Photography in a recession

This is written with my accountant’s hat firmly bolted to my head. Try to read all of this please. No quitting. It’s important.

This will be the second recession I’ve seen in my lifetime. The first one was in the 1990’s and wound up with us having a shed-load of negative equity on our flat ("apartment" in U.S. speak) which took years to pay off. That flat was our debt pile. Rich and I were young and foolish, it was our first property, and we remortgaged and borrowed heavily to make it look like our dream home. I vividly remember our black bathroom with gold-plated bath taps. Holy crap, we had bad taste back then.

So here we all go again. Shortly we enter the “bust” part of the boom/bust cycle. Not feeling the pain yet? Don’t worry, you might have another six months of feeling flush with cash, but feel it you will. The wheel turns, and always spins back to the beginning. Nothing changes. Life just repeats itself endlessly in infinite cycles. The world will live to see another boom, but in the meantime, how do artists and photographers survive the next few years? With the rise of the internet and the rise of the cheap digital camera, the rise of freely available online photography, free software, free stock photos, even free porn, how will artists and photographers (of whatever genre) continue to make a living?

Now I’ll side with Jimmy D’s excellent article, and say they won’t. Those of us who are self-employed, and rely on photography either as our main or supplementary income, are going to suffer horribly in the next few years. There’s no chance now of Fluffytek going completely professional. Rich reckons the best he could ever manage is semi-pro. He can maybe earn a little on the side from photography via the occasional private portfolio, but he could never do this full time because the market is simply no longer there. We could sell pretty prints of course, but making your money back takes a long time. Equipment and studios cost a lot, and UK model fees have increased about 40% in the last year alone (either the inflation figures are wrong, or models have suddenly become very hungry.) TFCD models are of course the obvious solution to the latter problem, and although free art models appear to be plentiful in America, in the UK they are decidedly rare jewels. And considering the rise in the number of internet photographers, models can pick and choose, and may well (quite understandably) go where the money is, ignoring the quality of the photographer.

In the end, it all comes down to money. Everyone has to eat after all. But if the general public are economising and not able to afford your services, and collectors are hanging onto their cash because their jobs are in jeopardy and they have to feed their families, then without your photographic passion actually funding itself, you’re going to be hard-pushed to rely on your art to pay the bills, and you simply won’t have the money to pay models.

So what now? Do you give up art and become a plumber? (Always a lucrative profession in the UK as decent plumbers are very hard to come by.)

Well, I think the priority should definitely be to add more strings to your bow. It may be that your art has to take a slightly lower priority than before, but that doesn’t mean you have to give up on it.



If you do decide to stick at photography or art as a source of income, then you should formulate a series of personally tailored strategies. Here is my Ten Point Action Plan (please feel free to add or subtract from the list):

1. Practise, practise, practise. In a recession, only the very best artists survive, and even they find it tough. Your work can’t be mediocre. It has to be outstanding, it has to be unique, it must stand out from the crowd, and your reputation must be flawless.

2. Barter with models more – don’t agree to the first price they charge. Beat them down a bit (fiscally speaking.) Don’t agree to the first price they quote, and try proposing a lower “all-in” price including travelling. Approach potential TFCD models and really work at booking them. If in doubt, rely in that all important male persuasion device, “charm.”

3. When you do shoot models, plan your shoot in advance as much as you can, practise lighting (Rich and I do this all the time), take less coffee breaks during the shoot, and really push your models to get the best out of them, particularly if you are intending to sell prints from the shoot. Your models won’t mind if they are genuine professionals – they will expect to work hard for their fee. And make sure your modelling release is in order. Get it checked by a lawyer if necessary.

4. Run teaching courses – always a lucrative little money-spinner if you have the time, although this is nigh impossible if you have a day-job like us. Consider providing Photoshop courses, lecturing, teaching at schools or colleges, or small tailored courses for leisure photographers – heaven knows there are an abundance of those around nowadays.

5. Compromise your principles and consider other genres. Yes I really did say that. Now I’m not proposing that everyone takes up shooting hardcore porn, largely because I don’t believe there’s a market out there for that either (too many videos and Red Tube nowadays. All the pornographers are going bust.) But you might like to think laterally for a bit. Consider other genres and a lower profit margin, such as landscape photographs for local calendars, putting on local exhibitions, collaborating with other photographers to run special events, pimping your prints, shooting private portfolios for couples, approaching magazines, even (*shudder*) bulk topless glamour piccies for 50 quid each for the lads’ mags. Whatever it takes.

I know one of our local photographers, an outstanding portrait photographer, is now reduced to going round local yummy-mummy craft fairs and charging £10 a time for quick portraits. Desperation indeed. Yes she has abandoned both taste and principles, but it’s a tough market out there. If photography is your income, you have to earn some money somehow. (I’ve used suggestions that are relevant to our little UK rural area – please do suggest as many other money-making ideas as possible. Yes they might be offensive to some, but this is reality.)

6. Advertise. Perhaps online (via Google Ads if you can afford it), fluff up your web site, get your Google search rankings as high as possible. Advertise in the local press, offer bargain lower-price offers to lure customers in (you can charge more later for extra prints or portfolio books), follow up all leads, network, make cold-calls. Do your research – whatever works for your genre and for your local area.

7. This one’s a no-brainer. STOP SPENDING MONEY. Make do and mend. If you are making a loss from your photography, then you cannot afford to use your plastic to buy that extra light, that big A3 printer, that groovy new scanner. And most importantly, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES BORROW TO FUEL YOUR ART, no matter how much you love it. IT IS NOT YOUR MONEY.

8. If your photography is not profitable, or at least breaking even over the year, then consider taking another job. This is the route we are currently going down. If you are self-employed like us, it is advisable to have your fingers in as many pies as possible. For example, I am going to take a deep breath and compromise my principles and actually try to sell some of this inane waffle that I sprout on here. I certainly don’t want to do it, but I have no choice. Bills have to be paid. Internet journalism beckons, no matter how much I hate the idea.

9. FACE REALITY. Be honest with yourself, no matter how hard this is. Draw up a list of how much you bring in, how much you spend, how much you owe, and then formulate a budget and STICK TO IT. Figure out just how much profit you made last year. And if it’s clear that your business (whether full time or supplementary) is never going to work out, rather than run up horrendous debts, be honest and get out before it takes you down with it.

10. Devise a long term survival strategy for the recession. A Five Year Survival Plan if you like. Everyone has different skills they can sell. Take a deep breath, summon your inner muse, and take some action. Start thinking and innovate. Stop wallowing in self-pity and actually DO SOMETHING.

Lastly, please don’t think, “Mmm. Nice post Lin, quite interesting. A bit boring but some good points.” And then treat this as a mildly entertaining read and promptly forget it.

I have given up five hours of my life to write this.

Why? Because it’s IMPORTANT DAMMIT!

If you don’t formulate a plan now, and actually ACT on it, how exactly are you intending to survive the next five years?



Images are of U.S. model Clayre KcKinnen.

Amoebas and Elephants

Contrary to popular belief, having a brain tumour doesn't usually make you feel poorly. I always get immensely irritated when people treat me as if I'm ill, or diseased. I feel perfectly O.K., and I lead a completely normal life thank-you-very-much. On the whole, I feel absolutely fine. Healthier than you do probably. If my tumour is happy, then I'm happy.

