http://www.identifive.com/

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/

this is an awesome little site with a great display of really really bad photoshop work- check it out

How cool would a dinosaur show be?

A heck of a lot cooler than a dog show.

why not?

Some thoughts of mine from last week

Even though in my opinion every piece of art should stand by its own merit without any need for explanation, I do feel that the process and discourse can be invaluable to express for the artists growth and just incase anyone is interested. I heard once (cant remember exactly where) an analogy that made a point that if a comedian tells a joke but noone laughs, he can explain it and people might say, "yea thats funny i guess" but he still didnt tell the joke well to begin with! This is a big reason why I cant stand a lot of the crap that gets shoved out there these days and takes shelter as "contemporary art" which seems to protect it. Seems to me noone wants to call these artists on their bullshit because that would make them "uncultured" and "closeminded" hey I argue that any artist who puts art out there has to be willing to humble accept criticism, and they shouldnt need to write a book to explain a single work they have in some gallery.

Anyways- so heres what im thinking about working with. The westminster dog show to me is an odd thing. As kids we would argue "my dog is cooler than your dog" and "my dog could beat up your dog" just like how we totally saw a laprachaun this morning on the way to school. This dog show seems to me like the ultimate evolution of that mindset, adults trying to beat eachother out on what may be the most trivial competition ever televised. These people put their dogs out to show off, but its not really about the dogs its about the trainers and owners, and absolutely everyone knows it. So why even keep up the charade? These people are crazy, parading around their pets who they have trained to amuse people. But on the other hand, these people love what they do and they aren't hurting anybody (except maybe the pride of the dogs) so I guess it could be a lot worse. True these people have passion and I bet if you bumped into one in public they would be perfect nice people, but Im still unnerved by it all.

It seems to me this whole event is a bastardization of what having a pet is really about. Why can't a seeing eye dog win an award for giving his life to help a disabled person keep up in our busy world? Why can't a nineteen year old collie get credit for being the last thing keeping an old man company long after his wife and friends have passed away? Why can't a police dog be awarded for putting its life on the line in a situation too dangerous for a human? Why cant a kid from the farm bring in his puppy and win an award for the pure amount of unconditional love he has for his best friend in the world?

HDR! This photo is a lie because no camera could expose in such a way that it captures the detail in the sky equally to the trees. This is a composite of multiple images (same scene but different exposures) and it creates this range of contrast that could not exist otherwise.

Why should manipulation be limited exclusively to photography? Any sort of portraiture work is a manipulation, casting the person in a more interesting light and focusing on more recognizable features is how they create an image people can relate to. They need to fib about the lighting and color to make something more interesting to look at, and even the simple things like style and media reflect on the image, manipulating it and changing its meaning from being a simple representation of a specific person. I could go on and on about this but wont- I will probably do my own work for this project along these lines, afterall all illustrative work is some sort of fabrication right from the bat.

I found this picture a long while back and was interested in the cartoon to rendering transformation, it significantly changes not only the character's appearance, but with what degree of seriousness you take him. When He has this human face he becomes both more accessible and yet more distant because of his apparent deformity. He's not so funny when he's real.

This was big in the news when it happened- and I was proud to be able to spot the photoshopping in a split second. I know its Iran, but are they really that bad at this stuff? Only 3 missiles worked, one they photoshopped in so they would't feel embarrassed.

Manipulation doesn't need to be negative. Here we have Obama, the decision of his pose, his clothing, and the background are all manipulations. And I'm not convinced this wasn't shot in front of a green screen- how high up does he need to be to have an almost level view with the top of the dome?

Riding off my last example. one could argue that the decision of what to include in an image is itself the most basic of manipulations. Photojournalism depends on pictures like this one; Im not a Hillary fan but I know this face is not one she makes very often. Its still scary...

Heres another one- this picture was pre-photoshop, but even before digital work, photos have been subject to manipulation manually.

Images of Manipulation

This one is rather obvious to see the manipulation so I think it is a nice starting point. This was created as a mock advertisment. But even without the photoshopping of Ronald McDonald, the original statue "David" has an interesting history of manipulation. His head and hands were both chosen to be sculpted larger than is accurate. Michelangelo definitely knew how to scupt, but he knew the statue was intended to be seen from far below, so he exaggerated the features to make them more visable.

First Project

The first project starts today- Manipulation