58 Sterile or soulful?

Through TOP, I encountered Jeff Ascough and his masterful wedding photography. But just as enjoyable as his photography, I found his blog to be eminently readable. In fact, like a good novel, I couldn't stop once I began.

Something that resonated in me was Jeff's embrace of imperfection. He argues that imperfections lend an image it's 'soul'. This hits home. I've been minutely mired in the malodious muck of manic perfectionism and my photography is losing it's soul. The image above is a great example.

Photoshop and ACR enable us to correct all the little technical bugaboos in our images. We can boost detail in shadows, fix colors, add local contrast, correct lens distortions ... and on and on.

Jeff, on the other hand, wields the sword of imperfection with skill ... slicing the heads off marching hordes of barbarous technical critics.

I'm reminded again of the Sir Francis Bacon quote: "There is not beauty that hath not some strangeness in its proportions". I propose that that extends to other aspects as well. There is not beauty that has not some degree of vignetting ... or there is not beauty that has not some inky black shadows ... Ok, these are all overstatements. But there is room in the cab for both.

I vow to shake the shackles of that certain stale and soul-less stench of perfectionist sterility and let my crappy photos stay crappy ... but at least they have real soul!

Peace,

Glen

57 Soft-Heeled Stealings

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Trembling and broken, the light seeking shelter

I could not find what I need

Though finding it not as important as seeing

And seeing the start of belief

I sought just a bit more than I ought

Fought just a bit more than I could

Gently teasing with soft-heeled stealings

I found the light where I should

Do I go on toward ... where?

I don't know

Or is this the light from the proper shore?

Trembling and broken in this soft, healing shelter

I know I need search no more

(c) Glen Goffin 2009

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Peace,

Glen

56 Avoiding flats-ville ... or at least bring your GPS

Two posts ago, I included a picture of a farmhouse in the late afternoon sun. It has a kitschy, flat, folk-artsy, 2 dimensional feel ... almost as if it had been painted by Grandma Jones out in the barn under her wide-brimmed, wicker sun-hat. At first, I hated it. Really. Then I tried reviving it by layering a texture hoping it would add 'depth' to the image. That helped. Over time that folky look has grown on me. Now I like the result.

I've been asking myself - what was the culprit? Bad photography? Yes, of course. Nonetheless, I plan to invent endless excuses in the next couple paragraphs :)

Flat Light

When light does NOT fall off with distance or flow and ebb across the image, it can get pretty boring. No dimensionality. Add the fact that bright sun creates shadows that are inky black with no detail. Yuck. The Grandma-Jones image was WAAAYHAYHAY like that! That mid to late day, clear-sky sun has that effect. Like looking across the desert at noon. Nothing ... nada ... just bright. Oh, barnacles ... the mind-numbing uniformity of it all!!!

Flat Perspective

Long distance photography (telephoto) removes the perspective cues our eyes depend on to distinguish depth. It's kind of like those popsicle-stick puppets we used to make as children or like those squiggly amoeba thingies you see in pond water under a microscope. Except of course they don't move ... and .... well ... they don't look anything like amoeba. Oh ... and it's not a microscope. Otherwise, it's exactly the same.

In fact, movie directors use this technique to "put" their big name actors in the midst of burning building and such. They pull way back and use a long lens. That lets the actors stand well away from the building but look like they are next to it.

Flat Composition

Rule - it's good to establish a clear foreground, middle ground and background in order to give your image depth. I hate rules.

The image in question had grass in the foreground that became a big green blob. Could've been the sewer drain had overrun and flooded the farm for all you could tell. Except, well, no cockroach canoes were floating on it at least.

Flat Focus

When the DoF is narrow so that only a tiny bit is in focus and things get blurrier as they fall away, it enhances the appearance of depth. When you focus past the hyperfocal distance of your lens (at the given aperture), then everything is in focus. No more falloff. Flats-ville. Of course, this is the most common approach to landscapes because it is often equally annoying to see blurry parts in landscapes.

