Me, Myself, and this blog

Creativity is just connecting things

This quote by Steve Jobs has been flying around recently even though it’s a few years old but it’s really good and I wanted to talk a little about it. Here’s the full thing:

“To design something really well you have to get it. You have to really grok what it’s all about. It takes a passionate commitment to thoroughly understand something – chew it up, not just quickly swallow it. Most people don’t take the time to do that. Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask a creative person how they did something, they may feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after awhile. That’s because they were able to connect experiences they’ve had and synthesize new things. And the reason they were able to do that was that they’ve had more experiences or have thought more about their experiences than other people have.

Unfortunately, that’s too rare a commodity. A lot of people in our industry haven’t had very diverse experiences. They don’t have enough dots to connect, and they en up with very linear solutions, without a broad perspective on the problem. The broader one’s understanding of the human experience, the better designs we will have.”

This isn’t just really good, it’s really, really good. That’s 2x the really. Really. It’s so good because while it’s specifically about design it actually applies so much more, and actually goes a long why in helping me describe what it is that I do – even though that answer might still be confusing to some people.

Steve is talking about design, and likely product design at that, but I think the essence of this is the need for lots of points of reference and lots of dots to connect. And the need fully digest something to be able to isolate those points worth connecting. Think about your favorite movie, how many times have you seen it? I’ve talked to people before who when mentioning a movie say something like “oh that is one of my absolute favorite movies ever! I’ve probably seen it 5 or 6 times!!!” This doesn’t make any sense to me because movies that I simply enjoy a lot I’ve seen over 10 times, and movies I really love easily over 100. I couldn’t even tell you how many times I’ve watched The Big Lebowski for instance, but it’s enough that I know almost every line by heart and have stared at each scene and studied how they were put together for hours. This is the difference between just watching something and really getting it. Of course Steve isn’t talking about watching movies, and neither am I really, it’s just a simple example of how really getting into something means different things to different people.

It’s no secret that I’m a very obsessive person who has to regularly fight the compulsion to collect things. I’ve been this way my whole life even if I only realized it in the last 5 years. I find something interesting and for some chunk of time that becomes my entire world. I fall asleep and wake up thinking about it. I dream about it and day dream about it. I endlessly research it and try to find the people who know the most about it and try to soak up as much of that information as possible. I immerse myself in that world until I feel like I get it. Sometime I get it in a few weeks, sometimes it takes years. And once I do feel like I’ve really “groked” something, I rarely leave it behind, even if it doesn’t continue to be my all encompassing daily routine. In fact, often it continues to expand – usually because of bits and pieces I fine in later obsessions.

In many cases my obsessions take up so much of my time that I end up needing to find a way to justify the time I’m spending on them and end up turning them into businesses. If you look at my history this becomes pretty obvious. My record label spawned from an obsession with punk rock in general and subcultures like youth crew straight edge hardcore movement specifically. My record distribution company spawned from an obsession with how those subcultures grow and manifest themselves. My design firm spawned from obsessions with advertising in general and the emotional responses imagery can provoke in people specifically. While I never actually started a real business from it, it was my obsession with old Japanese toys in general and Jumbo Machinders and Sofubi Kaiju specifically that drove me to the web and got me creating things there. Before these toys and the community I found around them online I mostly used the internet for one off communication and minor games, the toys gave me a reason to write articles, do research, take phones and try to actually build something. (My first “blog post” predates blogs considerably, and was a guest article in the mod 90’s on Alen Yen’s Toybox about an 18″ knock off Getter Robo figure I’d won on ebay.) Continued obsession with arts, and my growing connections to visual artists as the creative director led to my involvement in the art gallery world, and continued obsession with web communities and relationships led to the launch of blogging.la.

