph, therefore the images tend to not follow the guidelines of photography. 

a. Ideas sometimes grow out of irritation. What is a negative thought you are having about your project? What is the opposite of this negative thought? How could you implement a change in your project so that this negative thought will subside?

I do worry my thesis for my photography class is not very related to photography. But after I think about it I realize I use a lot of photography in my work. What I'm doing is using photographs and scans I've created as textures within my work that I assemble on the computer. I could not do any of this without a camera (and scanner). The final piece would be drastically different. The texture is the main reason I enjoy designing these pieces. Without texture it seems unseasoned. I think I do want to somehow incorporate photography more into my project, as in, instead of having vectored text, I hand do the text, at least on one of my projects, if not all.

c. What is a consistent theme/visual element in your project? What would be the opposite of this? How can you implement that into your project? 

The consistent theme within my thesis project is textures creating spaces that never actually existed, that are assembled on the computer and some sort of motion applied to the graphic. The motion aspect was the main draw-in for me to do this assignment, I really wanted to play with motion graphics, like motion posters for films and motion book covers for kindle! The opposite of a consistent theme. None of my pieces are for the same type of "client", one piece is a film poster, the other a book cover, and the other a motion logo for a production company. (Each piece will also have a still counterpart).

e. At the deepest core, describe why you like this project. Dig deep!

I love what I chose for my thesis. It is not at all where I imagined it would be, but I love the direction it is going because it is helping me learn After Effects, and it is combining literally everything I enjoy creatively. I am using Photoshop extensively, I am using my camera to create so many different types of photos, such as textures and hands, and learning how I can use photography to create a larger piece rather than having the photo as the final piece. I love learning After Effects. The experimentation reminds me of learning Photoshop in high school and how I would (more often than not) create artwork that I am embarrassed to show people today. After Effects is like a moving Photoshop, and I love creating something in both programs at the same time!

I love that I am making different types of promotional graphics, a poster, cover, and logo. I just thought - I could make a motion magazine cover!

f. Expand your project. If time, money, materials, etc would not affect you, how would you expand your project?

I would have for sure used a slow-motion camera. Originally that was the plan, but after speaking to many student filmmaker's, I could tell that it was not as easy as I originally thought. Normal cameras shoot at 24-30 frames per second, and a slow motion camera shoots twice as fast at around 60 fps. Renting one of these cameras can be very expensive. I could slow film down on the computer, but it would not be as smooth, especially if I slowed it down a lot, and my plans were to slow it down to the point where it was hard to tell if anything was moving. I wanted the hair to be moving slowly, too, so that takes away the option of the actors moving slowly to make up for the frame rate. Also, the image quality of a still frame from a video is considerably less than that of a still camera, so although the video portion of the assignment might look nice (unless I did slow-motion), the still part of it would be pixelated, especially if I wanted it at higher sizes.

o. Think of one of your most memorable dreams. How could you add elements from this dream to your project?

My most memorable dream is where I suddenly had the amazing abilities of Spider Man. My sister did too, and together we spun our way to the top of a tower, bypassing the staircase altogether. Flying dreams are also amazing, because that feeling flight and weightlessness is something we rarely feel and it makes one feel so alive! Even if it is just in a dream.

I also had a dream where my sister suddenly began to lie to me and once I caught her in a lie she shrugged it off and shooed me away. The utter confusion of an absolute truth no longer existing was one of the most powerfully a dream has ever affected me. I woke up panicked. For my motion logo I could possibly have something flying that should not be flying due to absolute truth.

