JPG Magazine: Stories: Interview: Interview with merkley

Interview with merkley

Interview with Merkley

By daniel k. gebhart

16 May 2007

How do you get people to be naked in front of the camera?

Women volunteer! I have a long waiting list - people like to look good. As a friend once said of me: vanity is a drug and I am a dealer. So yeah, I really never plan on "getting anyone naked" - that whole idea creeps me out. Most of them are friends, or friends of friends. Myspace yields many, many opportunities as I use it to keep track of my local friends and events. Only one [shoot] has been from flickr; all the rest are from my actual social scene, people I run into out and about, people with similar interests, etc. I wont be shooting any more flickr people - if there isn't any real social connection, I'd prefer not to go there. It ends up weird and awkward. I like the accountability that real life physical social networks create. I'm not really a guy who is always seeking out naked people to photograph. Honestly, the whole idea of seeking out nude models is rather creepy - it works much better if they come to you. I just started taking pictures of my friends and suddenly it all went bonkers and everyone wants me to take their picture.

Tell us about your "Sky Cam" you used here and there. ;-)

"Sky Cam" is really just my arm holding my camera - WOW! Revolutionary, I know. The lens is wide enough, my arm is long enough, and my cropping is sufficient to hide my feet when I want. On the first one I was in the shower - standing on the edge of the tub. I think you can faintly see me through the glass. On the other one I'm on the green chair in the lower right, feet cropped out of view. The Sky Cam shots aren't very fun to take - it's a real pain in the arm, but it's a fresh perspective, and I think it's fun to see things from a new view. I go down low a lot too for the same reason.

What lighting techniques do you use in your work?

I always use the on-board flash, nothing fancy. My equipment, besides the megapixels and the fact that it's all digital, is really not a very important aspect of what I do. I would not even do photography if it had to involve a lab. I do care about the lighting - but only in so much that there has to be enough information in the digital file to manipulate later in Photoshop.

So you're more the software guy - doing a lot in the digital darkroom?

Right. I like the Ansel Adams quote - the negative is the score, the print is the performance. Same thing with digital. Besides the content and composition being what it is, my original file that comes out of tha camera is complete crap. I am first a painter and I treat every original file as nothing more than a starting point - like an underpainting. After that every element in the photo gets individual treatment, just like painting. Painters understand how I do what I do.

There are no revolutionary secrets here - no special filters, etc. Really it comes down to just a whole lot of tweaking. I use [Photoshop] CS2 but everything I do could be done with PS7. Time and attention to detail are the important elements. Coming from a background where one painting takes me 75 hours, spending a few hours on a photo seems like I am getting away like a criminal. I sometimes feel guilty - like it's not painful enough. Painting is painful.

Which camera do you use and why?

I bought the Olympus E-300 because Good Guys were going out of business, and it was marked half of what I could get it for online. For some reason I felt like I needed something that looked more "pro" than my Canon Elph. I think I regret that decision every day. I hate my equipment and I want it to just behave. Tools limit art more than enable it, so I dont have any love for any of my equipment. I see it all as standing in the way. Except my computer - I am pretty amazed by it. I don't want to sound like a tech hater, because I am not - I love and embrace technology. Digital is soooo great! It's so immediate, experimentation comes dirt cheap. I like dirt cheap. But what I wanted to say about equipment is this: it's not the paint but the painter.

Do you plan your shots carefully?

Yes, I take hours to plan stuff out sometimes. It's the best part. The shooting part isn't as fun as the planning. I like to sit down with my subjects and think of fun new ideas - it's a fun way to spend a couple of hours with someone. It feels like productive goofing off, which is basically what it is.

Where do you get your inspiration from?

I dont know where my inspiration comes from. When I was a kid, I used to play the "what if..." game with anyone who could stand it. I've just always enjoyed coming up with ideas; it's really the most fun I have in life. It's basically just playing, inventing whatever, pretending. I know - it sounds so gay. Art is fun - people take it too seriously sometimes, I think.

How about flickr?

I'm actually more inspired by the immediate interaction and exposure flickr provides, and that (in and of itself) is a big motivator. There are some good photographers on flickr but I have to say that I'm not really that much of a fan of the medium. I am a lover of art, and a hater of artists. Ha - not really. It's been cool though, because in my comments a lot of people have pointed me to various photographers I hadn't ever seen. Usually comparing me or something, but I have seen some cool stuff that way.

Anything else you would like to tell your fans?

No final words. Maybe a big FUCK YOU!! to everyone?

Report a Problem

VOTE: Should this story be published in JPG?