final project reflection

Overall, I am very satisfied with the results of my final project and would even be compelled to make more. This project was very intensive in every way, from the shooting to the Photoshopping, but I really enjoyed the whole process.  I had a fairly good conception of the images when I began shooting for each of them, although ideas changed slightly as I reviewed the images I had available to me afterwards. I especially liked going out to different locations (including the zoo) to capture settings and animals to be composited into the images. Finding the costumes for each one was also fun; I had an idea of what I was looking for, for each photograph, but the image solidified itself after something was found. For example, in ‘the dinner,’ I knew the type of set up I wanted, but the finding of matching plaid clothing, in red, completed the feel and color palette of that image. In addition, it was also interesting to find/work with animals in incorporated into images. Because most animals will not pose, I took many photographs and then later added them into the image. Only the dogs were actually on location on the table, but they were originally on a towel. In fact that whole room was recomposed in Photoshop because I lacked a wide-angle lens, so it is no longer a real space. In other compositions, such as ‘washing,’ everything was photographed at once, except for the chicks added in later.

I found as I was making the images that I started to create a storyline between them. This was the effect for which I was going. I wanted to create film or storybook like images, rich in detail, a little macabre, with a strong sense of narrative. I did not want to tell the viewer what that narrative was, but rather let them explore the image and create their own. I feel I was pretty successful in this respect; this, and the fact that I really enjoyed the project is why I would not mind creating more. In fact, I have one image that I began shooting for, but could not complete in time; perhaps I should finish that and make more…

Final Project

Response to Carl Mydans

History by Carl Mydans

Carl Mydans: Photographs, 1935-1958

Carl Mydans, Life Photographer Who Chronicled Wars and the Depression, Dies at 97 - New York Times

What I am impressed by in Carl Mydans as a photojournalist (and also in his writing) is how in the moment he seems. It feels like he really threw himself into whatever his assignment, carefully observing and calculating the people around him. I find it interesting that Mydans “specialized in getting one picture that told the story by itself” (Grundburg) instead of utilizing a series. This seems like perhaps a unique and valuable quality in a photojournalist. In lieu of relying on multiple images, it appears Mydans really considered the moment he captured in his frame. Perhaps this is why I find some of his photographs more compelling than other photojournalistic pictures. The photographic agency seems deliberate often by use of framing and cropping. For example, the two images below use extended “blank” space in framing the subjects and giving them context – a composition I find more compelling than a closely cropped image of their bodies.

Perspective also sometimes seems to consciously place the viewer. For example, one image of the French woman having her head shaved places the photographer viewer in a position as if everyone is turning their heads to look at him in an unabashed confrontational manner, giving the feeling that they could also assault this viewer if he reacts in the wrong way. In another, the vantage point is even below that of the Frenchwoman, giving the onlookers a looming quality, again placing the viewer in a situation as if they must choose whether to go with the crowd or risk themselves.

 In another  photograph of two German soldiers Mydans places the viewer on the exact same level as them, some how lending them more humanity, their eyes though downcast, still visible. The almost gentleness in this picture is perhaps an unusual quality in an image of the enemy.

Finally, I find it intriguing that Mydans was so meticulous in documenting his pictures. I assume all the captions and long titles accompanying the pictures are his words and this gives an interesting, more direct and personal reading to several of his photographs. I think that his photographs would not need captions for us to read the history in them, but because Mydans produced them with subtitles as a photojournalist, I believe they should be considered with them.

response to elsbeth's gleaning

When looking at the images from the powerpoint my sense of discomfort arises not really from looking at sexualized and graphic images, after all it is just human bodies and nothing particularly new (I wouldn’t say that be have be exactly desensitized, since these types of images do still elicit reactions), but from how often bodies are distorted in order to be erotic and the references to violence. With fetishism and BDSM you can say that the individuals are consensual of the situations they are in, but something bothers me when I see images of women in submissive/bonded roles, inflicted with implied pain, or bound up in clothing contraptions. I can’t help but think of how it alludes to sexual violence against women and its place in our society.  It reminds me a something I read several years ago, I think by Susan Faludi, that fashions in the 80s included torn or ripped clothing for women, seen as sexy some how, but really suggesting sexual violence, such as rape. Whenever I see some girl wearing intentionally ripped clothing, I cant avoid thinking about how such signals have been normalized in our culture. So, when I see these sort of things in pornographic or erotic images, I am a bit angered that women are being subjugated and made uncomfortable that the chose to be so. Of course in images where women are the ones are in control, I don’t feel this way. Is this because of my gender? Because see this is a “role reversal” and a change from the “normal?” This further points out that women as submissive has become a normalcy in our society. Are women expected to be submissive and allow others to control them? Does this mean violence against women is, though objectionable, also seen as normal, and so made “invisible??”