Blog Prompt #19

1. How do you ensure that your work is relevant to you. If I want to do it, then it's relevant to me. I usually tend to prefer happier types of work, but if I feel compelled to create something dark, I won't stop myself.
2. How do you ensure that your work is relevant to the contemporary world? I really don't ensure it is, but I do think my work is very relevant because I create on Photoshop, which is a new medium compared to the history of art.
3. How do you brainstorm? Do you sketch? Do you use the camera as a brainstorming tool so that you “look” at the world through the frame of the camera and capture bits and pieces of your environment? I sketch in my sketchbook. My sketchbook is filled with so storyboards and boxes and notes about projects. I plan what I'm going to need, torn paper, photography, illustrator vectors, from my sketchbook.
4. Do you combine elements of various media? How do you do this? Do you do it physically with printed images or objects? Do you combine elements virtually in the computer? I usually combine media: digital photography, scans, vectors, usually combined within Photoshop or, in the case of my current project, After Effects.
5. How does your process relate to your ideas/concept? How does your process relate to your outcome/final pieces? Why are you using digital technology (if you are)? Why are you using analog technology (if you are)? I'm using digital technology because it best suits what I want out of the project. Part of my project I am able to do analog, like tearing paper, and I do that because creating torn paper digitally is ridiculous. Digitial technology is what I've learned in my classes, so you could argue it's not completely by choice, but I've used digital technology to create art even before being formally taught it.
6. How do you judge your work? When do you think it “works”? When do you think it is “not working yet”? What criteria do you use to make these decisions? It works when I like it, which may or may not be the original plan. Usually I try to get the original plan, but when it goes in another direction, I don't fight it if I'm really enjoying it. I base this off of if it looks pleasing and it's expressing what I want it to express. If it looks great, but you can't tell what the heck is going on and that is important to the concept, then it doesn't "work".
7. How do ensure that your work is new, unique, ground-breaking, and/or you are breaking the mold/thinking outside the box/pushing the limits? I start this from the sketches. I try to come up with ideas that are new where I can learn something and hopefully that something is an original idea. Often I'll come up with something I think is unique and discover it isn't. Usually if I find it exciting, then I don't really mind if someone else did something similar. Or I'll use the idea as a jumping off point.

Blog Prompts #17-18

I think photography will follow wherever the digital realm leads. If holograms are in the future, then there would probably be photography as a hologram. In video when you movie within a frozen scene, there is a huge photographic element to that and I think someday that will be explored except you can literally move within the image. I have no idea how that would be done, but it would be amazing.

Whenever I'm asked to define something like "art" or "photography" I try to make it as simple and general as possible, because really both are things that mean vastly different things to different people. A studio artist approaches photography very different than a documentary photographer or stop-motion photography, or scanographer, etc. etc. To me the definition of photography is any process which involves the photographic process of creating a still image through capturing light on a light-sensitive material. If the end product is a sculpture or motion graphic, photography was still used within the mixed media project.

Blog Prompts #12-16 Motion and Still Photography

Of course everyone knows that moving images exists in the wizarding world, so I probably don't need to go into much detail about that. In our world, we have to resort to still images taken so many times a second to appear like they're moving. There are lots of similarities between moving picture photography and still photography, such as how the light works within the camera. With still photography, the photographer can use strobes to create plenty of light, but in video, one must rely on continuous light. Also, the aspect of motion create a whole new dynamic because sun glares can obscure a whole frame, but the shot is still understandable and beautiful.

Especially these day, with informational TV screens that are situated with portrait dimensions instead of landscape dimensions, video and still photography take on similar rules, like the rule of thirds. And editing a video is done much the same way as editing a photo, except multiplied for each frame making it one of the most tedious jobs in existence.

Still photography has to put a lot more into a single shot to tell a similarly complex story. It has to use a single emotion to express a progression of emotions. Video usually has the added element of sound that can create even more emotion and action. Still photography often uses blur to create a sense of motion, or perhaps the subject taking a step or something mid-fall. A video can show the entire sequence. If a photographer wished to create motion in a still photograph, they could add a blur, which may create that sense of motion.

If I were shooting with a video camera and I wanted to create a very still scene, I would actually probably include some motion, but very very slight motion. I think very slow, calm motion sometimes creates more of a sense of lack-of-motion than a still photograph because you know things can move, they just aren't. When things are too still, people might think it is a photograph.

Blog Prompts #9, 10, 11

9. I really like the spinning cube in Ann Arbor because it looks pretty simple, but every time I come back from a visit there I look through my pictures only to discover much of my memory card is devoted to pictures and videos of us spinning the cube. If I were to make something in Photoshop I think I would make an animation where the cube spins and each side is a different picture.

10. An impossible scenario would be a person reading Deathly Hallows before the release date that does not work for Scholastic or Bloomsbury. This is actually not too simple a scenario to recreate because you could easily put a calender in the picture to place the time, but maybe the calender is old, how does the viewer know? So one would have to have a image of something very specific that could only have happened on or before a certain date, like international news or a picture of somebody alive that died before the book came out. This simple concept could actually be quite hard to recreate a scenario for because you would have to depend on images already taken.

