Just a Note

Monday, June 15, 2015 0 comments

Hi Friends,

I'm in the process of uploading many more of my photography works here, but I've been lazy.
Soon though. I promise.

I love spring time in NYC.

Read more »

Rebecca & Ivan

Wednesday, May 13, 2015 0 comments

Read more »


Thursday, June 7, 2012 0 comments

Read more »

Same Difference.

Friday, July 29, 2011 0 comments

Read more »

Feb 16, 2011 Kristi in Switzerland

Thursday, July 28, 2011 0 comments

I have so many pictures of Kristi... haha
I must've been subconsciously drawn to her beauty.
Read more »

B&W futro

Friday, July 15, 2011 0 comments

It's interesting to see SO many retro photography these days. I guess the softwares and their easiness of use is partly what makes it so popular, but like everything else, it's an emergent process. There probably wouldn't be so many retro-fying softwares compatible with everything (and optimized for ease of use) if demands were not as high too. It makes me think about why this retro thing is so popular, if it has always been, or if I'm just more aware of it because of social networking/ internet. It also makes me think about how people find things to be aesthetically pleasing; is it inherent? (/something biological and chemical?) or just influence of media?  like.. why, out of infinite styles of photographs, is this one so popular? is the desire for retro actually deeper than the aesthetic? like ...maybe showing our desire to relate to the "retro" age? I don't know.

so this photograph came out straight as a beautiful retro-toned photo, right out of my point-and-shoot, but I had to fight it. Sometimes I feel like it's easy to go that route, (not that easiness is a bad thing) but I just didn't want to default to that. I knew it'd look nice, but there could be so many other ways I could heighten this photo. (I also thought the shadow was extremely gorgeous, and wanted to articulate that.)

speaking of "heightening" photos....
photography in general is an interesting thing, because when it was first invented, it was really about mimicking reality, reproducing reality in a specific moment: (reducing reality 1-2-3-4D into 1-2D and perceived 3D is what it resulted, but actually i'm not sure how it was conceived. haha) well, It's now about the art, and distorting the closest possible to reality is a good thing. definitely encouraged. But I guess the camera didn't even capture the "reality" all that well in first place. And maybe what some styles are doing (by editing) is actually closer to reality, doing manually what the camera does a shitty job of.
...and further, why is the camera such a popular thing? out of infinite ways of capturing or reducing or distorting a reality.

later yall.
Read more »




Popular Posts