The Art of Peter Saul – Criminal Medicine

When I was a student at Florida State University, I had the wonderful opportunity of interviewing artist Peter Saul. At the time, he was 63 years old and an instructor at the University of Texas. After seeing his work at FSU’s art museum, I was inspired! There was so much detail and elements of story that I knew I just had to write my art education term paper on this awesome artist. This is a portion of my paper and interview concerning his work Criminal Medicine.

http://www.liliangarcia-roig.com/pdfs/MaxCatalog.pdf

The art created by Peter Saul reflects the images of surrealism, pop art, and abstract expressionism. His use of distorted gesture and unrealistic figures imitate the style of surrealists; his bright fluorescent colors and cartoonish style represents the work of pop artists; and his abstract figures mirror the abstract expressionists. Saul’s subject matter usually includes social or psychological issues. Viet Nam became the subject of Saul’s work in the 60s. Some of the artist’s work came from a personal level, such as his “Self-Portrait”. Saul has exhibited his work all over the world, including France, Switzerland (Bibliography) and at Florida State University.

Criminal Medicine, one of Saul’s pieces located in the Florida State University’s permanent collection, was painted with oil on acrylic in 1966. Like his other works, Criminal Medicine is filled with symbols of its time – the 1960s – the flower power, Vietnam era. This piece’s symbolism involves an objection to the war that was so devastating – and so objected – to so many people. Criminal Medicine is about the power the United States’ soldiers had over the Viet Namese. There are chemistry tubes and vials labeled “race mixer” and “criminal medicine”, a U.S. Army sergeant, a female figure with a hat, a house, protruding eyes, musical notes, a cross with an army coat nailed to it, and the word “adultery” labeled nearby a female figure with an embryo in her womb. She sun is shown in different phases: smiling empty-eyed and not smiling. The subjects are overlapped, and the cartoonish colors include bright pink, orange, yellow, green, and silver, with bright and military shades of green and blues. Saul’s style in this artwork is tightly pieced together with black outlining the colors.

Criminal Medicine takes on a deconstructionist attitude, with its contradictions in the social setting. It represents what was behind the scenes of the destructive war – prejudice, pregnancy, and prayer. The racism between both countries was prevalent. The soldiers were impregnating women before they’d leave the country, and there were people praying for their lives to be saved probably more than ever.

In his interview, Saul says that there is a lot of psychology involved in Criminal Medicine. The sun is a curious item in the painting, with its spacey smile on one side and its melancholy look on the other. Perhaps the artist was trying to remind himself that it was still the age of LSD, despite what was happening across the world. Ironically, Saul claims to have never taken LSD or any drug (Interview), although his work appears to be “trippy”.

(Note: LSD was banned in ’66 when this painting was completed.) (“Political Paintings).

For more information about this piece at Florida State University’s Museum of Fine Art, visit:
http://www.liliangarcia-roig.com/pdfs/MaxCatalog.pdf

Shannon Hudnell of Abstract Lucidity Wins Bride’s Choice Awards™ 2011

New Smyrna Beach, FL – January 30, 2011 – WeddingWire, the nation’s leading wedding technology company, is thrilled to announce Abstract Lucidity Art & Photography  has been selected to receive the prestigious annual WeddingWire Bride’s Choice Awards™ 2011 for Wedding Photography!

Recognition for the Bride’s Choice Awards™ 2011 is determined by recent reviews and extensive surveys from over 750,000 WeddingWire newlyweds. Our past clients are among those that shared their experiences on WeddingWire, the largest wedding review site in the nation.

Abstract Lucidity stands among the top five percent of wedding professionals in the WeddingWire community, representing quality and service excellence within the wedding industry. Awards were given to the top wedding professionals across 20 service categories, from wedding venues to wedding photographers, and were based on the overall professional achievements throughout the past year.

“WeddingWire is honored to celebrate the success of the top-rated wedding professionals within the WeddingWire community,” said Timothy Chi, WeddingWire’s Chief Executive Officer. “With the annual Bride’s Choice Awards™ program, WeddingWire has the unique opportunity to recognize the best wedding professionals across the US and Canada. We applaud Abstract Lucidity for their professionalism and dedication to enhancing the wedding planning experience last year.”

