That Freaky Modern Art

Hi everyone:

The Afghan Whigs are now blazing through my headphones as I sit in my familiar Panera surroundings. I admit it's getting a little out of control - when I frowned at the length of the checkout line, the manager said "You're in here all the time - if I don't get ya now, I'll get ya tomorrow." Funny thing is - I rarely eat here (usually just tea or a tasty Jones Cream Soda), it's just a place for me to get stuff done without the rug rats scurrying about.

So, I sent out a massive e-mail blast yesterday to update everyone on the whole art thing. I realized I hadn't sent one in almost a year, mainly because I've been focusing on the blog and the website. But, it dawned on me that many folks had either forgotten about the blog or simply just hadn't looked at my website in a while. Plus, I had some new names to add to my list. Mmmm- tasty converts!

Anyway, one of the responses I got back was so hysterical, I simply had to post it here. It was from an old friend from high school whom I haven't talked to in years. Anyway, she sent me the following response:

"As you may recall, modern art kind of freaks me out, so if you could refrain from sending me updates I'd appreciate it, but would love to keep in touch!"

The thing is, if you knew her, you'd know this was no joke. And after she sent me this reply, I laughed my ass off because I remembered a conversation we had many years ago about art, and this is almost word-for-word what she said then. So entertaining in its closed-mindedness; it was worth sending the e-mail update just to get that response.

I'm thinking about finally adding a "Blog" link to the website, so everyone can link in a nice straight line. I didn't do it at first because I wanted to make sure I was committed enough to the blog before adjusting my site design. That stuff costs money ya know! But, I've been a good little artist over the past year, so I think it might be time.

Otherwise, the new roll of film looks pretty good at first glance. Lots to pick from, but I've noticed that I tend to edit in stages. No big surprises there - I am a photo editor after all. Even when editing other photographers' work, I usually pull the first round of images in more of a photo researcher mentality - aka: pull whatever you think might work. From there, I go back through and edit out similars, photos that are less-effective than the rest, etc. Then, I usually take one more pass through - just to make sure I've got a solid group of selects.

For my own work, the idea is still the same, but the process works a little differently. I do a lot of editing in-camera, because as I mentioned in earlier posts, I've always shot selectively. This is a little harder to do with a 1920's plastic camera, where happy and not-so-happy accidents happen on virtually every roll, but I manage. Once the film is processed and I get it back, I do an edit and select which images will be scanned. I usually select a few similars, since the nuances of a shot are sometimes very subtle due to the way the camera exposes the film. Then, once the scans come back, I edit again - and many scans are left completely untouched.

The final edit of course comes with the printing process. I can't tell you how many images I've had that I thought were a home run, only to learn during my crazy printing process that there is no way in hell they're going to work. The good part is that usually I can tell after the first proof if the image is viable. The rules are very different for darkroom or digital printing, but since this process is pretty much my own (unless there is something I don't know), I've had to make up the rules as I go along. But, that's all part of the fun I suppose.

Well, now that you've had a glimpse into my editing process (I know you're all so enthralled and still catching your breath), I thought I'd throw up a few of my all-time favorite paintings. They're three portraits by Theodore Gericault - a French artist from the late 18th/early 19th century who really began as a military painter (battles, portraits of Napoleon, equestrian portraits etc). His greatest masterpiece is widely considered to be the "Raft of the Medusa" - a pivotal image in the history of French Romanticism, and many would argue, the history of art in general. But, in my opinion, his greatest work was his "Portraits of the Insane" series. I'll never forget the moment I saw these in art school - it was during an art history course on 19th century European painting. The professor put up the slides on the projector and I was completely blown away. But then he said they were done in the 1820's! THE 1820's? This was the time of Romanticism! Nobody was doing anything like this at the time - showing people how they actually are, instead of some idealized vision. The composition was completely revolutionary; the brushwork a precursor to Expressionism and even Impressionism on some level. Completely ahead of his time - it would take another 60-70 years before anyone of note tried something like this again. I hope that one day I can see one of these in person.

Well, this has gone on long enough. Happy weekend everyone, and stay tuned for a new piece - hopefully next week!

-Marc