Drawerings.

I have recenty been wandering through the internetz to look at photography, and have found some pretty dope stuff that really makes me envious. My envy reaches far and wide - into the elements of funds, skills, tech-knowledge, etc. While I have never studied photography and can basically admit to mis-using all techincal terms involving the camera, I really do enjoy controlling an object to capture what I deem to be beautiful or interesting. This is possibly a fascination of mine since I really have a short list of skills to express myself in the arts, but I have pride in my photos and my eye for a photo, so I might as well keep doing it. I just need to learn how to use programs like Photoshop to give myself more to do with my photos, obtain a turbo sweet camera, and get someone to pay for all of the above.

I came across a Dutch photographer by the name of Erwin Olaf, who has some critically acclaimed photos representing dead royalty and in a brilliantly dark and disturbing fashion. Amongst some of the icons represented are Princess Diana, Julius Ceasar, and Jacqueline Kennedy. The striking use of inner-person contrast (I made that word up) between their skin, hair, and evident blood brings a vibrance to these deceased dopplegangers, and touches on themes prevalent to their demises as social, public, and worldly monoliths. I thought it was quite crucial that he used the Mercedes Benz logo on "Diana's" arm to ironically note her way into, and out of, that tunnel.

Olaf also has some lavish photos made for select couture labels such as Armani, Calvin Klein, Versaci, and Gucci. Nudity has lost it's shock value for me. I do not find random nudity being used for such value attractive, and I can't say that random shiny erect cocks or spreadeagled vagina's hits me as shocking or artistic simply because it contains nudity. I do believe that the idea of something that we buy, as expensive as these labels, just to cover our naked bodies, when all we need is a white t shirt, is kind of silly, and Olaf is possibly addressing this by just covering their faces with the bags. Does your face say Armani, or does your body, or are you just hiding it all with a fancy name? I also read that some of his photos were rejected from the set because the models were NOT nude, which is ridiculous.

There is a set of very high-def, close-up portraits containing heavily doctored make-up jobs, that are a little frightening which I quite like. The tones and over-zealous colors do wonders on the emotions portrayed by the models, and I am unaware as to whether or not the majority of that situation is photoshopping, or make-up. Whatever the magic is, I like it, and its entertainingly creepy.

Without a history of using film, disposable cameras not-included, I can't say much like "awhh man it's so wack that they are replacing all things film with digital", but I do sort of feel like that. I am also affected more by this since I have found a passion for photography, to some level, and don't really know too much about either medium - digital or film production. I recently downloaded photoshop and will see if I can get some people close to me to show me the ropes. My cousin also left her Juxtapoz magazine here which has left me with the desire to at least make some "amateur" designs and mess with them if anything. We'll see.