W.G. Rowland wrote:
Letting the blood flow is cliche..

You want that kind of reality don't try and get someone who's not into it to do it.. Go find yourself a cutter..  A suspension artist..  A piercing fanatic..

It's not "real" just because you found a model who'd do it.

And it's certainly not edgy.

Agreed.

W.G. Rowland wrote:
Letting the blood flow is cliche..

You want that kind of reality don't try and get someone who's not into it to do it.. Go find yourself a cutter..  A suspension artist..  A piercing fanatic..

It's not "real" just because you found a model who'd do it.

And it's certainly not edgy.

It's called porn.

Searcher wrote:
A model cutting herself with a razor would be interesting to shoot. Not a deep cut, just enough to draw a bit of blood. A scratch. Like a shaving nick. It would be edgy, dangerous, real, textural. You would get good pictures. Because of the nature of the moment.

And yet something tells me most models here on MM would never go for it. The thought of a tiny break of their skin would send them into a panic. I find that sad. It actually depresses me to think about that.

How far would you go for the shot?

If a model wants edgy pictures, will they really allow a photographer to take their session to the limits of sanity? And fuck you who would say "use fake blood" because that's not the point at all. It's about the look in the eyes, and you don't get that from smearing Karo and red dye on an arm.

Fuck not crossing a line. You have to push. Always be pushing. Tearing at the walls you saw when you went to sleep last night is the duty of every artist, every scientist, every entrepreur. To be a creative is to consume and release all.

Let the blood flow.

I have images like you describe in my port. You're a bit far away, however. otherwise I'd help you out.

Searcher wrote:
A model cutting herself with a razor would be interesting to shoot. Not a deep cut, just enough to draw a bit of blood. A scratch. Like a shaving nick. It would be edgy, dangerous, real, textural. You would get good pictures. Because of the nature of the moment.

And yet something tells me most models here on MM would never go for it. The thought of a tiny break of their skin would send them into a panic. I find that sad. It actually depresses me to think about that.

How far would you go for the shot?

If a model wants edgy pictures, will they really allow a photographer to take their session to the limits of sanity? And fuck you who would say "use fake blood" because that's not the point at all. It's about the look in the eyes, and you don't get that from smearing Karo and red dye on an arm.

Fuck not crossing a line. You have to push. Always be pushing. Tearing at the walls you saw when you went to sleep last night is the duty of every artist, every scientist, every entrepreur. To be a creative is to consume and release all.

Let the blood flow.

wow,  knew alexander calder, william styron, luis alvarez, owen chamberlain, george smoot.. never saw any of them get even so much a a paper cut..

luis alvarez for instance told me the story of what it was like to be flying in the plane that flew over hiroshima 20 mins after the enola gay, he didn't think violence was a joke..


the mountains you'd be lucky to fall from are sand dunes to some people

Searcher wrote:
Fuck not crossing a line. You have to push. Always be pushing. Tearing at the walls you saw when you went to sleep last night is the duty of every artist, every scientist, every entrepreur. To be a creative is to consume and release all.

Let the blood flow.

WTF?

The only people who say 'Fuck not crossing the Line' are those that lack even a shred of wisdom to their nature.  There are lines we dare not cross for the future harm it does to us all.  If you are in pain, fix yourself.  If you are a Survivor, fix yourself.  If you meet a Survivor, help him or her at any cost.  But do not take advantage.

Searcher, it is unclear what you are searching for, but one thing is for sure-- with the ideas you professed above you are in severe need of finding out who you are, what you stand for.

Look up the word wisdom, and then apply it to your theories, see how it fits.  And if you cannot find understanding, then seek it out and don't stop until you do.  And after that, look up the words 'Survivor' and 'Cutter' and try to rationalize how you can possibly take advantage of such an amazing group of people.

I am going to assume that your quote above is simply a severe judgement lapse from someone too young to understand the implications.  I'll try not to come to the other almost inescapable conclusion.

It is our only job to know ourselves, be aware of ourselves-- to tear at our OWN walls that keep the elusive self awareness at bay.

To be wise is to know which boundries we can cross and which ones we dare not for the damage it will do us or others.  Creativity without wisdom, I believe, is a dangerous thing in the hands of someone with your outlook.

W.G. Rowland wrote:
Letting the blood flow is cliche..

You want that kind of reality don't try and get someone who's not into it to do it.. Go find yourself a cutter..  A suspension artist..  A piercing fanatic..

It's not "real" just because you found a model who'd do it.

And it's certainly not edgy.

You don't get what I'm saying. I'm saying I hate when people say they want to be artists but then don't commit to the process. Or, I guess my idea of the process.