11. When I think of combination I think of a bike lock, an outfit of several pieces, a mixed media piece, a brain, a person maturing into a grown-up, a dream where people keep changing form, a film set, a collaboration, companies merging, inspiration.

Blog Prompts #5, 6, 7, and 8

Because I'm a Harry Potter fan, I have to mention (have to) the Harry Potter books use of the word "dark" to basically mean "not the good guys".The evil wizards are called "Dark wizards" that use "Dark magic". I never really thought about why anybody ever uses the word dark rather than evil when the Dark wizards are so clearly evil (but is it?). Sometimes dark is another word for misguided. Whenever a character is called 'dark', then the story pretty much has to explain how the character became that way. When a dark loner character comes into play, the reader is instantly interested in the dramatic history that obviously led to that characters current characteristics.

Seeing in the dark is not as easy as seeing in the light. People are generally more comfortable in the light because they know what is happening. I think the metaphors for light and dark work the same way as light or lack of light. When a photograph is dark, it is harder to see and the viewer questions what is in the darkness. With light, they are comforted because there are no surprises.

Today I was riding my bike on the sidewalk on campus. I always, or at least usually, ride my bike on the sidewalk. I do so because cars are big and scary and I don't trust them. Two people I know have gotten hit by cars while riding their bicycles in the past year (luckily both wear helmets and because of that are okay). I've ridden my bike around campus for years. I always have. It's come to my attention that apparently one isn't supposed to ride a bike on the sidewalk. It's not a law, as far as I can tell, but just a courtesy because pedestrians only like looking straight. I don't ride fast past people, I intentionally try not to alarm them if I feel like they don't hear my coming (the ones wearing headphones), and nobody ever glares at me or anything. I pass tons of other bicyclists and pedestrians and everyone seems fine. Today I was riding my bike past a set of parents on campus and the woman crossed to the other side of the sidewalk without looking. There had been plenty of room to pass, but not anymore and I squeezed the breaks and said, "oooo, watch out!"

"Bikes are for roads, not sidewalks," the man said.

I wasn't very far ahead, but I turned around and said, "I find cars scarier." I guess both of the things I said could be taken as giving attitude. I guess. I didn't intend it that way.

I was already away when I heard the guy yell, "So don't tell us to watch out!"

This is one of those situations where I can tell that no matter who I tell this story to (besides Zach Colman, opinion writer for the State News two years ago), they're going to disagree with me. Everybody I know walks and probably doesn't like bicyclists, or they're bicyclists who use the road. I'm alone. But cars go at least 25 mps if they're following the speed limit and pedestrians go 3 mps and I probably go around 10 mps (I looked up average speed, which is 13-15, and I ride really slow, not necessarily by choice, but because my bike is a piece of junk and sometimes the pedals just stop and I have to walk the rest of the way). If my speed were closer to that of a car, then heck yes, I would ride in the street, and I do sometimes when I want to go fast. But when I it's rainy or it's snowy or I'm carrying stuff then I don't really feel like going in the street with the cars that are probably not obeying the speed limit.

So I feel in the dark because I know no one will agree with me and I don't know why.

However, ten minutes after whizzing past the sincere and friendly parents, I saw a boy with a Gryffindor scarf and I told him I liked his scarf and he smiled really widely and thanked me and I felt super light! I smiled to myself and suddenly felt like I could ride my bike faster, which I did because there were no pedestrians ahead of me for at least a quarter of a mile. There were lots and lots of cars in the street, I might add.

To completely change the subject for prompt #8, the artist within the required reading that I find interesting is Henry Peach Robinson. I feel like we share many of the same interests in photography. We both like to create scenes that never actually happened. I like to do it in the form of posters and a "key art" type of feel. His were photographs of people, acting as if they were real. And example of one is title Bringing Home the May.

Bringing Home the May is comprised of nine negatives! I can tell there's someone not quite real-looking about it, but it's still an amazing image! The fact that he did this with negatives and no feather tool!

When the Days Work is Done is also an amazing image made up of five negatives, shot on different days.

People really despised the way he put together his images. They felt it was a lie and false. People felt that photography told the truth, and if it didn't, then it wasn't good photography. Robinson's images did not tell a direct truth, and thereful he lived through much criticism of his work. But I feel he was very talented.