So, if you pay attention to these details you will likely cure the flats-ville blues and certainly be a better photographer than I! Then again, I'm sure you already are :D

Peace out bean sprouts,

Glen

55 Simple people, simple lives, simple images

Some images, just like some people, break all the rules. And yet they have that ... ummm ... je ne sais quoi. Or as Philadelphians would say ...they have that, "I got no stinkin clue". This is one of those. The crop is hideous. The subject's outline is mangled by the person behind him. The window glass blurs his fantastic hat. BUT ... his expression is priceless! Woohoo!! He saved my butt! Let's call him Martin Chuzzlewit ... not to be confused with Mr. Pecksniff or the younger Martin C.

I shot a lot of buggies in Lancaster County PA that day. Here's another. These buggies were moving surprisingly fast for only having two horsepower (sic). So fast, in fact, it was difficult to get them sharp and I was trying to be discrete so I used my Sigma 150mm (it's the longest lens I have).

Doesn't everyone resonate with the idea of slower and simpler lives? My wife and I spend a few weekends a year in Lancaster slowing ourselves down. Watching simple folk live simple lives. Not many of them have blogs since ... well ... umm ... they don't use ELECTRICITY!! Ok, that's a fallacy. They use a little bit. But no blogs. No Canon 5D mark II's. No Macbooks or photoshop. No twittering or flickring. They don't buy buggies on Ebay or Craigslist for that matter. Drudge is the stuff that you sweep out of the stalls ... wow! ... I really need to get a life.

We usually go to the same B&B (shout out to the Inn at Twin Linden!!). The gardens are gorgeous and the German / Dutch food is ... well ... fattening fer sure. Deep fried chicken in pure lard ...veggies fresh off the vine ... milk that still moos ... steaks that still give milk (eww) ... yummm, numm, nummm.

Ok, enough rambling. Here's another shot for the road (hehehe). Get it!? The road! Get it!?

Why do you guys read this nonsense!?!!!!

Bye for now and peace,

Glen

54 The value of experience and ... rubber, numm nummm

I remember just last October when I first … umm … “tried” … Photoshop. “Tried” being incredibly generous. What I really did was stare … and poke … and then stare some more … and then poke some more ... and then mutter things about the Adobe family lineage and where they should put their stupid program.

I felt as if I was trying to read a newspaper in Chinese. The pictures and the icons made sense but the words were complete gibberish. Do I read up and down or side to side? What the heck is a channel? A layer? A mask? How is an image different than a layer? Filters are for coffee ... not craqueleure. Why were there menus but then also side panels? How is it that paintbrushes can paint simple colors but I keep getting cat prints, hearts, scratch marks, fractal patterns and even blood stains!? It was all CRAZY BUSINESS!!!

Now it makes sense, of course. I just needed to see somebody actually using it.

With that in mind, I want to heartily recommend a PDF tutorial written by Mitchell Kanashkevich that is now available here at his website. Note that much of this tutorial uses Adobe Lightroom but there is a lot of PS content as well. And the LR techniques can be accomplished using PS alone.

Mitchell dared to ask if this was worth $12 dollars. Gee, let me see ... ummm ... you're going to save me hundreds of hours of experimentation. You're going to show me how you make images worthy of magazine publication and awards. You're going to save me from buying $100's of dollars of programs that I just don't need. ... hmmm ... let me get back to you on that.

This tutorial is great and worth MUCH more that $12 bucks. Just buy it. Thank me later :) Better yet, thank Mitchell!

The image at the top is an example of why you don't over-knead bread dough. If you do, it gets rubbery and doesn't feel quite right. Photoshop is great but too much is too much. One of the best messages in Mitchell's tutorial ... know when to quit! I clearly didn't apply that lesson in this image.