And yet...sometimes I do become aware that I'm not invincible, that something is definitely not quite right. I feel...odd. No other way to describe it. Not quite here. Other-worldy. In particular, I lose blocks of time. Whole periods of my memory have been erased. The early years of my marriage, for example, are all gone. This might be a good thing actually – the first few years of our marriage were apparently very stormy. And my medium and short term memory are also pretty ghastly. Rich has to constantly remind me of stuff that happened yesterday. I'm like the fish with a three second memory.

When I was growing up I used to be incredibly scared of losing my memory. It was a phobia of my youth. I used to think I would rather go blind than lose my past. Our memories are the essence of who we are...if you forget your experiences, then it makes you a lesser person. You're just a blank slate. You forget how you came to be the person you are.

The good news is that memory loss is actually completely painless, emotionally speaking. Because you can't remember past events, you're not upset about not remembering, because you simply can't recall what you should be upset about in the first place.

Another advantage is that whole periods of my sordid past have been completely erased. Also a good thing. And memory loss comes in very handy for inter-marital arguments too. If I get angry with Rich then I don't stay angry for long, because I never remember what we argued about originally. So having an addled and malfunctioning brain is exceptionally good for family harmony. Plus there's the added sexual bonus too. Every time is always the first time for me 'n' the studly Mr Fluffy. I literally never remember it being this good, so I am constantly surprised and blown away by his sexual prowess.

Alas, this memory loss issue will remain with me for the rest of my life. My doctors tell me it will probably get worse too. I'm not especially bothered by this, largely because I know I'm not going to remember being upset about it. It's not going to affect my intelligence or my identity. It's just inconvenient, that's all. And of course, as with most disabilities, you do learn to work around the problem.

Organisation is the key to leading a normal life. I have learned to write things down. Blogs are excellent recorders of stories (part of the reason I started one in the first place.) And I live by lists. I write lists for everything, and stick post-it notes all over the house. Rich designed his day-job software to have sophisticated calendaring and reminder services, so I get emailed every day about specific things that I need to do. For example, tomorrow's messages read: Monday- give cat anti-fur-ball gel, shave pussy, evening shoot. So if I end up with a completely bald and shitty cat on Tuesday, blame Rich's software not me. I just do what the emails tell me to.

If you have severe memory problems, then the only long term memories you will have are the stories told by your loved ones. Rich has to tell me the same stories over and over again. He knows I won't recall it next week, but I swear he never ever complains about being a regurgitating tape recorder. He's a fabulous chap, you know. Who else could possibly be so endlessly patient with me? (Of course, I don't actually remember his faults, if indeed he has any, which I'm sure he doesn't.)

I would also like to submit that photography is of critical importance to brain tumour patients. It is essential to take as many photos as you can, all of the time. I have issued the kids with cheap digital cameras, and they snap anything and everything. They are my memory storage devices. I will be able to remember them growing up through the eyes of the camera. My life's stories are stored on computer. My memories are in digital. If memories are who you are as a person, then my psyche is on my hard disk drive, laid bare for all the world's hackers to see.

Incidentally my appalling memory makes me an excellent agony aunt and confession storage repository. Please do feel free to tell me all your sordid, deep, dark secrets. I can guarantee I won't remember them in two days time. On the other hand, if I seem vague or repetitive in email conversations with you, this isn't because I'm stupid, it's simply because I am a fish.

Now I'm sure some of you are feeling sorry for me by now. This is a mistake, caused by your own inbuilt fear of losing your identity. Truly, you should never feel sorry for people with memory loss. Chances are they are happier than you are.

Thanks to my tumour, I'm in a constant state of contentment.
Amoebas are happier than elephants, let me tell you that.

The advantage of a bad memory is that one enjoys several times the same good things for the first time.
Nietzche



Amy, in high key.

The Art of Bullshit

Long term readers will recall that my oldest son is studying for an art scholarship at the esteemed Hogwarts School for Witchcraft and Wizardry. This is only awarded if they can detect that he is “truly gifted” (whatever that means) and that he “spends the majority of his leisure time creating art.”

Please note that photography doesn’t count as art, according to the Hogwarts examiners (don’t get me started!), although <10% of his portfolio as computer graphic design is apparently acceptable. Considering he spends 90% of his free time doing graphic art, at least some of his play-time can be used. He really shines at CGI stuff, that’s where his talent lies, but he needs this scholarship to prove to himself he can do it, and he quite rightly thinks that formal art training will help him on his future quest to be the world’s greatest graphic artist. (He’s only twelve. I bet you had big aspirations at twelve, if you remember that long ago.)

Anyhoo, next week is the week it all happens. He has an exam of course, comprising drawing still-life art under time constraint, and then he has to explain and critique a random painting which is given to by the examiners. In addition, he has to present his portfolio next week to the external examination board, and after they have judged it, he has to spend fifteen minutes speaking about his own work and critiquing five of his best images. According to his art teacher, the tea-addicted-and-very-vague Professor Trelawney, whether or not he succeeds in his quest for ultimate glory depends largely on how many times he uses the word “inspired” in his speech. Big help. Thanks for that, Professor.

If he gets the scholarship, he will of course get major kudos within the school, plus a special red cloak and presentation ceremony in the magnificent city cathedral, the award of “a scholar,” adoration from practically every female in his year (chix dig the scholars, and the red cloak, AND especially they dig blond-haired-blue-eyed-teenage artists…this, I suspect, presents strong motivation in his quest for ultimate glory.) Oh and I’ve promised him a new graphics card for his computer too, if he gets it. (Bribery works wonders - we get a not-insignificant discount on his astronomical school fees if he succeeds.)

The poor lad is completely terrified, to be honest. He’s only twelve, and this is the scariest thing he’s ever done in his entire life. He’s worked his little ass off for the last six months, producing some very fine art for his age (all things considered) and I am praying he gets this, not for the money (which in the end, is unimportant), but because he wants this so badly that he can taste it. Can you remember how fragile your ego was at twelve?

His work is pretty good for his age, I think. His technique is excellent, but his oral presentation needs a miracle.

We have one solitary weekend left to prepare for the big speech on his port on Monday.

"What are you going to say?" I asked him tonight.
“Mum,” he said, “I’ve got nothing. Is it too late to quit?”

So this weekend appears to be a crash course in the Art of Artistic Bullshit. He needs to learn how to analyse his own work. They want to know why he produces the surrealist-style art he does. He hasn’t got a clue to be honest. When I’ve asked him he says, “It just spurts out of me. I don’t know why. I just sit down with a pencil, and two hours later I have a picture.”

“Well, say that then,” I said.

But according to Hogwarts, honesty will not get him the prize. He needs self-awareness, psychoanalysis, arty-speak. He needs to fake inspiration from somewhere. When asked how he feels about his art, he looks like a startled rabbit. Complete blank. No clue at all. Nada.

How do you learn how to pimp your art in a weekend? How can a twelve year-old learn to sell himself to a big, scary examination board?

Can you fake a description of inspiration? Why isn’t the truth enough? Why can’t he stand up and say “I have no idea why I draw this stuff. Judge me on my results, not what I say?”

Why does bullshit matter more than the art itself?

All advice and tips, gratefully received. We need help, folks.

Panicking, we definitely are.