We are happy to announce that Abstract Lucidity is among the very best wedding photography within the WeddingWire Network, which includes leading wedding planning sites WeddingWire, Martha Stewart Weddings, Project Wedding and Weddingbee. We would like to thank our past clients for nominating us to receive the Bride’s Choice Awards™ 2011.

For more information, please visit our WeddingWire Storefront today at Abstract Lucidity Wedding Photography on WeddingWire.

For more information on the Bride’s Choice Awards™ 2011, please visit www.WeddingWire.com.

About WeddingWire, Inc.
WeddingWire.com, the nation’s leading technology company serving the $70 billion wedding industry, is the only online wedding planning resource designed to empower both engaged couples and wedding professionals. For engaged couples, WeddingWire offers the ability to search, compare and book over 200,000 local wedding vendors, from wedding venues to wedding photographers to wedding cakes. WeddingWire also offers an online community and a suite of cutting-edge planning tools for weddings, including wedding websites and wedding checklists, all at no charge. For wedding professionals, WeddingWire provides free online management tools creating the only market

Why Owning a Camera Does NOT Make You a Photographer – Part 2

Just to clear things up a bit due to some misunderstandings, I would like to state that I should have made my last blog on this topic a little bit clearer and perhaps longer. However, I did not want to bore anyone with a really lengthy, boring blog that would bore you to death with boredy boredom. Please be advised I pose to do no ill harm or misfortune to those who have good intentions for the love and art of photography.

The intention of my last blog, written a bit by my estrogen-bearing-motherly-protective-tendencies, was to call out the GWC’s = Guys With Cameras (and may possibly delve into the females as well). This does not pertain to people who truly enjoy pursuing the hobby of taking photos of nature, antique cars, objects, their families, children, and other people in general terms. This does not pertain to people who have been in photography and want to explore other subjects, professionally or otherwise. We all have to start somewhere, right? None of us were born professionals, myself included. My point is if you know in your heart and soul what your intentions are then you have nothing to worry about. Period.

NO GWC’s

The term GWC pertains to the asses that pursue women as objects, without anything else in their minds, with no other intention but to see naked women. They may pay them, they may not; but either way these women end up exploited one way or another, either by the photographer’s prurience, the model’s reputation, embarrassment, or otherwise.

If you are interested in photography, then by all means, go for it!! Do what appeals to you. Do what you dream! I am pro-dreamer, if that is even a valid term. (Just call me Shakespeare-Palin if it’s not!) If you are are into photography and don’t consider yourself a professional and would like to pursue more of your hobby, I suggest joining a local camera club, an art group, or even a positive online forum to continue your love of photography and keep on keepin’ on. Just keep doing what you love – it’s what life is about! (**This does not apply to perverts.**)

Why Owning a Camera Does NOT Make You a Photographer – Part 1

(*Note: The photo above was taken with a point and shoot. Most of my published works were taken with cameras that cost under $500.)

With the digital age in full swing and everyone owning a cell phone camera and taking photos of every possible thing out there, the world is suddenly filled with “photographers”. And if you call yourself a photographer and think that you are better than me just because your camera is bigger, better, or more expensive than mine, then you probably aren’t really a photographer at all, in the same way I can buy a jet and call myself a pilot.

Whatever. Fuggoff.

Being a photographer takes passion, and not the type that starts between the legs. Photography an art, and if a photographer is only interested in taking nude or pornographic type of shots, I personally wouldn’t consider that person an artist or a photographer, but someone who merely operates a camera. Being a photographer is also knowing and understanding how to use a film camera before you even pick up an automatically programmed digital. It’s about understanding what an F-stop is, ISO, metering, lighting, and all of the other technical things that – if you didn’t understand, then nuff said. Most of all, being a photographer is about knowing your subjects and embracing the right moment.

There are too many GWC’s (guys with cameras) out there calling themselves photographers and too many young and naive men and women out there believing it and getting themselves wrapped up in bad situations. Unfortunately, in some cases there are even professionals out there taking advantage of young women.

On the other hand, there are some really, awesome and talented photographers out there who are great to work with. It’s sort of like dating – you have to sort through the idiots in order to find the right one.

