125 Years Later...

On a blistery Winter day in Washington DC, 33 men came together to talk about their passion for science, exploration, and the unknown. Some of these men were no strangers to innovation themselves, among them being Alexander Graham Bell. As the night concluded, the gentlemen had an agreement to create a society of their own in order to pass along knowledge to a wider audience of their peers. They may not have realized it at the time, but in creating the “National Geographic Society,” they had ultimately changed the landscape of how common people would be able to see the world. January 13th marks the 125th anniversary of that meeting. What started as a friendly think-tank has become one of the largest, beloved, and recognizable non-profit organizations in the world. Their yellow logo, first put in use in 1910, has become an internationally-known symbol as a gateway into the world.

Looking back at its formation, the path of the Society is a truly remarkable one. If a person picks up one of the earliest issues (now possible thanks to their wonderful Complete NatGeo Collection), they will find a dense, esoteric magazine that is only legible by those in the relevant scientific fields. Issues were not released on a set basis, and the general public was largely unaware of its existence. Still, it plugged on and among those scientific circles who understood what the articles were saying, it began to gain some notoriety.

Important to note is that in these days before film and television, world explorers were the rock stars of their days. Men like Robert E. Peary, Ernest Shackleton, and Matthew Henson were comparable in their time in much the same way we know of Tom Cruise or Paul McCartney. Their journeys to reach the poles, scale the Himalayas, or tread through sub-Saharan Africa were dreams come reality with untold findings and mysteries returning with them. As these explorers had their expeditions written out by the Society, many of them even began to contribute, and the writing became much easier to understand for the common reader without sacrificing its scientific integrity. Through this one magazine, people throughout the country were able to see far-off lands that were – and still are – exotic. We traveled underneath the sea with Jacques Cousteau and learned the truths about chimpanzees with Jane Goodall all within their pages.

Perhaps the greatest contribution to the magazine came in 1890, when readers opened up to find an eerie black-and-white photograph of Herald Island, Alaska. The picture is nearly indecipherable by today’s standards, but as the first photograph published by the magazine, it set off a firestorm in the scientific community. Worried that their research journal would become watered down by the publication of photographs, they clamored for Alexander Graham-Bell not to use the medium. However, he was a great fan of the medium and famously insisted on “pictures, and plenty of them.” His guidance, along with long-time editor Gilbert Hovey Grosvenor, has made National Geographic the golden standard in the photographic world. You would be hard-pressed to find a budding amateur nowadays who does not want to “shoot for NatGeo” as a career goal. Now, we not only read about ancient or current cultures and landscapes, we can also see the world around us with stunning detail. Whether it’s an Afghan refugee with stunning emerald eyes or the stereotypical “lion downs a gazelle” shot, their images impact us often at an emotional level we may not even be able to explain.

On a personal level, their magazine has reignited a love for learning and knowledge that had previously burned out. They inspire creation, exploration, and the imagination just as well as any film could with the benefit that they are finding out about a world that actually does exist. In a time when it seems humans have covered every possible area there is to see, National Geographic continues to unmask the hidden places of our knowledge. There could be no organization more deserving of their success. So Happy 125th Anniversary to the National Geographic Society, and may they continue to “inspire people to care about our planet.”

no strangers

"no strangers: ancient wisdom in a modern world" is the newest exhibit to grace the halls of the Annenberg Space for Photography. Returning to its ties with National Geographic and scientific photojournalism, this new exhibit is guest curated by the astounding Wade Davis. The goal, according to the customary booklet handed out upon first entering the gallery, is to show the plight of indigenous cultures around the world, and how they express a shared humanity with all of us. Throughout the hall, there are several categories and sections, from language to rituals, that highlight this theme amazingly well.

My first thoughts, after seeing so many exhibits at the gallery, is that the prints themselves have set a new standard. Quite simply, many of these photographs look absolutely gorgeous in digital pigment print. The color and clarity on the majority of the displays easily outshines many of the Annenberg's past endeavors. Whether looking at the smiling faces of Wodaabe men, grinning widely as they attempt to woo a bride with dance, or Steve McCurry's always-impressive shots of Bhuddist monks wall-running, the gallery has made no effort to shy away from gigantic prints, allowing the viewer to take in every inch of the canvas. With the amount of color shown in this exhibit, the choice was a great one, and I hope to see more like it in the future.

The next obvious part of the display is the sheer amount of sections explored, which was a bit of a mixed bag for me. According to my notes, I counted no less than 10 different areas the photographs were placed in, with themes such as "Circle of Life" highlighting family values, or "Sacred Geography" discussing the ways cultures revere the environment they live in. I did feel that some of these categories, based on the actual photos themselves rather than any attached meaning, could have been combined easily. I did find the "Shared Origins" section interesting, as it highlights the San Bushmen tribe, supposedly one of the few peoples able to trace back to the very origins of humanity.

There are lots of people in these photographs, too, which may seem an odd complaint. However, I feel culture is a term that encompasses much more than portrait shots of rituals and families. It involves art, architecture, music, and so much more that I feel were lacking a bit of a presence. Many of the photographs began to feel very similar after exploring for some time, and I had much more enjoyment of the photographs of the ancient library in Timbuktu than of the countless still shots of faces.

That's not too say that all the people shots were similar, of course. In fact, the shots capturing action and life were extremely fun to look at. Perhaps some of my favorites were the photographs of Hamid Sardar-Afkhi, who seems to specialize in the nomads in Mongolia. I had, sadly, never heard of this gentleman before, but his shots of eagle trainers and fur-clad people playing in the Mongolian snow were beautiful. Maybe it's because I am already interested in their culture and landscape, but these photographs will long stay with me. I also enjoyed the shots from A Yin, a photographer who made comparison shots of Chinese families in their traditional garb several years ago, then in their current, modernized clothes today. Of all of the shots in the gallery, these drove home the theme of the gallery more than any other.

The new video for the gallery was also quite interesting and filled with photographers who are legends in their own right. Wade Davis and Lynn Johnson shared their experiences in the field, and I particularly loved Randy Olsen's comparisons between Portland and his work with the bush tribes of the Amazon. Several hit the note that we really aren't all that different from many of these tribes or people, with many of the same basic needs, principles, and understanding of our environments.

Overall, I did quite enjoy "no strangers," despite the emphasis on portraits and subcategories. Wade Davis did a great job exploring he common themes of so many different cultures. It would have been easy to simply talk about Africa or the Amazon, but here we see Chinese, Mongolian, Hawai'ian, Indian, Native American and many other cultures. And, as I mentioned, the prints are stunning in person and really need to be seen up-close to be enjoyed.

The exhibit just opened recently and will run through February 24th. As always, please support this free gallery and keep photography alive and well!

