an open letter to michael chabon

Dear Michael,

I want to be a writer and I'm writing to you about this because we have a few things in common and I'm thinking that a lot of time friends become friends based on the things they have in common so, even if we can't be friends, maybe you can give me a little advice on the subject of writing.  Namely:  How to make it big?  a.k.a. How to get started -or- You tell me what to do and I'm going to do it to a tee because I think you're a literary genius.  Just so you know, I've read like two and a half of your books and they are fantastic!  Now I know you are thinking "Really, just two and a half of my books and you think I'm a literary genius?"  The short answer, yes.

The long answer is that it is not only that but, like I mentioned earlier, there are things about you and I that go together.  For starters you are a dad.  Guess what?  I'm a dad!  You like comic books.  I like comic books!  I mean, I used to like comic books!  When I was in high school!  Another thing we have in common, you are a writer...(read my mind!).  I'm a writer too!  It's just that nobody knows my name yet-and that is precisely where you come in.

I'm sure you are also wondering why I've only read half of that book of yours.  Well, the truth of the matter is that I went back to school and they make me read other literary geniuses like Homer and Blake and O'Brien and Twain and Hemingway and Faulkner and Miller, and even though they haven't made me read any of your work quite yet (I'm sure they will, it's still early in my semester) I had to interrupt one of your books of awesome to read one of theirs.  I would have stood up for your work any day of the week and boycotted reading any of the required material but, y'know, there would be a quiz later on so...  Anyway, I would have written to any one of those other geniuses but you are still alive and seemed the most approachable.  I mean, I don't think I could have ever been BFF's with Hemingway or Blake besides.  They don't know anything about Dr. Who or Superman. 

Look at me rattling on like a star struck imbecile, back to the issue at hand.  What is the best route for me to travel in order to become a literary genius like yourself.  Well, I guess I should say a well known literary genius.  Here is my situation.  I'm married and have a full time job as a photographer.  A great job-to be sure. Let me make it plain:  I am blessed, but being able to add "Literary Genius" on my resume instead of "photographer" I thought would look and sound so much more prestigious.  They always say never miss and opportunity to better oneself.  Besides the full time job I, as I mentioned earlier, am a full time dad too.  My wife and I do well for ourselves in our current careers but I've always had this dream of becoming a writer in hopes to one day establish myself as a bonafied literary genius-y'know, like yourself; so I'm thinking hey, Michael Chabon is a dad and a husband and a genius writer and likes superheroes and watches TV and probably hates four way stops just as much as the next person who hates four ways stops and I'm sure he will know what to do.  Like any common American citizen I am positive Mr. Chabon will want to evoke his superhero fantasies of his childhood and see me, another common American citizen, in need.  Maybe not in need of saving in the same sense of being trapped under a bus, but instead being trapped underneath a life a mediocrity.  I may not be drowning in an undercurrent of river water, but instead am gasping for air at a job equal to that of stagnate water.  

Since I think I've clearly shown just how absolutely normal a person I am and that if I lived in the same school district as you, and your kiddos, we would most certainly be co-members of the local PTA together (if not best friends) and hopefully you will understand and help out a friend in need (if not, at least a fellow common American).  

Well, I've got to go start dinner for my family (as I'm sure you have to as well if it's around six or so in the evening when you read this), in the mean time I will await your response.  I know you are a busy person but please get back to me ASAP, the world is always in need of another literary genius, like yourself.

Sincerely,

brandon hayman (future literary genius)

video :: scenes of winter

I remember a Valentine's Day where I awoke to tons of snow on the ground.  It wasn't too long after I moved to Fort Worth and it was then I learned that, while a White Christmas was rare, we were almost guaranteed snow after the new year.  As we approach the end of February snow isn't in the forecast, but today was quite cold and with it was a cutting wind.  Quite beautiful

click here for video 

the hobbit :: a review

          First a couple of disclaimers:  I’m not a movie critic in any official capacity whatsoever.  I’m not up on the latest art house indie darlings, nor am I a huge contributor towards giant, explosive, karate-alien-super-soldier-villain-turned-hero summer blockbuster films (in 3D!).  I’m just a guy who likes movies and likes the movies he likes because he likes them.  Period.  I also was late to the party that was thrown (and apparently boycotted by some) when Peter Jackson announced that The Hobbit would be filmed at 48 fps therefore ushering in an entire new movie industry while the rest of us 24 framers just sit at home and watch our Hi-8 home movies until we cry.  A co-worker actually informed me of this newest controversy which I ignored since I live in a city that apparently isn’t capable of even showing the film at such speeds.

