Tags
Today I’m still digging deeper into the impact yesterday’s Supreme Court rulings will have on both the same-sex marriage issue and gay rights. Trying to separate the wheat from the chaff is giving me a headache. The Pollyanna approach being taken by proponents and the ‘we are headed toward legalized bestiality’ approach taken by the bigots has left little middle-ground for an accurate review of just how extensive and broadly those decisions will be interpreted by those who can actually take action. The only conclusion I’ve come to so far is that tthe word ‘journalism’ needs to be removed from the dictionary. Today’s news organizations are in such a rush to say something they no longer take the time to do any in depth investigation; their focus is on filling air-time rather than on getting their facts right. Or even coming up with an informed and intelligent opinion.
So taking a break to clear my mind, as usual, I turned to porn. Fox News would benefit from following my lead. Though as often as they have mentioned having sex with animals in the last 24 hours, perhaps they already are. Being more conservative in my approach, I tend to stick to naked male flesh. And ran across these shots that provided what I thought was a perfect segue from the lack of focus on reporting news to the only slightly less purposeful lack of focus provided by a limited depth of field in photography.
Back when people took pictures with a camera instead of their cell phone, using a camera’s aperture setting to highlight part of a subject while allowing the rest of the shot to not be in focus was a standard trick of the trade. Today’s point and shoot photography considers that bad, and instead tries to make the entire shot evenly focused. So even in porn, you seldom see these kinds of photos. And that, from the evidence of these pictures, is a shame. So is that journalists today have adopted this trick and made it the standard for their brand of reporting the news. On the plus side, I heard Anthony Weiner is taking another run at political office, so maybe all is not lost.
Related Posts You Might Enjoy:
Glenn said:
This was clearly done in post with either PS or some other piece of software. You can tell by the way certain parts are spotlighted but everything in the same focal plane is blurred. And of course you can see he is shooting with his cellphone. While amateurs may want everything in focus all enthusiasts seem to want is as narrow depth of field and as much “creamy bokeh” as possible. Which you typically need heavy “fast’ lenses to achieve. So it’s really about showing off your lens collection as much as anything.
Bangkokbois said:
Now that you mention it, before the day of digital photography I had a filter that did that.
Don’t think I ever actually used it though. Seemed like cheating.