When your bread turns out like rubber ... make croutons. Here is my crouton version :)

Joy and peace,

Glen

53 Silent sailors seeking harbors

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Quiet corners and dusty posers floating freely through the air

Sunlit seaboats sailing softly shining brightly just for me

These silent sailors do they realize I can see them dancing wildly

Do they care, do they dare

and will they ever leave?

(c) glen goffin 2009

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

52 When to Sign Your Work

I discovered a thought-provoking article by Ted Byrne today. My thanks to him for challenging my sensibilities. Oh ... yes ... and for providing me a nice topic to write about ... hehe.

Having said that, I think I disagree with him :)

**** Author's Warning

Long term exposure to this article may cause elevated blood pressure, acid reflux and marital distress. Warning signs include:

- failure to laugh, chuckle, snort or giggle

- incapacity to pronounce the name "Glen" without foam or spittle

- uncontrolled outbursts of "that idiot!" or "clueless goof!"

******

Ted raises the question of credit and it's relation to proportion. That is to say, proportion of contribution to a final work between subject, tool maker and artist and who deserves credit for what? It is a rare work indeed that does not include some element of a real subject even if abstracted. So most, if not all works include at least these three contributors.

Let's take an easy example. If I create a faithful copy of a Jackson Pollack, should my signature be on that image? So far, Ted and I agree. The artwork is Pollack's, not mine. As Ted admonishes, it would be vulgar of me to take credit for that artwork.

Now, what if I had made that faithful copy using colored beads glued to the side of a skyscraper 200 feet in the air? Or hand-dyed dog hair and sea-glass pasted to the side of my car? It could be argued that that is craftsmanship ... not artistry. Should it be signed by me?

Is there a difference between 'taking' and 'making' a picture? How much does a photographer have to do to 'make' a picture? Or what measure of influence must a photographer exert for the work to become "theirs"?

These questions hit close to home for us macro-n-nature-photography-enthusiasts. Let's call them manaphothusiasts for short. Or, better, manic-phothusiasts. If you like landscapes, too ... well then you'd be a lanamanic-phothusiast ... uhh ... duhhh. Do LPs actually contribute artistically or simply render flowers, rocks and trees on pieces of paper and liquified crystals?

First, I recommend reading Ted's essay directly rather than my interpretation. It's located here:

http://imagefiction.blogspot.com/2007/10/when-to-sign-photograph.html

Is it worth asking - what does signing your work mean? Is it any different than giving credits to a photographer? Clearly, it is. It says, "this is mine".

Not one to shy away from controversy, I've listed some rhetorical and intentionally irritating questions -

1. Should we add credits for every subject we ever take (model name, building name, architect, etc).

2. Is photography ever true creation or always manipulation of something previously created?

3. When is there enough contribution to call it 'ours'?

Those are softball issues. Old hat. Photography 101. Let's get serious ...

1. Photojournalists often only have an instant of time to point and click. Did they really contribute to the image?

2. Some of the best photographers need little to no post-processing (other than adding their watermark, that is :) Did they really do any work?

3. Should your child have signed his popsicle stick picture frame ... even though the teacher bought all the supplies and told him everything to do? He certainly didn't make the popsicle sticks or the glue.

4. Do I want to know who took my mom's childhood photograph ... yeah, I do. I already recognize my mom.

The final analysis ... artistry is about choices. Choices include what to shoot, when to shoot, how to shoot. Just because two people might shoot the same thing the same way doesn't mean there wasn't artistry involved. It simply means that that artistry is of a more common breed.

In the end, it's really quite simple. Give credit where credit is due and add a double dose of humility.

Interestingly, as a Christian, I see this issue in a broader context. It relates to what the root of sin actually is. That is to say, mankind pridefully taking credit for the things that belong to God alone.

For more opportunity to scoff and/or foam see my other (tongue-in-cheek) article on photographic abstractionism.