Endeavour: Mission 26

In 1990, Space Shuttle Discovery would launch with a mission that would eventually ingrain itself into the minds of billions of onlookers across the planet, though they may not have known it at the time. STS-31, the mission designation, was to launch a telescope unlike any other that had ever gazed upon the stars. Its name was “Hubble,” and the images it was supposed to convey were going to be revolutionary in the public’s perception of the out limits of the known universe. However, all was not well, and the first images sent to NASA were blurry, even indecipherable, and not at all what was expected out of the project. Careful examination of the materials used for the telescope revealed that one of the mirrors had been ground incorrectly and was off by an almost imperceptible amount. “Imperceptible” was more than enough in the world of science and technology, though, and the damage had been done to a NASA program that was already under a great deal of scrutiny.

This scrutiny would be the origin of a tale that would run parallel to the Hubble errors for several years. In 1986, a disaster replayed across millions of television screens around the country. 73 seconds into liftoff for STS-51-L, Space Shuttle Challenger would disintegrate, killing all 7 crew members aboard. The tragedy was the first public image of human loss in the space program since the earliest Apollo missions, and NASA was dealt a monumental blow in the process. After visiting the moon, many saw the space shuttle program as a step backward in our journey to the stars, and the Challenger disaster cemented questions regarding the necessity of NASA into the general populace. Research was halted for nearly 3 years.

As NASA was grounded and began researching the cause for the disaster, a replacement for the Challenger was commissioned and began construction in the surrounding areas of Los Angeles. Comprised of a ceramic “blanket” and thousands of unique heat-shield tiles (no two are the same on the bottom of a shuttle), NASA insisted on building a new shuttle from spare parts rather than retrofitting the test shuttle Enterprise. The newest, and last, shuttle was completed and rolled out by Rockwell International in early 1991. The official designation for the spaceship was OV-105, but it was also given another title named after the ship of famed British explorer James Cook: Endeavour.

The baby of the space fleet would go through four launches before being given what was undoubtedly its most important, high-profile mission: to correct the broken mirror of the Hubble Space Telescope. In December 1993, Endeavour launched STS-61. In battling through the Hubble errors and the Challenger disaster, NASA’s replacement shuttle almost immediately began repairing not just telescopes, but also the public image of the program. The mission was deemed a success, and Hubble would go on to show us the reaches of space with a clarity and detail beyond our wildest dreams. Suddenly, nebulae and untold galaxies seemed to be right in our our backyard, with recognizable names and memorable images that would go into countless textbooks and posters. Two wrongs had made a right, and the intertwining journeys of the Hubble and Endeavour was the first of many steps towards rebuilding the country’s passion for spaceflight.

Galaxy photo before and after the Hubble repair

Over its 30-year history, the space shuttle program and NASA would go on to shoot towards new ground in orbital flight. Endeavour would fly on many high profile missions and represent the peak in human engineering. Rovers would be sent to Mars, and the international community would succeed in building a cooperative space station in orbit. While various incidents would happen back on Earth, NASA would continue to quietly break new ground in space with a fraction of the budget of other US programs.

After another disaster with the shuttle Columbia in 2003, public scrutiny towards NASA had returned. In response to put NASA back in a positive light, President George W. Bush announced his Vision For Space Exploration in 2004, leading to a retirement of the shuttles in order to focus once again on deep-space flight and a return to the Moon and even Mars. The shuttles, having lasted 15 years past their original program expectancy, would fly their last missions in 2011 and return to Earth for good in new respective homes across the country. New York, Washington DC, and Cape Canaveral, FL, would each receive one of the retired orbiters for their museums. Endeavour, the baby of the fleet, would be the last orbiter to be sent out, returning to its birthplace of Los Angeles, California.

Just as it had renewed interest in space with its Hubble mission, Endeavour would once again become a point of pride among the country. Planning for the move to its new home at the California Science Center (CSC) would take many months. NASA and the CSC would not only have to plan a flyover of the city, but it would be the only shuttle that would have to navigate residential streets in one of the largest cities in the world to make its way to the final resting area. The final cost would amount to close to $200M, paid for entirely by the CSC using funds and donations. Much like the shuttle program’s lifespan, the move would be criticized due to the dismantling of street lights, trees, and signs along the planned route.

The shuttle arrived in Los Angeles on September 21st, 2012. The number of residents who turned out to see the shuttle flyby would be untold, possibly into the millions, as nearly every roof in the city would have someone perched on top. As the last of the orbiters to be retired, the air was nothing short of ecstatic as a modified 747 carried the spacecraft past several California landmarks, including the Golden Gate bridge, Hollywood sign, and Disneyland. The arrival was not unlike the arrival of the President of the United States as the air was cleared for miles around the shuttle, allowing it to drift quietly as the lone sight among the stars.

Endeavour flying over Griffith Observatory

 Space Shuttle Endeavour makes its final flight over Los Angeles on a modified 747

The tricky part, however, would be the 12 mile trek through southern LA streets. The course would be the first, last, and only time a shuttle would make its way through such a densely populated urban area. The course would involve not only residential areas, but parks, coliseums, and even the crossing of the 405 freeway, one of the busiest in the country. The task would involve using a transporter moving at 2 miles-an-hour or less, and portions of the street would have only inches of clearance on either end. The Endeavour would be the single largest object ever passing through LA, beating a considerably popular rock that had made its way to LACMA several months earlier for an art exhibit.

The move began in the earliest hours of October 12, and would take roughly 2 days before ending at the CSC late on the 13th. Any perceived negative reaction to the move was not apparent as it arrived in the Westchester neighborhood round 2AM. While sidewalks and streets were closed due to safety and logistical concerns, residents still turned up in droves for the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see “MIssion 26: The Big Endeavour,” the final mission of the craft. Onlookers would gaze in awe as the ship was parallel parked in a lot along Sepulveda Blvd, and cheers erupted as the transporter engine was turned off to signify the first major stop along the route to allow clearance of the roads ahead.

The next hours would bring their own parade of people and landmarks. Along with the Curiosity rover and Space X’s own successful launches as a private company, the Endeavour craft seemed to inspire generations of people both old and new. As the shuttle was returning home, several tales could be heard about parents or grandparents who had helped build the craft. Current employees of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory gave details on the specifics of the shuttle to curious parade goers. Even the LAPD escorting the craft seemed excited, often stopping for pictures of their own with the shuttle in the background. Perhaps one of the most popular photo opportunities was in the parking lot of the famous Randy’s Donuts, with its giant spherical wonder no stranger to tourists itself. Even Toyota would get in on the parade, towing the large spacecraft with a Tundra pickup truck over the Manchester bridge of the 405 as the main transporter was not approved due to the weight concerns.

