It's not Photoshop. And it's not mine, either. All the photography on this blog is mine, except this image, Temporal Form No.8. This is so wonderful, beautiful, inspiring, I need to make an exception and post this work. Ansen Seale, the brilliant photographer/artist/geek (you don't mind if I call you that, do you? I mean it in the best sense) developed a camera that takes slits of images, only one pixel wide. 1 pixel. For those of you not in the digital world, that's not at all wide. First he used to it record panoramic landscapes and virtual tours, then he noticed that artifacts or mistakes happened when something moved in front of the camera. He exploited the camera's inadequacies and found a new reality. He is the Dali of photography. Enjoy more at AnsenSeale.com.
Thanks to Kettle Art for the show!
image posted with permission. don't steal. ask.
1 comment:
Actually, the size of a pixel is completely relative, based on resolution. Typically, computer monitors display at something around 72ppi, or 72 "pixels per inch", which really means pixels per horizontal or vertical inch of real space. This is probably the frame of reference you're using. (Btw, resolution for printed work on paper hovers around 300ppi, as it's generally accepted that any additional resolution higher than 300 is not perceivable by the human eye). Saying that a pixel is tiny is somewhat innacurate considering that it is possible to have a file with, say, 1ppi, which would mean then that the image dispays each pixel as one inch wide. Not so tiny. So there really is no comparison between a digital pixel and a measurement in the real-life analog world without considering the calculation denoted by resolution.
Post a Comment