            Even though I hold no degree in film, film making, or film history one thing is true: I, like most people, love movies.  As I stated before, I like what I like because I like it, but before I say whether or not I like The Hobbit allow me to explain what I was thinking before I paid a visit to the box office.

            A trilogy Mr. Jackson, are you for real?  I’ll give it to you.  I’ll give it to you that the first three movies, which I was at the midnight showings for (that’s the night before regular people woke up) were pretty amazing.  Yes, I was a card carrying member of the Lord of the Rings fan club.  I read the books, I watched the movies, I bought the DVDs, then I turned around and bought the extended director’s cut special edition DVD boxed set with another hour and a half’s worth of movie…and then I watched the special features.  I was that guy though I drew the line at dressing up in costume.  That never happened.  Even so, I was pretty happy watching the academy awards after the final LOTR had been released and the Academy pretty much gave LOTR every award there was unless it had to do with acting.  Sorry, but that’s the truth.  I remember thinking as the credits rolled at Return of the King that yes, The Hobbit should be next.

            My apprehensions came when I learned that it was going to be two films.  Having read the book I thought that two films was a bit of a stretch.  I mean, it has been a while, but I remember the book being a fairly easy read with simple language and a fun undertone; obviously meant for kiddoes.  So, how exactly will he stretch this into two feature films?  I equate it with adapting Goodnight Moon into a full fledged television series.  After realizing that Mr. Jackson never asked me and that when it came down to it the two-part-er has no bearing on my life, I moved on, got over it, and forgot about it.

            Until I learned he was going to make it into three movies.  Okay, hold up.  A trilogy?  You mean, like three big long movies-epic ones-like LOTR only a prelogy to LOTR?  After learning about the planned trilogy the whole idea became a giant money-grab for me.  Just another way for Jackson, Hollywood, Warner Bros., etc. to pad their pockets and fill the theaters with fluff and feather and leave the pillow fighting up to the viewers and critics to figure out if it was all worth it, knowing all the while that for us to find out if it is worth it we’d have to pony up the money first.  In fact I wouldn’t have seen the film at all had it not been for my oldest son who was really excited about it.  Soon enough I found the two of us paying for tickets and walking into the theater.

            Since I had pre-conceived thoughts of the entire franchise being a money-grab I opted out of the 48 frame per second edition and the 3D.  Good ol’ fashioned 2D and 24 slow frames per second for my old eyes.  Therefore I can’t give a report about the picture.  Even if I had seen it at the faster rate I don’t know enough about the subject matter to give any voice to it anyway.  What I do know is that it was nice to start at the film’s ending and at the beginning of the first.  Meaning it was nice to see the old Bilbo Baggins and Frodo again, if nothing else for nostalgia’s sake.  Seeing familiar faces at Bag End before Frodo began his own adventure coupled with a soundtrack that I did fall in love with stirred up that old excitement of the first films within me and truly made me want to go home and watch the old films again.  It’s like coming across a photograph of yourself with your arm around the neck of an old friend, and being reminded of all the great fun you had with them, then missing them.  Once the film starts you have to suffer a little back story beforehand that helps you put into perspective the reason why these dwarfs need to take back their mountain, but as soon as that big round door comes into view it seems that all the mayhem of before and all the darkness that is yet to come years down the road doesn’t even matter; if Frodo and Bilbo are content with their simple lives, then so too am I. 

            In hindsight, I realized that 45 minutes of the movie passes before Bilbo even begins his journey to the Lonely Mountain, but I really wasn’t bothered by it because spending time in Bag End is like when I take a trip home to South Louisiana.  There time sort of slows down and I’m forced to sit back and just listen to the wind.  One can never spend too much time in Bag End, like the good ol’ South I’m sure the food alone is reason enough to never leave.  Of course if two more movies are soon to come after this one then yes, eventually Bilbo must be off on an adventure of his own, and so the movie’s momentum finally begins. 

            Like the other films that came before it, The Hobbit doesn’t really slow down once the adventure starts.  Of course the parts that are my favorite are the parts I remember from reading the book, namely the goblins that turn to stone and of course Gollum deep inside the cavern.  That isn’t to say I haven’t got new favorite parts, such as the meeting between Gandalf, Elrond, Saruman, and Galadriel; and the moment in which Bilbo saves a life.  For me the entire film is a journey back to the places I loved before.  Seeing them again on the big screen while new characters-along with a couple of older ones-travel them is just as fun.  Each scene is beautifully photographed as before and Martin Freeman’s portrayal of Bilbo is spot on.  As an audience member you are never quite sure if Bilbo is in or out.  At one moment he is the hero he is told to be, another moment he is the coward he knows he is.  Which direction he takes seems to change by the second and even Bilbo himself seems surprised to have made it as far as he has once the last shot goes dark.