Oh ... and one last thought before I go. There is another reason not to sign an image ... when it stinks :)

Peace and love,

Glen

49 Canon Mystical Mojo?

Is there a mystical Canon mojo? Are there secret color correction algorithms that have been handed down to Canon engineers by Tibetan monks over thousands of years? Or, in this case, Japanese monks, I suppose. Perhaps, as they were endlessly standing on the tips of bamboo poles perfecting their Kung Fu, they were mentally working out lens correction equations ... like say the five fingered exploding heart technique or, in this case, the 50mm exploding bokeh technique.

I've heard tell many times that Canon has a 'magic'. Initially I lumped it as stiff-necked partisanship and religious zeal since I was already stiff-neck-edly (neckedly!?!) partisan toward Nikon myself. I mean, hey, I spent a TON of $$ on that gear! (disclaimer: engineers define "ton of $$" as anything more than the cost of lunch.)

Before going any further, let me say, Nikon use-ability is brilliant. I find every aspect of the feel and use of the D80 to be intuitive and easy. If Canon has the tao of imagery, Nikon has the zen of useability. Ok, with the sugar comes the vinegar. I also find that the pictures I get from the D80 are just that ... pictures. What does that mean? I have no idea. It doesn't mean anything until you see an image that is much MORE than a picture. They have life. They're strong and don't need any help. With my D80, I have to use PS to resuscitate my pics ... to give them life ... to act as a photo-AED (auto-electronic defribillator). CLEEEAAR!!!!!

Sometimes though, I wonder if it is like looking at your sister? She may be drop-dead gorgeous but you can't see it because ... well ... she's your sister!! If I make a 5D mk II part of my family well ... emmmm ... hmm ... eww

Then there is this weird thing that keeps happening. This little voice in my head that says "AHA!!" every time I see a spectacular image that came from a Canon. I think that is the part of me that can't accept that my photography skills stink so it blames the camera. Not sure. It seems to be pretty consistent and pretty accurate. Could I survive a blind-fold test? Doubtful ... but ... well ... maybe.

I'll ramble on about this more later. Meanwhile, I would LOVE to hear your opinions!

PS - if you don't know what I'm talking about, visit some of my fave photogs like Kathleen Connally, Ami Vitale, Mitchell Kanashkevich ... and on and on. Kathleen does very little PP'ing to her images.

Peace and love,

Glen

46 Photography with a Conscience

I was going to title this: Conscious of Conscience. Say that 5 times fast and I'll buy you a seashell from that girl at the seashore or maybe a peck of pickled peppers from Peter ... well you know what I mean.

I was moved by the collection of short, 5+ minute interviews with leading photojournalists hosted by the Canon Professional Network (go here). From elephants to silver-back gorillas to Iranian refugees and Bangladesh social plights, these interviews are passionate and sobering. Don't expect to look at your pictures of flowers or streetlights or park benches the same way again.

These are photographers with a message and the message itself is more important to them than the photograph. I tend to focus on the photograph and forget what I was trying to say. Or actually, more often I never had anything to say to begin with.

Photojournalism isn't fine art photography which isn't commercial photography which isn't sports photography which isn't ...zzzz ... what? oh, yeah ... I mean these are great photojournalists and their whole gig is to go where we can't go and show us real situations, real people, real emotions, real joys and sorrows. That probably isn't our gig and I'm not saying the same shoe fits us all. But I do believe that even fine art photography is benefited when we at least ask ourselves, 'what am I trying to say?'

Coincidentally, I also layed my ears on an interview with Bob Krist by Matt Brandon (here) and was caught by his lament that the new 'ethic' sacrifices truth for aesthetics. Bob was a National Geographic photog and considers himself a storyteller ... a communicator. Hmmm ... I tend to think in terms of 'vibe' more than story. I try to express a feeling or a mood that maybe doesn't even have words to express it. That may also be why my stuff stinks!

Anyway ... as brainfood goes ... this post was bologna on a week-old pita so I hope you have some mustard ...

