It’s just paper, scissors, stone.

The summer transfer program here at RIT has been one of the most fulfilling experiences I’ve had in my entire student life, regardless of academic concentration. For once, I feel like my growth as a student is a direct result of my school work. I am producing something alongside my learning, as well: something I never imagined happening ’till much, much later.

However, I really haven’t gotten much time to shoot much on my own, outside of school. Spending twelve hours a day at the school kind of saps you of that energy you reserve specifically for having the capacity to do anything outside of school. Luckily, this weekend’s workload will be somewhat light (or will it?), and tomorrow’s road trip will give me a little more freedom, as well. I’m taking the Xpan out for another spin, in yet another attempt to effectively use the wide frame.

I have about five or six drafts saved since the day I moved out to Rochester; I doubt you all will ever see them. So it goes.

I’ve kinda halted posting photos up here and on my Flickr a little bit ago. I’m still shooting and developing, but I’ve gotten terribly bored of tracking all my posts and comments on Flickr. Web2.0 has brought out both the bad and good in just about everybody with access to the internet. People have turned into stat junkies; each picture somebody posts and each comment they receive is just another number to add to their totals. Though my eyes light up when I see the yellow “New” light up next to my “Recent Activity” link, I’m tired of contemplating whether or not the occasional praise I get on Flickr comes from somebody who knows what they’re talking about. And though any complement is a good complement, the main purpose for my Flickr uploads is so they can be seen by people who are experienced and perhaps somewhat reputable in the field. Since Flickr isn’t an isolated entity like a website, it has a better chance of being found by such people.

After a long mental battle, I’ve decided that my peronal goal to complete a photo-a-day project isn’t in my best interest. Sure, taking a photo every day is the best thing I can do for myself as a growing artist (I’ll use the term lightly), but, as I have proven with my prior two failed attempts, I churn out a lot of crap that I’m not exactly proud of, hence my recent great purge of all the photos that I’d rather not let be seen. Why publish something that doesn’t truly reflect my intentions as a photographer? I suppose that’s the magic of such projects. People get to see somebody’s picture taking process, including all the gems and fuck-ups, and since it’s under the “experimental” label of the 365-Day project, people just shrug said fuck-ups off. What would the gem-to-fuckup ratio have to be in order to label somebody as a “good photographer?”

It’s the same “monkeys on typewriters” scenario that can be said about Garry Winogrand. He died leaving hundreds upon hundreds of undeveloped rolls of film in his house. How many of those actually contain good shots? Even if there was, perhaps, one or less gems per roll, if we looked at the contact sheets, would we see an intelligent thought process involved–series of shots that displayed a higher form or seeking and capturing? Is that even what characterizes a good photogrpaher? Most of us obviously haven’t seen every last frame on even a small portion of the film he left behind. We know him for the mind-blowing images from the various publications he’s been in (look up “Women are Beautiful” and you’ll see what I mean). I don’t mean to sit here quesitoning his reputation as a photographer (especially coming from a dude just beginning to venture out into the real world of photography), but it simply makes you wonder (what a bullshit statement to conclude such a paragraph with).

If you do not wish to trudge through a load of inner-conflict bullshit, just stop reading right here. You’ll thank me later.

The reason I’m deciding against displaying my fuck-ups (since I started with the term, I’ll end with it) in the form of a photo-a-day project is that I tend to be a huge perfectionist. I always have been, which is the reason I’ve come to stop re-reading my school essays. If I do so even once, there is a good chance I’ll end up with a smoldering lump of what used to be a fine-as-it-it essay when the due date comes around. The same has applied with shooting for me recently. I haven’t really gotten anything done since I always find something wrong, either conceptually or technically, with what I’m doing. This is what school is for, I suppose.