            In preparing to write this review, I read some reviews of my own, just to get a feel for what was being said, and to educate myself a little more about the hype surrounding the film and its touted 48 fps.  One critic noted that by the end of the movie he was all in.  I have to admit that the filmmakers’ hinting at the dragon that is just waking up inside the mountain underneath its own mountain of gold and treasure was a perfect way to end the film.  I found myself siding with the critic as I debated what I really thought about the movie.  Is it a money-grab?  Yes, it most certainly is, but it can be argued what isn’t a money-grab in Hollywood these days?  Is it overkill?  Yes, and so were the extended director’s cut special edition DVD boxed set that I bought of LOTR, and loved every minute of it.  Do I like the film?  The answer may not be as obvious as The Hobbit’s predecessors, but if the next film serves up a halfling facing down a fire breathing dragon then the answer is a definite, “Two tickets, please.” 

old man winter

Old Man Winter should be cold and the skies should be gray. The only way to find comfort in his presence is to wear a scarf, earmuffs, and a knit hat. If not, the wind from his breath will truly numb the tips of your fingers and toes. He begs for hot chocolate to be served and a glowing fire in the house. A sunny day isn't a characteristic he prides himself in, even if the temperatures are below freezing. His mornings are frost-bitten, his nights bitter and cold like crushed ice they crunch underfoot. During the day the sun hides behind a veil of clouds, fog, and mist, threatening Winter's perfect day, but never making good on his threat. The sun stays back a ways knowing his time will come and be filled with swimming pools, beaches, barbecues, and hot, humid, nights. For now, winter has his way. I bundle up and take a walk through the park appreciating Winter's handiwork as much as I appreciate those summer nights. In Texas we seldom see much of Old Man Winter so I want to spend as much time with him as I can.

shooting film in a digital world

Recently the world of photography has been transformed seemingly overnight by a little phrase called "digital". This shift from film cameras and capture to pixels and computers has really created a bit of a debate within the community. In the early days of digital capture, the technology really was not present; a digital camera that took one photograph that produced a one megabyte image would cost around $10,000. The cost benefit was not even present, but the instant gratification was impressive. Fast forward ten years, and we take a photo on our cell phone that can rival a 35mm photograph printed at a typical retail lab…or is that entirely true?

In today’s debate, it is not so much about instant gratification, but about something a bit deeper. Depending on who you may talk to it may be a quality issue. It may be a color issue. It may be an issue with sharpness. It may even just be a debate of ambiance or nostalgia, but whatever the issue is, it is debatable, and in a world where Kodak stopped producing one of its most famous film products, kodachrome slide film and their New York factory being leveled to the ground, there is a fear that film is indeed dead.

But, and it is a big but, film may be making somewhat of a comeback. Is it true what they say, what’s old is new again? In New York, a group of ex-Polaroid factory workers are at work, even now, on new instant film for all those Polaroid film enthusiasts that were stunned when Polaroid announced that they would stop producing all instant film altogether, leaving some 300,000,000 Polaroid film cameras, and their owners, with no film to shoot becoming paperweights overnight. (The Impossible Project, 2010) In the mean time, a successful California based fine art wedding photographer-Jose Villa-is busy creating breathtaking sun-drenched, pastel engagement portraits and wedding albums using the tools of photography that have been around for years, a Mamiya and a Holga camera and Fuji 120 and 220 film. His success, and the success of others who are following suit, bring up the question again, ten years after the digital bug began biting, is film dead? I have to argue, it is not.

Please understand that just because film isn’t dead, that does not mean that the world over should ditch their digital cameras and shoot film alone. In the digital age that would not only be a bad idea, but a very impractical one. The realization that digital has made photography more accessible to the amateur (by amateur I mean simply those people who do not make their living as a photographer) is noted and is appreciated. There is huge value in giving a mother an inexpensive digital point and shoot camera that allows her to preview pictures that she takes of her children instantly so that if the photo did not turn out, instead of missing the moment and leaving it to chance, she can-in a matter of seconds-re-take the picture making necessary corrections. Instead the idea is to say that film is here to stay and therefore let us explore the reasons why, its practical usage, and also to demonstrate how film can be incorporated into the digital world without slowing down the fast pace we have grown accustomed to.

