The annual March Madness Tournament is in full swing over at Flashkit.com, and I barely squeaked into the round of sixteen with this entry. In a rematch with NJP3, the voting was neck and neck for 2 days – he certainly brought some skills. I was lucky to escape to round 3, where I’m up against yet another mighty foe. No time to rest!

Todd Hinchman, 1989.
Straightup wallride in Indianapolis.

As great as this wallride is, I couldn’t keep my eyes off the deck art while processing the shot. Drawing on your griptape is a trend that, for the most part, ended with the 80s. However, through the wonders of modern technology we can obsess over Todd’s deepest teenage thoughts. His favorite bands (including our own, “Subject to Change”), girlfriend’s name, and even personal mantra are all on display for the world to see. Now, where are my paint pens…

Matt Gollnick, 1989.
A burst of flashes captures this layback on the indoor quarter.

I probably drew this in 1992, while a freshman in college.

Here’s a quicky from the sketchbook. Poorly executed, but I like the late-80s’Madchester‘ clothing on the guy.

After looking at this sketch, I’m actually glad I can’t remember what it was all about. Teenage angst – you gotta love it!

And what’s with that extra joint in his right arm?

In a world where photoshopping is acceptable verb usage, transparent photography loses a little bit of its magic. Though I suppose it’s hard to look at some and not think it’s marginally cool.

It’s simple to do. First pick a decent subject – a refrigerator, car hood, computer case – then place your camera in a stationary position. A tripod works best. Then take two photos; one of your subject closed, and one with it open. Some simple layering in PhotoShop will complete the composite. Peek-a-boo!

I remember drawing this in the early evening, waiting on a ride to a party. With awkward teenage energy I sketched this out in about 20 minutes, the whole time thinking of what lay ahead. But why Malcolm X, and why now? Maybe it was Black History Month in 1989, just as it is now. Maybe I had just seen Do The Right Thing. < --- Actually, it wasn’t out yet.

I made this a couple years ago while doing some PhotoShop tutorial work. As a first and only effort, the quality is lacking. I wanted to share it here for its cultural significance, albeit a shallow, trendy kind of significance.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

This was drawn in the early 1990′s while I was still living at 312 South Arbutus. I’m not sure what to make of this, but I have about five pages of similar work. The ‘Three One Deuce’ affected people in strange ways, and I was no exception.

I’m pretty sure this was sketched out in early high school (1989), probably from a shot in Rolling Stone or Spin.

This sketch was done in March of 1991 while visiting my friend Ian at Arizona State University. There’s nothing remarkable about it, other than it being 15 years old already!

A sampling style band logo from nearly ten years ago.

Every trip to the Barnes and Noble starts the same way for me: Looking through the ‘Art and Design’ section of the magazines. I look for a new Lurzer’s Archive, flip through the STEP and CMYK, all the while keeping my eyes peeled for something cool. Last week, Look-Look Magazine practically jumped off the shelf like a pet store puppy.

This zine is straight up creativity with no ads (more on that in a minute). The basic idea is to print reader-submitted art from young people. Simple enough, and the final product is amazing.

The cool thing is there are no ads. Well, there are four ads in the back, but the content has been submitted by the same young artists. Here is what Look-Look wrote about the Ad Gallery: “On top of giving us the money to make this magazine, they [the advertisers] go one step further and actually allow young people to create their ads. They are one of the things that is right with this world, and for that we thank them.” Very, very cool.

Look-Look has it all…painting, photos, poetry, essays, and more. Pick up a copy and support the kids yo!

I’d like to think that I can take decent photos (which I can), and that I’m on the level with other photographers who do this full time (which, of course, I’m not.) Proof of this smacks me in the face every time I run across an artist like Loretta Lux.

Her vision is somewhere between creepy and cute, and this somehow forces me to think about the children she captures. Where do they live? Why do they dress like that? Why don’t they smile? Her absolute control over lighting and color is Kim Jong-il-esque. In fact, I would be surprised if she wasn’t using a uranium-enriched 10D.

If you do a little digging, you will find out that Loretta uses a compsite technique to create these stunning visuals. First, she captures interesting settings, and then shoots her subjects with them in mind. This is one way she is able to control the overall palette. However, digital manipulation like this is poking traditional photography in the side with a sharp stick. When does traditional photography end and digital manipulation begin? Can these images be considered true photography? How will history view artists like this?

Whatever the answers to these questions may be, our only burden is to enjoy her fine work.