HOME | DD

deepvoidskitzoid In reply to rattyredemption [2012-12-30 20:32:11 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for the kind words. As for the forms in the pictures, they are nothing more than random everyday objects that have a greater or lesser degree of opacity. I own a small publishing company, which gives me access to all kinds of specialty papers; dichroic, holographic, etc., which I use often as background to achieve a sort of shimmery effect. I also use things such as aluminum foil, saran wrap, tons of mirrors, old dishes, old Iphone covers...anything really. Thrift stores are gold mines!
The color is the main "secret". I can tell you that I'm shooting in as close to absolute ambient darkness as is possible to achieve in home-built studio. Because light has to be filtered through multiple layers of material and still be brilliant enough to illuminate the objects I'm photographing, I use at least 800 watts of bright white source light, highly concentrated toward my subject. Before I started buying the corkscrew type bulbs, this caused more than one set collapse because the heat melted the surrounding structures! However, the new bulbs stay cool enough to solve the problem. I tried using LEDs, but I just can't seem to achieve the same effects as I can with incandescent bulbs.
The actual source of the color is the biggest secret of all...which I can't really describe without giving it all away. I'm certain I'm not the first to use this technique, but it's fun to work with it and tweak it to my needs. Much of it does have to do with mirrors and other highly reflective surfaces. I've probably bought, and broken, more mirrors than line the hall at Versailles. I think it's the mirrors that give some of the pictures a sense of depth and a sense of immensity. In reality, I'm shooting relatively small objects; nothing bigger than a salad bowl.
I was looking through your gallery, and it's the kind of stuff that you're doing that got me started in this in the first place. I love the form/formlessness and hallucinogenic quality of your art. It's always fascinating to learn how one viewer's interpretation of this type of art can differ so greatly from another viewer's, or the artist's own vision. With the type of art we produce, I think it's less about how it's done, than about the results. Anyway, great stuff. The animations blow me away. I have to use Photoshop and Illustrator in my work, but only to do book covers and such. Animation is like rocket science to me! Have you ever thought of making some of them available to users of psychoactive sound creation programs? They'd be perfect visual stimulation.
Anyway, thanks again.
Take care,
Mercury

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

rattyredemption In reply to deepvoidskitzoid [2013-01-08 12:33:18 +0000 UTC]

i apologize for the delay, normally i reply within 24 hours, but have been insanely busy this last couple of weeks. and haven't been online as much as i normally am, as a result i have nearly 250 messages/notifications in my da message center.

cool that you own a publishing company, and very interesting to hear more of your workflow, i had to read that a couple of times but think i understand it all.

also interesting to hear your using cfl's, i've heard they can produce a purer whiter light than incandescent lights?

re the source of the colors: i do respect that, but i'd also like to ask have you ever experimented with oil light projectors? and if so what did you think of the results?

i find it fascinating to think that this is a form of macro photography, yes? in my own abstract work the sense of scale is often difficult to judge.

that's very cool to hear that digital abstract art like mine inspired your photography.

quoting you:

"I love the form/formlessness and hallucinogenic quality of your art."

cool, thanks very much, that's what i like to hear, he he. and i spend days, sometimes weeks on end, building 3d models to then try and hide them in my mix of swirly colors and lighting effects, he he.

re the interpretation: totally agreed.

quoting you a couple more times:

"With the type of art we produce, I think it's less about how it's done, than about the results."

in the context of which medium us artists and photographers choose to work, i agree. although i do personally love to learn how other artists produce their art, even if it's in mediums, i wouldn't choose to work with myself. i enjoy the science behind art as much as the end result.

"Animation is like rocket science to me!"

there's no denying how technically complex digital animation is, and considering i'm working full time (7 days a week) on this project, i struggle at times to keep up with the advances in technology.

as soon as i figure out how to do something, there is usually a better way of doing it, or i find multiple errors in my work that i feel compelled (as in ocd) to fix them.

luckily i'm very patient, and although i totally suck at maths, i'm about equal parts artist and technical minded, otherwise i seriously doubt i could motivate myself to use this medium.

re dynamic sound/visual apps: thanks for the suggestion, and i'm actually using video game technology for a lot of this project, which involved a steep learning curve at times.

the goals are to first produce a dvd's worth of music videos, of which i'm working with a popular youtube and reverbnation trance musician. the 2nd goal is to convert the project files into a rhythm based music game.

as soon as i have some more spare time (usually when i'm rendering an animation in the background) i'm intending to have a longer look at your gallery, i'm sure there are many more of your photo's i'll want to add to my favorites folder.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0