The Price To Pay

A UK survey last year found that over one in ten female students uses “the sex industry” to help pay study fees, by which they are apparently referring to glamour and nude modelling. Now I strongly object to Fluffytek being labelled part of the sex industry, on SO many different levels. I feel we are part of the art world, but I know many of you will just tell me I’m kidding myself.

Truth be told, no matter whether we are labelled artists or, heaven forbid, pornographers by the public, many of the models who have worked with us in the past have done it not for the art, not for the empowerment and to make themselves feel beautiful (although this may well be a side effect, and they may use these reasons to justify what they are doing to themselves, family and friends), but simply for the money. To students who are trying to put themselves through university, who are on the breadline, taking their clothes off for a couple of hours is lucrative – better paid than sweating at the local McDonalds, that’s for certain.

Sure, nude modelling is risky and scary if you’re a newbie and you don’t know the photographers or the way the industry works, but once you’ve build a reputation as a good model, checked the references and become used to working with reputable photographers, then you can earn a tidy sum per month, which will help with living expenses and college fees.

Of course there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that, and we really hope that models feel comfortable, trusting and happy working with us. We really try to ensure we look after them, that they have fun, that they realise how beautiful they are, and that they have helped create breathtaking art.

But…there has to be a but…how many of these young women have actually thoroughly thought through just what implications nude modelling will have on their families and friends?

Some models I know haven’t told their parents they model nude because the parents would have a blue fit. Some have been ostracised by their university friends when they have confessed to modelling naked. Almost all university-age models we have come across admit that nude modelling negatively affects their relationships. One young and very popular model eventually ended up in the divorce courts, not a result of shooting with us, I might add – the jealousy of seeing his wife splattered all over nudie magazines became too much for her hubby to bear.

And then there’s the career implications. Most models who supplement their income with nude modelling are very confident, well adjusted and happy to be shooting with us. They enjoy themselves and they are good at their work. But I strongly suspect that many do not think about the possible effects of this part-time job on their long term future career.

We have had several models who explained that they were modelling to pay their course fees whilst they were training to be teachers. Several have wanted to work in childcare with the young. A couple of models wanted to go on to careers in prestigious corporations. One was a lawyer who was training for the bar. They didn’t think nude modelling would conflict with this at all. Because they feel so natural in front of the camera, because there’s nothing unnatural or wrong about showing your beautiful body for the purpose of art, then they think this means that there is no risk of discrimination in the future. They think that if they choose a pseudonym and try not to show their face very much, then they can avoid the risk of being recognised.

This is just plain naïve. Sweet, but naïve. I specialise in employment law, I have frequently seen cases where a teacher has been fired from a school because her pupils have found naked pictures of her on the internet, which she took many moons ago when she was young and trying to support herself with modelling whilst she studied.

The real world doesn’t see nude modelling as art. It is biased, discriminating, judgemental. It thinks you are working in the sex industry, and that this means that you have unsavoury and unwholesome morals. Let me spell this out for you, in simple plain English, as your Aunty Lin, unofficial lawyer and employment counsellor:

1. Be very, very sure that nude modelling is what you want to do.

2. Don’t do it just to earn money, as a sideline to help with your studies, unless you are absolutely positive (and you have researched it thoroughly) that you are embarking on a career where naked pictures of yourself on the internet will not cost you your job when (not if) you are recognised. That means no childcare, no working with minors, possibly no professional career either. Because I model nude, I will never be able to become a judge now. And if my accountancy profession find out, I would be kicked out of that too. (That’s O.K. incidentally, I knew what the price would be, and it was worth it, IMO.)

3. Realise that at some point in the future, your nude pictures WILL be found. Even if you have a different modelling name, it makes no difference. The truth will come out one day, make no bones about it. It’s easy to find out the real identity of someone on Google, and it doesn’t matter if you’re using a false name. Don’t believe me? Think you’ve covered all your tracks? You’re wrong. I’ve done it loads of times. If you know what you’re doing on the search engines, it’s not difficult, trust me.

4. You must be sure that you’re not going to be ashamed in the future of your images, that the man you haven’t yet-met-but-might-one-day-marry won’t mind that you were once “Juicy-Lucy, fetish model extraordinaire.” That your parents support you (yes your parents’ opinions are still important even if you are over twenty.) And that you won’t ever want to embark on a profession where you might get fired one day because you used to model nude.

By now some of you will either think I’m exaggerating, scaremongering, or worse. Lord knows I wish this were the case, but I’m not.

Nude modelling is a double-edged sword. You get to feel beautiful, to create art, and to have a higher degree of financial security. This is wonderful of course, but please remember that this comes at a price which must be paid at some unspecified time in the future.

Just be sure it won’t be too expensive.



Rachel T.

Cure for the winter blues

Yesterday was supposed to statistically be the worst day of the year. The 21st January is when most people are most depressed, on average throughout the year. Considering what happened to the world stock market yesterday, this may well be true. But in actual fact the reason is chemical, not (just) financial.

We’re animals, so we’re supposed to be hibernating at this time of year. There’s less daylight, it’s cold and thus our metabolisms run slower. Our bodies want to hibernate, snuggle up in a nice warm comfy rabbit hole and go to sleep. A hundred years ago poor Russian peasants used to hibernate every winter, in order to stay alive during the winter months when food supply was scarce. They woke up once a day to eat, and slept the rest. This winter sleep was called lotska. (Sounds like a good way of avoiding the market crash to me.)

Nowadays, we don’t sleep as much as we should, of course. We must work, and because of the nature of modern society, we have to keep going regardless. Depression at this time of year is very common. Seasonal affective disorder is rife. Shorter days and longer hours of darkness in autumn and winter cause increased levels of melatonin and decreased levels of serotonin. The imbalance of these two hormones creates the biological conditions for depression.

The problem is caused by a cute little serotonin transporter called SERT, which is a throbbing little molecule that pumps serotonin back into cells. In the winter, the horny SERT becomes hyperactive with desire, and a little over-enthusiastic in its performance. The end result is that the hormone is sucked from the junction between neurons, called the synaptic cleft, much too quickly, resulting in a completely unsatisfied hormone imbalance, and those deeply frustrating seasonal blues.

Anyhoo, if any of you are still awake, you are doubtless on the edge of your seat, dripping with anticipation and longing to learn just what you can do to flog those sexed-up little SERT’s into submission. (Right? Right? Is anyone still reading this?)

Bright Light therapy can of course help with SAD, because of the increased vitamin D supply. But if you can’t afford a lamp, or if you can’t get out in the garden or get some exercise and some sunshine regularly, then may I recommend vitamin D3 supplements. Plus magnesium, B6 and High quality fish oil (EPA/DHA) daily, or just eat fish several times a week. The fish intake is critical. If you don’t get enough omega 3, you are going to screw up your body big-time, I promise you. People who have the right omega 3:6 ratios in their body rarely get depressed. Are you a vegan? If so, eat flaxseeds and walnuts every day instead.

Of course you have to be boring and live sensibly. You know the drill. Eat regularly, keep your glucose levels steady, no sugar, less saturated fat, more veggies, eat good food and not rubbish. Oats for breakfast are known as nature’s anti-depressant, so porridge is good mood food if you eat it. Chucking plenty of lemon balm in your cooking is a great stress reliever too.

O.K. enough of the nutrition stuff. (Once I get started it’s complete verbal diarrhoea, I swear. For the love of all that is good and sacred in the world, keep me OFF the subject of food.)