When the shuttle goes on permanent display October 30th, it will stand as a reminder of human ingenuity and perseverance. While there will always be controversy regarding the overall program, Endeavour has worked to inspire countless people into looking towards the skies again. Its retirement has brought pride back in full force as the US looks towards the future of space exploration. Whether in building the space station or allowing Hubble to bring us instantly recognizable photographs, the shuttles have been a success in one thing: reminding us that despite how small we are in regards to the universe, that we can still make our way into the outer reaches. That this is just the beginning.

Endeavour crawls towards an overnight parking area during its parade through LA city streets

 Closeup of Endeavour's nose as it makes its way to the California Science Center

Comic Con 2012: Cosplay

For hundreds of nerds every year, Comic Con is more than just a convention where they can hear about the newest entertainment tidbits or collect exclusive toys. Instead, the trip is more of a pilgrimage, a chance to blend in with 140,000 like-minded people in a world where some may find difficulty expressing themselves in everyday society. At SDCC, social norms are relaxed, and fans will often find extremely unique and creative ways to show their passion for these arts (within the admittedly fuzzy realm of good taste, of course).

Perhaps the most popular form of expressing their creative side is known as Cosplay. Short for "costume play," the best way to describe the art is that it is Halloween with specific characters in mind. Rather than dressing up as a generic ghost or pirate, cosplay draws on the idea of living life as a character from a movie, game, or any other type of popular or geek medium. For the poorer or less-enthused, this can simply be throwing on a shirt with Superman's logo on it and finding a cheap red cape to tie around their neck. For the professional cosplayers - and, yes, there can very much be a business behind the phenomenon - costumes can cost upwards of thousands of dollars and take months of construction to make sure every minute detail is accurate to the source character.

As Comic Con has grown over the years, so has the many cultures and traditions around it. Cosplay is without a doubt one of the most popular traditions of the event. Even roaming outside the convention center, a visitor is bound to see a few Disney princesses, Mario and Luigis, Stormtroopers, and any number of anime or video game characters. Some are instantly recognizable whereas others choose to costume themselves in obscure characters as kind of in-joke known only to those who have seen the source before.

Sometimes, the hobby does take off in a grand scale. Many people who don such costumes are the designers as well. Holly Conrad was one such designer who enjoyed cosplaying before her Mass Effect costumes caught the eyes of Bioware, the game developer whose game she based her costumes on. After being featured in the yearly Masquarade event, where SDCC attendees get to see the biggest and best costumes of the year in a stage show, Bioware hired Holly to make official costumes for company events and supervise the upcoming feature film. Some girls even use cosplay to launch or sustain modeling careers, as is the case with well-known cosplayer Jessica Nigri.

For me, I do like to cosplay when I have time, but I unfortunately cannot afford any amazing costumes or props quite yet. Last year, I donned my best suit and brought along a replica top to go as Cobb from Inception. I can also be found wearing a Nerd Herd outfit most years in honor of the show Chuck. Mostly, though, I enjoy the photography aspect of it and enjoy seeing the amount of work and love that go into the various costumes I capture on screen every year. When I can do more than just take a quick snapshot, I like working with the models to take more professional shots, as recreating scenes or just generally having fun with the costumes is a great way to get creative and unique shots that normal portraits don't always offer. So, to wrap up my Comic Con blogs for this year, here are some of my favorite shots from 2012:
 

Comic Con 2012: Fri-Sun

The later half of Comic Con was honestly a bit of a blur. In between the lack of sleep and the massive waiting in lines, the days could easily be condensed into one blog post. Friday and Saturday tend to be the busiest days of the convention, with massive panels in the ballrooms, tons of great costumes, and general shenanigans throughout the entire day. This is starkly contrasted with Sunday, which is extremely laid back and consists mostly of people doing last minute shopping or niche panels to close out the weekend.

Friday was a day mostly spent walking around and getting great pictures of the cosplay (which will be a blog of its own in the near future). I find it important to take a day and not have any plans. Wandering around the convention floor, letting things happen as they do, can lead to some really interesting moments. For this particular year, it was the day I randomly saw the cast of Community getting interviewed on top of the G4 booth, getting Tracy Hickman and Ken Higgens autographs from the DC booth, and landing a few great pieces of swag to take back to my coworkers. The magic of SDCC works in mysterious ways, and it did not disappoint this year.

Saturday, on the other hand, was the major day of planning, as I would wake up at 4:30AM to line up at the line for Hall H. This was my first time entering the room, and I unfortunately did not land the best seat due to misunderstanding the signs regarding certain reserved sections. Still, I was able to see the main screen, and after hours of waiting in line, got to spend most of the day there. The first panel was Django Unchained, which was interesting. I was not particularly interested in the film until Tarantino revealed an 8 minute sizzle reel, which impressed. Following quickly was the panels for End of Watch and the new Silent Hill film. I felt bad for these panels, as they were clearly filler panels (the majority of Hall H was there for what came next. Details in a second), but they did what they could do what was essentially a captive audience. I was actually really intrigued by End of Watch, and genuinely want to see it after previously knowing nothing about this low-budget cop drama.

The main panel for me came next: the 2.5 hour WB/Legendary Pictures panel. The energy before the show was ecstatic, and the room nearly brought the roof down when the curtains next to the main screen started to pull back to reveal a Cinarama experience. Chris Hardwick came out as moderator, and the entire show felt more akin to a rock concert than a convention panel. It was clear from the get-go that WB was going to go all out with this, and one-after-the-other, film teasers and footage was released. The show started off with Pacific Rim, Guillermo del Toro's giant robots vs. giant monsters film. We saw the first ever trailer for the film before the production goes into media blackout mode until Christmas. It was... intense, to say the least. After months fo buzz, it was great to see what the film was all about, and it looks like it will be great fun.

One of the big two I was looking forward to came next. Working at the studio, I knew we would be revealing it, but no one else in the Hall seemed aware. The screen went black, and the crowd was treated to various scenes of a destroyed city while a narrator recited Oppenheimer's famous speech stating "I am become death, destroyer of worlds." Then, we heard a very famous roar made by a very famous lizard that breathes lasers. The crowd went nuts as we saw the famous lightening-absorbing fins and the title card "GODZILLA" flashed on screen. It was everything I hoped for, especially considering the movie is not even officially in principal photography yet, as far as I'm aware. It was good enough we saw it twice.

The WB portion of the panel was a ton of fun, as well. They wasted no time in bringing out surprise guests WIll Farrel and Zach Galifianakis to promote The Campaign. I don't think I have ever laughed so hard at something live before. The panel barely even mentioned the film and consisted mostly of the two comedians (three if you count Hardwick, who was holding his own quite well) riffing each other or the fans.

