A friend asked a question recently in a Facebook group I belong to: "What have you learned the most from being a Photographer." To be honest, I still haven't read any responses from any of the other group members. I was just humbly thinking only of myself, (selfish).
Seriously though, it was a deep question for me. I've been realizing that I'm thinking less and less of myself as a "photographer" and more as an artist. I don't want to shoot myself in the foot mind you. Please don't draw the conclusion that I don't want to be a photographer anymore. I love being a photographer and creating images. All I'm saying is I'm mentally allowing myself to see myself as more than what I do.
I've always tried to draw inspiration from many and varied sources, and I'm always trying to glean some new piece of knowledge or skill from somewhere. As well as stealing bits of knowledge here and there, I also try to bring it all back and see how they all relate and/or fit together. As I've been doing this over the years, I've come to realize composition applies to everything. However, It's not solely something to be found within a frame.
Songs are composed within a meter and key, a photograph is framed in the viewfinder, a drawing must be limited to the paper or surface upon which it resides. Most art thrives when parameters are placed and boundries are set. But composition can also be found wherever there is order. Our bodies, the trees, even the stars compose.
Well, maybe it's us. Maybe things seem composed because we have given meaning to them. The greeks, who looked into the stars and saw images. It was not the stars that composed the images, but the oracles who divined meaning from mess.
The egyptians believed order came from chaos. Chaos first, order second. Our words that shape our thoughts, a poem that embodies pure emotion, two separate lives becoming one through marital bonds. It's beautiful, and it's everywhere. And it's hard. :) But that's ok, nothing great was ever easy.
8.16.2012
7.26.2012
Videos
Videos I have made. Ta-da!
The CVN vids are for the Campus Video Network that was supposed to be a closed network for campus to air videos done by BYU-Idaho themselves and the students that go there. To my knowledge, it has yet to come together. Anyway. Hope you like them. I used Adobe After Effects for everything actually: for linear editing and motion work. Shot on a Nikon D90 and D7000.
I also did most of the "Virtue" film on the BYU-Idaho "True At All Times" website as well. The motion design work was done by Josh Balleza.
Wanna make movies with me? My services are for sale. :)
Library color-appleRGB from Doug McKay on Vimeo.
CVN PhotoPan-Hinckley-png-lowres from Doug McKay on Vimeo.
The CVN vids are for the Campus Video Network that was supposed to be a closed network for campus to air videos done by BYU-Idaho themselves and the students that go there. To my knowledge, it has yet to come together. Anyway. Hope you like them. I used Adobe After Effects for everything actually: for linear editing and motion work. Shot on a Nikon D90 and D7000.
I also did most of the "Virtue" film on the BYU-Idaho "True At All Times" website as well. The motion design work was done by Josh Balleza.
Wanna make movies with me? My services are for sale. :)
Library color-appleRGB from Doug McKay on Vimeo.
CVN PhotoPan-Hinckley-png-lowres from Doug McKay on Vimeo.
4.24.2012
Check out the new website!! After years of saying, "its almost up..." it is up! dougmckayphotography.com
3.30.2012
Where We Are Now?
I've been learning a little about the history of Modernism, and have been trying to wrap my head around it. Generally, this blog has been soly a place for photos. However, I'm going to try to say more.
First of all, a few statements. They will hopefully serve as a foundation for my theory for where we are now and possibly where we're going in the art world.
-Art movements are basically fads. Sometimes for the intellectuals, other times for the emotionally sensitive and expressive.
-Fads are generally short lived.
-Art movements are different than styles.
-Art movements are often characterized and organized according to style, though not always.
-Art movements often contain various styles.
-Styles are are not found in principles of art, but art principles can be found in styles, though not always.
-True creativity is never truely original. Everything is a reference to something previous. Originality is only as obscure as its sources.
-There is an ebb and flow, a push and pull between expressiveness and rigid rule-based art. This dicotomy can be seen in the differences between classical painting and fauvism; swiss modernism and american postmodernism.
Our tendancy is to push something to it's limits which seems to happen just before an art movement dies out. In the case of Dada, this seems to be the very cause of it's death as a movement. After attacking anything and everything, art attacked itself. Eating oneself is a sure way to limit ones progress. Dada has since been adopted as a style in subsequent movements.
The interesting thing is how much in common the art movements have had in the past century. All have been consumed with the idea that there must be an end to the previous "movement" and a new one must be defined. All have gone to great lengths to express how very unlike past movements such-and-such movement is and how it is the newest and most modern. Clement Greenberg, a prestigious art critique of the 20th century observes this same phenomenon when he states "the same demands as before are made on artist and spectator.... Art is, among many other things, continuity. Without the past of art, and without the need and compulsion to maintain past standards of excellence, such a thing as Modernist art would be impossible. (greenberg, Art in Theory 1900-2000, p. 779)"
It seems, in the postmodernist's statement that "we are not modern, for we denounce structure" a break with modernism was not created but a new appendage of the great Modernist culture was formed only perpetuating the reign of the mighty Modernist. Daniel Bell, an american sociologist, gave a critique on modernism in which he says the difficulty in defining Modernism is three fold. First, modernists hold a "rage against order," which means no modernist is content to be defined. By the very nature of modernism, an artist must rebel against the previous definition and prove by art how the previous definition is false or incomplete. Second, the eclipse of aesthetic distance creates a senario where it is impossible to contemplate and define because of the involvement necessary to a modernism piece. Think of a dancer who can't appreciate a dance because she is in the midst of the dance. Traditionally art was contemplative; you had psychic distance. Now the goal is to put the viewer in the midst of the action to experience. Third, there is a great "preocupation with the medium.(bell, Art in Theory 1900-2000, p. 1118)" The great thing in common is experiment. Which is also a common thing in Man's history, period.