Lastly, my final prescription for perfect happiness? Lots of snuggling up in bed with your loved one. Steamy, raunchy, unbelievably good sex with oodles of orgasms is the perfect cure for those winter blues.



What? You mean you didn’t come here for a science lesson, or to hear about my sex life? O.K. I admit Pirate Maiden may go some way towards cheering you up too.

It’s all about me, me, me

Thanks for yesterday's comments folks, which really got me thinking...

Why is ego so important in art nowadays?

Once upon a time, photographic art was something that was commissioned, paid for. Most of the famous painters throughout time were paid to paint, and were directed in what they produced. I guess professional glamour, portrait photography and so forth, would fall under this bracket today. Your client's needs dictate the direction in which the art goes. Effectively the art is produced to a spec, whilst allowing the artist to experiment with his art within those limits.

But what about the humble and invariably destitute art photographer? He doesn’t operate within any limits, only those of his imagination. How fabulous! But he doesn’t get paid either. Do any of you art-nude photographers make a decently monthly sustainable wage from shooting fine-art nudes? No don’t bother answering that. I can hear the cynical laughter from thousands of miles away. Nowadays such commissions are extremely rare.

In these days of the internet-focussed art world, most of today’s art produced by the ordinary average artist doesn’t result in guaranteed payment. Nowadays artists are judged by results, on how good they are. It has a strong psychological element. Artists are expected to express their soul in their art, and they are judged accordingly. Only if a photograph is outstanding not just technically, but also conveys depth, emotion, a message, only then does a photographer stand a hope making the grade of “an artist.” What does this painting of a nude say about the artists intent and motivations? What was he inspired by? What was he feeling when he painted that?

Wow. What incredible pressure. No wonder an artist is nervous about showing his work. If an art critic says that photograph is crap, then it’s not just the image that is crap, it’s like saying the whole of the photographer’s psyche is a failure too. No wonder most photographers are nervous when their work is published. It’s like putting your emotional guts on the firing line. The slightest criticism could result in the poor photographer questioning not only his art, but his worth as a human being too.

Sure, a photographer may say, “I don’t care what you think. This is my vision. I am my work. Everything you need to know about me is in my art. It’s who I am. If you don’t like it, don’t look at it.” And that’s fair enough, and I admire an artist who is mentally strong enough to genuinely feel that. But all too often, it’s just words, and the artist feels crushed and twisted up inside. An artist is only human, and the ego is fragile at the best of times. And there’s the time element too. If a photographer who has spent years of dedication and passion to produce a portfolio of images, and then to have them rejected by potential galleries and slated by critics, or worse still, totally ignored, then it’s enough to make even the most passionate photographer consider quitting and taking up knitting instead.

Of course, the opposite can apply. You can have an artist who is effectively so supremely self confident about his work that it borders on narcissism. Some artists have an inordinate fascination with themselves. Their ego is so bloated that they think they are practically perfect, and derive an almost erotic gratification from admiring their own work. And that’s perfectly wonderful too, IMO. All the self-help books and shrinks in the world teach you to love yourself. And self-love can be great for your art. Make no bones about it, if you are confident that you produce outstanding work, then it is much more likely that you will be able to convince others that’s it’s fabulous too. The most effective marketing tool in the world is self-confidence.

So should we all start buying self-help books and brainwash ourselves into thinking we are all Picasso? Should you sort out your emotional self-doubts, get some therapy, and then this will make you a better artist?

Is it better to have self-love rather than no-love? Arrogance or humility?

There’s no easy answer to these questions. A photographer is not a trained shrink. He can’t be expected to psychoanalyse himself every time he makes a photo, and consider how society will judge him if he shot that nude in that particular way. He shoots an image by way of experimentation, he re-creates the vision that is in his head. If he thought about the feelings and reactions of others all the time, then he’d be so paralysed by fear that he wouldn’t shoot anything at all. Although arguably his self-doubts and fragile ego probably make him a better artist. Angst is a powerful motivator of outstanding art. Humble photographers may well produce better photographs that arrogant ones. Think of all that juicy consuming passion and angst inspiring your art, flowing through it. All that wonderful emotion captured in your work. Mmm…

However, it IS important to keep a balance between self-confidence and self-doubt. Worrying about critics or courting approval of others puts a dangerous amount of power in the hands of your viewers. As Mr Wood so eloquently said in yesterday's comment, "You have the CHOICE to let these negative things weave their way into your life or not."

Fear can paralyse your artistic development. It’s not possible to please everyone all of the time, no matter how good you are. So just be yourself. You are who you are. Forget about everybody else – don’t get distracted by the background noise.

Just get on with doing what you do. The business of creating.

“Painting is a faith, and it imposes the duty to disregard public opinion.”
Vincent van Gogh



Claire-Louisa.

The Worm Turns

I appear to have been going through a mini-metamorphosis this week, particularly with regard to my writing. This could be to do with my impending radiation, but I suspect it’s more to do with photographic happenings around me. There has been an explosion of plagiarism (both photographic and written) in the last few months or so. Plus a rise in bitchiness, back-biting, censorship, and general under-hand tactics. In other words, typical politics in the photographic world.

IMHO, this greatly detracts from the ability to create. In theory, artists and writers should be able to shut out the world, ignore other folks being conniving and mean, and continue blissfully creating their own art to their heart’s content. But in practice, even the most thick-skinned artist or writer will be affected negatively by politics. Other people’s shit gets to you after a while, no matter how much you try to ignore it.

So I have spent an entire week thinking. Really THINKING about the photographic world, both literary and image-wise. I have been taking a step back, analysing the situation, looking at others’ behaviour on the forums and in the modelling world in general. What I have found is not good. Other than the friends I know and trust (which I am happy to say are quite a few), many people in this photographic world are nasty, manipulative, selfish. Worse, they are unprofessional. In the art business, and in the photographic art world in particular, I always believed in the higher ideals of professional courtesy.

As a qualified lawyer and an accountant, I have been a professional for over twenty years. I have become used to people sticking to standards of behaviour, both high ethical standards, and courtesy to others at all times. I expected the same from the photographic art world. From what I have seen recently, I can only conclude I was hopelessly naïve.

In the end it comes down to one simple question:

How do I develop a thicker hide?

(Apologies for the negativity folks. Clearly I need a vacation.)



This is Amy from last week's shoot. She really doesn't realise just how pretty she is, which makes her all the more charming of course.

Ten Random Things Game

Well, I’ve dreading this for nearly two years, and it’s finally happened. One of my (non-photographic and thus anonymous) bloggie friends D. has tagged me for the ten random things game.

One of the daft little bloggie games that is going around the internet at the moment is where bloggers tag each other with memes. Now I don’t mean “tag” as in assigning categories to a photograph or in the MM sense, I mean “tag” as in the kiddie game of “Tag ! You’re it!”

Bloggers tag other bloggers to write ten random but very personal things about themselves in the form of a list. Although I've been writing a blog for quite a while, no one's ever done this to me - until now.

So here goes:

1. When I was about twenty, I had OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder) pretty bad. To the extent that it seriously interfered with my daily life e.g. I used to spend hours lining up shoes, and had to turn the light on and off twenty two times before I could get into bed. I managed to eventually crush it without medication. My father had it. My middle son has it. Damn genetics.