In less than four hours, I’ll be on a plane to Rochester, New York, where I’ll be attending school for the next three years (or more!) of my life. Hopefully. People say this too much when they know more than they think, but I honestly don’t know what to expect with this transition. I’ve never been to New York; hell, I’ve barely even stepped foot outside Califorina and its neighboring states. I suppose it was a similar case with moving to Santa Cruz (I didn’t really know anything about the area besides the constant “I heard there’s a lot of liberal counter-culture going on over there” from my comically worried parents), and I hope everything in Rochester will click as well as it did at UCSC. I can see myself very easily falling into the same “I’ll just sit at my computer for the rest of the day” hole as I did in Orange County. I suppose this is how people fall into solo drinking habits.

Without further ado, goodbye California!

What? Coffee developer?

My Flickr “pro” account expired today. I will mourn its departure for seven days now, Jewish style. I’m taking donations for a new one.

I’ve been doing a little exploration in terms of photography this past week. I dug up a red filter in my dad’s old camera bags the other day, so I decided to go out and make some ’scapes. Good day, too. I suppose it’ll be one of the last cumulus-cloud-filled skies I’ll see for a while, so I tried to make the most of it. I walked up to “the rock,” up in the hills behind the orange groves. From there, the better part of the valley is visible. The clouds’ shadows made patterns atop the sea of orange trees to the east, and illuminated and enshrouded the buildings (obscured, of course, by olive and palm trees) to the west.  This day was an example of one of my favorite picture-taking situations. Unfortunately, I left the rolls of film I was meaning to bring on my desk, so I could only get twelve shots in before I had to turn back, and by the time I got there, the sun was setting, and I sadfaced. Pictures from that in a little bit.

Today I found an article about creating a simple developer from almost normal household materials. I jumped on that idea and shot a test roll. After spending three hours trying to find the right materials, I mixed the (rather stinky) solution and cooked the test roll. I even decided to hand-develop, mostly I had barely ever used my steel tank and reel. Their recommended 12 minutes is a little short for Tmax 100; next time I’m going to try 20, as folks in the Flickr group are recommending. I’m just now realizing that this is something I should’ve done before I developed it. I suppose I was too excited to think about it. All in all, it works. However, it does leave a really weird gray tint to it. I’m not sure if it was the process (I’ve had a couple rolls come out that way after I hand-processed them), or the developer, or something else. I’ll have to look into it. The real test with this developer will come when I finally decide to do some printing. I’ll post whatever is, you know, good, in the next few days.

I’m broke. I need a job.

I guess $4 for a roll of 120 versus $15,000 for a digital back is the biggest reason…

I’ve been shooting digitally for a few months now, and in spite of the tone of the following, a digital SLR was probably one of the best investments I’ve ever made. I made the purchase during a time when I didn’t have access to a means to develop film at a reasonable price, and that inconvenience, I felt, hindered my growth at a period of time when growth was crucial. I never mind having to wait a day or two to get around to processing a few rolls, but at that time, it was agonizing to have hundreds of latent images in rolls I exposed three months ago. And “hundreds” is no exaggeration. I went through periods when I could go through three 36-exposure rolls on a productive day. This was a period when I had just started getting my chops back, after a long hiatus.  I needed the quick feedback, and I had no way of measuring my progress. A digital SLR was a godsend for me at the time.

About ten months later, my film developing situation has changed, and my poor 40D is sitting between my Olympus OM-1 and my EOS 3 on my “cameras I use…occasionally” shelf. In place of it, my two Canonets and my (borrowed) Hasselblad have become the cameras I bring with me when I go shooting. I’ve voluntarily (or, perhaps, the opposite?) chosen a fast-aging process over something much more convenient (and, in the long run, cheaper). I suppose I’m rediscovering why I was so hesitant to switch over to digital in the first place.

Some folks claim they like film for the “romance” involved in the process and the overall appearance of the resulting images. I suppose such a manual, involved process is a “romantic” experience. From the lovely chemical perfume that permeats from a freshly-opened canister, to getting fix and its undeniable scent on one’s fingers, to turning the lights on to reveal a print, film creates a level of intimacy which simply cannot be achieved by dragging sliders and moving curves. There is nothing like dedicating an entire day to the process, going through fifteen music albums and an entire tank of gas scouting out spots to shoot. Like I’ve said, I have no qualm with waiting a while to get results.