If one must begin at any place why not examine film itself? A brief overview of film is that to the general public there was one size and it was called 35mm. Sold in rolls in small canisters, it was available with 24 or 36 photos-or frames-per roll. This was standard for all 35mm cameras and was the most commonly used. The professionals had other alternatives depending on their subject matter and the focus of their profession. More simply put, landscape photographers would use larger film formats, negatives that ranged in size from a 4x5 inch frame to an 8x10 inch frame. Portrait and wedding photographers didn’t need to go so big, so their film choice was usually medium format film, which was probably equal to two to three times the size of 35mm, thus giving higher quality and also the possibility for larger reprint sizes. All this is to say that the most current high-end digital camera models being sold today boast about having a full-framed sensor, meaning a sensor that is as big as a 35mm negative (Cambridge in Colour, 2012), and cost in the neighborhood of $6,000. There are digital cameras that have larger sensors than that of a 35mm negative available, and by larger I mean a 50 percent increase in size, that will cost about $30,000. (Hasselblad, 2012) That larger sensor still hasn’t matched the medium format film size, which is double that of a 35mm negative frame. There are some particulars here about pixels and fracturing and the sort of computer babble a lot of these kind of debates get into, but the long and short of it is this: when a photo is taken on 35mm film, when scanned with a film scanner at a good photo lab, it produces a 25 megapixel photo. (Rockwell, 2008, para 5) The $6,000 camera that was mentioned before takes pictures up to 16 megapixels, 9 pixels short of 25.

Now, the point isn’t to bore you with technical know-how, but one more point must be made when talking about film exclusively. Film records higher quality of color, color gradient, and highlight and lowlight details. This gets a little complicated, but I found it best explained by Diana Eftaiha, “…the digital image is captured on a grid of light sensitive pixels, and each of these pixels produces an image result depending on the amount of light hitting it. Where in film, light-sensitive elements are randomly distributed along the film emulsion, overlapping to create a sense of continuous color tone gradation. Pixels on the other hand are not overlapping, so when an image is enlarged beyond a significant extent, these pixels become more and more visible. Furthermore, pixels can only represent certain color values as solid blocks. This means that one pixel can only represent one color value even though the light and color information falling on it from the original scene can contain multiple values. And this is why digital photography is known to produce a non-continuous, incomplete gradation of color tones, an area in which film photography is still ahead of the whole new digital trend.” ( Eftaiha, 2010, para 6).

Now that we have explored film and explained its differences from digital capture, as well as touched on the actual cameras a bit as well, lets look at this from another point of view, maybe a bit more economic. What I have found, in our digital world, is that more time is spent staring into a glowing screen than time spent staring into another person’s eyes. That is just a personal statement from me. A lot of photographers became photographers in order to connect with people either with their photos or through them. A landscape photographer may not photograph people, but they enjoy showing their photos to them. They enjoy the interaction they have through their art and watching it cause a reaction in his or her audience. A portrait photographer is all about the subject, and capturing the essence of that person. A wedding photographer is all about the event, the people, the cake, the flowers, the details, the dress, the groom, the bride, the kiss; on and on it is all about recording the day and archiving it forever. Today’s photographer has been sucked into the editing process, he or she has been slowly drugged, little by little over the years until suddenly they are spending three or four hours with their client and 24 hours in post production after the shoot ends. When Florida wedding photographer Ricci Valladares was asked by Rangefinder Magazine about his switch back to photographing weddings with film he stated his biggest change had been his workflow. “No longer does he spend several hours after each wedding uploading, backing up, editing and doing postproduction on his images. Instead, he packages his film and ships it off to the lab. Two weeks later he receives a DVD of high-resolution scans and a collection of proof prints.” (Perkins, 2011, pg.116 ) Signed, sealed, delivered. That equates to more time spent with clients and doing what you love, taking pictures; and less time spent on a computer eating up the time you could spend shooting something more.