2. The most erotic thing about a guy is his hands. Long tapered fingers really turn me on. Artists’ hands. Yummy….

3. Conventional good looks are completely irrelevant to me. (One of the reasons I’d make a terrible photographer.) I find a guy irresistible because he makes me laugh, because he is profound, because he is incredibly intelligent, and brilliant at whatever he does.

4. I am addicted to brussel sprouts. Unsexy, I know. Boy did that kill the mood.

5. Ten years ago I thought Anne Geddes was pretty good art. Well, there goes my artistic street cred. Yup …I can see it…..there it goes, toddling off down the street….bye, bye. (Melvin you have my permission to shoot me now, and I don’t mean photographically.)

6. I gave up being a criminal lawyer after devoting two weeks of my life to helping defend a crazed loon who wore a black cloak, thought he was Jesus, and was prosecuted for buggering a donkey. I mean, life’s too short, right?

7. I have a laundry fetish. Despite being a feminist for most of my life, a high-brow, power-hungry, fast-track career girl with two degrees who is a complete workaholic, I just lurve to wash and iron clothes. I sniff all the fabric softeners in the supermarket. No really, I do.

8. My most erogenous zone is the back of my neck.

9. If I hadn’t taken up nude modelling, I would have gone on to be a judge this year (I've had a long time to get used to dealing with loons)

10. I have a modelling alter-ego called Caroline (which is my middle name). Caroline wears a long blond wig, and does more….um….adventurous modelling, shall we say. I think I’ve only posted one of Caroline’s photos on here, ever. And that’s probably one too many.

Now, I'm supposed to inflict this on five other bloggers. Hmm, kinda difficult to choose because many of my online bloggie buddies wouldn’t want to play this, because they prefer to keep their private lives, well, private. So I’m going to hazard a guess as to five folks I really want to know more about, and hopefully won’t mind too much: Jimmy D (glamour photographer to the stars) and Dave Levingston (amazing dance, landscape nudes and some rather fetching nekkid kitchen photos.)

And as for the girls, I’m going with three great writer/models: Lela Rae, Orixx and Unbearable Lightness.

So folks …wanna play? Or “are ya chicken, McFly?"....

Jenvy and Diablo, horsing around last year.

(R4): Shooting For The Wrong Audience

O.K. Let me first state I am not a photographer. I am but a lowly soon-to-be-ex-model. What do I know about what constitutes art? I am merely one of those 99.9% of the uneducated public out there. I am not one of the photographic elite. I am untrained, ordinary. I am outside The Club, so to speak.

Secondly, has everyone read the editorial of Lenswork magazine this month? If you have received your copy and just skimmed the pretty pictures and then chucked it in the corner, then GO READ IT.
A brilliant piece of philosophical writing about the state of modern fine art photography. (One day when I grow up, I want to be able to write like that.)

Brooks Jensen argues that “too much of photography is about photographers.” He argues that there are too many trite mundane images out there, that “photography is so mechanical that it can seduce us into thinking that mere production (the capture and printing processes) is a creative act.” He makes the very valid point that too much of photography is taken up sweating over the photographic process, the subtleties of the type of paper used, the darkroom process, and for what? To be judged by other photographers, not the general population. Fine Art Photographers in particular shoot for their peers or for specialist collectors, not for the average Joe Bloggs like me who wouldn’t know the difference between different types of fine-art paper if it hit us between the eyes.

Jensen argues that there is little that is truly creative in photography any more, little that inspires and connects with non-artistic viewers. If the average person goes into the photography section of a bookshop, what does he find that really inspires him as Art?

I took up his challenge yesterday, in Norwich’s leading bookshop, and I have to (rather sadly) say that I agree with him. Books on photographic processes, fuzzy images, different bizarre displays of photographic techniques, some pretty landscapes. No obvious signs of outstanding fine art, that’s for sure. No wonder very few folks buy this stuff. I couldn’t find a single book I identified with. Not one that actually leapt off the page, and said “this book will change the way you see the world.” In other words, no real Art. I also went to an exhibition of modern art and photography over Christmas in Norwich’s leading art gallery. Same thing. Some unusual and bizarre stuff to be sure, and some very groovy colourful imagery, but nothing that stirred the soul. Nothing that I could lose myself in, until we reached the collection of old paintings in a corner of the gallery, at which point I came alive and spent way too much time having my mind blown by one of Francis Bacon’s paintings. But alas, the fine art photographs left me cold. Same ol, same ol. Lots of peculiar "arty" technique, but little that had real meaning.

Have photographers got so caught up in the making of photography, and the ease in which it can be displayed online, that they no longer concentrate on the “create” part of photography any more? How do you expect to make your art connect to the public, to connect with a viewer, to really GET THROUGH to your audience and really enrich their lives, if you are largely concerned with your work being judged by other photographers? Do you really think about the emotions stirred up by the image, or are you just concentrating on technique and the editorial process? When is a nude photograph just another B+W nude, and when does it really show beauty, meaning, soul?

Jensen says that “photography is not about light, as is so often proposed, but rather about life.”

So forget about competing with your peers for who produces the better picture, the better technique. Get on with the process of shooting photographic art that will generate emotion, that will give life to your art, and enrich the lives of the ordinary person like me who sees it.

And let me leave you with one last question from Jensen (particularly relevant for me at the moment also):

“If you knew you only had one day left to live, what [art] would you want to leave behind?”



Rich reckons he’d leave this one.
From this we conclude that his life's message to mankind is therefore located in my ass.

There are girls waiting to meet me!

At least that's what the site said.

I was browsing photographs, as you do on a lazy Sunday afternoon when, down the side of one of the pages, appeared a series of images of scantily clad and panting girls groping their breasts. Apparently these beauties were from my local village, and each was waiting to chat to me, date me and much, much more.

Wahoo!

All these girls in my local village, and all want to meet me for adult dating! How lucky am I?!

But, wait a moment. My village has about 200 people in it, most over the age of 50. There are probably about 20 girls that are of dating age, and unfortunately, this being Norfolk, England, they are all rather spherical. In fact I'm sure that none of them look anything like the girlies on the screen.

So much for being able to look up your location from your IP address and show location relevant adverts! Call Trading Standards, petition parliament, its a con, but oh, then I'd have to tell them where I saw the ad .... hmm...never mind...

Damn, there goes my secret affair with a young wannabe starlet who can't find a good man.

What a bummer!

Rachel T who is definitely not from round here.

The Biggest Show in the World

O.K. So it’s 4 a.m. and once again I’m racked with insomnia, courtesy of my head. Seven days straight with practically no sleep. Bleh. So you’re gonna get my sleep-deprived incoherent ramblings on…American Politics. Zzz…

Now, I know diddly-squat about American politics, although the BBC tells me, quite unobjectively, that it’s very important. The Race for the White House. The most powerful man in the world. Or woman, apparently.

I thought it might be interesting for you folks to see how your little goldfish bowl is seen from the outside. The world’s media is NOT objective. Quelle surprise.

According to the newspapers and the t.v. news here, the next president is going to be Democrat. Either Mrs Clinton , or Barack Obama. A white woman or a black man. That’s it. Gender, race and personalities are what hit the headlines over here. I have no idea who the Republican candidates are, or even if they exist. The UK media is predicting that the backlash against Bush will be so strong, that the Democrat candidate will win by a landslide. Who are the Republican candidates? Do they stand a snowball’s chance in hell? Personally, I think Arnold Schwarzenegger should be allowed to run. I can picture him saying “Asta La Vista Baby” to our Prime Minster (who SO deserves to be nuked by Arnie for turning this green and pleasant land into a totalitarian state.)