Then came the highlight for me: Man of Steel. It was a simple panel, with only Zach Snyder and Henry Cavill there to promote the movie. It was the main film most of us were there to see (that or Iron Man 3 later on). Zach did not waste any time in showing off the first, SDCC-exclusive trailer for the film. It was fantastic in every regard, and very different from what I expected from a Zach Snyder movie. Just the teaser alone was heartfelt, and emphasized Clark Kent's desire to know more about his past, as well as decide what he must do. It was clear from the first images that this was not going to be a movie that was entirely visual flair with no story behind it, which is a criticism many have of Snyder. It was everything I wanted a Superman movie to look and feel like. When the Q&A started, one man was moved to tears to the point he could barely ask his question, so Zach answered by rolling the trailer a second time to give us more time to take in everything. For all the simplicity of having only two men there to talk about a tentpole film, the movie landed in a very, very big way.

Not long after Man of Steel ended, the lights went dark and we began to hear deep voices humming a song over the loudspeaker. Cheers erupted, and we were treated to beautiful artwork from The Hobbit coming into focus on the side screens. We were treated to a very long clip from the production diary before Peter Jackson came out with a few of the cast members, including Sir Ian McKellan, Martin Freeman, Andy Serkis, and Elijah Wood. I have never seen such respect given to a cast before, but Hall H made it clear that there have been few movies to garner there attention as much as this. We watched a 12-minute excerpt from the two films, and the film looks absolutely gorgeous. Almost similar to a moving painting. I could not help but get a little misty-eyed upon seeing such beloved characters back on the screen. I left soon afterwards, greatly happy to have experienced a pnael I am sure to remember for many years to come.

Sunday came and went quickly with one last loop around the convention hall, purchasing a couple of prints to take home with me. The con seemed to have gone quickly this year, though it seemed as though 2011's was only last week. I was extremely happy with everything this year (aside from getting sick after pulling too many early mornings). While I still hope San Diego quickly goes to work on expanding the convention center to fit everyone, I want to continue this every year from here on out. There is no place like Comic Con if you're in love with entertainment arts.

Comic Con 2012: Thursday

Today was the official start of Comic Con and its main events. While Preview Night kicks things off with shopping and small events, many of the main parties and panels do not begin in full force until Day 1. With the influx of main-day tickets, the lines go up exponentially compared to Preview Night.

So, upon waking up at 4:30am, I should not have been surprised at the line outside the convention center by the time I actually arrived an hour and a half later. For a brief moment I panicked, but apparently the first line of the day has not been split into its different branches for exclusives tickets, some signings, the main exhibit floor, etc. When we were actually let in, the line spread in several different directions, and I thought I was comfortably near the front of the exhibit hall crowd.

Unfortunately, SDCC can be tricky, and with exclusives becoming bigger and bigger, lines eventually become hazy. Many retailers will buy exclusives to mark up and resale later on. They also have the advantage of being already on the floor when sales begin. By the time I reached the Mattel line, it was already out of its queue and split to the convention center walls. Thankfully, the exclusives I was purchasing for myself or others (Batman, Sandman's Death, Dana on Zuul's altar) had either larger limits or simply were not as popular. I managed to snag the three I wanted, but several others in line with me were not so lucky as items sold out as we moved through.

Beyond that, the day became much easier. With the shopping done, I was able to utilize the bag check (an absolute godsend) and roam the halls getting photos, looking at cheaper items or artwork to use the rest of my spending on, or hang out at the Batmobiles in between interviews on stage. Comic Con magic reared its head again, and I managed to see Ellen Page getting interviewed and get a couple close shots of Stephen Amell (CW's Arrow which I am HIGHLY looking forward to), neither of whom I expected to see.

Best of all were the evening panels I attended. Being so close to the cars everyday, I have fallen in love with the Batmobiles and wanted to attend the panel about them in the evenings. I arrived early and got to sit through the Vertigo Comics panel, where Neil Gaiman spoke via video that he was making a new Sandman prequel with JH Williams III as the artist. What was essentially a panel I was squatting through became a huge announcement, and I am already anticipating next year. Plus, the Batmobile panel was extremely enjoyable, and I was happy to see it was a packed house for the documentary viewing.

Overall, I am still not happy with some of the policies of SDCC in regards to crowd control, but it turned out to be a lively day, and I intend to keep at it by going back downtown for some food. Hopefully tomorrow will be much more laid back with a heavy focus on cosplay pictures.

Comic Con 2012: Preview Night

Last year I posted a lengthy blog discussing my first foray into San Diego Comic Con International (SDCC for short). It was an amazing experience, and one I hope will become an annual event from here on out. Rather than post one comprehensive guide this year, though, I wanted to post thoughts and highlights for each day instead, however long or short they may be.

The biggest difference this year was flying solo for the most part. Rather than relying on a friend for a place to stay, I wanted the whole experience of going and planning the trip for myself, expenses and all. This was certainly an eye-opening journey into what this convention is all about. Tickets sold quickly this year, with the majority disappearing within 90 minutes of going online. The same can also be said for their hotel system, and thankfully I managed both, staying at the Sheraton Marina. Eventually, I submit my information for Trade Passes and gladly purchased the additional Preview Night.

Today started off with a train trip. After some hassle with the ticket vending machine, a small group of us boarded and made our way in tow. We spoke quite a bit on the way down, and I made two great acquaintences for the trip. Seth Green was also on the train, but that is neither here nor there. In any case, our arrival in SD was mostly uninterrupted and we went our separate ways. I checked in at the Sheraton, where they attempted to charge me almost $300 more than I expected. After getting that taken care of, I discovered my room was small, but quaint and well decorated. Aside from the payment, I do think it is a pretty nice little room.

The biggest change this year will be the 24 hour shuttle service offered by SDCC. The hours were shortened for Preview, but it is very nice to be able to go to my hotel throughout the day if needed. As the first shuttle dropped us at the convention center, I felt a great sense of relief and familiarity. The posters were different, and there was a giant inflatable Jake from Adventure Time outside, but it was great to stroll back to the old halls again.

However, for only being Preview Night, I fear for the size of this convention. I had some issues getting my badge printed and lost half an hour getting the issue resolved. That short time placed me back considerably in line when getting ready for the exhibit hall. The day barely felt like a preview at all, and was honestly just as hard to navigate as one of the normal days. By the time I actually arrived in the hall itself, any chance of getting many free giveaways or exclusives was dashed. So, I mostly just wandered around trying to find some islands of solitude where it was possible to move around and get a few handouts when offered. Our Warner Bros. Bootg was fantastic this year, recreating our famed Stage 16 right in the convention floor. I also managed to snag a sweet spot up front when Jim Lee started giving drawing lessons at the DC booth.