Like stated at the beginning of this paper, it is understood that the majority of photographers will shoot digitally. It is understood that many parents, vacationers, and enthusiasts alike love the convenience and cost benefit of digital. Digital cameras are more affordable than the old film ones were in their day. One can see the image as soon as it is taken and know if it is a good one or not. Prints cost literally pennies at your nearest one hour photo lab, nineteen cents last time I checked at Wal-mart (cheaper if you have it delivered straight to your home). At the end of the day, one can peruse the pictures taken at the park, the beach, the fair, graduation, etc. and simply delete the ones that were bad! No more paying for wasted shots! No more fumbling with film cameras and trying to figure out how they work! This will be the argument for the majority of the public. Even when asked, professionals will admit to their digital love affair, “Can they [pro photographers] get a better shot with 120 chrome [film] than a 20MP DSLR [digital camera]? Probably, but only by a modest amount. But the DSLR is just so much easier to work with, and so much more flexible that when the final goal is digital (as it almost always is today) the choice for these photographers is not very hard.” (Templeton, 2010). Yes, even for the professionals it is cheaper, it is quicker-depending on how fast one is on the computer, and it is what clients are demanding.

In our digital world, though, film can still be incorporated, rather seamlessly, into the fast-paced instant gratification culture. Both professional and retail store photo labs offer scanning of 35mm film which they turn and put onto a CD. Once home, all one needs to do is put it into a CD rom drive and wait for the prompts in order to save it to the computer or order more prints. For the professional this can all be streamlined relatively easy and worked into the regular flow of post production. Even so, there still exists a certain thrill of seeing a photograph in print. At the start of the digital revolution, many clients simply asked for a CD of all the images and thus the job was done. Little by little, much like how digital duped photographers everywhere into hours spent editing, professionals are turning the tables by offering prints, proofs, and albums that turn pixels back into prints and again gives clients something to hold on to and the ability to establish an emotional connection, much like the former generation could do with their parents’ old wedding photos.

Allow one final emotional argument to be made that will lean towards the fantastic and the aesthetics that make up the world we live in. Film looks beautiful. I myself shoot weddings, and when I post four or five shots on my photo blog, I am always asked about the film shots I post. The client always asks what I did to the photo taken with film. My answer is always, “Nothing.” It is exactly what the client looked like. That is exactly what the scene looked like. Film has a quality that one just can’t put their finger on. It has an ambiance that can not be described with words. Jose Villa, the California wedding photographer I mention in the beginning blogged this on his website, “Film has such a classic timeless feel I just don’t get with digital. When I have tried shooting digitally, I find I spend all my time working to make it look like film. Think about how bizarre that is, when you could just shoot film to start with.” (Villa, 2010, para 2) Valladares, the Florida wedding photographer said, “many photographers have observed that digital lacks some intangible quality-some call it warmth, some call it a ‘film feel’” (Perkins, 2011, pg 114).

Many photographers are film buffs. They grew up learning the craft on film. Learning, failing, and learning from that. Digital offers up a much faster learning curve, seeing your faults instantaneously. That does not necessarily make a better photographer. It also does not necessarily make a better photo. Shooting film also represents a time when everyone was not in such a hurry. One could take a photograph and keep walking, and not check the back of the camera to worry if it came out. Film offered, and still does, a lot of latitude when it came to the light it absorbed onto its face. Overexposed photos could be darkened, underexposed could be lightened. Sometimes the camera had a light leak which could offer up some surprising ghostly results that in the digital world no longer exists. Within the analog community, they have grown fond of film’s little imperfections that could often flare a photo red or yellow. An improperly loaded roll of film would offer double or triple exposed frames that were unexpected but can actually be looked at as little forms of found art. A sky overlapping one’s aunt overlapping the hotel while on vacation, telling an entire story in one frame rather than an entire roll of film. It is pretty magical. When I first began falling in love with the medium and learned more and more about film, not only how to properly shoot it, but the numerous ways it could be manipulated, a whole other world opened up to me. I remember saying to a co-worker, a mentor at the time, “The more I learn about photography, the less I know.”

Film isn’t a thing to be feared, or rejected, or to be made complicated. If anything can be made complicated it is all this talk of pixels, sensors, scans, negatives, lenses, cameras, and the list goes on. Film has graduated from the photography community. Digital capture is its new student. Just because film has learned all it needs to know, does not mean that it has nothing to teach us. It has so much more to say, especially now that there is a new kid in school to compare it to. Digital will never disappear, but neither will film. Instead of rejecting one or the other, dig out Dad’s old film camera, buy a roll and give it a spin. You may be surprised by what develops.



References

Cambridge in Colour. (2012). Cambridge in Colour. Retrieved from http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-sizes.htm

Eftaiha, D. (2010, April 26). Film vs. Digital Sensor [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.thedphoto.com/gear-equipment/film-vs-digital-sensor/

Hasselblad. (2012). Hasselblad H-System Camera Specs. Retrieved from http://www.hasselblad.com/products/h-system/h46-31.aspx

Perkins, M. (2011, February). Caught on Film. Rangefinder. 114-120.