Furthermore, I was struck by the distortion and constraints placed on the human body. Somehow non-real (typical) proportions, such as extremely large breasts on slender bodies, have become the erotic for our culture. Something that cannot be (usually) achieved has become the fantasy, which just says something about the limits we place on ourselves as a society. Additionally, I noticed that when used, clothing, in addition to revealing, also placed restraints and referenced bonding. Again, this alludes to sexual violence and needing to exercise physical power on someone to get what you want. Even when a woman is in the dominating role, her clothing confines her literally or figuratively (I think for example images of thongs and fishnets recall ropes, etc. and so reference enforced restraint). I suppose this is why, in the end I cannot understand practices such as these, although I’ll leave to each his own, because it so often restricts the female body whatever the role, and even if not for the pleasure of males, it cannot escape this connotation within our society. Maybe this is trying to change and reverse this imagery, but I don’t think violence references need to be continued. Even if not inflicted, it still remains. Why do we tie something down? Because we don’t want it to escape, we desired submission. We want to control it, implying that the controlled doesn’t want that situation. So even if there is consent somewhere in such a scenario, the fact remains that it refers to a controlling implied-violence situation.

reflection on panorama project

The panoramic project was an interesting introduction to a new format/technique of photography, difficult for me because it is a completely different frame with which to view the world. When taking photographs, or even just looking around on an everyday basis, I am constantly putting a photographic or film framing around everything, making compositions in my head. However, I cannot as easily do this for a panoramic; I can take a wider view of something, but cannot see the distortion that will appear in a photograph.

For this reason, I experimented a lot and took many different panoramic scenes to explore how they would turn out. One of the immediate things I thought of when out shooting was to take vertical panoramas. I thought this would be an interesting way to see the world. We are accustomed to gazing at a landscape/scene and panning just slightly or looking out of the corner of our eye to get a wider picture; however, what we do not register as often it the up and down “landscapes” around us. 

I was pleased with the way my vertical panorama of the stacks turned out, but did not chose it for my final print because I thought the tide pool imagery added was unnecessary. It seemed like a fitting and conceivable subject – I could image sea life under those translucent tiles – but to this image, already distorted by the format, I felt it did not add anything, and perhaps even detracted from the overpowering luminescence of the tiles. This is why I decided to go with the horizontal format, feeling that the manipulated length added in the middle hallway complimented it. Hearing feedback, I would like to go back and merge the two formats, but I am unsure what would happen when the bowing distortion of the vertical combined with the spanning view of the horizontal. Overall, I think it was an intriguing project, but now that I have a better sense of panoramas, I think future forays would have more of a discernable direction. I would also like to try more vertical panoramas, I like the alternative slice they offer.

Response to work by Dorothea Lange and Ansel Adams of Japanese Internment Camps

My art history seminar actually just looked at Adams and Lange’s work of Japanese internment camps recently, talking about how the Japanese American body was represented. ­­­­Elena Tajima Creef wrote an essay in which she describes how Adams tried to reinscribe this body with patriotism and loyalty. She argues, which I can see clearly in Adams work, that he tried to represent these interned individuals as counter-images to that of the wartime imagery of the Japanese as the enemy. He has two broad categories, those of landscapes, which he imagined instilled some kind of strength and endurance in the Japanese Americans, as well as portraits, many shot from below, in “American” clothing, and often of schoolgirls, giving a heroic and all-American purity. What I think is important to note is that Adams, in trying to champion his subjects, takes away part of their identity. They must fully relinquish all that is Japanese in order to be considered loyal to America.