Overall, it's great to be back, but once I get my exclusives early tomorrow, I really do not intend to spend much time on the convention floor this year. It has become simply far too large, and I would expect the count to hit 160,000 easily this year. I got my Man of Steel bag, and I will be in line early Saturday for the Legendary Panels but it hardly seems worth trying to fight the mob in a vain attempt at giveaways this year. Attendees can only really choose one booth they want stuff from, because hopping in line means you will lose out on all of the other booth sales or giveaways. It's honestly ridiculous.

That said, it's part of the Con, and my blog may contradict itself by the end of the weekend. Now here are some photos.

Who Shot Rock and Roll: The Exhibit

Music is one of the few things in this world that can be claimed as universal. Regardless of a person's native language, the language of notes on paper can be read anywhere in the world. Among the most exciting and influential of music is that of Rock and Roll, a catch-all term used to cover a very broad spectrum of music dating back from the 50's. While most professors and teachers will claim that Rock music encompasses a specific type of music with specific emphasized beats, history itself shows that rock is more than just the notes on the paper; Rock and Roll is and has always been a lifestyle. For myself, Rock music has been a guiding factor in my personality, and I know many others can claim the same.

There should be no surprise, then, that the new exhibit from The Annenberg Space for Photography has been one of the most anticipated so far. Entitled "Who Shot Rock and Roll," the theme carries visitors from the earliest beginnings of the genre, with photographs of superstars before they had made their breakthroughs, to its current status as a major international medium. The gallery is broken down into eight sections, each with a specific theme or goal in mind.

Perhaps the biggest change from the past few showcases is that this current display sticks mostly to the photography itself rather than adding in a ton of interactive elements. There are a few headsets available to viewers to listen in on artists at a few key places in the gallery, but gone are the 3D slideshows or retouching booths from past exhibits. The gallery itself has also undergone some minor changes, with fresh red walls and prints covering the outside windows to hold the mystery until visitors actually step inside the front doors. On this opening weekend, this was also one fo the few times I have seen stanchions outside for lines of crowds, though thankfully it was simply "steady" instead of all-out crowded and everyone was able to walk right in.

I found the themes to flow nicely, with some fantastic prints of both never-been-seen and wildly popular photos mixing in. Right off the bat is the "before they were stars" section with some great candids of Elvis Presley and Madonna, among many others. Displayed were everything from top-of-the-line prints to polaroids shot at randoms parties with the musicians. I felt the themes this time around flowed very well, with specific purposes that were well chosen. I did not noticed too many photos that seemed "off-theme," as has been a bit of an issue the past few shows.

I did have to say that for a gallery of Rock and Roll stars, there was the issue of having too many photos that focused on people that really should not have been part of the genre. While I do enjoy Tupac and B.I.G., they really aren't "Rock," and certainly should not have been in the exhibit that already had a distinct lack of Sabbath, Dio, CCR, Metallica, and many others. It certainly showed a bit of discord that the music industry has with its fans in trying to lump all artists of pop culture into one genre (though I did get some amusement from mothers trying to hide their small children from a giant print of Eminem's firecracker penis made famous by Dave LaChapelle).

I also felt as though the one overall idea the exhibit insisted on was not met. Several times, visitors are presented with the notion that while the musicians or photos may be famous, the photographers themselves are not. The exhibit claims itself to give tribute to the unknown artists that captured these iconic images. If that is the case, then why in the world are there giant prints from David LaChapelle, Annie Liebowitz and Rolling Stone photographers in this gallery? It seems contradictory, and I feel the exhibit would have been better presented as simply a wonderful look at the genre through the its evolution rather than trying to hype unknown photographers.

Those issues I had with the gallery were small nitpicks, however. Overall, I did really enjoy the display, and it's great to see some great icons being shown in the gallery. The documentary video itself was great and insightful as always, and I have to give credit to the makers for actually getting Noel Gallagher to do interviews for it! There were some fantastic shots among the walls, a favorite of mine being a shot of one lone eye looking in a rear-view mirror, unmistakably owned by Paul McCartney. Such images show just how much of a force some of these icons have begun, and how recognizable they have made themselves to even the novice music listener. While there were some omissions I felt hurt were inexcusable (not one shot of Dio throwing up the horns, the biggest symbol of the genre today), the exhibit is still a must-see for anyone that has grown up with these artists in their lives.

The Annenberg Space will carry the show through October, so there will be plenty of time to see it this summer. Just make sure to crank up some Steppenwolf on the way to get in the mood for the showcase!

Batman Goes To Dinner

When I had originally moved out here, I wanted to be an actor. Like many people who come here from the Midwest, I was driven by a dream. And, like many of the people who have made the exodus to Los Angeles, that dream has yet to come to fruition. Between bills, travel, and the industry itself, it is not a goal that many will ever be able to attain. However, still I plug along, making auditions as I can between my job and life in general. Thankfully, I was lucky enough to have production experience, however small, and managed to land a job at the world's largest movie studio. So, while my acting pursuit's future has yet to be determined, I am lucky enough to be around production and some pretty awesome moments.

My main job isn't very glamorous. I am, after all, just a tour guide. The way our department works, I am lucky enough to show people up-close views of the action itself rather than be confined to the tram the whole time. I do not enjoy always being tethered to 12 random strangers, many of which don't even speak the same language, and after 4 years, I think my time has come to move on sooner than later with the hope that I have gained enough connections and friends that I may be able to get some help if needed. That said, for all the times I do not like my job or have complaints, along comes times like this past Friday that remind me of that original dream and why I moved here to begin with.

One of my favorite stops on our tour is our museum of picture cars. No matter how lively or dead my tour at the moment is, I always make sure to slow down and spend extra time with the museum. It's our tour guide sanctuary, an extremely amazing area of the lot not even accessible to other employees of the studio without a tour guide's badge to open the door. We've had some pretty incredible pieces in there, from a '56 Rolls-Royce to the Mystery Machine to the Mach 5. I have plenty of fond memories of slow days where I would be sent to look after them, dust them, and generally keep them safe. For someone who lives and breathes films, there is nothing like dusting an original Batmobile with no one around to bother you but the hum of the florescent lights overhead.

So, imagine how excited I was when they picked a few of us to work a special event this week involving our absolute favorite character: Batman. We were all accustomed to seeing the Batmobiles on a somewhat rotating schedule in the museum, but in honor of The Dark Knight Rises coming out in July, I guess Chris Nolan has commissioned a documentary regarding the history of the Batmobiles to go in as a special feature on the Blu-Ray next year. For the first time ever, all of the Batmobiles were going to be in one place, including the 1966 George Barris Batmobile. Even better, a few of us in the department who were especially fond of the cars were asked to work a once-in-a-lifetime event in which the iconic cars were going to be taken down the street in Burbank to the weekly car show at Bob's Big Boy.