The U.K. media is concentrating on American personalities and celeb-backings. The U.S. policies (if they even exist) are glossed over, forgotten. Would Barack Obama actually stand a prayer without the mighty Oprah? Should Oprah be running the world instead? Maybe she does already. Now there’s a scary thought. Why do American politics appear to be run by the celebrity factor? What happened to …gasp…real policies? How do the candidates feel about global politics, green issues, energy, religion, security, science, space, healthcare? It’s all very well promising to save the planet (a sure-fire vote winner) but how will the changes in energy infrastructure be paid for? Does anyone running for president actually credit the American public with intelligent thought or do they assume Americans are soap-loving sheep who just like a bit of drama?

Is this concentrating on personality-before-policy a feature of global media-misreporting, or is this really what it’s all about? A contest between a black man who is not actually black (but pimped by a chat-show-queen), or a woman who is so dry, brittle and power-hungry that she’ll stoop to nothing to rule the world? And if it’s personality that counts, do you really want to give the global domination of the world to a woman who can’t even keep her husband in check?

From an accountant-like-me’s point of view, I'll side with the economists who say the elections should be all about the economy. If the global economy is ever going to grow, then whoever wins must find a way to reverse the catastrophic failures of the Bush presidency, notably the screwed up and overly aggressive attempts to use hard military power, and the bovine attempts at diplomacy. The world needs free trade. As far as I can tell, none of the candidates so far have given a hoot about free trade, whether it be Republicans mooting blocking immigration, or Democrats waffling on about the need to prevent jobs going offshore. Frighteningly, Mrs Clinton has even talked about re-writing the North American Free Trade agreement, which was one of Bill’s main achievements in the first place. Why is it that she appears to be forgetting her husband’s mantra of “It’s the economy, stupid?”

The only remotely objective source of information for me is, you guessed it, the blogosphere. I am following the varying political threads (with accompanying gorgeous naked laydeez) with great interest. Maybe someone out there could please do a tutorial for the non-Americans? You know, a basic idiot’s who’s who. Their policies, the world implications, and so forth. And subjective opinions too please. Who do you think should win and why?

After all, the whole world has a stake in the US elections in November. And it all depends on your vote. You’re not voting for yourselves. You’re voting for the entire planet.

So, if the world goes to hell-in-a-hand basket in 2009, I’m blaming you lot.




Lou-Lou.

Photoshop and Fantasies

Excruciatingly long post. Get yourself some decent coffee and draw up a comfy chair. We can’t rush this one.

About four months ago, Richard suddenly became allergic to Photoshop. Overnight he just stopped using it. Now this is the dude that is crazy about anything to do with computers, the dude who studies CGI, the dude that teaches Photoshop courses to local camera clubs, this is Mr Fluffy, skilled Photoshopper extraordinaire.

Once upon a time he used to idolise Roge who is a gifted photographic artist who spends hundreds of hours basically re-creating every molecule of skin of each of his models. Rich used to believe in the power of Digital Gem skin smoothing, he thought nothing of spending 15-20 hours after a shoot devotedly Photoshopping the images, so that each model could look perfect, better than her best, she could look at those pictures and think “Wow, I never knew I could look that good!” Indeed, without Rich’s fantastic Photoshop skills, I can guarantee I would not be a model today.

At one point, towards the latter part of 2007, his reputation actually reached the level of “respected photographer” to the extent that models would seek him out, ask him to do their portfolios, and not charge for images. We had (shock, horror) real genuine clients, who wanted the Mr Fluffy treatment. Ordinary women, middle-aged, imperfect just like me, who wanted to look good, feel sexy, and be empowered by the modelling experience. And Rich loved it. He loved the look on their faces, the widening of their eyes when they saw the images, the exclamation of “Damn, I’m hot, and I never knew it.” He really loves making women happy (it’s his biggest weakness, truth be told.)

So what the hell happened to our intrepid hero? Why did he lose his faith? Why did he cancel all the clients, back out of the professional side of things, and cancel all shoots?

Well, as I said before, the disillusionment set in towards the end of last year. He was under huge amounts of day-job pressure, and he simply didn’t have the time to spend 20+ hours post-processing per shoot. Not every shoot would take that much time, of course, but hey, we’re talking Mr Perfectionist here, aspiring to smooth-skin a-la-Roge, every wart and wrinkle removed until the client was happy and felt and looked 20 years younger. He was spending so much time in Photoshop that he had no time left for the family. It stopped being fun, and started feeling like work.

And so he cut back on post-processing. He realised that photography was not about creating an illusion, not about lying to the subject that she really DID look that good at 50, that her spotty skin was really flawless and that those several spare tyres and wrinkles didn’t actually exist. “Photoshop is not a cure for pigging out on chocolate,” he said.

He used Photoshop to smooth out the back-drop, and that was about it. The photos were still stunning of course, the lighting was beautiful, and he is a good enough photographer to position the model so that her less-than-optimal physical attributes were in shadow, or at an angle. And heck, I saw the results. They were really GOOD. The models didn’t look like marble statues - they looked REAL women. Their inner beauty showed. No they didn’t look as young, nor like they came out of a celeb-magazine, but their skin had texture, their wrinkles increased the character and beauty of the shot, not detracted from it. They still looked hot, and best of all, this was REALLY THEM (O.K. and a significant amount of photographic skill I grant you!) I was really much prouder of his new images than the previous heavily post-processed ones. Simply put, he was developing into a better photographer.



But some of the models did not like this. No, they did not like it at all. Some models who came for TFCD shoots were upset. They felt cheated. “Why haven’t you digitally smoothed my skin?” exclaimed one. “Why have I still got rolls of fat on my belly?” complained another. “This isn’t good enough. It’s not what I signed up for. I want 50 perfect photos. Do it again!” Another model even tried to post-process the images herself, by Photoshopping the skin. Of course this not only violated the model agreement, but it made Rich incandescent with rage. “What’s wrong with the images?” he fumed. “She looks gorgeous. Why can’t she see that this is really her, and that she’s beautiful as she is?” But this was not enough. Models wanted the Mr Fluffy treatment. They wanted to look like a T.V. celeb. They wanted to be other than they really were. They wanted the illusion.

And that was the turning point for Rich. He went through a phase where he cancelled everything, all shoots, he stopped looking at nude photographs, he even thought about giving up nude photography. And for a horrible moment, I really thought he was going to. But thank the Gods for this blog, and for you lot. I refused to let him quit, and I talked incessantly about photography and the bloggie community, so that he had no choice but to join in. And he came out of his shell, and started to chat to some of you again. And of course, I’ve been able to shove under his nose some stunning art produced by so many of you, which has re-encouraged him to start shooting again.

He began the same way as he did last time - by shooting me. And now I’m tentatively booking models again! He’s on the road to recovery. And he’s doing it his way. Minimal post-processing, unless HE wants to spend the time modifying the images, unless HE thinks it is necessary to produce better art. He’s not going to use Photoshop to “fix” the less-than perfect, just to make the women happy. He’s not going to lie. He going to do what the hell he wants. It’s his art, after all.

