Author and game designer Greg Stolze has just published a new gaming book titled A Dirty World.  Besides the fact that I like games and film noir, I mention it because some of my images are in it. The original images I shot were dark, moody and show my early explorations of the femme fatale character.  In A Dirty World, the images are, well, dirty.  Retouched with scuff marks, stains and tears, the images have a sense of real world abuse far from their digital origins.  The game itself provides the same sort of filter, but on the real world.  Players experience an alternate universe filled with danger, seduction and tough broads.

The interesting thing about this experience is that I don’t actively push my images through stock houses or to publishers.  My images were spotted on the model’s Flickr page (see Monica Dahl’s Flickr stream).  This is just an example of how on the internet, random links between sites and search engines make everything a valid channel to promote your work.  In this case, the model’s own portfolio directed the author to me.

Not all photographers agree with this sharing philosophy upon which the internet was founded.  Many maintain a tight hold on their images and bend over backwards by doing things like watermarking, slicing images into multiple pieces, embedding them in a flash movie or disabling right-clicks.  While none of these are perfect solutions to stop “image theft”, I understand their motivation to maintain tight control over their usage.  I admit that I had similar notions early on.  But at some point, I decided that maintaining tight control over my images was more work than it’s worth.  Especially these days when letting your images circulate freely  is the best way to get them seen by people you would have never thought could use them.

I love Polaroids, so it was a sad day when Polaroid announced they would discontinue production of their instant films this past February. I knew the end was coming, but I had been in denial up until then. I had used up my stockpile of instant film with my army of Polaroid cameras: a modified Holga(roid), twin SX-70’s, an old passport camera, and even a 35mm NPC film back. I really enjoyed using Polaroids and each frame that developed was special, even the ones that were terrible. There is something liberating about shooting a Polaroid. There are hardly any adjustments beyond focusing, no raw files, no white balance adjustments, no bracketing, nothing. Like the act of photography itself, each Polaroid represents a single moment in time that is impossible to duplicate. And just like memories, Polaroids are romantically low fidelity and wonderfully imperfect.

My affair with Polaroid prints eventually had to end as film supplies became scarce and third party substitutes cost nearly $2 a print. I’m all for romance, but it’s hard to be carefree when shutter starts sounding like a cash register.

Just when I least expected it, Polaroid released a new printer called the PoGo. As the name implies, it is portable and it is also digital. It fits into a jacket pocket and you can pair it with your phone or digital camera to make 2″x3″ prints. Part of the magic is that the printer charges the paper which releases ink. So, like Polaroid of old, it’s all about the paper. Though with the PoGo, what comes out is your already-dry print that doubles as a waterproof, smudgeproof sticker.  The prints might seem a little gimmicky at first, but I think this new print form factor offers some new creative possibilities.

As I unboxed the printer, I wondered how this PoGo compares to using old Polaroid instant film. Is it lo-fi and imperfect? After making a dozen prints, my answer is yes. Lo-fi in the digital age means that the color gamut is small and the resolution is low compared to your standard desktop inkjet printer. Is it imperfect? Yes. Since the printer pairs directly with your phone or camera, there isn’t any opportunity for image editing beforehand. And, the final print will color shift (and crop) your source image without any warning. So, I think that there is some fun to be had with this printer as the results are a bit unpredictable and dreamy.

Something closer to your memories.

But the real question is: Is it romantic? No, not by comparison at least. To me, it’s still a digital printer that can spit out a dozen copies of the same image without batting an eye. Don’t get me wrong, this is a great thing. A wonderful thing. But, the precious nature of a print is lost when you can just hit the print button again.

The story goes that a famous photographer was sent a Polaroid camera very late in his life and he gave it a try. When asked about this new camera and what he thought of it, he said that only once you’ve had a lifetime to learn photography would you be skilled enough to use a Polaroid.

Now, I don’t think he was being elitist. I think he just meant that the Polaroid distills all of the photography process, theories and second chances into a single shutter click. It is automatic. It is point-and-shoot. It is easy, but at the same time, incredibly hard. The onus is entirely on the photographer to see it and get it right in their head. If you can’t do that, you’ll never get it.

In the end, I think the PoGo printer gives me another chance to cut myself out of the editing loop and to print just what I shot. Now, I have to figure out how to get what I want.

Gate 30 sits at the very end of SFO’s terminal one.  Beyond the restaurants, recharging stations and other conveniences offered to travelers in transition.  It is safe to say this is the farthest you can go without actually being airborne.  While I wait on the cusp of vacation, I gaze through the wall of windows before me.  Planes glide across the view like so many aquarium fish.  Their fins and flaps effortlessly guiding them to their destinations.  I wonder what kind of fish I’ll get.  Probably a filet-o-fish knowing my luck.

I decide to take a few snapshots with my pocket camera.  The first one is a disaster.  A huge reflection of myself is ghosted over the planes.  Oh yeah: sunlight + window = reflection.   Oops.  To avoid the “artistic” self-portrait, I place the lens against the window and shoot again.  It works and that’s the image you see above.  Other ways to avoid glare are to change your angle (position)  or to use a polarizing filter, but this works in a pinch.

So, I’ve decided to spend my vacation in Las Vegas.  I may have been influenced by my last photo shoot with a femme fatale making a payment with cash…and lead.  I hope to avoid any bullets on this trip though.  I’m mostly interested in taking time for my writing, a little gambling and more photo taking, naturally.

In case you are wondering, that bag isn’t full of real money.  I like try to keep my prop budget under $100,000 what with the recession and all.  So, to achieve the effect I stuffed a towel in the bag and covered it with a bunch of bills which I had copied and cut out.  No, not in Photoshop…some of us still like to play with scissors.