art movement that began in the 1950’s and incorporated everyday objects
I saw my first Warhol in the 80’s, when a friend, now my husband, brought me to an art exhibit in the 80’s. Its simplicity, combined with the smooth commercially printed look, appealed to me and every so often I find myself digitally editing one of my images in that manner.
Warhol, was an incredibly interesting artist whose creativity and experimentation appeals to me still. He truly was a man who looked beyond the everyday objects, and found ways to make them fresh again.
someone who prefers calm environments, solitude, and small circles of friends
It’s easy to see who’s been the most affected by the changes Covid has brought to our global world. Psssst. It’s not us introverts.
In some ways this global wake-up call has put the stamp of approval on being a homebody. I’m curious to see what the lasting effects of this will be, particularly on our youngest people.
It’s a terrifying virus. For some, asymptomatic or no worse than the common flu, while for others, deadly. No one knows for sure what category they’ll fall into.
Masks confer an anonymity to the wearer that presents other issues to society. I miss those little moments of connection that smiling at a complete stranger brought. Maybe we should bring back the peace sign? A small gesture but one that says “I see you.”
Interesting times we’re living in. While watching a movie, it opened on a scene shot in an airplane. No masks. Will everything going forward look so dated? What will the future look like?
I had a moment this week when I saw an image posted by a respected, long-time photographer who had his start in the days of film, as did I. Now I have no issue with editing a digital photograph, particularly when you shoot it in RAW and the camera has not imposed it’s algorithm onto the image. SOOC (straight out of camera) is often waved as a badge of honor but those images, when shot in JPEG, have already been altered by the camera and the settings that you’ve pre-programmed. I used to be more judgmental about the digital editing process until I’d educated myself about it. Dunning-Kruger effect…google it for more information but essentially it breaks down into you don’t know what you don’t know until you learn more about the subject.
This image I saw was a nature one and was so edited that it hurt my eyes to look at it. As a test I took a similar image I’d taken and edited it in his style just to confirm my thoughts. It matched…I could make my image look identical to his “Oh my God, the most brilliant amazing _________ I’ve ever seen shot.”
Does it matter? Probably not, but as an ethical photographer it irks me. Why? Because it creates a completely unrealistic expectation with people who don’t know better.
The problem with this is, I recently had a photograph widely shared where one individual stated that I’d painted in the lightning strike. Is that possible? Yes. Had I done that? No. Have I ever done that? No. I’d crouched at the edge of a field during a lightning storm to get that shot. Today’s image is a new lightning shot and if you decide to try this, know the risks.
I’ll bring my rant to a close. Be ethical in your photography. I love beautifully edited images but if it’s digitally enhanced or filtered to death, why not admit that? If it’s a composite, say so. Nature is amazing enough as it is. That’s good enough for me.