The look of a film photograph is also something to consider. Obviously, the composition of the material gives it a much more “artistic” texture, and the fact that this can be adjusted through so many different inexpensive mechanisms–push-processing, different films, different developers, different dilutions of developers, etc.–is really appealing. This is complimentary to the fact that a digital sensor simply doesn’t react to light the same way a piece of film does. Digital cameras simply have not achieved the flexibility that film has had access to for decades. They’re coming close, though, and this is part of the reason why I can’t say that the overall “look” of film makes me “prefer” it to digital. I’m sure that, with practice and the right camera, one can get a digital image to look like any kind of film. (I’d probably get a lot of angry responses if I told this to the wrong group of people.)

The true reason I’ve preferred film over digital in recent days is the fact that I’ve always enjoyed working with my hands. One might call my appeal as “romantic,” but I’d say it’s just a fixation on a joy I’ve had since birth. From my primitive pre-preschool drawings and writings, to piano lessons more than ten years (holy shit!) ago, to extremely enthusiastic and thorough chem labs, I’ve always gotten great satisfaction out of creating something, tangible or otherwise, with my hands. I hand-made two pieces of furniture in my house. I’ve never paid for an oil change. I take broken stuff apart just to see what its guts look like. My film obsession is simply another part of the fixation. My images are a product of my hands as much as they are of my eyes. Film photography is a multisensory experience for me.

Didn’t we have a “Friday the 13th” last month?

The title is somewhat obsolete by now, but I suppose I’ll keep it.

I’m spending a weekend in Santa Cruz in a few weeks. The “real” reason to be there is for an appointment with one of the advisors, but I thought it would be nice to meet up with old (a term I’ll use loosely) friends. I hate to say I miss things, but I’ll admit that I really do miss that town, and the people I met there.

I’ve decided I’ll be participating in SoFoBoMo 2009 this summer. Or, attempting to, at least. I’ve already come up with a concept and everything; I suppose it’s about time to learn InDesign. Wish me luck!

Oh hey, let’s talk about another movie.

The most beautiful thing about the cinematography in Rachel Getting Married is its stream-of-consciousness style. The camera is treated as just another character in the film, playing the role of an observer–an attendee at the ceremony. It lets go of the grip of being some omnipresent being, putting a frame around the puppet show taking place within its borders, in favor of taking a step back and letting the characters carry out their own portion of the plot. In doing this, we are thrown into the shoes of nearly every soul that makes it into the frame. The characters create a world that makes that in other films feel static and hazy. Each one has a strong presence, and the camera work is what sets it off.

I am so tired of seeing the generic alternating L-cut close-ups that are supposed to encompass a tense, plot-driving dialogue, which are seen in nearly every movie and TV show. They seem to me like a cop-out for somebody who doesn’t know how to frame a conversation effectively. That said, it’s extremely refreshing to see somebody think out of the box, and proceed to pull it off.

The style in Rachel Getting Married reminded me of L’enfant. After a two-hour laissez-faire dysfunctional love-fest, we’re left with a feeling that the characters aren’t any better off than they were in the beginning. This could alienate some audiences, but it’s great for me, considering that the movies I tend to really like generally always end up this way.

And I’ve gotta say, it’s refreshing to see Anne Hathaway in a good movie, for once.

Five days in the making…

It’s taken me a while to publish this.

The Watchmen movie definitely left a lasting impression. Going into it as one of those jackasses who has read the graphic novel (twice now), I faced it with high hopes, but low expectations. Hours after it ended, I’m still giddy over how meticulously detailed it was, and how unbelievably faithful it was to the comic book, minus the ending (despite the fact that Snyder cut out my favorite panel in the book).

Looking at it in the “I’ve never read the book because I’m not a douchebag” perspective, it was all I would’ve wanted in a superhero movie, and more. The fight sequences were some of the best I’ve seen in a movie; visually stunning–they reminded me of Devil May Cry crossed with Oldboy crossed with Sin City. It was well-paced (though, I understand, the movie’s pacing is up for debate…I just think some people really hate flashbacks), and it really didn’t seem like it ran almost three hours.

