Banksy's "Looters" (listening to my heart go pitter-patter)
I am ashamed that despite residing in such close geographic proximity to a locale that was once home to around 20 Banksy pieces, I've never photographed any of them. I believe there are a mere three current survivors, and those are barely hanging on.
Sean Cummings, a New Orleans dude, owns the building this piece was on. He had this chunk of concrete wall cut out of the building, had it restored, removing layers of tags and plastered flyers, for $50k, then he moved it across the city to its current home, the lobby of the International House Hotel in New Orleans, which he also owns. I love to learn of a wealthy person throwing a a ton of money at such a worthy project. What a badass.
Initially, I was irritated by the glare from the light source on this piece. A square chunk of LED lights points directly at the paint. No attempt at diffusion, just a naked bank of little suns. I was taking a break to ponder how I could better edit in post to "fix" the glare, my motivation being respect for the integrity of the art, rather than any proof of my own photographic prowess. I thought about Banksy's "Balloon Girl". When a limited framed print sold at auction for a record more than one million pounds, a shredder built into the frame began to eat it right there. The level of thought provoked, the innovation, creating art that begins to self destruct upon purchase, the degree of change in the piece’s message, and the courage to create something provocative, are hard to wrap my head around.
The light source was my shredder, in its small way. I decided that regardless of its price tag, it’s still a tag, rough and gritty, not meant to be perfectly displayed in the museum sense. Considering this, I decided that the horrible angle of the caustic illumination on "Looters", while less severe than an instant shredding, and whether intentional or not, had a similar effect: annoyance. I've ceased all efforts to "fix" this, and the glare is now one of my favorite parts of the photo. Banksy's intention behind his work is meant to provoke thought, whether it questions what is "art", or as a social, cultural, or political commentary on the generally controversial side of its subject matter.
I'm grateful that this did just that for me: provoked thought, even if it's result was as simple as making peace with a photographically offensive light source. I'll take it. And when I reconsider the fact that I was late to the party, I realize how lucky I am to have seen it at all, a point which also contributed to the cessation of my little light glare hissy fit. Cheers to me on what essentially amounts to growing the F up and seeing a win as a win.
Banksy's "Looters" (listening to my heart go pitter-patter)
I am ashamed that despite residing in such close geographic proximity to a locale that was once home to around 20 Banksy pieces, I've never photographed any of them. I believe there are a mere three current survivors, and those are barely hanging on.
Sean Cummings, a New Orleans dude, owns the building this piece was on. He had this chunk of concrete wall cut out of the building, had it restored, removing layers of tags and plastered flyers, for $50k, then he moved it across the city to its current home, the lobby of the International House Hotel in New Orleans, which he also owns. I love to learn of a wealthy person throwing a a ton of money at such a worthy project. What a badass.
Initially, I was irritated by the glare from the light source on this piece. A square chunk of LED lights points directly at the paint. No attempt at diffusion, just a naked bank of little suns. I was taking a break to ponder how I could better edit in post to "fix" the glare, my motivation being respect for the integrity of the art, rather than any proof of my own photographic prowess. I thought about Banksy's "Balloon Girl". When a limited framed print sold at auction for a record more than one million pounds, a shredder built into the frame began to eat it right there. The level of thought provoked, the innovation, creating art that begins to self destruct upon purchase, the degree of change in the piece’s message, and the courage to create something provocative, are hard to wrap my head around.
The light source was my shredder, in its small way. I decided that regardless of its price tag, it’s still a tag, rough and gritty, not meant to be perfectly displayed in the museum sense. Considering this, I decided that the horrible angle of the caustic illumination on "Looters", while less severe than an instant shredding, and whether intentional or not, had a similar effect: annoyance. I've ceased all efforts to "fix" this, and the glare is now one of my favorite parts of the photo. Banksy's intention behind his work is meant to provoke thought, whether it questions what is "art", or as a social, cultural, or political commentary on the generally controversial side of its subject matter.
I'm grateful that this did just that for me: provoked thought, even if it's result was as simple as making peace with a photographically offensive light source. I'll take it. And when I reconsider the fact that I was late to the party, I realize how lucky I am to have seen it at all, a point which also contributed to the cessation of my little light glare hissy fit. Cheers to me on what essentially amounts to growing the F up and seeing a win as a win.