Sunday's drive up your blog… with Ramblin' Rooster

The official blog of RoosterEgg.com

Posts Tagged ‘pictures

Delete My Perfect Worthless Picture

with 14 comments

I’ve been spending a lot of time lately hanging out over at the fundamentaljelly site looking at his pictures. (http://fundamentaljelly.com/ as if you didn’t know). It seems like there’s been some kind of birth of inspiration for photography sweeping WordPress lately.

 

I loved photography in my youth. I still remember the first day of class and everyone had to stand up and state why they wanted to learn photography. When it was my turn, I stood up and said, “I want to be a Playboy photographer”. It got some laughs and truth be told I wasn’t serious, even though I’d take that gig in a heartbeat.

 

Once school ended so did my photography stint. I’m not sore about it, just stating fact. Now days there’s probably very little film photographers left. It’s made me sad to lose one thing and that would be the “alien photos”.

 

Seems like no matter what, there was always a crazy, abstract, weirdo photo and the beginning and end of every roll. Sometimes you’d get a couple more at the end. I collected those photos and use to take the ones that people threw away when they got they’re pictures back from the “fotohut”.

 

I had a real appreciation for these photographs. I thought they were awesome and unique, even the ones with the distorted finger that turned out to be grandma holding the camera like a hungry bear. I always thought they were interesting in composition.

 

Those are all gone now too. With the dominance of the digital camera, the ease of deleting unwanted pictures is a mere click away. No reason to keep those pesky, one-of-a-kind, pictures on your card.

 

It’s too bad.

 

Egg On!

Ramblin’ Rooster

Advertisements

Pictures of Pictures

leave a comment »

I was tooling around an art museum today. In every room there was a sign that read “No Photography”. I’ve always pretended to be illiterate for just these types of occasions. Unfortunately they have these pesky employees that hang around watching for illiterates. They wait till you have your camera out, pointed, focused, zoomed, a perfect shot ready to be captured before they pounce on you screaming in that annoying whispering voice “no pictures”. I wonder what these employees are. They’re like less than a security guard, more insignificant than a rent-a-cop, and far less glamorous than a fry cook. They’re like vagrants in uniforms.

 

Why are they all over me about taking pictures? If I had to guess, I would say that famous paintings are like famous people. They want to be left alone even though they depend on us, the commoner, to support them. I would have never guessed that “celebrity style” has become so out of control that a painting or sculpture would develop a prima donna attitude, but it seems to be the case.

 

Someone tried telling me once that you couldn’t take photographs of paintings because the flash faded the paint like the sun does a photograph or something like that. I don’t really remember because I stuffed a banana in their mouth and threw them into a gorilla cage. I know they were only foolin’, trying to cover up for those famous pictures and their attitudes. You always see it in the celebrity handlers, always the same, always, but I’m not fooled. I won’t buy into the “poor me celebrity” propaganda machine.

 

So to teach them all a lesson and to nip this problem in the bud, I burned down the museum. Let’s see you try and “protect”, (or rather dote over) your “better than thou” beautiful, unique, 200 year old, priceless, irreplaceable, masterpiece now!

 

Wow, having just written and reading that, I see I went too far, over the line, a living example of bad decision making.

 

I’m sorry.

 

Egg On!

Ramblin’ Rooster

Written by Ramblin' Rooster

May 6, 2009 at 4:24 am

Defaced Portraits

with 4 comments

There has always been something terribly sad to me when it comes to pictures of people that have been defaced. I’m sure that a lot of the people being defaced probably did something to make the defacer deface them, but still there’s just an aura of innocents that seems lost.

 

I think it has to do with the fact that a picture is a moment in time meant to be frozen and stored away for future reference and remembrance. Most of the time the person in the picture is smiling or at least playing to the camera with some sort of joyful “cheese”, I guess there is probably a fair amount of pictures of people who are not happy, but then again I doubt those are very often defaced.

 

School pictures are the worst, I almost think they were invented just for other kids to maul and destroy. Do you ever take an eraser to a wallet sized picture of a fellow student who gave you their picture? You can do some serious and wacky damage with a pencil eraser. It goes back to the smiling. Here’s a picture of a kid, happy, care-free, (or at least it appears so in the picture) and then someone adds fangs, a Mohawk, glasses, an eye patch or blacked out teeth. It’s like an assault on the person in the photo, a moment of prestige ruined for all time and the victim can’t even defend themselves.

 

Then of course you have advertising and the random vandalization. You can see this most often on public bus benches, most of the time their realtors. I wonder what the percentage is of people who vandalize those pictures being disgruntled customers seeking out the only revenge they could muster. I’d guess 0.01%. I don’t find the same sadness in these moments. I think it’s the market angle, takes away the innocence. If it’s done originally, (or even classically) I might even find mild amusement in it.

 

Oddly enough, when it comes to magazines and phone books, I’m a bit of graffiti artist myself. I like to make models ugly in my wife’s clothing catalogs and make all the lawyers look like freaks and punks on the phone book. It’s a good way to pass the time when you’re on hold.

 

Wowzers, I never knew I was all over the board like that, sympathetic to benign to perpetrator. Who knew I was so crazy?

 

In all cases, I wonder what it’s like for the people of the defaced pictures to see themselves altered in such a way. I’ve never been exposed to such a horror, but I would imagine it would attack the ego and undermine self-esteem, if only for a moment. So maybe if you alter a picture, to vent frustration or act out your anger, (like drawing a dagger in the head of an unfaithful lover) just destroy it when you’re done. As for all the realtors, lawyers and anyone else brave/stupid enough to put their face of a public advertisement, well they’re just asking for it.

 

Here’s to defacing  you, kid.

 

Egg On!

Ramblin’ Rooster

Written by Ramblin' Rooster

January 20, 2009 at 4:37 am