Peace and joy,

Glen

45 The Red Couch

There are certain patterns of gold and red that find themselves inside my head.
Certain places where I can go to imagine wonders and wander with mages.
Warm I slide deep down inside of the place where my book and I do hide.
And holding close to me my pillow ... or is that my steed?  I suppose it depends on me.>

(c) glen goffin 2009

~~~~~~~~~~

This is a shot I took in Bermuda in the summer.  It's from the lobby of the Princess Hamilton (sudden sighs of, "oh, yeah, I remember those couches" bubble from the audience). 

I love to write poems.  And I think that if I spent more than 10 minutes, I might actually write a good one.  There is something about the magic of a well placed word, the rhythm of a percolating syllable, the delight of an unexpected turn ... all of which I find so satisfying.  Try it.  I promise not to tell :) 

Love and peace,

Glen

43 Little Boy Days

Don't you love the expressions on these little boys!?   There's something really wonderful about the faces of children.  So genuine.  PS - do you like how I made him stare at my name!?  Shameless, isn't it ;)  It's kindof like he's thinking ... "who the heck is that!?  And what is his name doing there?oh ... and I have to peepee."

~~~~~~~

Little brother, these days are ours to share

There're no cares to care, no enemies to beware 

Just dares and ice cream and little dog tails

There're trees to climb before mom calls, before light fails

There're girls to hide from and spy on and pulling pony tails

Little brother, these days are licorice and sweet

And though we don't know it now

These are days we will long to repeat 

(c) glen goffin 2009

~~~~~~~

Peace and joy,

Glen

41 Destination: unknown ... let's name it

Let's take a journey together ... to a place not only of sight and sound but of mind.  A journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination.  That's a signpost up ahead.  Destination: ... ummm ... crap!  I don't know the name.  Ok, let's pick a new name for this twisted car wreck I call a blog.

photopoema

Poema is latin for poem (oh, gee, really!?!).   This is one of those names that sounds cute but you can never remember it.  Ummmm ... was that photopopo ... or, uhh ... photopoma ...grrr ... no, I know ... photo-dodo after the dufus that thought of it.  Forget it, let's just go visit PixelatedImage.

glen goffin photography

Now that's cutting edge!  Nonetheless ... my leading candidate.  At least it perfectly captures my complete lack of imagination.  "Yeah, mom, I would've used a cutting edge name but they kept confiscating it at the airport."

stinky fish photography

Brilliant!  And by brilliant, I mean lame.   So why do I like it?  Wait, don't answer that.

So I tried to find an English to Gaelic translator because Gaelic is just sooo cool.   So many vowels and stuff.  I like that arthurian faery woodsy vibe.  Hmmm ...

Ok, so what are the goals for this new name ...

1. fun

2. creative (aka. fresh)

3. memorable

4. distinct 

5. makes people think you know what you're doing

6. looks impressive on business cards

7. makes your mom say ... oh, son, I'm so proud of you

8. sorts first alphabetically ... just kidding ... that doesn't work anymore

9. still available - this is the toughest one

Oh, about this photo.  I was at our local high school picnic and the kids were bouncing around in the inflatable bouncy thingies.  This little girl was drawn straight to my camera.  Her face is only inches away from my lens here, that's why the DoF is so narrow.  I tried my best to get her eyes in focus but that left the netting and even HER EYEBROWS out of focus.  Now that's narrow!  And this was at f/4.   Just goes to show that focal distance is as much a factor as f-stop.  

I did a little dodge/burn on her eyes and teeth and I'm still working on skin tones.   Skin tone was a killer.  I tried many different approaches.  In this, I used a PS action from Night Fate (#62-5) that I loaded from Deviant Art.

And to quote one of my favorite commercials ... oh, Miss Foster! ... my daughter loooves your art class!  

Peace and joy,

Glen

40 How much color or ... "Desaturated Dreams" or ... less is more

This image is a perfect example of the dilemma I face these days.  Being a relative newbie (in a middle-bie body), I struggle with very basic issues right now and this image demonstrates my clear lack of tokens for the clue bus heading to ...