For those unaware, Bob's Big Boy is a classic diner chain in the United States. Really, it is THE classic diner from which most of the ones we think of today, like Denny's or IHOP, came about. It's a piece of Route 66 Americana history, which flashing neon signs and a friendly statue outside every door of Bob with his full plate. The one in Burbank itself is the oldest remaining one in the chain and has been registered as a State Point of Historical Interest in California. The building itself was built in 1949 and became a huge influence to the design of countless 1950's-era coffee shops. Restored to its former glory in the mid-1990's, Bob's is undeniably a part of culture in Burbank, and a well-known stop for many residents and tourists. Every Friday, the parking lot becomes a bevy of classic vehicles in a car show known around the country and featured occasionally on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. After filming on the lot off-and-on for weeks, there was no better place or event to finally gather our most recognizable picture cars for the public to view.

So, as we watched Burbank police officers escort the cars in a motorcade through the streets and eventually into the parking lot, we tour guides got to work helping wrangle the public and generally be nerds for a couple hours talking about Batman. It was a wonderful experience overall, and after working on the lot for years, I was finally able to get a few photos with the cars I loved so much. For once, I was in the inner circle (literally, as we had the cars roped off with only studio employees allowed in for closer looks). We met some truly amazing people, including George Barris himself and Alan (or Andy. It's all kind of a blur as far as names go), who built the Tumbler. A few other guides stopped by after their shifts to see what was going on, and it was a fun celebration for everyone involved, some of whom had been working on this documentary for weeks now and well deserved a couple hours of break.

Of course one of the favorites was the '66 Batmobile, and the reason this event was so special. While the studio keeps the other four, the original is kept in George Barris' showroom not far away on Riverside. Built off a Ford Futura concept car he bought for $1, the Barris version has become one of the most well-known movie cars in history. There have been countless replicas made (although only 4 copies were made by Barris himself using Chevrolet bodies), but the original stands well above the rest. With its orange trim and many Bat-centric elements, it was far-and-away the most suited to sit in the parking lot of a classic show at Bob's. Although, George was having just as much fun getting photos with the others as he was with his own.

The Michael Keaton Batmobile (shown here in our museum. I didn't get too many at Bob's because of where it was parked, sadly) was also another favorite. This one seems to be the most popular among movie enthusiasts, likely because it was the first one many people in my generation remember seeing. There were two made, one built on a Chevy Impala and another built on an Oldsmobile. All others seen around the country are replicas. They don't go too terribly fast, as they aren't very easy to turn and are mostly a fiberglass shell, but it's still incredibly fun to see out and about on the rare occasions they do send it out. The way to tell the real ones from the fakes? The main Batmobile used in the films has a working OnStar system in the dashboard due to the commercials made in the early 2000's.

While they were still on the lot, I managed to take a few snaps with my cellphone, and here you can see the two Schumaker Batmobiles in the background. While the movies themselves tend to be poorly received, the cars themselves are pretty fun and probably the closest in spirit to the '66 model with their flashy neon lights and moving parts. The Val Kilmer car (back left) can really let loose when it wants at a top speed of about 90mph or so. The back wings can open and close (flap, if you will), and was originally supposed to be designed by H.R. Giger until his version was deemed too dark. The Clooney car (back right with body up) is by far the largest at 30ft long and holds a price tag of supposedly over $1 Million. The body does lift to allow it over speed bumps, and even the tread of the tire is designed with Batsignal inlays. Most of our actual "work" at the event was making sure people weren't poking their eye out on the tips of the two giant wings coming off the back of the body.

Then came my favorite: the Tumbler from the newest Christopher Nolan films. I have spent hours talking about this car and enjoying its presence. Best of all, at the event (and featured in the second photo) was the architect himself who gave us tour guides tons of great information. The one we've had at the studio for ages is mostly the "promotion" car that is sent out for display and is generally kept in nicer condition than the rest. It was the 5th built, mostly using spare parts from the other four ("We had all these extra parts lying around so I figured we couldn't let them go to waste. May as well build another!") In the Dark Knight, it was famous for doing a doughnut in the middle of the street right before jumping in front of a rocket fired by The Joker. The Tumblers are absolute beasts with a top speed of 110mph and propane tanks rigged for the fire effects out of the back. It was an honor to be able to speak with him about the design, and my friend Josh and I were hanging on every word.

There are several great memories I will always have of the studio, but there are very few that will be able to match this event. After the documentary is done, most of the cars will be split up to go their separate ways. Supposedly, we may never see our Tumbler again (though Cassandra, our Transportation executive, is apparently trying to get one of the camouflage ones as a replacement). But, at least for one final day, we were all just part of the studio, hanging out with what seemed like old friends by that point. There will never be another job I have where I get to say "I dusted the Batmobile." And that's pretty neat.

I finally got my photo with the Tumbler!

And, of course, Bob

A City of Creatives... Unless You're An Amateur

One of the greatest parts about living in Los Angeles is the sheer amount of creativity and inspiration that can be found if a person looks hard enough. To circle the city is 342 miles, encompassing a wealth of knowledge, cultures, landscapes, and countless other areas of interests that spark young individuals in their pursuit to find themselves and their careers. Thousands of youth and other transplants find themselves here every year searching for something that only this city can give them. And, for the most part, the city does embrace new ideas made with passion and skill. However, in recent years, this once earnest endeavor from the city's higher ups has stagnated and is slowly causing a crisis to new creatives like myself and my peers.

It is not often, I get political on this blog, and even when it does I try to remain focused on how it relates to the field of Photography (well, except for the one 'Chuck' post anyway). This is no exception! There are a few issues, however, that I feel inevitably get discussed my anyone interested in seriously pursuing this field. The use of digital manipulation is one example; when a photographer should stay disinterested or step forward in photojournalism is another. This post is about the topic of the rights of a photographer in public areas, which I believe is one of the biggest issues of all.

I, like most beginning photographers, have been involved in discussions and debates on rights and actions as a camera-bearing soul. It's one of those topics that simply come up. The debate focuses on when a photographer should be allowed to take photos in public spaces and often leads directly into the First Amendment with "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press" generally being cited. There are many circumstances of photographers being bullied by law enforcement or other individuals when no cause was given. Another debate is in regards to when permits are needed, what is commercial, and what freedoms you should be given on an average day in a public space. Like many individuals, I often talked about these subjects but did not have any experiences of my own to really draw on to make these discussions and ideas hit home.