Daguerre wrote:
The only people who say 'Fuck not crossing the Line' are those that lack even a shred of wisdom to their nature.

I did not say "the line" I said "a line."

I'm talking about carrying bonds into the studio and letting them interefere with what you show in the final work. How often do you look at an image of a model on here and know who they are and where they come from? For me it is often. What is being presented is too obviously stemming from personal ticks and not a broader understanding of humanity. Mona Lisa vs. pasty chick in shower with finger in mouth.

LadyLockeout wrote:
the idea of the process being total commitment, yes? Why settle for fake blood when you can get the realism with a minimum of fuss?

Exactly. Only there is fuss, and it's ridiculous.

Searcher wrote:

Exactly. Only there is fuss, and it's ridiculous.

well, that depends on who you work with. it's no fuss for me, as my port can attest to, however it does cost money.

W.G. Rowland wrote:
Letting the blood flow is cliche..

You want that kind of reality don't try and get someone who's not into it to do it.. Go find yourself a cutter..  A suspension artist..  A piercing fanatic..

It's not "real" just because you found a model who'd do it.

And it's certainly not edgy.

Searcher wrote:
You don't get what I'm saying. I'm saying I hate when people say they want to be artists but then don't commit to the process. Or, I guess my idea of the process.

What I'm interested in is-- where does your idea of 'process' come from?  Where do your commitment issues come from?  And who would you be, to judge  or even be aware of anyone else's commitment to their own process?

Searcher wrote:
I think of my studio like an indian sweat lodge. I want pain and struggle and chaos and introspection to show in my images, so I want them on the set.

Could you link to some of these images?

Daguerre wrote:
What I'm interested in is-- where does your idea of 'process' come from?  Where do your commitment issues come from?  And who would you be, to judge  or even be aware of anyone else's commitment to their own process?

Artists must be judges. There are too few soothsayers. There are too few prophets.

Process is what makes the work come pure from the heart.

Maynard Southern wrote:

Could you link to some of these images?

Nothing I have been able to capture amounts to the vision I wish to express.

Searcher wrote:

Nothing I have been able to capture amounts to the vision I wish to express.

Ah.

Davis Images wrote:
Hey you should hook up with the guys who produced the Guinea Pig movies.

Hideshi Hino

Amazing, but somehow retarded. Perhaps the technology available at the time.

C David Stephens wrote:
A model grabbing a photographer's nads and squeezing until he passed out would be pretty edgy too.

If you're volunteering, I would like to shoot that. We would have to add something else so you would still be surprised though.

Searcher wrote:

You don't get what I'm saying. I'm saying I hate when people say they want to be artists but then don't commit to the process. Or, I guess my idea of the process.

you hate people who dont think like you?

that's creative

lotusphoto wrote:

you hate people who dont think like you?

that's creative

Don't be trolling in my thread.

Searcher wrote:
You don't get what I'm saying. I'm saying I hate when people say they want to be artists but then don't commit to the process. Or, I guess my idea of the process.

What you've written is that you're personally upset when someone--rebuttably an artist--doesn't commit to your process and your goal.

Using that standard, you're not an artist to a sculptor unless you commit to the process of sculpting; you're not an artist to a singer unless you commit to the process of practicing your music, etc.

One of the aspects of art is creating or finding suitable media. If this concept is critical to you as an artist, it's up to you to find appropriate subjects--it is not the models' failure to be artists so much as your inability to accept other people's legitimate limits.

I will make no direct comment as to this particular concept other than to ask whether you understand the issues surrounding cutting, or are just looking for a "cool visual".

(Hey--why not have the model do his/her own nose job? That'd satisfy two of your artistic needs.)

Searcher wrote:
Don't be trolling in my thread.

so you can start an argument with anyone/everyone, but if someone contradicts you...

Searcher wrote:
You don't get what I'm saying. I'm saying I hate when people say they want to be artists but then don't commit to the process. Or, I guess my idea of the process.

As you haven't produced one image that lives up anywhere close to your "vision", basically, if my logic is correct, you are someone saying they want to be an artist, but you haven't committed to the process.

Daguerre wrote:
The only people who say 'Fuck not crossing the Line' are those that lack even a shred of wisdom to their nature.

Searcher wrote:
I did not say "the line" I said "a line."  I'm talking about carrying bonds into the studio and letting them interefere with what you show in the final work. How often do you look at an image of a model on here and know who they are and where they come from? For me it is often. What is being presented is too obviously stemming from personal ticks and not a broader understanding of humanity. Mona Lisa vs. pasty chick in shower with finger in mouth.

Dude, I think you're trolling in your own thread-- you just can't be that whacked.