I guess this means that he’s going to produce significantly fewer publishable photos per shoot, and it probably makes him more of a purist. But I reckon it makes him a better photographer too. Certainly he’s a happier one.

Women need to accept themselves as real people, not expect the photographer to transform them into someone they would like to be. This is the difference between feeling empowered by your own real beauty, and not just living in a celebrity-fuelled fantasy.

You are beautiful because of who you are, warts and all.

Trust the photographer to capture that.



Pirate Maiden. Beautiful for both her looks and personality. No Photoshop required.

Good news for a change!

Off-topic post. Do excuse me. Normal arty-topic-posting to be resumed shortly.

Rich is pretty stressed out today. He’s putting out a software release, dealing with lots of customers at once, and both his parents. Plus he is also babysitting a tiny pink teddy bear with a plastic bottle of milk. If he doesn’t feed the bear, it glows bright red, cries pitifully like a baby and gets increasingly loud until you shove a bottle in its mouth. The bear does this at completely random moments throughout the day (and has the useful side-effect of scaring the customers too.)

When you feed the bear, it gurgles happily and goes back to sleep. This is apparently to teach little girls the responsibilities of having babies. Unfortunately my three year old is so stressed out by this bear, that she has absolved herself of all responsibility and given it to her Dad to look after. I am not allowed to look after the bear, only her Dad. Rich hates the bear. The customers hate the bear. My daughter hates the bear. I guess that the manufacturer’s goal of cutting the teenage pregnancy rate by “real baby simulation” is definitely successful, but boy do they start young nowadays.

Life seems pretty surreal at certain times, and this is one of them.

On the other hand, I am deliriously happy! (Or just delirious, I’m not completely sure which.) And I’m especially happy to report that I was wrong. I take it all back.

I love the UK National Health Service.

Not only am I NOT leaking brain fluid after all (that constant worry kind of ruined Christmas, but the tests eventually came back negative) but the local funding for my super-dooper-nuke-it-and-see-radiation came back almost straight away, and now I’m pencilled in for treatment in early February, PLUS I’ve found out that my treatment is not at el-grotty hospital that I went to before Christmas, but instead the NHS are paying for it to be done at a privately funded very posh hospital (not too far from Harrods, very handy if I get bored.) Yee-ha! I am so happy I could burst right now. I LOVE FREE HEALTHCARE!!! They came through in the end! I’ve never been so glad to be wrong. I insist you all move to the U.K. immediately.

Combined with the fact that other nice things are happening (hubby not only fixed his poorly computer, but also bought me a new point-and-shoot camera, a Fuji FinePix S5800 to cheer me up, and…highlight of my Christmas….David Hewlett actually grew a beard….did I mention I have a thing about beards?), I am actually tentatively daring to hope that 2008 might be a much better year than the last one!?!



I don't think this actually counts as a trophy shot, but some poor deluded souls have actually asked to see what we look like "normally" (whatever that is.) Please note Rich doesn't grab the boobs of all his models, only the ones he sleeps with.

See what I have to put up with?!

Paranoia: its just life

When Lin wrote her post on lighting yesterday, she said that it would probably cause a bit of a stir. It sure did.

The point that she was trying to make was that many photographers have their own unique "look" which often encompasses a particular lighting style, a personal signature if you will. She argued that others who create a direct copy of the original photographer's image with the same lighting and maybe an element or two's difference, are merely acting as photocopiers. She thought this was plagarism, and that it was wrong.

The responses seem to indicate that people think that I should accept the situation, stop being paranoid and learn some lighting. Ouch.

Let me put this to you. Is it really O.K. to see a shot you like posted to a blog or a portfolio site, sit down and work out the lighting, find a model, and shoot the same picture, with the same lighting and a similar pose, post it the following day as being yours, and then sell it and make money from it? It happens all the time, and I don't know of any photographer who likes it, unless they are one of the photocopiers.

The problem is that at one time the photographers were innovators, they had a style, be it posing or a lighting style, and for a while it would be their own style, unique to them. There were very few of them and photography was an expensive job, so the styles moved slowly. Now in the days of the internet, there are millions of photographers, they have the money to buy the kit and the time to study the pictures and work out how they were done, but they don't have the imagination to be an artist, so they copy what they see. Because there are more photocopiers than innovators, the value of innovation has been lost and now the majority, even those who should know better, think that this photocopying is normal and acceptable.

It's just another example of the moral bankruptcy of the modern world.

People think its O.K:

To download free music, music companies make too much money, sod the artist,
To download free films, the studios are money grabbers,
To download the text of a new book, its over priced,

It's O.K. to rip off any damn thing you like, if you can.

Moral bankruptcy.

Read it again.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.



Lin, from yesterday.

Lighting Wars

Today I want to ask a question that almost certainly does not have a simple answer.

Is it ethical to copy a photographer’s lighting technique?

I propose that the answer to this is not clear cut. A lot will depend on whether the photographer says you can. And most of them do not give this permission.

Not all photographers are secretive about their lighting, of course. Jimmy D often gives free advice and bloggie-tuition about how a particular shot was set up, and the specific lighting involved. Marcus Ranum also makes no secret about how he does specific shots, and I think he even provides occasional tutorials as to how it is done. IMO, this is marvellous, and incredibly kind and generous of these artists. They are sharing their wisdom with the world, they are teaching, simply out of kindness and for the pleasure of helping amateurs who are trying to learn.

But what about other circumstances which apply to most photographers? What about for the majority of images, when a photographer spends a lot of time and effort setting up a particular shot for his own artistic purposes? Is it O.K. to copy the photographer’s lighting in that instance?

Of course, most photographers want to protect their image, protect their copyright, and their art. But just as you can’t copyright an idea or claim a specific pose as just your own, in a similar way you can’t patent or protect a specific lighting technique. Someone, somewhere will copy your lighting. It may not be ethical, but there’s bugger-all you can do to prevent it.

It makes Rich feel rather flattered when folks try to copy his lighting, but occasionally it makes him pretty mad too. “They can try, ” is the usual dry comment, when we spot a fine art nude image which has virtually the same pose, and similar lighting. I’ve no idea if this happens in the rest of the world, but I must admit this happens a lot in the UK, especially on Web-Models. Rich has taken to not posting his best work on there because he gets so annoyed about it. If he designs a new lighting idea, shoots it and uploads an image, then I can absolutely guarantee that within 3 days there will be a whole range of copycat shots pop-up on there. But the copycat images are always poor imitations because no-one can get the lighting right. I guess there’s some satisfaction in that, but Rich still gets very irritated that there is always a rush of photocopying, as everyone frantically tries to out-do him. Web-Models is becoming a kind of fine-art pissing contest, where everyone tries to prove they can do the same thing.

Those poor souls who try to rip off his lighting have no chance in hell of course. His lighting set-up is NOT simple. There are all sorts of lights absolutely everywhere. It’s like Blackpool Illuminations up in the studio sometimes.

“Turn towards the big light,” he said to me today, when I was in eight inch fetish heels, blind as a bat, unable to balance, and trussed up like a chicken (yes, I’m well enough to start suffering for my art again…finished photos will no doubt be forthcoming eventually.)

“Ummm…” The problem was that through the clingy material over my eyes, I couldn’t see a bloody thing, and they all looked like big blurry lights to the blindfolded wobbly model. (Sometimes it’s easier for him to just pick me up and move me like a Barbie doll.) His lighting appears (to me) to be very complicated, but I guess that’s why his photographs work.