how much STINKING COLOR - ville !!?!

Of course, it's the choices we make that define who we are as artists ... yeah, yeah ... and I should always wear clean underwear in case I get hit by a car.  I  know, mom, I know.   

It is Kathleen Connally's work (see the last post or go here) that has me really thinking about this.  As I continue to study her work and shamelessly copy elements of it, I realize that it varies in it's level of saturatedness (saturation being such a boring word).  The pieces I like most, however, come across as rich and full but somewhat desaturated.   My head is trying to wrap itself around this magic spot where less is more in photography.  Where pulling color out ends up releasing richness and vibrancy.  

I think color is often used to mask other problems.  It's like ... hey, this is a picture of a dead leaf ...  but if I crank up the color it kindof grabs your attention.  Sortof like ambulance flashers at a crash scene.

I think it's more like salt ... too much is nasty and too little is bland.  But the only measure for the right amount is ... well ...  'a dash'.  Ok, I guess I'm still figuring out what a dash of color means in photography.  I know that the image above is too much.  I guess I'll just have to keep tasting till I like it :)

Love and peace,

Glen

39 Kathleen Connally - A study in light

Ok, I'm infatuated again. This time with a woman named Kathleen Connally ... or rather ... her photography, that is.

A couple of posts ago I wrote my opinions on the difference between good photography and great photography and about how great photography won't let you go. It's borders are secure and, once inside, you don't want to leave. Captivating ... taken captive ... captured

Well ... I've been captured and, if you dare, go here. But remember that you were warned.

So what is it about her work?

1. Light - She likes to shoot on overcast or foggy days

2. Light - She likes diffuse light for the most part

3. Light - She likes the subject to glow

4. Sharp - she has a very steady hand indeed!

5. Almost 3D quality - I think it is her beautiful 85mm f/1.2 and her Canon 5D that have an almost magic quality. So much so, that I've begun reconsidering my Nikon friends! But she is by no means limited to that 85mm lens! Graciously, she describes each photograph and the lens and processing she uses. I have scheduled much study time :))

6. Wonderful choice of models and subjects - Her children, her family, her pets, her farm ... all are adorable and captivating subjects. In fact, she has dedicated her blog to her township and she calls it ... "A Walk Through Durham Township".

7. Gentleness - For the most part, her images are very understated. Desaturated more than saturated but perfectly so. You know that spot where the colors pop even though they have been pulled down? It's that 'magic spot' where the image comes to life. This is her gift. Finding that spot.

Please, you must go visit. But promise to come back ... even though you won't want to!!

Peace and blessings,
Glen

38 Hosting adventures and what's in a name?!

I almost called this post 'Out of time' but that would be about 1.6 inches of exaggeration... since I HAVE ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD!  Only my mom and my wife even know I'm rehosting (hi mom:) and my wife thinks that means we're gonna have another dinner party.

But in case some bored surfer (or is that surf boreder ... sic) happens on this post on their way to TOP or David DuChemin's or something ... well ... my condolences.  But here it is anyway.

My faithful readers know (hi mom;) that, after reading David's post on blogging, I started to get the bug to rehost Stinky Fish on a more professional site.  Now, don't get me wrong.  I've had a great experience with Blogger so far.  In fact, what they offer FOR FREE is quite amazing really!  I have only a few complaints and I think one of them is actually reasonable ...

1. Limited set of templates 

2. Domain name includes 'blogspot' ... (omg ... run for shelter!!)

3. Commenting support seems to only work intermittently.  Debra Trean tells me that she can never post comments on this site.  I've reset the scripts several times but no luck.  A google search shows that I'm not the only one with that issue.

4. 