Blog Prompt # 1, 2, 3, 4

The way we see the world seems like it should stay consistent, but I think what we see changes all the time. It can change from what we put over our eyes, on our eyes, or behind our eyes (and by that I mean, what we consume that affects our brains). Although we nearly always see something, we often see that something differently every time. Our brain compensates for differences in lighting and perspective flawlessly, so even if we pass the same bench from left to right every single day, if we should ever pass it from right to left, we would recognize it as the same bench. If one day we pass the bench wearing contacts, and the next glasses, we will still recognize the bench. If we're carrying a large cardboard box passed the bench and only see a portion of it, we still recognize the bench. Depending on how drunk we are passing the bench, we'll still recognize it. I suppose if one is high on drugs, depending on the drug, he or she may not recognize the bench anymore.

I wear both contacts and glasses (I've recently taken to wearing glasses more, but I still wear my contacts because of a conversation in my Comics and Visual Narrative class in which my professor, Ryan Claytor, explained that if you wear glasses often, the character you design of yourself should be wearing glasses. After that conversation, I wore contacts to his class 90% of the time just to be safe), but over Christmas break I forgot to bring extra sets of contacts, and the ones I had been wearing were overdue to be thrown away, so they were highly uncomfortable. I spent nearly a month in glasses save a few days when I attempted to wear the contacts. When I did wear them, it felt that nothing was obstructing my view, but everything was... sharper? Cleaner? I wasn't quite sure. It gave me a headache and I took ibuprofen on the first day.

But to me, when I wear glasses, the slight obstruction of the blurry frames in my field of view, and the less-than-clean lenses make me feel like it's lazy time. Like I should still be in my pajamas. As I'm wearing them more, this feeling is going away, but because for years I wore glasses only at night and in the morning, I don't feel the need to be as productive or energetic while wearing glasses.

I also find that alcohol has a similar effect except that instead of getting clearer, things seem less clear (and the headache is also present) but you can't exactly pinpoint where. The illusion, if that is what it is, is seamless. After having a drink or two I spend a lot of time staring around my field of view trying to find the seams.

My friend also suffers from Who-Knows-What-To-Call-It, a condition where he wakes up paralyzed and hallucinates. Apparently it's an actual thing. I only know of one instance specifically, though he's said it's happened occasionally throughout his life, where he woke up and his ceiling fan turned into hundreds of monsters that zoomed down at him, about to attack, and he can't do anything about it because he's paralyzed. Then a minute later he's okay, but thoroughly freaked out.

I used to consider the idea that blue to me may be pink to someone else, or even something I wouldn't recognize. How strange that way of seeing, but to that person, my way of seeing would be so foreign. I don't actually think this is the case, but it is interesting to think that maybe we do all see differently. Maybe my eyes are closer together than my friend's eyes and she can see a wider field of view than I can. Some people can see farther things clearer and some people can see closer things clearer. I am so near-sighted I can't see clearly beyond four inches from my face. My brother, on the other hand, has one near-sighted eye and one far-sighted eye, so that when others try on his glasses, they can't stand to wear them for too long. Before I had glasses, but my eyesight was worsening, I just assumed that everybody saw things the way I did. I was so confused when I could read the blackboard in class and had to sit in the front row just to follow along in class. Even today neither my glasses nor my contacts ever seem to be as clear as I'd like them to be and I have trouble recognizing faces at a certain distance so that when approaching people wave to me and I don't know how they are until a few awkward seconds later.

And I can't write the prompt without mentioning the woes of watching a movie or T.V. show late at night with the intention of maybe falling asleep during it. Impossible with both glasses and contacts! (Although apparently there are contacts you can sleep in, but just not mine). The glasses completely hinder the ability to lie down one's head on a pillow (I've tried, and as "flexible" as your glasses may seem, they will never be as sturdy afterwords). And sure, I've napped with contacts, but it dries them out and they become suctioned to one's eye and depending on the length of the nap, painful to remove for remoistening. I never wear my contacts all day because they also dry out, so I plan when to wear them depending on how "clearly" I want to see the world (my optometrist insists I can see more clearly with my glasses because it corrects my astigmatism, so I can't understand why I'm more comfortable going to the movies in contacts).

Perhaps I should consider other ways in which one's visual perception is altered. I concentrated mostly on glasses and contacts, but it was still highly relevant to the prompt question (which I know I didn't provide).

Blog Prompt #24 - Final Project

My final project in color photography, I really want to make a series using this image below.