Not everything has had a justifiable business come from it – lots of the things I’ve collected have been from obsessions that lasted only as long enough for me to track down a bunch of them, learn enough about where they came from and what was drawing me to them. Sometimes I just collect images of them. Some of those things stick around, some are sold to make room for the next thing, but the info and knowledge I amassed from studying them carries on into everything else. I learned print production from designing concert flyers at kinkos. I learned product design from seeing the difference between how Ark and Popy designed toys for the same robot characters with vastly different results. (image above is a rendition of Baltan by Popy on the left, and Ark on the right) I learned marketing from touring with punk bands. I perfected trend spotting by hanging out in fixed gear bike shops in LA and Tokyo. I sharpened attention to detail by watching baristas at Intelligentsia craft the perfect cup of coffee again and again. I learned business best practices by sitting in the lobby of technology conferences and listening to what people said about others -who did they have respect for and why, and who didn’t they. Most recently my obsession with the D.I.Y. culture that fueled much of my punk rock years has drawn me to hackerspaces. I spent years hanging out in European hackerspaces before attempting to open one myself. It’s a different world for sure, but many of the underlying themes are constant. That chapter in my life is still being written.

Travel has also been a massively important piece of this – going to many places regularly and surrounding myself with interesting people gives me a much better perception of who is doing what and why, and where similarities pop up and dots that need to be connected. When I talk to people and companies, I’m able to draw from all these experiences. Otaku level knowledge only comes from immersive obsessions, and I’ve spent a lot of my life collecting obsessions.

This existence isn’t all roses and sunshine – part of the trade off with always trying to find new and exciting things means to make room in my head for it I often have to leave less shiny uninteresting things in the past. In means I need to see a pattern developing before I recognize new threads. It means I’m rarely content with my surroundings and when I have 5 free minutes I need to find something to fill them with. It means I go through cycles of insomnia because something I’m so excited about something new that I can’t shut off my brain to sleep.

But I wouldn’t have it any other way. I can’t imagine looking at the world through any other viewpoint and I love being able to help people see their projects from another perspective. I love tying things together. And these things all become part of my repertoire, part of my arsenal. I know that doesn’t really answer the “what do you do” question any better, but hopefully it sheds a little more light on the process.

Kicking the dust off

The more I write the more I write. When I slack off I lose the motivation, it’s almost like the tubes get clogged and it’s much harder for me get going again. I was on a really good streak there for a while with the 750 words thing but then the technical problems and self inflicted criticism conspired to work against me and I fell off that wagon never to return again. I have this fantastical idea that if I hadn’t missed that one day I would still be doing it and kicking so much ass but the thought of going back is like having to admit that I failed before and that is a shitty way to start something new so I just abandoned it. But I need to write, and I need to feel the need to write, and so this post is filler. It’s just me flowing whatever comes to my head to try and clear the tubes and get things moving again. If you think of a sink in an old house that hasn’t been used in 10 years or something – you turn it on and wait, you hear something gurgling but still nothing comes out, you keep waiting, and then finally there’s a little sputter of rusty brown shit water that is filled with bits of gunk and is really the last thing in the world you’d want to touch, that’s what starts flowing. But you keep waiting and the brown becomes tan becomes cloudy becomes clear and then all is right with the world and you can fill up your glass or take a shower or whatever you were intending to do. The next day when you do the same you still have that rusty shit but not for nearly as long.

That’s what this post is, it’s the rusty, cruddy shit that is clogging up my pipes that I need to clear out. Of course I could just write something privately but for whatever reason, call it masochism or exhibitionism or just plain egotism I need the audience. The audience of the 3 or 4 people who actually read my blog, but it’s the exposure that works for me. If I know ahead of time that no one is going to see what I’m writing then I just give up and feel like I’m wasting my time. Knowing that in a few minutes I’m going to hit publish means I do have to try and make real sentences and convey some kind of tangible idea. So if you are reading this I appreciate you being my muse, even if you weren’t planning on doing that today.

So I need to write because I have decided to take the plunge and full on really write a book for the purpose of writing it. Not just collecting shit I wrote before and calling that a book. But starting from zero with a final goal in mind and working towards it. I thought this trip would be a good venue for that since I’m writing what is basically a life philosophy manual pretending to be a book about travel, with traces of self help. Though the help may be one sided, I’ll benefit from writing it but who knows what kinds of take away you’ll get from it. I’m writing about the multibasing idea and how, in addition to that being a shitty name, it’s more than just travel and taking less luggage with you. It’s about a way of life. A perspective. And a suggestion or two about how the perspective you hold decides what you see. If you think the whole world is nothing but the single room you live in, then chances are you aren’t going to spend much time trying to get out of that room. However if you think the whole world is the house which is filled with many rooms that you bounce between without any real decision to do so, well then you have a bit of a bigger world view, but it’s still limited by the walls you built yourself. See where I’m going with this?