What Adams photography does not reveal is the stark living situation and militaristic qualities of the internment camps, some of which was captured by Dorothea Lange. Lange was restricted to what she could photograph (never guns or watchtowers for example), but she still managed to portray her subjects as tragic players. What translates in her photographs is the immense amount of time spent by these individuals waiting and the loss they were forced to endure by these imposed situations. Many of Lange’s photographs were not published at the time, perhaps because they might have invoked the same sense of national shame we feel now, but was crucial not to display during the war. In light of this, do we think Adams photographs are just and fair representations of the Japanese American? Were they effective in revealing, perhaps not the atrocity of the camps, but the lack necessity of such institutions? Is it alright to shed all “essential Japaneseness” in order to validate a point? If Lange’s more tragic images had been seen, would it have incited outrage at Japanese American treatment, or would it simply have been ignored in the effort to visualize the Japanese as enemy? Lange too sought to demonstrate patriotism, but combining this image with heartbreak was perhaps not what the American (white) public of the time wanted to see - or at least the government did not.

Still a source of national shame and delicacy, these images are important in that they depict the experiences of the interned Japanese Americans, but they are only a thin slice and some times distorted image of the reality of this experience. For this reason, recounts and opinions from the Japanese Americans that survived this ordeal, whether  in writing or photography, like that of  Toyo Miyatake, are an important part of giving these individuals agency, translating an experience in which they we once subjugated.

Response to my gleaning on Family Photography and Eugenics

Articles: bell hooks, In Our Glory. Shawn Michelle Smith, Baby’s Picture is Always Treasured 

I find both hooks’ and Smith’s theories about the role of photography in asserting racial identity intriguing and historically ironic when placed side by side. . As hooks points out the accessibility of the camera allowed African Americans to produce their own images and tell their own history and narratives. Conversely, the white middle of the late 19^th/early 20^th century tried to preserve their racial strength through use of eugenics, baby books and photographic documentation. What I wonder is how conscious modern, especially young, communities are of the meaning of photographs within their family and racial contexts? One could say that because of double-consciousness African Americans, or any American racial minority, would inherently be aware of the power that claiming photography gives their community because they are aware of their position in America. But then are whites too conscious of the historic use of photography and the baby book that Smith explores? Smith suggests we have lost the eugenics meaning of baby documenting from the early 20^th century, and made it into something sentimental, but the hidden racial meaning could still remain.

Can “sentiment, then, fully account for the nature of our desire for baby’s picture?” Surely we don’t want to acknowledge or see some supremacist racial desire underlying our family photos but by denying it aren’t we just saying this practice is normal and natural? And thereby letting whiteness remain invisible? But is this really the case? Don’t we all to some extent have connection to old family photograph and our heritage what ever it may be? I think these types of photos invoke nostalgia, pride and curiosity about our pasts in many people. Can we accept hooks’ and Smith’s analyses as applicable to all modern Americans, black or white respectively? But still, something rings true in their writing, revealing hegemonic meanings and promoting counter hegemonic practices. I think part of the reason I have such a strong connection to my own family photographs, overwhelmingly those of my mother’s side, is not only because I have fond memories of them, but because I attempt to reclaim my culture history; like hooks writes, “(re-member) evokes the coming together of severed parts, fragments becoming a whole…using these images, we connect to a recuperative, redemptive memory that enables us to construct radical identities, images of ourselves that transcend the limits of the colonizing eye”

I found these essays so intriguing, that I hope to some time do an interview/photographic survey project of the images and recounts of biracial/multiracial individuals in relation to their own family photos. My own family being a part of this group, I think these people would have a unique perspective to offer in reference to these two contrasting historically informed uses of photography. Too often we are made to choose one or the other, but these histories have been blended within our own bodies and can be seen through our photographic memories.

framed photo of anthony his mother gave me, looking rather a lot like those white middle class babies of the eugenics era. nice work anthony! ;)

picture of my brother and I that he decided to post on his facebook account, for whatever reason. still has the same regard for  me and probably still wishes I would kiss up.

Panoramas

I haven't decided which one in going with yet...

Response to Leni Riefenstahl

Leni Riefenstahl: 1936 Olympics | | guardian.co.uk Arts

Where There’s a Will: Books: The New Yorker

Leni Riefenstahl: PHOTOGRAPHY/OLYMPIA 1/18

I’m not sure I find Leni Riefenstahl’s photography compositionally very interesting. I feel as if I have seen many of these images before, whether in Greek statue, or sport and “anthropological” photography. But perhaps this the point of her importance as a photographer; she made advances in how photographs were taken, especially of moving bodies, so that her innovation has now become the norm. One of her Olympia photographs (below) that I find intriguing is completely unlike the others in that it hides the whole form of the body and abstracts the sky with the absence of dramatic clouds and the dark surface cutting across the top.