Ok ... now the REALLY BIG NEWS!  I'm also thinking of renaming the site.  I chose Stinky Fish because every other name that occurred to me seemed pretentious and self-indulgent (as Simon would say).  I wanted something with whimsy and humor to encourage a spirit of fun and adventure in photography.  I actually have some friends who think that Stinky Fish is too self-deprecating (love that word).   

What I think they mean is that it is hard enough to be taken seriously as an artist with out deprecating all over yourself :)  But I've always been someone who feels that the work should speak for itself.  If it is good ... or even great ... no title or name or silly blog posts can change that.  It will be self evident.

Now, the reason I'm considering the change ... is the COMMERCIAL aspect.  Would anyone hire a wedding photographer from Stinky Fish Photography?  Would you like that on your wedding album?  hmmm ... maybe they are EXACTLY the people I want to shoot for ... decisions, decisions

If anyone does read this ... please leave me a comment (if it lets you) on your opinion of the name :)  In fact, if you would, could you go to http://stinkyfishphotography.wordpress.com/ and let me know if you like that site better than this one?

Peace out,

Glen

34 Photographic grunge

Project: Lay on that grunge vibe!

Hmmm ... where to start? Ok, let me pull out an old photo from my Philadelphia set. What? It's blurry? Oh frisco! Ok, let's go with it. I mean, let's grunge it up so that you hardly notice.

First, make the color pop a little and adjust white-balance. Of course you can do that in either Lightroom or PS. In this case, I just went straight to PS and used the eyedropper tool under color balance. That stinking eye-dropper is way too cool!

Next, let's layer on a texture to give it that dark and scratchy look. I had to go through a bunch of different textures from my inventory. This one is courtesy of Ghostbones, I think. I tend to get a lot of my textures from Flickr users who give them away rights-free. I try not to use any that come from folks who want to keep their rights to them because then, when I make a composite work, I have to remember all the derivative rights acknowledgements. What a PAIN!

When I'm trying out textures, I open the texture and then copy it on my project as a layer. Thank heaven for CTL-T! Then I experiment with the layer type to find the one most suited. I think I landed on 'multiply' for this one. I had to tone it down to about 60% or so. As I look at it now, I wonder if that had been too aggressive a blending mode? 'Overlay' might be better. I'll go try that again later.

This particular texture has a natural vignette to it so that helped focus the viewer on the sign and the headlights of the car. It also hid that fact that, at 6400 ISO, there was notable noise in the skyline.

The texture has a yellowish tint. I didn't bother to correct that since with grunge ... well ... anything goes really! That's what makes it fun.

Anyhow, voila, here's the result. Did I get that late-night, grunge-band kind of vibe with this? Is it too over-the-top? Grunge is like hot-sauce, you add it 'to-taste' ... and I like it HOT!

Peace,
Glen

31 Google Adsense Ads

I love the fact that a regular Joe like me can effectively become his own publisher with all the help that Google has provided. I'm such a novice though! If you're a novice too then join me and we'll try to navigate our way through this. If nothing else, it will be comical ... like ... um ... ordering a cheesesteak with Swiss. Sorry, that's a Philadelphia inside joke:) Well, you know what I mean.

On good blogs, there are almost always banner ads posted which just seems natural to me. I mean come-on, those are real websites. Stinky Fish is like an embarrassing amusement. The kind of site you have to ALT-TAB from the screen when anyone walks past. And for the number of times my faithful readers (my wife and my mom ... yeah, that's them up there) read this site, advertising isn't worth the electrons it would take to paint the pixels.

But even as I write this post, Google has strategically enticed me by placing the word 'monetize' directly in front of my eyes - just inches above this very text. Monetize ... yes yes yes ... (the sound of little splishes here as my drool-plets hit the keyboard). I can hardly type anymore as my eyes are fixated on that word. It must be the key to complete financial freedom ... to a vacation home in Ocean City ... to a Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 ... to an Alien Bees lighting rig ... yes, yes ... I'm certain of it!! Of course, I was certain that The Apprentice wouldn't last a whole season :(