One of the things that set me off was a friend, actually several friends, hearing about the trip Tara and I were about to go on and calling it “the trip of a lifetime.” I thought about it and realized that most people would be excited to go on the trip of a lifetime, but hearing those people say that was very depressing for me. It made me feel like this trip is some big built up one off thing that could never be achieved again. And of course I didn’t want to think that because I see this as a continuing step in a direction I’ve been heading for a long time. And those people knew that, they know about other trips I’ve been on and they know about my penchant for being transient and mobile, so WTF? But then I realized they were projecting – if they were going on this trip it would be the trip of a lifetime because, some of them anyway, hadn’t left their own counties in many many years, if ever, and hadn’t left their cities in a pretty long time as well. So them looking at the itinerary we had laid out was overwhelming and impossible, where as to us, it’s cool for sure, but it’s just the trip we’re taking this year, and there will be more like it later, just like there were some like it before. For me, this isn’t the trip of a lifetime, it’s the trip of the moment.

Realizing this changed my thoughts from being bummed that the idea was I’d never do something like this again, to being bummed other people thought they could never do something like this on their own. And that’s why I decided to write the book, because seriously anyone can do this, and they only reason they don’t is because they have convinced themselves it would be too hard. They couldn’t get the time off work, couldn’t save up the cash, couldn’t just leave things behind. Fuck that. It’s not that they don’t take big trips because big trips are too hard to take, they don’t take big trips because they have convinced themselves big trips are too big to take.

There is a saying about trying and not trying. If you don’t attempt something, there is a 100% chance you won’t pull it off. The only way to ensure you never go on a trip, is to tell your self going on a trip is too hard, expensive, time consuming, etc. I’ve never thought that way, I always assume if something is too hard I’ll fail somewhere in the process of trying. I can’t stomach the thought of not trying and then wondering what life would have been like if I did. I don’t want to think about the memories and experiences I could have had. Trying and failing is much more rewarding than playing it safe. So while the book is about traveling, and about traveling regularly to several places – maybe even “living” in some of them simultaneously, it’s also about how to use that same way of thinking in life in general. You’ll only ever pull off what you try, and if you think the world is only the one room you live in, then there is 100% change you’ll never walk out of the room and see the rest of the house, or the front door and see the outside.

So I’m writing this book while I’m on the road. Trying to write a little every day. It’s going, not as fast as I’d like, but it is going and if I just keep chipping away by the time I get to the end of it I know it’ll be something I’m proud to have done, even if only the 3 or 4 people who read this post read the book. Wish me luck.

Toy Cameras & The Photographic Image

“Despite all signs to the contrary, it was not the original goal of Mr. Lee… [inventor of the Holga] to make toys, but rather to ensure that people were fascinated and interested in creative film photography.”

My recent photography obsession isn’t limited to just taking pictures – I’ve been talking to photographers and looking at tons of photos as well. Two things that have sparked my interest a bit recently are the extremely high end stuff like Leicas, and the extremely low end stuff like Holgas. I actually think the two play really well together and at the same time create images unlike anything else. Recently, the folks over at Magnesium (the worlds most respected photo agency) asked me to curate a piece they were doing on toy cameras. I happily accepted got to work sorting through mountains of photos taken by a few very talented photographers using some exceptionally cheap gear. The images in the piece were taken with Holgas, Dianas, Fujipets, Lomos and even a Hipstamaic or two. Really fun stuff. Here are a few of the shots, but I encourage you to check out the full piece as well.

©Manny Santiago

©Stavro Papadopoulos

©Nathalie Farigu

©Ken Lee

Read the full article by Manny Santiago and see the complete photo set on Magnesium.

750 words again and again

It’s the beginning of March and so far this year I’ve written more than I’ve written in most years combined. OK that might be a little bit of an exaggeration but it’s probably not far from the truth, and I’ve certainly been on a much more productive kick. If you’ve been paying attention you know I’ve been crediting 750words.com for a lot of that. It’s a simple premise – assume 250 words fills a page, and write 3 pages every day. It doesn’t matter what, just write, every day.

