Lala Martin
Some time ago I found the photographs of Martin Lala on the network. I could not avoid the surprise and immediate captive by images that I had as textures, landscapes and portraits of an identity that is folded upon itself in a fragmented space where the horizon is reached only by choosing the proper angle, a density still where the presence of model and photographer was as hard as all that remained to complete.
Do - Her Eyes Are Closed (I am)
images Lala are maps that mark us all that no glimpse of their world, their terra incognita, are roads themselves arrested in a turn of the road, waiting for someone to pass and stop to watch and stay stuck there, watching, as a part of the portrayed.
In the Faceless Crowd / No Name Face (I am)
What is portrayed Lala, her face, insert body become fragmented and that map is not his body or his face or his portrait, but an earthy landscape that makes us lattice and we entered our own strangeness of looking so deep, so far, so need to catch that absentee sounds like the sea shell in our eyes.
Your identity is banished, exiled from itself and only emerges as a drowned man's hand marks a milestone in his absence, a gesture that becomes a sign, in language so tenuous, but firm, points out the frontiers between two folds of his physicality, his stay in the picture on the map in the world.
Every New Beginning Comes From Some Other Beginning's End (Colorless Tiara)
His photographs are crossed by lines are plowed land in which the traces of a collapsed time seem to beat, seem to want to rescue him, wanting to wake up and make it walk. Are textures that form a gauze veil entremuestra the remaining distance to reach a certainty.
Disparate (I am)
Lala's photographs are landscapes a wait.
Lala Interview with Martin :
Who's Lala Martin?
Lala Martin is a girl who began writing and then moved to photography.
is a person who was always clear that what it was going through some branch of art and in fact tried them all. Is someone who can do any job offered, the only explanation that it is only going to be completely happy with a pen or a camera in hand.
Remember the first time you thought the composition of a photo before it?
I am not someone think of the compositions before taking the pictures, not I plan what I want, let it be presented alone. I work a lot with space and that what they usually do is take a good look at the place that I have available and see what I can do with it, but I am a firm believer that the best composition is that surprises you liking it without you need to do anything, the surprise in the end result is a factor not resign in the hands of some advance planning. If we talk about fashion sessions made for companies or individuals, and here we are talking in other words, for there you have a production at your disposal that will simplify many things - like the location, costumes, and there is a conceptual idea campaign you have to respect - of course with their freedoms.
Can you See my Vision
What material resources do you use for your photos?
Everything is close at hand adds, if known choices. For more than not to plan my compositions I can tell very well in the environment those elements that were not in the picture and try to work on it but I'm not picky, anything will do. No tripod work, I like to use what has available at the time to work the different heights and distances, I always saw the tripod as an element that helps but I do not like being subject to it.
Would telling us the whole process that leads from your idea of \u200b\u200ban image to that vision?
Very occasionally I have ideas before conception of a picture. What I most often happens is to have a concept in mind and do not know which image to take to capture it. That's what I like, part of the challenge and decision, of course, trial and error. And always take more than a different image that can be covered by the original concept - The decision on what show and does not respond to several criteria, but I always try to consolidate what the public expects to see with what I actually want to show. In that sense, let alone earn me what people want to see my work, but knowing. We take the image digitally currently working with my home camera, a HP Photosmart M627 (it's a personal matter, I know that at some point I'll have to use a reflex for the same work demands and their issues, but the now I see no reason to change my camera) and then are selected which are and which are not ends in the subsequent edition is usually done in Photoshop or as say my recent work in Lightroom.
Follow You
A very important part of your work has to do with editing in photoshop, with the creation of textures. Could you explain that conceptual impact these interventions have after the shot? Do you use other tools besides photoshop?
I think the picture has two interrelated moments quite independent of each other - making the image and post-production thereof. When using programs like Photoshop or Lightroom, to name the ones I use, one can get as good a picture not look much better but is just that, one can not sell the spirit of his work. The contribution it can make a Photoshop action is merely a matter of colorization, a Lightroom preset can solve issues such as light exposure, a texture may emphasize a composition or add an extra element to assist in the matter of aesthetics but the sense the image, its meaning and if significant can not ever come of post-processing. And I strongly believe that because you can do a cut and choose which part of reality is going to communicate or can merge two images, but this fusion going from the concept of the image as a whole, can not depend merely stylistic issues, aesthetics have to reinforce something that has existence independent of it. To put it more concretely: the touch is a great tool that can give us many possibilities - it is able to improve an image if used properly or create an aesthetic aberration if used indiscriminately, but if an image says nothing, if it is unable to transmit anything per se, change the tone or apply a texture will not do the miracle.