You don't need a broader understanding of humanity, you need a broader understanding of you.  I think you'll find some personal surprises of your own.

Searcher wrote:

If you're volunteering, I would like to shoot that. We would have to add something else so you would still be surprised though.

I thought you'd be the one to suffer for your art. I'm happy just faking it.

Kevin Connery wrote:
What you've written is that you're personally upset when someone--rebuttably an artist--doesn't commit to your process and your goal.

No, that they don't commit ot any process or any goal. They haven't put thought into how much effort is required to create an image.

Kevin Connery wrote:
I will make no direct comment as to this particular concept other than to ask whether you understand the issues surrounding cutting, or are just looking for a "cool visual".

The visual. Not immediately interested in neuroses that would cause someone to cut themselves with a razor. That was just an extreme example of something requiring a level of commitment. Someone already inclined to cut themselves would be a bad choice for the shot.

I'm thinking about art and fear, and how to force the models out of the state of mind they had when they walked in. Innocense, confusion, intelligence, grace, long moments... these things fascinate me.

C David Stephens wrote:
I thought you'd be the one to suffer for your art. I'm happy just faking it.

That's sad.

Maynard Southern wrote:

As you haven't produced one image that lives up anywhere close to your "vision", basically, if my logic is correct, you are someone saying they want to be an artist, but you haven't committed to the process.

No, it's more that I can't point to one or two images and say "that sums up everything I'm working toward," because I'm in the middle of finding it.

Daguerre wrote:
You don't need a broader understanding of humanity, you need a broader understanding of you.  I think you'll find some personal surprises of your own.

But that's the point. Why paint the painting if you know everything about why you're painting it?

Yes, I'm one of those crazy artists. No, I don't know what I'm shooting tomorrow. I always find something. And occasionally something I capture serves as a catalyst for new interests.

Searcher wrote:
The visual. Not immediately interested in neuroses that would cause someone to cut themselves with a razor. That was just an extreme example of something requiring a level of commitment. Someone already inclined to cut themselves would be a bad choice for the shot.

I'm thinking about art and fear, and how to force the models out of the state of mind they had when they walked in. Innocense, confusion, intelligence, grace, long moments... these things fascinate me.

Well, from what you are writing here it seems to me that you are interested in definitely more than just the visual aspect of blood. More so you are interested in TRULY altering a model's state of mind, FORCING them out of certain state of mind.

I think its definitely ok to take this to a mild level, but I think the path down photography, fear, blood, reality, stripping of innocense and force is wrong. And not wrong in a conservative way. Im talking about silence of the lambs wrong.

It's ok--I think many people have to go through this--seeing how far to take their work before it becomes abusive. Statements are fine in many cases. Cremaster had all fake blood and worked wonderfully.

Perhaps you can do this on a milder level using something other than blood? Or perhaps capture the same in the real worl rather than placing a model into an unpleasant situation.

Renata Brazilia wrote:
Well, from what you are writing here it seems to me that you are interested in definitely more than just the visual aspect of blood. More so you are interested in TRULY altering a model's state of mind, FORCING them out of certain state of mind.

I think its definitely ok to take this to a mild level, but I think the path down photography, fear, blood, reality, stripping of innocense and force is wrong. And not wrong in a conservative way. Im talking about silence of the lambs wrong.

Yes.

Renata Brazilia wrote:
It's ok--I think many people have to go through this--seeing how far to take their work before it becomes abusive. Statements are fine in many cases. Cremaster had all fake blood and worked wonderfully.

Perhaps you can do this on a milder level using something other than blood? Or perhaps capture the same in the real worl rather than placing a model into an unpleasant situation.

I don't care about blood. I care about rawness and vulnerability. I don't want to take that picture. I want to get the model to a state of mind where I could take that picture.

Searcher wrote:

Kevin Connery wrote:
What you've written is that you're personally upset when someone--rebuttably an artist--doesn't commit to your process and your goal.

No, that they don't commit ot any process or any goal. They haven't put thought into how much effort is required to create an image.


The visual. Not immediately interested in neuroses that would cause someone to cut themselves with a razor. That was just an extreme example of something requiring a level of commitment. Someone already inclined to cut themselves would be a bad choice for the shot.

I'm thinking about art and fear, and how to force the models out of the state of mind they had when they walked in. Innocense, confusion, intelligence, grace, long moments... these things fascinate me.

Perfoming violence for the sake of causing fear is not most people's concept of art, nor is the capturing of the expression of fear caused by that violence. It bothers me that you feel that everyone else has a natural tendancy to enjoy violent scenes, and that their refusal to participate in such acts is caused by fear alone. There's enough violence and bloodshed on this planet... let's not celebrate it by turning it into "art".