That changed recently with a photo shoot in Griffith Park. Specifically, in the Old LA Zoo picnic area. I have shot there multiple times on various subjects ranging from taking photos of the landscape to headshots for my friends. It is a great location and fun to explore on a beautiful day. So, after a long bout of creative block and simply wanting to take pictures of something, I got in contact with a friend of mine who agreed to model for me. We set a date, met in the park, and went out to enjoy the day.

This was not an intensive shoot, which is the first thing I feel needs to be clarified. This was simply me, my hotshoe flash, my friend, and our backpacks of clothes and extra accessories. I did not even have so much as a tripod, which tends to be the litmus test in most park areas. The shoot went well, and was nothing more than a way to catch up with a good friend of mine and try something different as far as clothes and fashion go. She had enough of a portfolio already, and vice versa.  There was no intention to sell the photos, nor did either of us ask for payment from the other. I generally have my models sign a license, but seeing as this was a close personal friend, have not even had her do that yet.

Now, obviously, there would not be a story here if everything went well. Well, after about two hours of shooting and getting about 300 photos, along came an LA Parks and Rec vehicle stopping near us. We knew something was about to happen, and in all honesty, we thought it would be regarding her outfits, which were alternative to say the least. However, out stepped a man who identified himself as Albert Khod of LA Parks and Rec Services. He had papers explaining that we needed a permit to shoot in the park and that if we continued, LAPD would be called, and we would be fined. At first I refused, stating that we were doing a noncommercial shoot without stands, and was well within my rights to shoot on public space.

Albert continued to argue with us, stating he had been informed to restrict anyone from taking photos that were not "families" and that he had "evicted" hundreds of people, "even students," over his years of working in the park. This was what truly began to worry me the most. After much bickering back and forth, my friend and I realized this man had no idea what he was talking about, especially after I asked him to clarify why, exactly, I was being asked for a permit for a simple, non-professional shoot and he could not answer. Relenting, we packed our things and left to get lunch instead.

Now, after getting back to my apartment, I began doing some research regarding what I could do regarding the situation. After digging around, here is what the Los Angeles Administrative Code states regarding filming permits:

[Los Angeles Administrative Code]
[Division 22, Departments, Bureaus and Agencies Under the Control of the Mayor and Council]
[Chapter 13, Department of Public Works]
[Article 8, Motion Picture Coordination]
(Title Amended by: Ord. No. 148,883, Eff. 11-13-76.)

Sec. 22.350. Permit Required to Use City Property for Commercial Filming Purposes.

No person, as defined in Section 11.01 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code, shall use any property belonging to or under the control of the City of Los Angeles for the purpose of making any commercial motion picture, or still photograph, of, or including such property, without first having obtained a use permit to do so from the City Council, or whomever the Council by order, resolution or ordinance may delegate such authority. No such use permit shall be issued until the permit applicant has paid the application fee and the use and service charge required in connection therewith, and until the permit applicant has furnished proof of insurance with coverage as required by the Director of the Office of Administrative and Research Services in a form approved by the City Attorney.

Added by Ord. No. 144,744, Eff. 7-8-73. Amended by: In Entirety, Ord. No. 170,515, Eff. 6-18-95; Ord. No. 173,363, Eff. 7-29-00, Oper. 7-1-00.

[Los Angeles Municipal Code]
[Chapter VI, Public Works And Property]
[Article 3, Public Parks, Playgrounds, Beaches And Other Property]

Sec. 63.44. Regulations Affecting Park And Recreation Areas.

(Added by Ord. No. 153,027, Eff. 11/16/79.)

B. Within the limits of any park in the City of Los Angeles:

3. [Suspended until further action by Ord. No. 176,929, Eff. 10/1/05.] No person shall rent or offer for rent, or sell or offer for sale any commercial merchandise, or any article or thing of any kind or nature whatsoever; or practice, carry on, conduct or solicit any trade, occupation, business, or profession, except by contract with the Board, Department, Commission or their authorized representatives. Nothing in this subdivision, however, shall prohibit the sale or offering for sale of newspapers, periodicals, books, pamphlets and other forms of communication except that said sale of offering for sale is prohibited in museums, in those portions of a park to which access is restricted by the payment of an admission fee or in those facilities which are operated under contract with the Board, Department or Commission.

(Amended by Ord. No. 159,064, Eff. 7/16/84.)

As stated, the permits required do encompass still photographs. However, the situation becomes fuzzy when regarding what defines the term "commercial." After deliberation, my friend and I decided that since Mr. Albert Khod had seen someone with a nice looking camera and someone obviously in costume, he decided that it must have been a commercial shoot and decided to act without any knowledge of the situation. Despite that neither of us had any sort of lighting or stands with us, were shooting handheld, and her costumes was made mostly from a year-round Halloween store, we were deprived of what was an otherwise fun shoot.

The most troubling aspect of this is that he stated, repeatedly, that he had "evicted" so many others, even students. However, he on the very website for the LA Park Film Office, it states this at the very bottom:

The location fee may be waived for students, press (with valid I.D.), non-profit organizations with proper documentation, government entities, and those producing programming for broadcast over public access channels in the City of Los Angeles; provided they do not require the area to be expressly reserved for their use and are willing to work around all other park activities.

This to me is the worst part of all, which is a blatant lack of knowledge about the very rules he was being asked to enforce.  While one could argue that said students or press still need to go through the LA Park Film Office, I find it highly suspect that these "hundreds" of students all had lack of proper permits or even need for one.

Upon looking farther and talking with others, I find that one of the biggest culprits in all this is the Los Angeles City Council who would pass a measure that would put at risk the very creatives that it hopes will one day hold up the city's reputation. As written, the law is extremely vague and puts at risk practically anyone who has a DSLR camera out on city streets. While I could expect some sort of crackdown at something along the lines of the Occupy Protests or our annual Laker game riots, this situation was entirely unwarranted and unnecessary.

I cannot understand the need for a city such as LA to require permits to any photographer who may remotely have a decent camera or commercial success. The permit fees, according to the LA Film Office, for a still photo shoot are $75 per day, even if the photographer is by himself. This means that someone who is potentially by himself taking landscape photos of the mountains is technically required to pay a $75 permit, in addition to other fees, if he may eventually put that photo on his website (something some courts have ruled as being commercial use).

Such a mindset, in addition to incentives from other cities, is why California has seen a dip in local production over the past few years with the only resurgence coming back slowly over the past few months. If even local students are being told not to take photos in one of the country's largest parks, how can the city expect large studios to want to stay in the area? And why stifle the youth base that eventually turns around to carry the very production industry the city is based around? It is ludicrous, short-sighted, and reeks of bad decisions from our city council and Mayor Villaraigosa. Speaking of, the funniest part of all this is that I was spotted with my camera at ArborFest in the very same park a few years ago with the very same camera and was asked by some of the sponsors/officials to actually send them the photos afterwards since they liked what I was taking! No surprise these photos also included several shots of Antonio Villaraigosa himself meeting with people.