I made this last summer for fun using cyanotypes for the hair and painting in a lot of the the original image using Photoshop brushes. This might just be one of my most favorite things I have ever made. Especially since I didn't use any of the artistic or brush stroke filters. The only thing I did not make was the paper texture. I found that online at a free texture website. Whether that is legitimate or not, I have since wished that I had done the paper texture


I have photos of family and friends that I'm going to use. So far I have three white males and an Indian girl, so I'm going to have to take some more pictures so I don't accidentally make some controversial statement about race and gender that I never intended. I've done some more cyanotypes, that unfortunately didn't  turn out, but luckily, for my particular assignment, it doesn't really make a difference (the professor who lent the chemicals to me reckons the chemicals might have been accidentally mixed together at some point).


I also have created my paper texture by rubbing instant coffee on paper and then baking it. It, er, worked, but it's not quite the texture I imagined. Who knows, I might end up liking it, but we'll see. I may make a trip to Hobby Lobby's scrap-booking section, however.

Blog Prompt #23

This picture here by Thomas Berger is amazing! It was literally the first picture I clicked on, simply by random. But when I opened it I got so excited! It looks like a pop-up book, yet it is an image that, to me, looks like it was done in Photoshop. It's still great if it wasn't done in Photoshop, perhaps more so. I think this might be something I would really love to explore. I love creating depth to images in Photoshop, which of course is fake depth. I always try to make it look as real as possible, but here, Berger acknowledges the fact that it's completely fake and uses that to create a beautiful surreal landscape.
I naturally assumed the rest of Berger's pictures would be equally amazing, but a lot of them looks like ordinary photos. But the pop-up pictures are truly inspiring.

Sarah Blumé is an artist who is responsible for this image. It's very similar to the idea I had of recreating my comic book I wrote in high school. Drawn images with real background. Well, "real" in my case, but still. People who create images like this are without a doubt creative. Even if this idea is not completely new, a person who wants to play around with a camera would probably go outside before photographing an image like this. I think it's very inspiring and hopefully something here I can use in my own work.


Mark Jenkins is an example of a photographer who's work is based more on content than style. His work is sometimes humorous and sometimes I-guess-it's-funny. He has one image that has a red carpet, the epitome of glamour and fame, that leads to a manwhole in Washington, DC. A large portion of his website is dedicated to photos of plastic bubble-like children doing interesting (or not interesting) things around the city, such as pulling down signs, climbing statues or billboards. It reminds me of Jan von Holleben, who I would also say his work is more about content rather than having the perfect "look". I think it is a admirable quality in a photographer, because these are the works that speak to us rather than just being something nice to look at. I think every photographer has something to learn from photographers like Mark Jenkins.

Blog Prompt #23 (actually #22)

My roommate has this really interesting piece on her wall that another student from MSU created for class. I'm not sure what type of camera the images were taken with, but it was printed and then glued to board to give it structure and depth. It was then left outside for a night and leaves stuck to it and it was slightly damaged, but that was the look the artist was going for, I think. I'm probably way off with the description on how this piece was made, but it was similar to that, at least. When my roommate told me about it, I was impressed that she had even come up with that idea. The image is a tripdych, but the three pieces are different sizes. I think it's a great way to display an image and have it also be a sculptural piece.

Stop motion is also a great way to combine photography with other media, because it is essentially photography, but you have to have a filmmakers thought process when creating the piece. I love it because I have always been interested in film, and I love photography, so be able to combine the two is so much fun. But the possibilities of stop-motion are different than the possibilities for film, so you get very different type of work from the two.

A wearable version mixing photography and mixed-media is placing photos on clothing. Screen-printing, iron-ons, and other methods are used all the time to create t-shirts for groups. It may not be considered "art" by many people, but it is definitely something that helps create a sense of unity between a group and represents that group to the outside world.

Another method is projecting an image onto something. I think projecting an image can look pretty awful, but if it is done correctly, can look amazing. I'm thinking of the movie Adam, where the character Adam project the image of space around his apartment. It looks amazing in the film and to be able to see that in an actual space must be amazing. It reminds me of the few camera obscuras I've been in.