I started doing this at the end of January and immediately fell in love. I liked that it was private so I didn’t feel like I was writing for anyone else, just writing to write. As someone who has always had dreams of being a writer the writing “just to write” part has always been the hardest. I’ve tormented myself with thoughts of what people would like to read or what they would care about and talking myself out of putting pen to paper, or more realistically finger to keyboard on so many occasions – 750words allowed me to jump right over that hurdle and totally kill it.

Some thoughts on Photography

Forewarning, this post is looooong. It’s also filled with a bunch of skate park photos mostly because I live close to the park and it’s a great place to practice.

My relationship with photography has been one of three things, taking photos to use myself, looking at photos taken by others, or working with photos taken by others as part of a larger project. I’ve worked with photographers in both an “fine art” way (showing them in galleries) and a “professional” way (hiring them to shoot something, or buying their existing works to be a part of some design). I’ve looked at photos in magazines, in museums, and pretty much everywhere in between. The photos that I’ve always been drawn to are the ones that don’t so much tell a story, but that inspire wonder, and make you think about what the story might be. The photos I generally ignore, or look at for some specific thing and then forget are the ones that just document things. Portraiture usually falls into the prior category.

When shooting photos myself I’ve had a bit of a roller coaster ride which I’m still kind of on and that has inspired a lot of this analysis. So in my very early experiences with photography, I had some kind of cheap 35mm camera in high school that I’d occasionally shoot photos of my friends with. Those photos no longer exist, the prints having been cut up to make collages and the negatives lost long ago. That’s probably for the best, if I recall correctly those photos pretty much sucked. I should note that the collages were likely the motive for the photos to begin with if you get what I’m saying. I had an idea of what I wanted a collage to look like so I went and took the photos to make it. I’d take one roll, shoot the shots I needed, and that would be that.

The main insert from Toybox Records #001, the first 7" I put out with examples of chopped of photos.

Anyway I wasn’t much into the actually photography part of it, that was just a means to the end for me.

Over the following years I had similar situations where I needed a photo of something for some specific purpose so I went and took the photo to fill that need. It was almost like I was a working photographer with only one client, myself. Though I didn’t do this often, my photos are featured on a good number of records and posters I designed over the years not because I thought I had the best photo for it, but rather because I had *a* photo for it. I needed a photo, I took a photo, I used it, I moved on to the next project. I actually remember more than once being annoyed that I had to finish out 30 shots on a 36 roll because I had gotten the shot I needed in one of the first 6 photos I took and the rest were just in my way.

Then digital photography entered my world. I could shoot only the one photo I needed and then download the shot to use it. For a lot of people digital photography was awesome because it allowed them to take more photos because of the reduced cost of materials. For me, it allowed me to take less.

This kind of coincided with my realization that there were some photographers who consistently took great photos. As a kid growing up I had photos ripped out of magazines like Trasher and Maximum Rock N Roll that I’d taped to my walls. I was attracted to those photos because of the subjects, and hadn’t thought much about who was on the other side of the lens. One afternoon in Chicago my old friend Jon Resh handed me a copy of a brand new book he’d just bought called Fuck You Heroes. It was a collection of photos that had been shot by Glen E Friedman. I remember sitting on the floor in his small apartment near Wrigley Field flipping from one page to the next and literally losing my mind because I was realizing that so many photos that I had grown up with and been inspired by were all taken by the same person.

I knew more than half of the photos in that book because I’d stared at them for hours in other contexts. I’d looked at them dreaming about being a part of the world that the photos had come from. But sitting on the floor in that apartment looking at this book I realized that there were plenty of photos of those same people, those same events, that I’d looked at and passed over but for some reason I’d consistently been attracted to all these photos that had been taken by this one person. I realized who was taking the photo and how they were taking the photo was obviously just as important and the fact that I’d never realized it before was a testament to how good of a job that photographer had done.

I can safely say that afternoon changed my whole perspective on photography and I started to think as much about what was happening behind the camera as in front of it.