As far as the Nuba series, they are informative documentary photos, if all you are looking for is representations of visual culture, but there are more compelling documentary photographs out there. I think it is the subjects that are intriguing in the photographs and not the photograph itself. I find it interesting that she said “to explain the absence of imperfect specimens from her gallery, she later told an interviewer that old, ugly or disabled Nuba hid themselves in shame.” Is this really true? Or was she making aesthetic or idealistic choices? Also I hope the text accompanying the photographs are just bad translations, because otherwise it is fairly condescending.

Still you’ve got to hand it to her for being a stubborn and persistent woman. As Judith Thurman wrote in the New Yorker article, she had a narcissistic self-assurance, and a denial for her admiration of Hitler, for which she was criticized (along with producing other Nazi-related film), would have “endanger[ed] the ruthless suspension of self-doubt that her identity had, from childhood, depended on.” So she stuck to her guns on all matters, which makes her a model of a feminist woman. She was exceptional in her time for her talent and determination to not let being a woman stop her, even if she did use her beauty as her means of advancement. So whatever the controversy and mythology surrounding her, there is no denying she was influential. Had she made her photography and film in another time, perhaps we could be more dismissive as well as reproachful, but the fact that she lived over one hundred years with so many stages in her life is impressive and telling of how much history and change has happened in the last century. Commanding women will always have my respect for their advances in pushing and redefining gender, but in this case it is a little hard to separate the woman from the tainted character.

Response to Annie Liebovitz

Annie Leibovitz’s Disney Dream Portrait Series

A Photo Editor - Annie Leibovitz and the Queen

BBc Executive Resigns over Film of Queen - New York TimesAnnie Leibovitz - Photo Gallery

American Masters

For me, many of Annie Liebovitz’s portraits capture as sense of intimacy combined with wit or drama. This drama is especially drawn out in her larger montages created by the lighting, settings and postures of subjects. Whether it is a portrait of the queen or a tableau of Disney princesses, there is a sort of ethereal or otherworldly quality that seems to imbue the light. This seems especially applicable with our look at utopia/distopia images. There is something that seems so real about these pictures, as if you are standing in the same room, yet they are fantasized and a bit idolized. I suppose in part this is what happens when you take portraits of celebrities. There is a sort of convention of how to display these people with glamour*; even if they are depicted as “just people” we are still ever aware of their special-ness, whether it be their beauty, talent, intellect, or power.

I would say she has two general categories: the portrait solely displaying the face/body as the subject, and then the portrait in which she creates a imagined film still. This brings up the question of the portrait artist; is it about the artist or the subject (especially if they are someone well-known)? It seems to me that Liebovitz is able to retain her style in photographing a huge range of people, and is not afraid to assert herself to obtain to picture she would like – as seen in the short documentary of her photographing the queen. Looking at her images now, I realize how many of her photo shoots I have been exposed to (in print magazines, etc.); in many of them I was drawn to their magical quality, but there did not seem to be much poignancy after that. However, when photographing celebrities or fashion, there does seem to often be a sense that the subject/image is not necessary, but enchanting nonetheless. Although I’m not sure how I feel about all of the messages sent by her photographs, I do admire Liebovitz for carving out her own distinctive niche in the realm of portraiture – an area where the photographer can be just as important as the subject. 

Reflection on Stop-Animation and Free/Class Shoot Selection

While at times a frustrating and tedious process, the stop-animation project was worth the effort and especially interesting because of the collaboration with the music class. I have worked with both film and photography (of course) before, and though stop-action could be placed between the two, it takes a very different approach and sense of patience. Since I chose to animated inanimate objects (more in my scraped first-draft than the final), the initial shooting took a very long time for not much “film.” When I chose to redirect my approach, it was much easier to shoot, both because I photographed not only inanimate objects, but also because I worked-in a narrative. This choice I think really gave my film a clear direction and point while still remaining light and fun.