Really good photographers develop their own lighting styles over a long time. They experiment, they practise, and if they are talented, they might get very good at it. Good enough to call that lighting arrangement their own, good enough to become emotionally attached to it, good enough for it to hurt when someone else steals it.

After all, in a photograph, everything is about the lighting. Illumination is THE art-form, and it reflects the uniqueness of the artist who created it.

So to all you wannabe’s out there, yes I know you become good at photography by studying the best, and by copying those photographers whose images you admire. We understand you have to practise, and part of the training is to copy lighting set-ups that are better than yours.

Just don’t go and claim the lighting as your own idea, O.K.?
Don’t then go out and call yourself a photographer and sell the images elsewhere.

It’s not nice.

It’s not polite.

And it’s certainly not YOUR art.



An image of me from a few months ago - included only because Orixx told me to:-)

Technical disclaimer: Any resemblance of the lighting arrangement in this image to that designed by any other photographer, living or dead, is purely co-incidental and was not intended by this photographer, i.e. he thought he designed this lighting set-up. Although no doubt it's been done before, and probably better too.

What’s in a name?

More observant readers will notice that we’re playing around with our Fluffytek blog title at the moment (well spotted Jimmy!) We’re not really sure what to call it to be honest. For a long time it was “Fluffytek Photographic Art” which was all well and good until Richard took up CGI, whereupon we changed it to “Fluffytek Art Blog” which was nice and general and would cover just about anything Rich wanted to create including mutant-cyber-boobies-from-Venus, or whatever pot-brained idea he came up with next. But the title didn’t really grab you by the balls, if you know what I mean. Time for a re-think, perhaps?

So I was delivering a cup of tea to Rich yesterday afternoon, as he was sitting at his computer, playing with his virtual breasts as usual.

“Are you ever going to create any art that hasn’t got boobies in it?” I asked, eyeing up the cyber-model’s humongous shiny bazookas that were on the screen.

“Probably not,” he admitted, somewhat sheepishly.

“They look like giant pink watermelons,” said my teenage son, appearing from nowhere, as often seems to happen, almost by magic, when pictures of boobies are around.

So once we had booted out the peeping Tom, we discussed the blog further and decided to change the title to “Fluffytek Nudes.” But I’m still not happy. No doubt “Fluffytek Nudes” would significantly bump up our Google hits and internet visibility, but it also will most likely result in the local constabulary banging on the door. Don’t forget it’s Big Brother Country over here. Blogs are monitored very closely.

Anyway, you’re going to see some experimenting with the title for the next few weeks. Please do ignore it (unless you can make some suggestions, which will of course be very welcome.) We’re just playing with ideas, and will probably go back to “Fluffytek Art Blog” in the end. The police don’t seem to mind about this sort of thing too much, as long as we keep it relatively tasteful and call it “art.”Ironically, if we posted the same pictures and writing, but called ourselves pornographers, then our servers would be seized by the cops in no time. Go figure.

Changing the subject slightly, modelling pseudonyms have always fascinated me. I always end up thinking of models by their modelling name, long after I find out their real one. It’s almost as if their modelling name reflects the “real them” more than their real-life name.

When I first started modelling, I decided to give myself a nice, feminine girly makeover, and name myself after a flower. But it had to be the right flower, so as to reflect “the real me.” So my first modelling name was “Dracunculus” after “Dracunculus vulgaris,” the Voodoo Lily or Rotting Flesh Plant. Definitely VERY me. It’s splendid 3 ft purple phallic flower looks like a bit of a monster and smells exactly like rotting flesh for two weeks a year. (I plant them in our garden next to the neighbours’ fence - I don’t like the neighbours much.) But as I consider myself fairly evil, it seemed an apt name. (Aside to potential photographers: please note that I do not actually smell of rotting flesh, even if I often feel like it. I smell of violets mostly, and sometimes chocolate cake. Honestly.)

Anyhoo, the problem with “Dracunculus” was that no-one could spell it, and photographers thought it meant they could shoot goth-horror-dripping-blood-nudes with me (no kidding) so Rich recommended I change it temporarily to the innocuous “L-von-B” until I decided how I wanted to be seen in the modelling world.

Several years later, I’ve given up deciding, and now I mostly just go by my real name. Somewhere along the way in the last few months, especially after my recent faux-pas resulting in me being outed in the local yummy mummy community, I mostly just stopped caring about what other people thought of me being a middle-aged nude model, and decided that the modelling me was actually the real me. Even if it is embarrassing when people find out that I model nude, I no longer hide it, and I can’t be bothered to go back to all the secrecy drama.

Strip the clothes off the woman often enough, let her wander free, naked and as herself, and the layers of pretence, hang-ups and social conditioning will gradually fall away over time. In the end you’re just left with the real person. No fake names necessary any more.

And that process towards “the real you,” is what IMO makes nude photography so amazing, and why every woman should do it.

Although I certainly wouldn’t object to some giant pink watermelon boobies, even if they’re not real.



Lynx. Magnificent.

I resolve....

Rich’s new year resolution is to lose weight. Again.
As with most people, this is likely to fall by the wayside within the first few weeks of January, especially since our middle son has resolved for the New Year to improve his cake-baking ability (wannabe trainee chef.) I predict that Rich is doomed to failure within a very short time-span.

Making promises to yourself to change is a good thing of course. It’s great to want to improve yourself, to be a better person. But more often than not, these resolutions fail.

Why?

Because we make unrealistic expectations of ourselves. We aspire to dreams that are well beyond our capabilities. We are perfectionists. We dare to dream, but when reality bites, we blame ourselves.

Big-scale change involves deprivation, suffering, adapting to a new regime. And most importantly it involves changing your daily habits. It’s the habit-changing that is the most difficult thing. Humans are animals of routine. On the whole, we dislike change. It’s scary and unpleasant. Unless you have a will of steel, or there’s a gun to your head, then changing your daily habits is going to be extremely difficult and very unlikely to succeed.

And yet…we continue to make resolutions. We are eternal optimists. We believe we can do it. High hopes are hard to give up, which is why we repeat the same old resolutions year after year. We set ourselves up for failure, for the guilt trip. And for what?

You’ll note that older folks don’t bother to make New Year Resolutions any more. With age comes wisdom, and older people have either achieved ultimate perfection already, or they have realised that beating themselves up for constantly falling short of their expectations, simply doesn’t work and isn’t worth the energy.

My suggestion? Don't make any new year's resolutions at all. If you want to change, just do it. Doesn’t matter what day of the year it is. Just stop smoking, don’t drink so much, stop pigging out on the wrong food and lose that weight. But follow your dream in a way that works for you. Be real. Realise your limitations, and take it slowly. Set yourself short term goals, change your habits gradually. Get support from your friends and family.

And if life gets in the way, and you screw up and you can’t keep to your resolutions at all, then do not under any circumstances beat yourself up about it. Forgive yourself. You are not a failure. It just means that your original resolutions were a little over-optimistic. Or maybe the time just wasn’t right to follow that particular dream now. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try that dream again some day. It just means that you should keep your feet firmly on the ground whilst doing it.



Lilmummy, taken last year. I resolve for Rich to shoot more nudes than last year...it IS O.K. to make resolutions on behalf of your partner, right?