For a while HDR has been regarded as a sort of artificial or unrealistic school of photography.
It was frowned upon by the photography establishment and until now not seen as a legitimate form in its own right. Many such photographers thought that the extreme dynamic range possible with HDR made the photographs “unrealistic” and not true to reality.

Until HDR emerged, everyone was used to the fact that a taking a photo meant committing to a certain exposure. Anyone who has tried photographing outside from whithin a building knows that the final photo either shows a proper lighting of the interior OR the exterior. That is, either the interior darker details are visible and the outside is a white blur OR the outside bright details, clouds etc are visible and the interior details of the room are a dark blur.

Traditional photography means you have to chose. But in real life we don’t have to chose. The eyes adjust to the proper sensitivity according to where we focus. The combined experience is that we can see BOTH the details in the clouds outside AND the darker details of the interior room. HDR works the same way – you get the best of both worlds, and a photo that is closer to the experience that you actually had when you were there.

Trey is a nice guy with a mission to promote HDR photography. He runs a blog at stuckincustoms.com that has tens of thousands of visitors every day, but decided to help other HDR photographers spread their work and generate traffic to their sites. So he created HDRspotting.com which works as a traffic generation engine. It’s a community by invitation where members can upload and share their work.

I have posted numerous HDR photos to HDRspotting.com, and as a result thousands of people have now seen my photos of the fairy tale castles and landscapes that are so common in Scandinavia it’s almost hard to spot them. Here’s an example of what I mean: the lake pavillion in central Copenhagen. Visible from a unique angle this winter because of the prolonged frost that made walking on the lakes possible.

Enjoy!

Go see for yourself!

As i leaned to lift the cover from the pram my beer spilled unto my pants. I had managed to drink one sip. Again classic. Todays HDR is from another more successful day in the palm house of the botanical gardens. Enjoy!

“Ørestaden” is a newly built part of Copenhagen that used to be a desolate field on the island of Amager. That was before they built the Bridge of Øresund connecting Denmark and Sweden. At the time the idea behind Ørestaden was to create a huge area of urban dwellings for the growing population of the combined Copenhagen/Malmö region.
And so they built. Each new housing project more ambitious than the next. Each architect had his own idea of a magnificent building. Every square meter of allowed retailspace was jammed together in “Fields” – The largest shopping mall in Scandinavia. No cafes, no restaurants, no cosy little places to hang out. No-one thought about the urban area as a whole and what it takes to create what James Kunstler calls a place worth caring about.

Sadly Ørestaden now looks to become yet another ghetto. It’s simply not a place that anyone want’s to visit because it doesn’t speak to us. It’s bleak and inaccessible. From an architectural standpoint many of the buildings in Ørestaden are succesful. VM bjerget – “Mountain Dwellings” is an example of this, having won 4 international awards. Blame it on the recession, but apartments in VM -bjerget are now being offered for rent at reduced prices.

Art has many of the same characteristics as architecture, Not coincidentally the Danish School of Architecture is housed in the Royal Academy of Arts. So what makes some art more popular than other? Technical prowess, Depth, Originality, Visual aesthetics? Art may possess all these qualities yet still not hit home with the audience.

Whether we like it or not, the brand of the artist as well as the accessibility of his work is a deciding factor.
I feel comfortable owning a piece by an artist whose story and background I know, whose reputation is well known in general, whose art appeals to me and is easily accessible.
Does accessible mean that the art is shallow and has no depth? Ask David Hockney

The value of art has historically been closely linked to the story of the artist.
The new paradigm of art is really not new at all – The artist is responsible for maintaining and increasing the value of his art. Though storytelling, through promotion and any other means possible.

I am committed to this task, blogging is just one tool.
Enjoy todays Mirror Mirror (top).
Buy it here:
[wp_eStore_fancy2 id=10]

A few years ago I received 6 limited edition prints from this series as a gift. They now adorn the walls of my apartment and I can’t walk to the kitchen without getting a cheeky grin from Mick.
I think the great quality of Bents photos lies the intimacy they possess. They feel private, much different from the usual ad smiles I see on every billboard. They feel like the family portraits that also hang in the hallway of my aparment.

Intimacy is hard to come by as a photographer. But when the photographer turns subject and snaps a photo in the mirror, things start to get intimate. There’s something else present – that which escapes the photographer. A moment of solitude and privacy. When published, this kind of photo reveals what the subject wishes, not the photographer. This is true exhibitionism.

It’s located in the Meat Packing district of Copenhagen. Some of the district is now inhabited by artists, and I have my studio in a shared space called “Slagtehus 40” (Slaughterhouse 40) which opened only last summer.
As a former slaughtery it’s a rough space – walls covered with tiles, floors with epoxy to make it easy to clean off the blood from the cattle and swine being butchered here..
The place still smells like an animal. Partly from the traces of blood, partly from the catering firm housed downstairs. I have no idea what they’re making, but it doesn’t seem mouth watering.

My space is in the corner of a larger shared room, edges marked by tape on the floor.
It’s not huge, but I have enough room to work and store some of my previous pieces.
In the corner I have my desk on which I draw, sketch, blog and communicate using my mac.
My windows face the courtyard where in the summerevenings the hip young crowds gather in front of the bars “Karriere” and ” Jolene”.
The floor and walls is where I paint my acrylic works.

I like it here. It’s my space.

When it comes to worklife, I figure there are 2 kinds of people:

Type 1. Those that work the punch-in/punch-out job, and prefer it this way.
Type 2. Those that work the punch-in/punch-out job, and want to leave and be their own boss but feel they can’t.