A word about the ending: I want to say that it was a cop-out, and that I really wanted to see the squid at the end, but in a way, what Snyder did kinda worked better than the weird deus-ex-machina Moore put into the comic. This did, however, cause some major continuity errors.

I’ve been doing a little bit of “cleaning” on the Flickr. I’ve hidden just about every “bad” image from both of my 365 project failures. I figured they wouldn’t be missed (by me, even), and they’ve created too much clutter for my taste.  It’s my attempt at creating a better good-bad photo ratio on the ’stream, to make it appear cleaner to visitors. The whole 10 visitors I get daily. I suppose it’s doing better than this blog!

This last batch of color film has been a color correction hell for me. I’m still deciding on whether or not I want to upload them. They’re not horrendous or anything–I kinda just don’t want to see this most recent batch get replaced on the front page by something perhaps a step down from what they are (that roll was truely awesome; the other frames were basically exposure brackets of the ones I used).

I’m on the prowl for a film scanner; if anybody has a CanoScan 8800F they wouldn’t mind letting go of, I’m your man. Or, more ideally, a CoolScan series scanner.

More of the same

I’m kinda running out of subject matter within walking distance here around the outskirts of Hemet. Luckily, there’s been talk amongst a few of my friends about a trip to Simpson Park next week.

I hadn’t realized that I haven’t experienced “normal” Hemet weather since I moved back here, ’till now. Now that the rain’s gone, the haze is back, and there is an overarching feeling of grossness every time I walk outdoors. The temperature begins in the low 40s, and then shoots up to the mid 80s within an hour before noon. I go out with a jacket, and end up carrying it around the entire day. The sky is no longer a deep blue between fluffy clouds; it’s more like a really light blue with a slight yellow tinge, broken up once in a while by strange-looking offwhite cirrus wisps and chemtrails. All the more reason to get a red filter, I suppose. The mountains are no longer these giants looming over the valley; the haze has reduced them to faded lumps of land mass in the distance. I’m beginning to think that this is the reason why I had always been under the impression that there weren’t many photo-ops around here. I suppose I’ll just cross my fingers and hope for more decent weather this year. And, plus, it’s only for a few months, right?

I haven’t talked about movies for a while…

…so I guess I’ll go with this one.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona, like Volver, is just the kind of movie Penelope Cruz needs to be in. It’s another example of her appearing more comfortable in a Mediterranean environment. It also seems that Scarlett Johansson is a little more comfortable, too, but not much more can be said about her acting. The movie seems to start deciding to be good the moment Cruz’s volatile character walks onscreen. That’s not to say that the first half was bad; its potential just ignited once everything was in place, and the story was allowed to proceed.

The movie is presented in a storybook sort of fashion. It has a beginning, a middle, a twist, and an end. There isn’t much to grasp, so it’s best to just enjoy the ride. It’s a lot easier to swallow once this is understood. However, I didn’t like the fact that some obviously mature subject matter was treated somewhat tamely, like when a parent spells risque things out in front of their child, as a form of censorship. There’s something about the constant uttering of “make love with,” and “go to bed with” that felt rather unnatural. C’mon, Woody Allen. Seinfeld said “sex” in the 80s. I’m sure audiences can handle it these days.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona is quirky, to say the least. It’s definitely one of the better dramadies I’ve seen in a while.

Oh, and a photographer’s note: lol at the “Oh, I have a Leica all of a sudden” scene. Though it does explain those pictures of Scarlett Johansson on a set with one around her neck floating around the internet. And it was definitely more appropriate than seeing a Leica with black tape over the logo being used to photograph a crime scene in NCIS, or one of those prime time crime shows.

Can I see Watchmen now? Please?

No, spell check, I will not capitalize “internet.”

I’ll post three

…because I don’t really have anything to say.

Processing color film was interesting, to say the least. I’ll say that I now have a hightened sense of space and positioning, after stumbling around between the enlarger and processor. Color balancing has to have been one of the most frustrating experiences I’ve ever endured, but I quickly learned the nuances, and next time it’ll be much easier.

I overdeveloped my last roll of Tmax! Curses!