Rockwell, K. (2008). Why We Love Film [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/why-we-love-film.htm

Templeton, B. (2010). Pixels [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://pic.templetons.com/brad/photo/pixels.html

The Impossible Project (2012). Retrieved from http://www.the-impossible- project.com/about/

Villa, J. (2010, January 26). Loving Film in Today’s Digital World [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://josevillablog.com/2010/01/loving-film-in-todays-digital-world/

Oh Hot Jam...

My son. He loves music. He actually has a pretty good ear for it too. I'll admit, his music is filtered through me and Ash who listen to what we like, and from there he usually chooses his favorite songs from the ones we play. Like, his ultimate favs in my car are Weezer and Ludo, while his favs when he's in Ashley's car are Lady Gaga and Beyonce's "Put A Ring On It" which he's also biased to due to the song's cameo in the Chipmunks Squeakwal. Often we have to repeat things to Ewan, three even four times, just to make sure he gets it. Things like: Which side of the car do you always get in on? Which side? Which. Side. WHICH SIDE? to which it eventually dawns on him that maybe he's at the wrong side of the car and needs to walk around to the other side to get in it. If only life were a Broadway play, or maybe an opera, because then things that are said are said to music, that's the only time he seems to listen, or to hear. He can sing songs back to you...easy, he remembers artists, song titles, lyrics, and often asks if he has the lyrics correct or not-or often what the lyrics mean if it's a word he's not familiar with. Sometimes he may get the words wrong even, and if asked I'll correct him, but in this particular case, I'll let him go on singing the wrong words. I don't think it's such a great idea to send my kid to kindergarten with the risk of him telling anyone at school, "Oh hot damn!..." So, sing the wrong words all you want on this song, and I'll rest easy knowing that neither the FCC nor the principal will be knocking on our door.

Fall Gallery Night

As the rain steadily fell, sometimes heavy, sometimes a light drizzle, but consistently fell without a break in the day-or during the weekend even-we hopped in the car and drove towards Camp Bowie Boulevard to visit a friend and make ourselves a part of the local art scene. Although my walls really cannot hold pieces that are sold in the galleries we visited, the talent-not to mention the free wine and hor'doevres-still draw my attention. It seems at times that there's too much talent and not enough venues. Too much talent and not enough people to appreciate. We all want to be rock stars, and movie gods; Angelinas and Warhols; celebrity pop rock actor diva missionaries, but not many of us are. Honestly, though, some of us deserve it. Some of the artwork on display last night shouldn't be shown in a small local salon down the road, but hung in an over sized room and a small plaque mounted next to it reading: Don't Slow Down Number IV mixed media on wood, 2009.

Gallery night happens in Fort Worth twice a year. First in the spring, another in the fall. Local museums such as the Amon Carter, the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth, join with local galleries like Art On The Boulevard and Rebecca Low, as well as a good handful of businesses, a local salon or a modern furniture shop, all open their doors to starving artists who itch to find a place to show their work. And for one night, you get in your car and cruise the art district stopping and perusing these shops at your leisure, bumping into friends or acquaintances, making new ones, connecting with artists where one can ask direct questions about inspirations and processes. Or not. Just stand and admire, stick a stick into a block of cheese and move on. The evening is your own and the whole city is an art gallery.

Outside the Salon on West 7th the rain didn't stop the party. Mic and amp set up on the sidewalk a man sang Tom Petty with a stand up bass and guitar accompaniment. Yuppies huddled together underneath a white canopy in the parking lot and sipped their wine and danced on what floor space was available. While this isn't my scene, who can't appreciate people that get out of their apartments and enjoy life a little? We snaked our way through the thin crowd and made our way toward the car.

Driving from door to door while the rain soaked the ground, the street, the steel of the buildings, and the concrete of the street-the whole world mirrored on the road we drove on-I can't help but get inspired with my own art. It's standing inside these art galleries and looking at the work of others that both humbles and challenges me to think differently, and to make those concepts a reality. I'm not Warhol, nor am I even a starving local hanging artwork up at Salon 717, but standing around photographing the world that surrounds me and seeing my shots saved in a little icon of a manila folder on my computer screen really won't get me anywhere either. Hey, I'm not asking for world celebrity. I'm not looking to be star. But, if a couple nights a year I can see my work hanging fancy in a gallery, standing around dressed and vest, wine in hand, work on the wall, at least I can say it was fun.