Who feels more pain? Probably type 2. Pain comes from wanting what you cannot have.

There could be a trillion reasons why you might feel quitting just isn’t an option. Some common reasons are:

a. The mortgage due next week.
b. No time for moonlighting on my escape.
c. Fear of the unknown.

These are absolutely valid reasons, don’t get me wrong.

a. The mortgage is due, and if you’re like most people are, it has been due ever since you landed your first job. And as your paycheck increased over time, so did your mortgage. Net result – higher turnover in your household economy, but about the same level of free funds.
The constraint is the same as it has always been.
If you’re looking to change this, what you need is some more wiggle room in order to gain momentum for your escape. That means reducing your mortgage.

b. No time for moonlighting? Well, that’s why it’s called moonlighting – put in the hours if you’re serious about escape. Reducing time constraints is another option, but this may not be possible for you in your current job. Maybe the solution would be to switch to an interrim punch-in/punch-out job that is less demanding on your time. Going from 80 hours/week to 40 hours/week makes a big difference in your time schedule, but most likely won’t cut your paycheck in half.

c. But what’s on the other side? That’s for you to decide, but you probably have an idea, otherwise you wouldn’t feel this longing. Help yourself visualize the other side by describing what you’re aiming for. Most important – What is that you want to give to the world? What is it that you can do, that will make someone elses life better/easier etc?
What will your time schedule look like? What will your work environment be like? – a desk in a shared office space or working on the fly at the local café?
The more detailed, the less frightening.

Plan your escape and you will find the resolve to execute it.

best regards, Carl

Now is the time for all you fine art photography buffs to swing by the V1 Gallery in Copenhagens very own MEPA district – Kødbyen.
V1 is hosting a joint exhibition of works by two up and coming artists that both have an eye for the human form.

As the press material states, Matthew Stone is such a promising artist that The Sunday Times has named him the most influential British artist under 30. Norman Rosenthal – famed curator and organiser of the controversial “Sensation” exhibit at the Royal Academy – has compared Stone to a young Hirst.
In short, Stone is not your everyday amateur photographer.

Asger Carlsen is not a stranger at the V1 gallery. Although the Dane works and lives in New York City, he has guested the V1 six times in the past five years. I guess that’s what you call an in-house artist.

Carlsen contributes “Wrong” – a series of doctored photos that at first glance look like the everyday snapshots we all manage to catch on the holiday to Rome or at grandmas birthday. The point of entry for Carlsen seems to be to make the viewer question reality. Are things really what they seem? Carlsen creates morphed images that depict people with duplicate faces, an MC rider with wooden legs and beachscapes inhabited by huge styrofoam blobs.

Many of the photos inspire laughs and smiles, some are plain ugly and for some I think V1’s introducing text puts it accurately by using the phrase “I wish I could Un-see this”.

In my opinion Carlsens theme has been tested thoroughly before, and I am not incredibly shaken by the idea that someone possibly tries to sell me something or manipulate me everytime I open a magazine. A number of television and viral ad campaigns spring to mind already, just think of Carlsbergs ping pong penguins and you get the picture.
As far as contemporary relevancy goes, this is a bit 2005-ish.

I have to give Carlsen credit for his photshop skills and choice of motif. I can’t tell whether he decides beforehand and has a composition in mind or just sorts through his archive of snapshots and picks out which ones to work on.
I suspect it’s a little bit of both. Especially the works of people with wooden legs look preconcieved and must have been created by repeated shots at the same location and then a bunch of layer masking in photoshop.

Bottom line: Carlsens photos are interesting and funny. they inspire a moment of contemplation, but the concept
gets old fast, and I quickly wonder if the dog knows other tricks.
A few photos have a nice aesthetics about them, but the majority make me want to vomit. But if you’re into weird, then there’s plenty to indulge in here.

Whereas Carlsen doctors the surreal, Matthew Stone focuses on human reality – close up.
His photoseries “Bodylanguage” hides nothing as it explores the human shape. Stone molds landscapes by twisting his models in every which way. Most of his photos are set in a controlled lighting environment with clear reference to Man Ray and Mapplethorpe. In that respect there is not much new under the sun – or clothes.

Some of the more interesting works are photos set in a gridlike frame. These cubicle shaped grids are displayed on the floor and create a 3rd dimension that is interesting for a subject like photography. This effect is mirrored in the cropping of some of the wall hung photos. These create a 3rd dimension in itself, and the resulting cubes appear as though they had different photos on each side.

I find Stones’ landscapes intrinsically interesting – hypnotic in fact. They have a visual quality about them that sucks the viewer in. Details abound. The sharpness and resolution forces me to look closer and inspect every little goosebump on the thighs of these naked bodies.

Are naked bodies relevant in 2010? The controversy issue must be dead by now, but Stones bodyscapes invoke emotions and a sense of curiosity that can never be irrelevant. As far as aesthetics go – Stone’s got me hooked.

The exhibition closes May 1st. Opening hours: Wednesday-Friday: 12-18. Saturday: 12-16.

Enjoy!

I shot this video the other day: wondering what the famed Danish arctic explorer Knud Rasmussen would have spent his time doing during his trips up north.

Remember, this was before the time of the Jedi…

Knud now spends his days looking at the Baltic sea from Skovshoved north of Copenhagen.
His statue was placed there in 1963.

Hava a look and enjoy ;o)

This shot is of the Palace cinema multiplex in Copenhagen. Home of many great movie experiences..ahhh.

Enjoy!

From Photography by Carl Frederik Waage Beck