It is my conclusion that where we are now, is merely a modernist lull. Modernism seems obsessed with the new and the novel, always seeking the newest thrill. If we go at the rate we are now, only academia will be the keeper of the flame of past art styles and movements. That is, academia and Google. Commercial art, Fine art, Documentary, Journalism, Hollywood... all forms of art seem to be blending; taking a piece of what "he" did and mimicking what "she" did, and referencing "their" movie or song and creating a "new" piece of art. Styles seem to be loyally guarded by cult followings, tribes. The art of the future will be influenced and remembered because of the Hipter scene, the gamers fantasy world, and manga. Kitche.
First of all, a few statements. They will hopefully serve as a foundation for my theory for where we are now and possibly where we're going in the art world.
-Art movements are basically fads. Sometimes for the intellectuals, other times for the emotionally sensitive and expressive.
-Fads are generally short lived.
-Art movements are different than styles.
-Art movements are often characterized and organized according to style, though not always.
-Art movements often contain various styles.
-Styles are are not found in principles of art, but art principles can be found in styles, though not always.
-True creativity is never truely original. Everything is a reference to something previous. Originality is only as obscure as its sources.
-There is an ebb and flow, a push and pull between expressiveness and rigid rule-based art. This dicotomy can be seen in the differences between classical painting and fauvism; swiss modernism and american postmodernism.
Our tendancy is to push something to it's limits which seems to happen just before an art movement dies out. In the case of Dada, this seems to be the very cause of it's death as a movement. After attacking anything and everything, art attacked itself. Eating oneself is a sure way to limit ones progress. Dada has since been adopted as a style in subsequent movements.
The interesting thing is how much in common the art movements have had in the past century. All have been consumed with the idea that there must be an end to the previous "movement" and a new one must be defined. All have gone to great lengths to express how very unlike past movements such-and-such movement is and how it is the newest and most modern. Clement Greenberg, a prestigious art critique of the 20th century observes this same phenomenon when he states "the same demands as before are made on artist and spectator.... Art is, among many other things, continuity. Without the past of art, and without the need and compulsion to maintain past standards of excellence, such a thing as Modernist art would be impossible. (greenberg, Art in Theory 1900-2000, p. 779)"
It seems, in the postmodernist's statement that "we are not modern, for we denounce structure" a break with modernism was not created but a new appendage of the great Modernist culture was formed only perpetuating the reign of the mighty Modernist. Daniel Bell, an american sociologist, gave a critique on modernism in which he says the difficulty in defining Modernism is three fold. First, modernists hold a "rage against order," which means no modernist is content to be defined. By the very nature of modernism, an artist must rebel against the previous definition and prove by art how the previous definition is false or incomplete. Second, the eclipse of aesthetic distance creates a senario where it is impossible to contemplate and define because of the involvement necessary to a modernism piece. Think of a dancer who can't appreciate a dance because she is in the midst of the dance. Traditionally art was contemplative; you had psychic distance. Now the goal is to put the viewer in the midst of the action to experience. Third, there is a great "preocupation with the medium.(bell, Art in Theory 1900-2000, p. 1118)" The great thing in common is experiment. Which is also a common thing in Man's history, period.
It is my conclusion that where we are now, is merely a modernist lull. Modernism seems obsessed with the new and the novel, always seeking the newest thrill. If we go at the rate we are now, only academia will be the keeper of the flame of past art styles and movements. That is, academia and Google. Commercial art, Fine art, Documentary, Journalism, Hollywood... all forms of art seem to be blending; taking a piece of what "he" did and mimicking what "she" did, and referencing "their" movie or song and creating a "new" piece of art. Styles seem to be loyally guarded by cult followings, tribes. The art of the future will be influenced and remembered because of the Hipter scene, the gamers fantasy world, and manga. Kitche.
2.06.2012
Complementary Blue and Yellow
looking for complementary color palettes today. blues and yellows. yay.
2.03.2012
2.01.2012
Pre Missionary Brochure
I shot this at work (BYU-Idaho University Communications). Possibly will get used for cover photo of Pre-Missionary Brochure.
11.10.2011
7.26.2011
The long walk home
I shot close to 1800 frames on my walk home from covering spring commencement and convocation last weekend. Thought I would make a show of it. I only started shooting from the edge of campus to my house, so there was a little more walking than whats shown here. Can you tell where I walked by the color of the lights?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)