Join my new Flickr group, "Artifacts"

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Please join my new group, if you're on flickr:

Artifacts

This group is dedicated to photographs that bear clear evidence of photographic tools and processes. Lens flare, unusual bokeh, sensor dust, light leaks, digital aliasing, damaged film, unusual chemical processes. Anything from tintype to high tech is welcome. We are not merely looking for your favorite lomography/lo-fi pictures, but rather for photographs that are as much about the process that created them as they are about their ostensible subject.

Thanks!

 

[dazedgonebye]

Interesting idea. I've joined and will give some thought to images that might belong.

Thanks,

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Cool, thanks!

I've always liked pictures that proclaim their artifice--figured I might as well start my own personal gallery of 'em.

 

[semordnilap]

i've got some i can add... always interested in process!!!

 

[Michael Markey]

Had a look ,left a comment. Interesting .

 

[robklurfield]

I'm there. Posted this shot and comment. An interesting concept Bob, and one that requires many of us to step down from our high horses and admit to being human and mistake prone. turn off the artifice to illuminate the artifacts that prove it's not real, that it's really memorex (or Tri-X).

all those dots in the region around the sky. some serious lens dust. thought it was on the sensor, but it's clean as a whistle. my 15/4.5's UV/IR filter on the other hand is NOT clean enough to eat off of. off comes the artifice. it's a photo and it shows. all that's missing is thumb intruding into the frame (easy to do with this lens).

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

You should feel free to explain the photo in the comments! Thanks for joining up.

 

[kshapero]

count me in

 

[Merkin]

what about multiple exposures?

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

sure, definitely! I will only casually be curating it...I'm allowing 2 per day, no reviewing on my part.

 

[batterytypehah!]

Heh. That might finally give me a place to unload a few rolls worth of 127 shots that I botched multiple ways. Dust in the chemicals and lost specks of emulsion, from using incompatible fixer, I think. The way those films curl you're probably going to see some Newton rings, too. Here's one that came out acceptable for my (as yet anemic) RFF gallery.

 

[shadowfox]

I have one for you:

Hint: Take a look at the water ripples near the bottom... or are they?

 

[charjohncarter]

I joined, but I warn you will get tired of my light leaks.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

heh...we'll see!

You guys have added some good stuff--thanks a lot!

 

[Merkin]

happy to. One can never be a member of too many flickr groups. Once I re-edit all of my holga shots, I will add some of those as well.

 

[Bingley]

Flare? Damaged negatives? Crazy bokeh? I am so there...

I'll join this evening when I get home.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

All you need is to suck at photography, and you're in! ;-)

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I joined. I have to fire up my WIN95 machine and run my FORTRAN RAW convertor for the DCS200ir files.

The Calibration Pixels for the KAF-1600 CCD array are preserved, but the Kodak drivers cut them out. Mine does not. They look like film sprockets.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I joined. I have to fire up my WIN95 machine and run my FORTRAN RAW convertor for the DCS200ir files.

The Calibration Pixels for the KAF-1600 CCD array are preserved, but the Kodak drivers cut them out. Mine does not. They look like film sprockets.

My hero!!!!

 

[maddoc]

artifacts like this, right ?