Blog Prompt #21

Everybody constructs their perceived identity by one's appearence (clothes and hair), perhaps by their interests and activities. People like to feel part of a group, and sometimes that feeling leads people to become a stereotype or almost like a stereotype of who they are. A person's, say, musical interest often reflects upon other aspects of that person's life, such as his or her clothing. In my daily life, I actively try to be nice to people because. I wouldn't call that a "performance" because that makes it seem like I have different thoughts in my head, but it is definitely something I have constructed about myself, because that is the way I wish to be perceived.

But it is not just our personal selves that are being constructed. The cultures of people are always being constructed. Cultures don't just pop out of nothing, they start from something and build. That's construction. Every person is influencing everybody else and adding on to that culture. Store shops and magazines also construct our environments, telling us what to like and dislike. Teachers constructing our knowledge on a particular subject.

Our environment is very much constructed as well, the obvious road and building construction aside, the amount of side-walks in a city is a deliberate decision and very much constructs the way a city is used. Cars, needless to say, have very much constructed a new way of traveling farther and faster. The style of buildings gives an area completely different feelings, which is why people may chose to live in the city or the country. Those two places and different constructed environments.

I do not think that constructed is the antithesis of "real". I don't believe it means the same thing as "fabricated". To me, constructed means "built", which means it could still be very real. But there are plenty things that seem fabricated in life. Feelings are often fabricated to hide a person's true sadness or giddiness. People's critique of other people's artwork I think is also constructed. I use the word constructed because it probably is close to that person's true opinion, therefore not fabricated. But people, including myself, phrase our critique carefully so as not to sound too harsh. It's a very constructed response.

Blog Prompt #20 - Constructed Realities

The book Constructed Realities: The Art of Staged Photography, edited by Michael Kohler, describes the affect of viewers haven't a shorter attention span, “We therefore consume images fleetingly and randomly. It takes very special pictures to grasp and hold our attention. We need to be seduced by images that outdo reality through excessiveness—as in advertising and movies.”

A lot of people think all these "changes" that are occurring in the world today, like colloquial language including things like "lol", and people feeling the need to check facebook every couple of hours. True, these things are new and different, and people are changing, but why is that a bad thing? Things are always changing. Things have always changed and they always will. As easily as you could argue that we're all changing, you could argue we're still the same. I think it's in human nature to prefer talking to people in person, and although many people do spend a lot of their time on social network sites, usually those relationships started face to face or, as in the case with tweet-ups, where people who follow each other on twitter can meet in person. I think people's attention span is changing, but so what? The idea of art has always evolved and changed, and the fact that our attention spans are getting shorter could produce a challenge to creating artwork that artists really enjoy. But even as I say this, I do try to have patience with not only images, but just things in general. I prefer slower takes in movies, long shots in scenes, and slower reads in artwork. But in advertising, I do want something that will capture my attention fast because I don't have time to care. Generally, it's good design that captures my attention first, which means designers have a challenge in the advertising industry. But it's a fun challenge, and I don't think we should be upset about it.

Another excerpt from the same book explain the term "infotainment" and how contemporary people react to them,

“But the term ‘Infotainment’ also implies this: with the gradual fictionalization of even the news, the old categorical oppositions of ‘documenting’ and ‘staging’, appearance and reality gradually dissolve. They are being replaced by a variety of hybrid forms for which it will be impossible, in fact pointless, to attempt to distinguish between fact and fiction. Even the accusation that ‘Infotainment’ is guilty of continuous ‘lying’ is therefore unjustified, for it is neither ‘true’ nor ‘false’. Like advertising, movies and all other genres that adhere to the laws of fiction, it works at a level beyond these oppositions—the level of ‘hyper-reality’, where reality is ‘simulated’.”

I think sensible people understand that infotainment is not reality. Of course there are some people who can't tell the difference, such as little kids who think Dan Radcliffe can actually do magic. I do believe that people often wish the "reality" they see in magazines and commercials is an "ideal" reality from which a lot of people develop a desire for. But that is not a new thing. In photography there is that aspect of "Is it real or isn't it" because things can easily be manipulated. I think these images can create something that is magical and we might think it's real, but same with the French trapeze artist, Lola, from the 19th century, who could hold herself up with her teeth. Apparently she was held up by a frame or wires. It's the same concept. People were deceived. Even if the audience knew it couldn't happen, for the sake of entertainment, they extended their belief beyond things that made sense. In Photography people do the same thing. Even if we know magic isn't real, it's fun to see a magic trick, but the trick isn't as fun once we know how it works (sometimes, anyway).

