shake_the_shell: (Great Garbo 1)
2010-10-27 04:11 pm

NaNoWriMo and the art of photographic seduction

I, finding myself free of time and just enough courage and motivatoin, have signed up for NaNoWriMo this year. Those unknowing few who also bear the aspiration of being a novelist, or of a general literary disposition, can find out more information at their website here.
Quite simply, the goal is this: To write a first draft novel of 50,000 words in the month of November alone. Month of November means just that - you begin as soon as it's the 1st, and have to finish by the 30th. You can't have written at your idea (should you have one) prior to this, though ideas & plans for your tale are welcome (of which I have one).

So. Five delicious days to go. And then the games begin! I'm rather excited. It has been what feels like forever since I've had the intention of writing at one sole idea for any longer than say, an few hours. I left most of my writing drive behind for Art College & all it's stresses. Thankfully, this year of decisions has brought this great love of writing back to my anxious arms, and I have more than enough free time to pursue it at will, due to not having mounds of coursework. Write I shall; a whole 50,000 words. I'm getting giddy just thinking about it.

Averages work out at 12,500 words a week, roughly. That's 1666ish a day. I know this may sound an insane goal to some, I may sound less sane for being excited for this, but I truely am relishing the very idea. To be fair, the outlook for me isn't a scary one - in my gracious teen years, when I would spend at least 2 hours writing at my computer a day, I could easily knock out 3000 words in one sitting. After all, it's only a first draft. You are only expected to write, sponataneous and everything that comes to mind. If you do this, without hesitation, you'd be surprised at how much you can write in a short amount of time. Being a nippy hand with the keyboard helps also.
My only concern is some....personal issues, that may interfere with my little head, which is prone to creative blocks when there is emotional stress abound. However, the goal remains, as does my determination, at least to channel said concerns into something productive as opposed to a ball of withheld emotion. It seems to work when I write poetry & prose in my notebooks, so a transferal of tactics should sit alright. At least I hope.

I have also managed to get my blasted Diana's up onto deviantART, finally. That bloody scanner...less said, the better. Seeing as I'm boycotting Tinypic right now, any interested in seeing some shots of barley can have a gander at them on my account here and here. More incoming, as I have some others that need a clean up in the dust department.
However. I cannot express just how much of the feel is lost from these images when scanned in. I developed a few in the darkroom and was blown away. I was instantly seduced by the dreamy, soft, out of focus edges, the contrast, the delicious black & whiteness of it all. I was on the brink of hailing to the 120 Diana format only, screw those 35mm Canons of mine! I did regain my sanity - I do love my Canons. But I'm officially now a fully fledged lover of the Diana. I knew instinctively I would be; it was the edge I sought to bring into my photographic repetoire. It's a shame the in-the-flesh-developed copies can't be shared easier, as I am insistent that scanning them in just doesn't do the images justice.

Now all that is left to do is to convert my fellow £35 for Diana F+ w/o flash, why the hell not give it a whirl? Mr Moore, I'm looking at you...

shake_the_shell: (Waterhouse 2)
2010-10-14 12:16 am

Bare naked ladies

(I've already said much on this subejct at DA, but...aye.)

I have to wonder, as a professional artist who painted many a nude woman, what dear Waterhouse (wave at the avatar) would have thought about the images you find in the 'Artistic Nudes' catagory on deviantART.
I am in no way a prude, but it took a strong disposition at times to look through without grimacing in horror at the photographs being tagged as "artistic" of all things. Most of the images are what you'd imagine young horned-up couples sending to each other after posing in the mirror - that infamous photo of Vanessa Hudgens comes to mind. And this is just the mild stuff. Others are more blatant, and in reality are nothing more than soft porn. Why not call it what it is, instead of sending it out in such a mask?

It's that very reason that made me dubious about uploading a certain photograph. It is what it is - an artistic nude. Nothing explicit, carefully taken & mulled over. It became a harder decision because the subject was myself - I hesitated at having a photo of me amongst the tripe masquerading as something else.

Nevertheless, I did - those genuinely interested in its artistic merit can find it here. It's a self portrait, taken digitally *gasp* and edited with a texture layer in CS2. Highly unusual for me.

Unsurprisingly, it got comments within seconds of it being there, and of course, favourites without comments. It proved to me what I had jokingly knew would happen - if you want attention, get your kit off. There isn't anyone out there, even the most prudish of us, that isn't interested in at least having a peek at some naked flesh.
shake_the_shell: (Dearest Bosie)
2010-09-04 08:48 pm


I forgot I had an account there! But I do :)

I'm updating it slowly, I've only 14 or so photos up so far, but there are a few that aren't on Flickr as of yet; older images from Botanic Gardens in Belfast for instance. Feel free to add if you wish, I'm down with that (I think that's what the kids are saying these days...).

I desire to scan in my Diana F+ films, as I used up two. But the issue is, my scanner is 35mm only, and these are 120's - so much bigger than the usual negative I own. So. I've to use the other scanner in my father's room. Which I've no idea how to use. And I can't figure out because it is tricksy. And he's been to busy to show me as yet. Humph. I must wait patiently.