“Slit camera” is a misleading term. I use slit cameras almost exclusively and my pictures could look like this but I abandoned the technique 25 years ago. These shots are done with a camera and mount used for photo finishes at (horse) race tracks. Applying such a camera to a subject not meant for it is easy. Finding the best subject to shoot with it is another. Yes, he’s done his homework, but this is not something he invented. The technique involves panning on the moving subject and I am positive this is the way the film looks coming out of the camera. I’m not sure how this could be accomplished with digital I stopped doing it as people like having something they can identify with in a photo they’re going to hang on the wall of their home or office. Art dealers like dealing with abstracts because most of their customers are moderately blind to reality and want something on their walls which will not distract people during the first months of a new piece being hung. It has been shown that after the first few months, most art blends in with office or home clutter and goes unnoticed. Abstract art is not immune to being completely invisible in no time flat because nobody can figure out what they are looking at. I have friends who work in government and some have bought art from me to hang in their offices. One guy, who works in a secure facility has a large portrait of a girl in blue on his wall and he says he sometimes comes back from lunch to find others sitting at his small conference table staring at her. When he rotates her out and replaces her with an abstract, nobody ever bothers his office. When I gave Rob a tame nude for his wall, it almost got stolen. Jan On Oct 20, 2012, at 1:06 PM, Trevor Cunningham wrote:
Art Faul The Artist Formerly Known as Prints ------ Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com Greens: http://www.inkjetprince.com Camera Works - The Washington Post |
