My initial thought on learning this week's theme was that I was going to have to go outside and shoot a bridge or something. So far, everything I've shot for these assignments has been on the little green table in my office and this week's ended up being no exception. The idea of going outside does not repel me, I'm just a lazy-ass. I wanted my final result to have more of a blue-print feel but wasn't successful achieving that particular look.

I was surprised that the quote belonged to Jean Cocteau. A poet seems at the opposite end of the spectrum from science. If you have not seen his 1946 version of "Beauty and the Beast" - do run right out.

as to process, for some reason wanted to study water on this one...kinda the 'scientific' properties of water....i took alot of picture of water's meniscus...but they did not work too well for me.........i couldn't get a bug to stand on the water long enough for a photo....and i also tooks some pictures of moving water...but I found them not engaging enough.....also in the exploration i took out my level, because i find it intriguing that water always finds a horizontal, level position and the horizon in art, literature and architecture is a huge interest of mine...so hence the picture....admittedly though it looked the coolest of all the photos i took....so yes my formalist tendency took over and that is what I submitted....it was fun experimenting with paul's macro lens.....i wished that i had more time to play with it....

anyways....thanks everyone...there are some cool images...and Robert....what is that???????

When I first read the topic I thought, "Argh! This is a terrible topic, obviously submitted by someone who hasn't participated in very many photo projects." But, as I thought about it some more, I began to think that this is actually an excellent topic, for the same reason.

One of the goals for this project is to open ourselves to new ways of looking at things. To think about the topics, and be creative. One very good way of doing this is to do atypical photo topics. It makes it that much more challenging.

Even though I came to think of this topic as a good thing, I still initially felt a little unsure of what I was going to do. But, after thinking about it even more, I came to the conclusion that this topic is actually wide-open, and lent itself to endless possibilities.

I'm going to (uncharacteristically) take a moment to describe the steps I went through, because I actually found it pretty exciting to go through this process.

First, I basically dissected the topic..."Art is Science made clear". I initially focused on the word, Science. I asked myself what would I shoot to illustrate Science? After thinking about it, I realized that there actually isn't very many things (if any) that you could shoot that can't be linked to some form of science. There is in fact a science behind everything around us, be it physical, chemical, biological, mathematical, etc...

Given that the topic of Science now seemed incredibly vast, I moved my attention to the words, "made clear". What does it mean to make something clear? It occurred to me that another way of saying it would be to "reveal" something.

I personally think that a good way of revealing another aspect of something is to look at it from another perspective. At that point my focus (no pun intended) shifted from what to shoot, to, how to shoot it... to "reveal" its science.

If you haven't guessed by now, my image is an extreme close-up of Anne Marie's eye. Initially my goal was to not have any reflections, but in the end I was glad to see my own reflection. I think it added a layer to the image... biological optics vs. mechanical optics.

Now that I've gone on and on about my process, I'm curios to know if anyone else had a process they went through that they care to share?

Also, for the life of me I can't figure out what Robert's image is. Care to share, Robert?