As for the collaboration, it seemed an interesting way to combine two media/classes, but was a little disjointed. My partner and I first discussed and then I set down the images of the film and finally he responded with music made up from noises of matches lighting, rattling, blowing out, etc. I am not sure how he felt to be the second one to respond, but it seems to me that one partner has to “go first” in this project. Either music can be made, and then stop action added in response (something that would yield a different result, and which I don’t believe happened in these particular projects) or the stop action can be complied and sound then edited to fit with the sequence of images. Of course you can always go back and forth and edit something in the film or sound, but something happened first. An interesting project may to have each partner work on their parts separately and then just put together in the end; the result would probably feel somewhat disjointed, but as long as there was a common theme, they each would have generated their product on their own. Overall I think my partner and I were satisfied with the relationship we set up for this project and did not worry too much about forcing something, but rather went with the flow.

The free/class shoot selection process was revealing of my own tendencies as a photographer. Not that I have only one subject, style or color palate when I shoot, but certain themes do reappear. I think it will help me to be more conscious of my affinities when I go out to shoot and perhaps steer me towards a final project. So then what am I drawn to? Abstraction, texture, oddity? What I call arrangements? I think I just need to go out and take more pictures.

arrangements

selections from free/class shoots

Stop Motion Animation: Grow For Me

animation: elizabeth jones

music: casey latter

Response to the Unseen Gulf War

The Unseen Gulf War by Peter Turnley - The Digital Journalist

Though the images are grim and distressing, I understand Peter’s Turnley’s statement for the reason he feels these photographs must be shown. He wishes to show the realities of war without placing judgment on them. But by photographing only the aftermath of war in this series, he displays only the loss and death, thereby making the viewer extremely conscious of the effects of war. Here the purpose and necessity is not show; there are no scenes of fighting and gunfire, no triumph. In this way I think Turnley offers his opinion about war, even if he is not trying to be judgmental.  In no way could someone view this wasteland he shows as a victory in the traditional sense. The destruction is made painfully clear. Additionally because most of his photographs are bodies instead of just rumble, he points out the human element of what can sometimes be seen as a machine interaction between two group entities. With the subtitles that accompany his work, Turnley offers even more context to the viewer, stressing this as a reality and not something in a far away land.

By ending his letter in the opening with “I would like to propose that we discuss a portfolio of these difficult images now, as a future war in Iraq grows more likely every passing day,” Turnley indicates that he hopes his images make visible the reality of war; perhaps he wishes to use them to sway people from the inclination to enter another war. He says he represents no personal point of view in these photographs, but its seems impossible that after close contact with the subject he cannot help but feel some pain at the consequences of war. After all, he terms war a “necessary evil,” evil being an extreme choice of word regarding his opinion.  No one can look at war and not feel a strong opinion, what ever it may be.

Response to LOMOgraphy

BBC NEWS | Europe | Lomos: New take on an old classic

ACP - Why I don't like LOMOgraphy

I am drawn to LOMOgraphy by its saturated colors and philosophy of spontaneity, but really my qualifying it as good or as art is not going to be based on how it was taken, but rather the content. Perhaps its saturation and abstraction leads instantaneously to an aesthetically pleasing image when we disregard subject, and this easily achieved prettiness is why we want to disqualify it as true art. But the fact is that anyone can take a photograph today, from disposable, to SLRs to digital cameras, everyone can have access if they are willing to pay the price. So I don’t think it is a crime if LOMOgraphy has created a following aided by hype and accompanied by increasingly expensive equipment. It is a choice of the person taking the pictures how they want to take a photograph, and it is our choice as an audience whether or not we will accept them. Rejecting LOMOgraphy as the easy way out and a no-brainer I find snobbish. A bad LOMOgraph is going to be just as bad as a bad photograph from any other camera. A good LOMOgraph – someone had to decide what and how they were going to take that photo, and if they just got lucky, doesn’t happen to all of us once in a while? The point is, they went somewhere with that camera with the intention of capturing the world, just like any other photographer.

As to its consumer-friendliness, I think it is inspiring how something simple can bring many people together; a show like Trafalgar Square is beautiful because of its large scale in which many small parts come together. No matter how “good” each one is on its own, they become splendid when brought together as a group. If you think LOMOgraphy is being egocentric in a quest to impress with spontaneity, just ignore it. But I think people’s eagerness to share their lives with others is not born out of this technique; it merely provides an interesting and alternative route. In this digital and Internet age, we increasingly all want to share images of our lives, how we capture those images doesn’t seem all that important.