If you select that tab, it brings you to the Google Adsense setup screen. There appear to be two kinds of advertising plans that Google provides - pay-per-thousand-impressions (CPM) or pay-per-click. WHAT!?! (or as my wife would say, 'wuut!?!') A THOUSAND IMPRESSIONS!?! I'm already discouraged. Hmmm ... mom, I have a really big favor to ask ... :-]] If a picture is worth a thousand words, is it also worth a thousand impressions!?! Not mine, that's for sure.

So I typed in the account setup stuff and ... kabang!!! I got an error.

More in the next post. When I figure out what to do and proceed on my way to making millions of dollars in the phoblography (you heard it here first) and web publishing business.

Peace,
Glen

30 Google Analytics

Welcome to the revamped website!

So I added Google analytics just to confirm what I already knew. That I can ramble at will and not offend a soul! BTW, I thought this shot of a Pennsylvania outhouse was appropriate for today's post since it is pretty crappy. Bring your newspaper since I don't think there is wifi in there.

hmmm ... if a toilet flushes in the woods, does it make a sound? Now that's my kind of metaphysics.

Google analytics is free (at least so far) and actually pretty easy to use. You sign up for an account which is quick and then you paste their javascriptlet into your website. From that point forward, teh scriplet uploads website hits to the Google analytics server. Then you just poke into that portal every two seconds to see how many people visited your site since two seconds ago. Or, as in the case of THIS blog, you call your mom and ask her to surf your site so that you can see if the counter even works at all. Simple really. Of course, that's only if you can live with the disturbing secret that your mom hit on your site.

For more info go to http://www.google.com/analytics

back soon ... peace

29 Photographic Abstractionism?

Is 'photographic abstractionism' a self contradiction? Is it more accurately artistic distortion? Maybe those are the same things ... only different. Abstractionism was always an artistic distortion. Or was it an accurate personal revelation of a particular viewpoint?

There are enough common, foundational experiences of our world that we can be confident that, even to the artist, there were distortions of the thing represented relative to the perception of it. Of course, in many if not the majority of cases, the subject depicted never actually existed in reality. It was a complete figment but it was always analogous to real experiences ... and distorted even in that context. The intent - to evoke ... not remind. Of course, Pavlovian association can be leveraged to evoke subconscious response and so, reminiscent associations are a crucial element of evocative art.

This image has been distorted. Not warped. Just modifed. It is abstract in feel. A valid abstraction even though it uses a photographic medium. It's not depictive ... but it is definitive :)

that was fun ... complete nonsense ... but fun :) I've decided that the best blogs make you think. They don't necessarily make you agree ... but they challenge your sensibilities.

Peace,

Glen

27 The sweet smell of magnolias

It's spring ... and not a moment too soon >.<>

Here's another ;)

So gentle and lovely. And the miniature magnolia that we have only grows a few inches a year. Very bonsai in it's attitude really. The feng shui of trees I guess.

Those of you with a keen eye (and that's all of you, of course) will spot that I moved the tint a little toward yellow to warm it up a bit while still trying to keep it close to white. What do you think? I only used LightRoom (demo) for image adjustments on these. Didn't even go into PS. They could use some dodge/burn in the petals and someday I may go in and finlaize them. I have a feeling I'll be finding some other shots more worth the time ... hehe.

We also have another of my most favoritest of trees ... the cherokee chief dogwood. But that hasn't bloomed yet. I'll post again when it does :)))

I wish this post was smellovision but alas, you'll have to imagine it yourself. Fresh and clean with a hint of sweetness ... mmmm

Here's another flower from the same tree. This guy had a tougher go with the rain today but he'll bounce back.

Hope this brightened your day ;D

Peace, my friends

Glen