Be Careful of Photo Contests

A client in which I had photographed some pet photos wanted to enter some of the photos in a contest, but since I was the owner of the photos and reserve all rights, she was unable to do so. She asked me if I was interested in entering her pets in the contest, as she, like most pet owners, are proud of their furry family members. I told her I would look into it and get back to her.

Just as I had suspected, like most contests, the photographer basically gives up his/her rights and allows the contest holder and sometimes its affiliates to use the photo however, whenever, and for an undetermined amount of time as they please. The photo owner has no rights because by entering the contest, the fine print says so.

This doesn’t bother most amateurs, as they are usually more than happy having their photos in publications. But for professionals who work hard and depend on our photographs to make a living, it doesn’t fly too well.

Ironically, as I am writing this, I was just sent an email with a link from Photo Attorney’s blog. Her blog goes into greater detail and is well worth the read if you are thinking of entering your photos in any contest.

http://www.photoattorney.com/?p=1034
 

Shannon Hudnell of Abstract Lucidity Photography Wins 2010 Bride’s Choice Award

Press Release

New Smyrna Beach, Florida – January 19, 2010
– WeddingWire, the nation’s leading wedding technology company, just announced Shannon Hudnell, owner of Abstract Lucidity, has been selected to receive the 2010 Bride’s Choice Awards™ for Wedding Photography!

© 2009 Shannon Hudnell

The annual Bride’s Choice Awards™ recognizes and celebrates excellence in quality and service within the wedding industry, as determined by recent reviews and extensive surveys from over 500,000 newlyweds.

Shannon Hudnell/Abstract Lucidity is among the top five percent of all vendors in the WeddingWire community, which includes over 100,000 wedding professionals across the US and Canada. Awards were given to winners across 19 different service categories, from wedding venues to wedding photographers.

“We are excited to recognize and honor the success of the top wedding professionals within the WeddingWire Community” said Timothy Chi, WeddingWire’s Chief Executive Officer. “The annual Bride’s Choice Awards™ program has given us the unique opportunity to highlight the best wedding professionals in each region as reviewed by brides and grooms who have utilized their services in the past year.”

We are happy to announce that Shannon Hudnell/Abstract Lucidity is among the very best wedding photographers within the WeddingWire Network, which includes WeddingWire and Martha Stewart Weddings. We would like to thank our past newlyweds for nominating us for the 2010 Bride’s Choice Awards™.

For more information, please visit our WeddingWire Storefront today at

http://www.weddingwire.com/biz/abstract-lucidity-new-smyrna-beach/a1ddbb39fc8138c4.html

How Do You Know If You’re Infringing on Copyrights?

Let’s face it. We all know that intellectual property (copyright) infringement is running rampant in this digital age. Musicians are suing for illegal downloading of their music, photographers are complaining of their photos being stolen, and artists are afraid their work is being illegally printed.

One of the issues photographers and artists are currently facing is having someone download photos straight off of their websites and using them without permission. Just recently, there was an uproar over a New York Times reporter who admitted in an article to printing photos off of Flikr to decorate her house. She didn’t believe that she was violating any copyright laws and even encouraged others to do so, with obvious disregard to other people’s property.

In order to give a better idea of the concept of infringing on the work of artisans, I would like to use a few examples.

This is the original photo I took of the model.


Suppose the model didn’t like the way she looked so she asked someone else to “fix” some things for her. Is this copyright infringement? Unless the photographer gives permission for someone else to alter their work, it is considered copyright infringement.

Now suppose you are someone who just happens to “collect” (for lack of a better word) photos of women. You find a model you like, decide to change the photo up a bit by cropping a portion and changing the toning, then post it on a website or a blog. Is this copyright infringement? You bet it is. Just because the photo is altered doesn’t give you any rights to it. No amount of cropping and toning can make it yours.


Now suppose you see a picture of something you find on the internet and you would love to have a painting made of it. Maybe you want a few things changed up a bit like the colors. Maybe you’re an artist yourself and would like to paint it or maybe you pay another artist to make it into a work of art. Now you have violated copyright laws. Any use of an intellectual property such as an image, artwork, writing, etc., without the express permission of that person is copyright infringement. Plain and simple.

