I’d just like to take a moment to show you a few “hidden” (though not necessarily intentionally) cues that a spectator may absorb from the photos that I transform. Additionally, I’d like to express that my goal with these photos, at least the ones that are connected to or OF my personal ancestors is to leave a memorable—hopefully positive—impression on the viewer. Definitely, I feel I have found a compelling aesthetic and my output has become exponentially better, the most recent adjective I’ve been hearing is FANTASTIC—which thrills me. Being in OHIO, with degrees in both FiLM and 🇺🇸 CULTURE STUDiES, I have a need for such an expression of…of….something—the ANCESTRY studies, at least for now, fills this gaping void, for sure. 🐇 🕳
resurrection
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/resurrection
noun
res·ur·rec·tion | ˌre-zə-ˈrek-shən
Definition of resurrection
1 a—capitalized : the rising of Christ from the dead
b—often capitalized : the rising again to life of all the human dead before the final judgment
c—the state of one risen from the dead
2: RESURGENCE, REVIVAL
3 Christian Science : a spiritualization of thought : material belief that yields to spiritual understanding
I would now like to illustrate the few things I’ve been doing within the photos i’m working on to imbue a “sense of life” —i.e. RESURRECTiON—that hopefully makes them “come alive”. Most definitely the addition of color helps to peak interest, however—and likely this is the “cultural studies” part of me—I like to know not just “WHAT?” but “WHY?” Actually, I’ve just decided that THIS tangent will only present the READER with distractions. My objective in this post is simply reveal a . few of the “hidden” messages or indicators in my colorized or transformed or the preferred RESURRECTED photos.
though ages are listed, I’m not overly confident.
Obviously, I include names and or clever captions. Even the names I try to be playful with…such as always using a different colored lower-case “i”. This is for no particular reason other than aesthetic actually…and now my “system” doesn’t fight me when i simply key in “i”. [READ: I no longer have to type Ii to get the lower case one and delete the big one—that was tedious, let me tell you… but it was important enough to keep the aesthetic a-hem “alive” (yes, pun intended)].
kevbenso
In addition to the subject’s name…I have begun to include other layers—at first it was FIRST AND MIDDLE (in the case of FAMILY PORTRAITS) with the FAMILY SURNAME as the “headline”—then I tacked on the Matriarch’s maiden name, then the daughters married name. I mean, right there tells a story, if not THE story.
NEXT, i have begun to include, in a different color, but nicely complementing the overall palate, of course, any NICKNAMEs—which I typically verify by some other clue—either personal experience with the person or reading EVERY DETAIL in the Ancestral file I have compiled. Some are obvious, whilst others not so much. I definitely watch VERY CLOSELY, the Juniors or III generations, as they often try to make themselves stand outside of the shadow of their namesake father, at least in my pedigree. These are all DETAILS, though, that is very much a necessary element of their RESURRECTiON, I feel.
I definitely watch VERY CLOSELY, the Juniors or III generations, as they often try to make themselves stand outside of the shadow of their namesake father, at least in my pedigree. These are all DETAILS, though, that is very much a necessary element of their RESURRECTiON, I feel.
kevbenso
Additionally, I have become quirky about the spelling of both first and last name and whenever in doubt, I look at their obituary or their gravestone ( I love the gravestones that verify either their nickname, or something else that helps with the resurrection a la DONALD BENSON MOORE JUNIOR, “UNO CHAMP” or very much in the same vein, CHARLES “CHUCK” “LINDA’S HUSBAND” R POPADAK—usually the R alone wouldn’t stand a chance—I “think” it’s ROBERT but honestly the other two are enough to fulfill my ultimate objective—RESURRECT.
I try to include the YEAR SOMEWHERE, if known, in the photo—depending on the source and the credibility—i tend to trust what’s either written in ink or written in expression on their face. There was a huge discrepancy of about 5 years with a recent project [THE HOUSE OF BLOOM] in which the SOURCE claimed 1937 and it was clearly misleading given the youngest subject’s age in the photo and what ma th (the suggested date minus the subject’s birth year). I’ve never been particularly good at guessing ages…
ONCE I CAN CONVINCINGLY date a PHOTO, I place, usually in a more concealed fashion, the subject’s age, below the right ear, utilizing the concluded DATE as a timeline. I conceal these because while important—and not necessarily to everyone—I want it to not take away from the image at hand, though it does, again, help with the resurrection process. It’s also nice to see, relative to one another, age differences, etc.ONCE I CAN CONVINCINGLY date a PHOTO, I place, usually in a more concealed fashion, the subject’s age, below the right ear, utilizing the concluded DATE as a timeline. I conceal these because while important—and not necessarily to everyone—I want it to not take away from the image at hand, though it does, again, help with the resurrection process. It’s also nice to see, relative to one another, age differences, etc.
Often times, who IS NOT in the PHOTO (because they weren’t born yet) is also a good clue to go by.
That’s all I have for now, sorry for being Chief LONG-WIND at any point of this (yes, Marsha, that’s directed at YOU!) And I hope you have been compelled with my output thus far.
NEXT:
Leave a Reply