Class Shoot no. 9: Truth

Response to Photography as a Weapon

Photography as a Weapon - Errol Morris Blog - NYTimes.com

It is true that we tend to believe that photographs present the truth, but often it depends on the picture’s context. In journalism we rely on the reporters to give us visual information, either to aid interpretation or to provide evidence. We trust them. But of course, if the publication is not one with whose views we identify, we are much quicker to dismiss this photographic “evidence.” Based on the type of periodical, for example The New York Times versus a tabloid, we have certain expectations of realism or sensationalism.

The thing is, in art, we do no mind the manipulation of photography because the photograph represents the opinion of one person, the artist. Conversely, periodicals are supposed to be unbiased, working for the public good to heighten readers’ awareness of a subject. The difficulty with photographic documentation is that the photographer is always making choices about how to make his picture. The framing and inclusion of objects, focus, aperture, shutter speed, color, black and white, all are choice that influence how a photograph is interpreted. We are quick to accuse photographers of fraud, even without the use of Photoshop,  because we feel cheated of the truth, forced to see something only one way. It becomes very personal and about our own right to freedom.

Perhaps this is why grainy photography and film documentaries work so well. We think that the truth is being presented as it is because the photographer did not have time to contemplate his composition.

A photograph tricks us into thinking it is reality because our eyes process images of the surround world everyday, But photographs are not what we see, it is what someone else gave us to see. Photography can be interpreted and employed in a myriad of ways. Morris aptly concludes his essay explaining how photographs can supply both sides of an argument; speaking to the altered photograph of four Iranian missiles, he write “Photographs can be used — to borrow Heartfield’s phrase — as weapons. They can be used to warn us about the dangers of impending war. They can also be used to ratchet up the blind forces of rage and unreason that drag us into conflict.” It is the  context of a photograph  that makes all the difference.

 

Class Shoot no. 8: Deviant

these all say deviant to me, but for different reasons...

Response to Manufactured Landscapes

Zeitgeist Films | Manufactured Landscapes

Edward Burtynsky [ Photographic Works ]

While watching Manufactured Landscapes, I couldn’t help but feel an incredible sadness creep over me, sort of like the transition from dusk to night. There is a staggering sensation of beauty and stillness, but also of loss and a realization that you cannot go back. When confronted by the work of Burtynsky, you see astonishingly vast landscapes and for a moment revel in their magnitude and orchestration of elements and color, only to then recognize them as products of human alteration and waste, plummeting you down into its grim reality.

I think Baichwall was able to well convey the massiveness and beauty of Burtynsky’s work while placing it in a context and dialogue; yet she did not thrust a certain evaluation upon viewers, allowing them to formulate their own opinions. Baichwall adds to the discussion of Burtynsky’s work by allowing the viewer to know more about the background of the photographs: how they were made, what Burtynsky’s was thinking while shooting, and presentation of actual interaction with the people who where photographed as part of the landscapes. She adds a human element to Burtynsky’s work where he eliminates it, only referring to the human involvement. This leads me to see how Burtynsky, while at one time claiming no political viewpoint over the landscapes he was photographing, could not help but to eventually advocate environmental causes. These landscapes no matter how beautiful, eerie and strange they may seem, are real places. Humans are impacting the planet and in turn hurting themselves and not matter how much it seems like we cannot go back, we still cannot let the world turn into a wasteland.

The film also put into contrast Chinese versus American lifestyle. I think that when looking at the pictures of masses of people in China, we are astounded by their similarity, which contrasts with the American championing of individuality. Certainly no one desires to live a life of drudgery and in low living conditions, but the mentality of being part of a group effort and not standing out as an individual is promoted by many Chinese. In the film, workers on big projects were asked if they were proud to be part of something for their country. They often responded, “its just work,” but still this is not viewed as a strange question.  Consider the opening ceremonies for the 2008 Olympics. China was trying to put forth an image of common pride and happiness, harmoniously working together for the greater good. The choreography of thousands of perfectly timed performers certainly displayed this. This ideal of cooperating for the bigger organism differs from that in America; we believe that we have the right to be noticed. Along with the realization that we are part of the influence on Burtynsky’s landscapes, this concept is part of why these images are so striking for us. I think because of this, I can interpret these landscapes as a way to visualize and disclose the notion that we are part of a global environment and it is really only together that we will actually be able to reverse the mess we have wandered so deep into.

free shoot cont.: back home

Free Shoot: Devon