Suppose you are a model and you would like to enter some of your modeling photos in a contest. Unless you have permission from the photographer to do so, you could be violating copyright laws by submitting something that isn’t rightfully yours.

There are also a few grey areas that haven’t been covered. For example:

Suppose you are a photographer and you want to mimic the master works of Ansel Adams. You find the exact location of where Ansel stood, waited for the moon to rise and the clouds to form in the exact place, and you take a series of photos until you get the right one. Is this copyright infringement? No. You did not arrange the moon and clouds, you simply imitated a master’s work. Imitation is not infringement.

On the other hand, suppose you are a photographer and admire the work of someone else so you decide to copy the layout of the image. For example, the photo is very specific in the way certain items are arranged – perhaps there is a model with a very original pose with one leg around her neck, the other wearing a rubber boot, a rose on a table in a certain angle, lighting is set up just right, a particular book with its title shown is on the table under the rose, a fork is dangling from the model’s mouth, and there is a dead fish on the floor next to the rubber boot. This is someone’s original idea, it is very specific and nothing like anything that anyone else has done. You think it’s cool and want to try it out and copy it too. Would this be an infringement of the original person’s work? More than likely the photographer would win his case in a US Supreme Court because he could prove that his original idea had to be manipulated by human hands (as opposed to the Ansel Adams photo) in order to copy his work.

For photographers, I highly suggest displaying your name and/or website across everything you upload to the internet and only upload low resolution photos. This way if you find your work on someone else’s website you can prove it’s yours. As for those of you that think it’s okay to use someone else’s photos just because you see it on the internet, think again. It doesn’t hurt to ask someone for permission to use their work for yourself. We might even say yes.

© 2009 Shannon Hudnell

Is Someone Using Your Business Name to Defraud Others?

Twice within the last month I have had the unfortunate incident of finding out that someone had created an imposter myspace profile by copying and pasting my real information and photos onto the fakes. The imposters then proceded to use the profiles to spam people on my friends list with Acai Berry Juice websites. Within hours, I had both of the imposter profiles deleted, but it was time and aggravation involved.

Here is a copy of the screen shot I took of the first imposter on May 13th. You can see where they are using my actual copyrighted artwork, registered business name, age, location, and the link to my website goes to my actual website.

This is the spam that followed it:

This is from the second incident that took place on June 3rd:



The first incident was bad enough but when the second incident took place, I began to have a lot of questions. Am I being targeted randomly or is this being done by someone that knows me? Then I started to ask legal questions. What crimes have been committed? Here are a few answers I found.

Fraud – It is a crime to impersonate or deceive others for financial gain or advantage. The impersonator was illegally using a legitimate business to send spam links to their own business website. This could also include internet fraud and consumer fraud, which all have separate laws and various punishments in a court of law. Sometimes each state and jurisdiction has its own set of laws as well.

Copyright Infringement – This is the unlawful use of copyrighted material. They stole my photo, and it even had my name typed across it! What balls.

Depending on the outcome of this situation and state and federal laws, other crimes that some of this may fall under are harassment (this incident happened twice by the same company), and criminal harassment.

Now does this mean I’m going to pursue this? Probably not. As far as I can tell, no harm has been done to my business. But I will tell you it was a lot of aggravation. I had to prove to myspace who I am and send them of a copy of my business license. And remember that with myspace, things don’t happen at the snap of a finger because they are limited on employees.

Also, I do not know who the perpetrator is. It could very well be someone in China, which basically means there is nothing I can do about it. In fact, the website leftcool.com is registered with someone in China, and normmust.com no longer exists. More than likely, these were websites that also mimicked Acai Berry Juice and were actually geared toward identity theft. But that doesn’t mean that is the person who is doing it is the same person that is on the registry. Anyone can register a website nowadays anonymously or under another registrant’s name, so it very well could be someone here in the U.S. or even another country doing the dirty deeds.

There needs to be some serious changes with internet laws. Too much is out there and too many scammers are abusing it. If anyone, especially a legal expert, would like to contribute to this, please do so.

© 2009 Shannon Hudnell