In the years following that digital cameras were becoming much more prolific and ordinary people (not photographers) were able to dive into photography in new and exciting ways. Especially with the adoption of camera phones, that solved the “I don’t want to carry a camera around with me all the time” problem that many people, including myself, had. I explored this aspect with the SENT exhibition in 2003. Billed as “Americas first camera phone art show” we were interested in juxtaposing what actual fine art and professional photographers would come up with when suddenly they had to work in a format the size of a postage stamp with barely web resolution, with the results of giving a handful of other people a camera they could just keep in their pocket without thinking they were carrying a camera around.

We sent them out into the world to see what would happen, and hypothosised that this would help teach people that rather than just snapping a shot of something to document it, they could play with the limited nature of the devices and come up with some really interesting results. And by and large that’s what happened. It was a fun experiment, but the time for that came and went. Very quickly camera phones increased in quality and image size to work just the same as any other digital camera and the uniqueness of it disappeared. I look at those early days of cameraphones with a similar nostalga to toy cameras like Holgas and Dianas. Forcing artists to create with a very limited pallet can produce some very cool results which I think is why those plastic toy cameras are still popular today.

When you have all the choices in the world, which one you make doesn’t matter so much, but when you only have a few choices, they become very important.

Bad Brains "Omega Sessions." Cover photo by Glen E Friedman, design and handwriting by me.

I think that plays into photography a lot, for me especially. Over the years I’ve spent a lot of time talking to photographers about their methods and their philosophy. Shortly after that epiphony in Chicago I had the opportunity to work with Glen directly when we did the Bad Brains “Omega Sessions” album while I was working at Victor. Since then we’ve done several full blown photo exhibitions together at sixspace and he’s become a close friend of mine. We’ve talked about the art of photography many times and I think more than anyone he’s influenced how I feel about it.

There are two schools of photographers I’ve found, one that says good photography is all about editing. These folks recommend taking thousands of shots and then pulling out the handful of good ones to show off. Not surprisingly digital is huge with this world because shooting thousands of photos on film is not quite as easy. This is a practice that works very well for some people and there is no question that some photographers have gotten some really great results using this method of shooting. Including myself. I’ve definitely carried around a digital camera and snapped shots until all the memory cards I had were full and at the end of the day I was delighted to see that I’d gotten one or two stand out images.

But at the same time I felt like I was cheating. Honestly.

A photo I snapped in Harajuku, Tokyo in 2007 during a "photo walk" with a bunch of friends. I took this on a Canon TX1 digital camera and while I've always dug it, it was one of a few that I liked out of several hundred I shot that day.

And yes I know that could be my own neurosis about this, but I’d always think of the old days growing up when I needed one shot so I went and took it, and somehow that was more rewarding then taking hundreds of shots and hoping something good would result. Of course you can argue the difference between knowing what you want ahead of time and just seeing what comes from the day, but it still kind of bugged me and I felt like because I had no limits, I had no reason to think about things too closely.

The other school of thought teaches that you shouldn’t hit the shutter release unless you are sure it’s going to be a good shot. It doesn’t mean it always will be, but you shouldn’t be taking throw away shots on purpose. This is the theory that has always appealed to me, even when it wasn’t something I was practicing.

The more folks I talked to, the more I found that the photos I was visually drawn to were the ones taken by photographers who were still shooting on film. Some people argue that you can get the same look by just using filters on a digital camera but I don’t think it’s the look of the film as much as it is the look of the picture. There is more going on then just what is in front of the camera, and when the photographer behind the camera knows that they have only 36 shots to get the one they want there is a different approach then knowing they could take hundreds or thousands of shots without notice, I think you can tell that in the results sometimes.

If “art” is based on intention, then it makes sense. If you are looking at a photo that the photographer took because they really wanted to capture that specific thing, it will feel different than one that was taken by chance with hundreds of others at the same time. At least that is what I’ve experienced in my consumption of this medium.

I’m not knocking the first school of “shoot a lot, edit a lot” photography, I’m just saying personally the “measure twice, cut once” philosophy strikes more of a chord for me.

An image I shot at the Venice Skate Park with my Pentax K1000 on Neopan400 film, one of 4-5 photos I took that day. No one was skating at the time, people were kind of just sitting around waiting for mysterious thing to happen which I thought created a cool scene. Not sure if that translated to the photo or not.

