Wednesday, September 07, 2005


photoshop gaussian blur
Back in '99 blurred photos were highly considered by the cognoscenti. Fine Manhattan galleries displayed images that looked like the shots KMart wouldn't charge for when your color processing work was returned.
The goof-proof guarantee...



Blogger Barrett said...

Hmm...someone I've worked with/for up here in New York has made something of a name for herself with a collection of "ethereal" (yes, code-word for OOF in most circles;-) images. I like a lot of her work - I suppose it's because, in addition to my simply liking what I've seen of it, I hadn't seen too many others working in this style, to the point of running it into the ground (yet). But that might indicate that I don't hit the galleries as much as I'd like, or ought to.

Blogger emory said...

you are right, focus is a tool. no law that photographers have to be slaves to the crisp image.
what do cameras do well? reflect reality. seems to make sense to let them do their job. why shoot with a holga when you could shoot with a hasselblad?
some folks love the randomness of the holga's visual interpretation, the light leaks, the vignetting, the lack of contrast. mistakes can be beautiful.
But it's easier to work from sharp to blurry than blurry to sharp.
I respect film's ability to render the world too much to make mistakes on purpose
I make more than enough mistakes unintentionally!


Post a Comment

<< Home