Blog Prompt #19

I think there are plenty of things that should not be photographed. I think privacy is incredibly important and often times people forget the privacy wishes of others. Paparazzi is an excellent example. I think the paparazzi can come up with an excellent reason to photograph celebrities, and these days it pretty much comes with the territory, so I will not say celebrities should not be photographed while walking their dog. But I do think that that celebrity has the right to not have his or her children photographed.
Of course there are also very vulgar things that I don't think should be photographed, such as rape and murder, and torture (except perhaps for investigatory purposes).

We can photograph a person in pain, or in love, and we can feel the emotion through the expression of the person in the photograph, but we can't actually photograph emotions, and how our body reacts to being angry (heart beating faster), being embarrassed (face getting warm), or lonliness (a seriously empty clenching in the chest). We could photograph the actual muscles, but the muscles wouldn't convey the emotion, and especially not in a still photograph.

There are plenty of things I do not want to photograph. I'm not particularly interested in photographing unborn babies, or pictures of distant galaxies. These photos are used for different purposes than what I want out of my photos. I'm more interested in the art aspect of photography rather than the scientific aspect. Although I'm sure if I am ever pregnant, a picture of an unborn baby will mean something a great deal more than it does to me now.

Blog Prompt #16, #17, #18

Duane Michals said, “I think photographs should be provocative and not tell you what you already know. It takes no great powers or magic to reproduce somebody's face in a photograph. The magic is in seeing people in new ways."

I agree that the magic can be seeing people in new ways, but I don't think photography shouldn't tell you what you already know. One of the best things about photography is that it captures a moment that one can look back on for the rest of his or her life. If a photo captures a mother exactly as the son knows her, and then 50 years later when the mother has passed away and that son is showing it to his children and he gets filled with this emotion because this photograph is showing exactly what he already knows and he misses her, I think there is magic in that. But I do also agree that there is magic in seeing people in news ways within a photograph as well.

Michals is also the  the guy who originally said, "I believe in the imagination. What I cannot see is infinitely more important than what I can see.”

This is definitely a statement that many people would agree with. Because we see everyday things everyday (thank you, Captain Obvious), things we don't see are new and exciting and therefore more interesting.  It doesn't mean we dislike the everyday things, but humans like lives that aren't static. Imagination is a great way to switch things up for oneself and for people viewing one's photography. It can also show people that think imagination is just for kids that it is for everyone.

Another photographer, Arnold Newman, said, "Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an illusion of reality with which we create our own private world."

 

I think this is entirely true. There is a saying that goes, "A picture is worth a thousand words" but the picture could be lying. A picture is one instance and although you can capture emotion and feeling in a photograph, it is usually a conscious effort to get that emotion. If the paparazzi are photographing somebody, that person being photographed could look very tired and bored, but in fact, they're just sitting reading the paper and drinking coffee. Therefore the photo is an illusion. The viewer creates a narrative within the photograph that doesn't actually exist. Therefore, photography can tell a lie as easily, or more so, than the truth.

Blog Prompt #15 - Collage

When I was younger I would pack my lunch every single day for school. Only occasionally would I buy lunch, and that was a big deal. In high school I would get so hungry that by the time I actually sat at the cafeteria table I would have eaten my entire lunch. These days I still eat many meals in class. I think it would be interesting to have a photo of me eating my lunch in high school and me eating my dinner in college. Perhaps I would be the only one to find it interesting, but the difference between what I'm wearing, where I'm sitting, how much light there is, and what I'm eating would say so many things about how I've changed, even though the subject is technically the same. If these two images were collaged together, then the differences would become more apparent and important. The viewer would be forced to look at the differences of the images, and not just the similarities.

Blog Prompt #14 - Unknown vs. Familiar Space

Photography allows people to more easily compare two different things. While I studied abroad I didn't really notice how the cities I saw in Germany looked different than the cities I saw in Austria. They were both different than the U.S. But once I looked at my pictures and started describing the experience to people, I realized that Austria has a much more peaceful, soft, calming look to its cities while Germany has a more gnome-like feel.
If I were to take a picture of my home and then take a picture of someone elses home in Tokyo, I think the exteriors would look quite different, because Tokyo is a much more crowded city that where I'm from, Troy, MI. Therefore our homes probably look very different. One could point out things about the space of the windows, where the car is kept, etc. just by comparing the pictures.