And it really doesn’t have to do with with the subject as much as the atmosphere. Photos that capture a moment in time have always come across more compelling to me. Even if that wasn’t what I was producing myself. But I think that is the thing, I never related the quick shots I was taking myself with the amazing photos I was looking at that other people had taken. I didn’t have the intention to create a great image so I wasn’t trying to take a great image, so I didn’t think it was anything thing close to the same thing as someone who had the intention of making a great image.

Even though they were both photos.

If that makes sense.

Anyway, recently I was thinking about this and thought that was stupid. If I was going to take a photo, why not spend a little extra time on it to make sure it’s nice. Why take 20 photos hoping one of them will work out, or just uploading them all to flickr, when I can take a breath and think about what I really want the photo to look like before actually taking it. On one level I’d still be taking photos of the same things, but I thought maybe with a little extra care the photos I would get would be much better with some added thought.

And that’s when I decided I needed to shoot on film. Of course I have my iPhone with me all the time and thanks so some cool apps I can replicate the “look” of a film photo rather than just looking like a stock digital photo, and that was a great step (any anyone who has checked out my flickr stream knows I’m no stranger to), but if I wanted to really explore this I needed to get a camera, load it with film, embrace those restrictions and see what I could come up with.

Venice Skate Park, taken with an iPhone G3 with effects from the CameraBag app applied. This is the "helga" filter which is supposed to replicate the look of a photo taken on a Holga.

It should be no surprise to anyone who knows me that I couldn’t just be simple about this so within a few weeks I had a Pentax K1000 (a fully manual SRL from the 70’s, thank you craigslist), a Nikon N90s (a much newer fully auto and computerized SRL, on loan from Jason DeFillippo, a FED-2 (a Russian rangefinder from the 50’s that is most accurately described as a knock off of a Leica), and a Holga. All 35mm except the Holga which is medium format, but I haven’t played with that much yet. Between these 4 cameras I feel like I’ve got a good variety of functions and looks and I thought I could dive in and see what I might be able to do with them.

I’ve only just started this so I don’t have a lot to show, and realistically I might not ever have a lot to show. If the shots I take end up being more embarrassing than interesting I’ll probably write this whole thing off as an interesting experiment, which isn’t a bad worst case at all. And if I happen to get some shots that I’m more proud of, well all the better. I can say for sure that in a few weeks of actively walking around with a film camera I definitely feel like I’m looking at things differently. It’s kind of crazy because I’ve had a camera of one kind or another in my possession every single day for the last 5 years at least, so the ability to take a photo at any time isn’t new. Instead it’s knowing I only have a few photos that I can take. So I’m looking for those. Trying to pull something out of the mix I guess.

Unknown skater at the Venice Skate Park, shot on a Pentax K1000 SE with Fuji Neopan 400

As I said I don’t know where this is heading just yet, but I think the process of limiting myself forces me to be creative within that area. I think I do better with less options. I know not everyone feels that way, but I think the restrictions can be liberating, where as lack of restrictions sometimes is just too intimidating. Self inflicted restrictions anyway.

And really, if nothing else, I’m really enjoying the creative outlet. It’s easy to forget how important that is sometimes, so having an excuse to embrace it makes my brain work in ways that I like, and don’t get to indulge in often enough.

Venice Beach post storm, shot on roll of Kodak color 35mm a Nikon N90s

More of my crappy photos:
Some film shots I’ve taken and kinda dig
More Venice Skatepark Photos – film and digi

Facebook Friday

I proposed this idea on twitter yesterday and decided it made a lot of sense. Going forward, from here on out, or at least until I decide it doesn’t work as well as I thought it would, I’m going going to visit Facebook on Fridays. I realized that I get in this cycle of checking twitter, checking e-mail, checking facebook, then doing some work, then checking those three all over again. E-mail and twitter generally result in something I need to respond to or act on, but Facebook is largely just looking at comments friends have made or new photos they uploaded, a lot of which I’ve already seen on twitter or Flickr anyway. So I’m going to cut down my usage and see what that changes. So Facebook Fridays it is. If you are a friend on Facebook and need to contact me, regular e-mail is a better option anyway.

Anyone want to try this with me?