In one comment you make to the caption, you talk about the many ways you can take the same image, just combining with others or editing it. In fact, in your series Fusionary Imaginary play with this idea using the photo collage. Do you think we can still use the term goal refers to the reproduction of an image by the photographic apparatus?
Of course, if you do not believe it would not take pictures! I think, as I said before, an image can be meaningful in itself or can generate a whole new meaning by applying another image (that is what Imaginary Fusionary my series of photographs to achieve a union of whether leaflets, brochures, etc. generating a new concept that arises from the union of these images metonymically working, part of the whole). Many times I see that some people may use this technique to generate Leopard (which it seems that everything changes and everything is renewed so that in reality everything remains the same), are mere personal choice, me personally I like to have something to say.
As to the multiplicity of the photo message, it is best and is perhaps the magic of it all: a text can be interpreted in many ways but the possibility is lower and we are always in the dilemma of whether we understand what we have said or not. Instead the image is an anchor in itself, and everyone chooses where to anchor and how - Feelings can be aroused by the image itself may be a phenomenon fully evocative and it is a projection that makes the person on a moment of your life or experience that the picture reminds him, is a wonderful process of empathy. And the camera is always there, the camera is the pair of eyes that are choosing what shows you - is you can discover why it is showing you.
Share a Little Piece of your Blue
Has passed away analog photography?
I think not, but be very careful when talking about these issues. I personally feel in debt to analog photography because I so far I've only worked in digital form, and I think you have to get to the very essence of this art that only you can give the analogy. In this last period I have purchased several analog cameras and I'm actually looking forward to a trip I have planned for October to try. But she said we must be very careful about these issues because, as yet there is genuine interest fashion, and lately has had a good analogy of a genuine interest, but also being used as a fad by many.
Many of your favorite photos yourself meddle as a model. What function does this intervention? Are you the one that is within the fragmented body?
always me who is inside the body fragmented, it is evident from the case, even though some of my pictures of myself using other women's names are merely stylistic issues - but could not never deny my own person in what I do.
I often use myself as a model for the need for urgency: many times I feel the urge to take pictures for me is a particular concept and obviously, I have a staff of models in my house so I ended up being posing because I know if I postpone the case then you will not have the same meaning. Also many times it is a matter of fidelity to the original idea: even if it is the work of the photographer to guide the model to achieve the pose you want, many times the model is close but does not achieve 100% by the simple reason you can not see the images that one has on the brain then, in those cases where I know nobody would be able to do that I need, I do.
The Voice Unheard
Contemplating your work gives the impression that the treatment of space in your images is very specific: no limits and, simultaneously, perhaps for the density gives with your textures, takes on a personality, a kind of identity which overlaps with the identity, in turn diluted by the fragmentation and the glimpses of your figure. Are we talking about a landscape or a portrait?
A landscape. I like to think that everything is a landscape, portrait or even a macro, everything is subject to change, and everything has a story, even the pores in skin. That's why for me everything is landscape, even the most elaborate ideas. Everything that I tell a story from the picture drawn to a close-up of an eye shows me a field of things that are there for a reason, a reason, and that I can consider beautiful or not. Everything is a large sign that unfolds before our eyes, we like what we see or not.
Your images, that kind of push your body in an area that seems to have been settled yet, give a sensation of tenderness sheltered weak to be protected to avoid being trampled. There is a kind of fragility strengthened, the dignity of what is shown. Lala, how what we are talking about your photos? If his intention to tell us about something, of course. And, if it were not, what is so silent your photographs?
mine not only the images that give us most of the people living on this count and keep quiet. Photography, painting, drawing, whatever it tells us something. And if they are empty images, images that the creator did not say anything, the good thing is that maybe someone else if they can be saying something. In the case of my pictures I did not explain or talk about what I say or what to tell because I think it's like grab some scissors and cut them into pieces, and if I did that not only would be limiting my work but would also fail, and not allow them to take their own life according to the aspect with which they look. All I can say is that my pictures tell you what you want to tell you, and to be silent so that you do not want to hear.
More information:
http://kumulonimbus.blogspot.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lalamartin