To clarify, I do not dislike the idea of permits in general. For commercial shoots of a larger scale, permits are a great revenue to an area. It also limits the amount of production moving into an area and holds them accountable for any damage that may occur to the surrounding environment. This is one of the biggest reasons for many parks across the country using "stands" or tripods as a litmus test for what should require a permit, as larger equipment and stands will eventually cause more damage to the surrounding areas. My complaints rest solely on restricting the small, personal, nondescript shoots that are able to work around the general public, remain mostly hand-held, and consist of smaller teams. There is no need to harm the people who are generally trying to get their foot in the industry or even losing money on these shoots.

I now have an experience that really hit home in regards to those earlier debates with fellow photographers regarding our rights. I feel this entirely situation was a violation of my rights as a photographer, an abuse of power by Mr. Albert Khod, and representative of why Los Angeles is struggling in meeting the growing needs of newer creatives. If I renew my membership with ASMP in the near future, I will discuss this matter with their union's legal counsel to not only see if anything can be done, but to also educate myself on permits and other matters to help other photographers understand what is needed in such situations. Until then, I urge other LA residents who may be reading this or are otherwise affected to write their city council to demand a more clear, concise wording of the administrative code that does not harm the amateur shooters of the city.

In the meantime, I will be using my home of Burbank for future shoots. I feel they have a wonderful template that not only ensures revenue from the major studios in the city, but also protects the youth culture trying to get their foot in the door. Burbank's codes are clear, concise, and add very simple exceptions that would have prevented this whole situation and others like it. From the Burbank film permit website:

When is a film permit not needed?

A permit is not required for filming that uses hand-held cameras (video or digital), wireless microphones, hand-held light diffuser or other related hand-held equipment and, if your filming does not involve exclusive use of any sidewalk or other public property. Equipment must be held in the photographers or filmmaker’s hand and carried at all times with the photographer or filmmaker or subject(s) of the filming during the course of filming. If a tripod is used as a camera-stabilizing device, no permit required as long as the tripod is of such size and weight that it will not interfere with the safe ingress, egress, or access to any public facility, or that it will not otherwise negatively impact the public safety during filming. We recommend that you contact the Burbank Film Permit office to review your film request at (818)238-3105.

Goodbye, Chuck Bartowski

On a crisp evening in early December, I was standing outside Stage 10 on the Warner Bros. lot with a few fellow tour guides. I was technically Dispatcher for the evening and should have been back at our base off the lot handling carts, but it was a particularly slow day and did not have any carts returning from tour for an hour or so. So, I justified my time away as being a special occasion, and I doubt any of my managers would have been surprised or reacted negatively considering the moment. As we few guides stood waiting, lit only by the sulfur lamps on top of the stages that special time of early evening, I looked behind me and saw none other than Adam Baldwin standing next to his trailer and golf cart, smiling and staring at us. When he noticed me glancing his way, he, without hesitation, walked our way, shook my hand, and said in a way much like only John Casey could say "Great working with you."

See, this "special occasion" was none other than the last day of filming for the series "Chuck." It was a series that quickly stood apart from the other shows on the lot, and became very popular among our growing tour center. After working around them, visiting their sets, talking with the cast, crew, and fans, it had created a certain type of reverence in my heart. And here we were, our little pack of four or so guides, waiting to give them one small farewell after a few gut- wrenching seasons. Upon first starting my training, I had honestly never even heard of the show. It was only after the hounding of my "classmates" that I began to watch and became instantly hooked. However, it was not just the show's qualities and traits that kept me talking about it throughout many future tours with people who probably had never watched an episode. Rather, they were one of the most gracious productions we had on our lot, always willing to say hi to our guests, give access to their sets, or watch filming when possible. I often say that they took lessons from their soundstage neighbors "ER," and they still both rank as the types of shows we still get excited about talking about years after the fact.

Even more so, the show made us excited to be working in Hollywood. Many of us were transplants from all over the country, and working at Warner Bros., even at the lowest rung of the corporate chain, was something that seemed almost out of the realm of possibility. But, we made it, and due the nature of the tours on the lot, we weren't just giving scripted content to hundreds of tourists at a time. No, we were right in the thick of things with our little groups of 12 trying to make sense of the industry like so many other newcomers. And, at every turn, there was "Chuck." There they were, blowing up cars or buildings or driving the Nerd Herd around the lot. Even when we had tourists that didn't care, that had no interest in any of our productions or would otherwise not talk for two hours, Zachary Levi was there with his "Hi, welcome to Warner Bros! Enjoy your tour!" It didn't matter if he was busy or talking on the phone with his agent; he would always wave and shout his little greeting. And, if anything, I hope he knows that it at least made our jobs as tour guides more enjoyable when everything else about the job or guests was dragging us down. The show reminded me of why I picked up everything and moved out here to the West Coast in the first place. It made me fall in love with the industry all over again.

And, of course there were hard times, which is partially what made the experience so special. Just as many people follow sports, I and many other fans had learned to follow Nielsen Ratings like the science it is. We writhed and squirmed each and every year around March, worried about that ominous phrase "On The Bubble." By all accounts, "Chuck" was not a show that should have made it. It was one of the very few shows (possibly the only show but I'll have to do research on it) that survived the Writer's Strike during its first season. We saw many other great shows on the lot become affected, including another darling with us in "Pushing Daisies." Somehow or another, though, the fans always came through. They ate Subway sandwiches. They wrote to the network. And the wave kept going as the sponsors professed their love right back. Even without great ratings, and with advertisers that knew the fanbase was not necessarily going to go out and buy a ton of Toyota Matixes, people in the industry could not let it go. They gave it 5 seasons because, when it came down to it, people just loved "Chuck." Whether it was the great personality of the cast and crew or the fun, nerdy void the show filled in for the internet generation, it was granted a couple extra lives. And, finally, it was granted a perfect ending.

It seemed like everything was leading to that night with our little group of guides and Adam Baldwin. You see, it was a special occasion. Our last tour of the day on Chuck's last day of filming had a 7-year-old girl on it. She was under our age limit, but she had come to the ticket counter with her parents holding one of the seasons of "Chuck" on DVD and a special note for the cast. Her favorite character was Sarah Walker, and she wanted to try and get an autograph or two on her DVDs from the cast. Normally, we would never even remotely consider hounding our cast members, and the girl would not have been allowed on tour due to her age, but our ticket counter knew that this was one last hurrah and let her on board.

So, our Field coordinator made some calls as best she could. Any other show, and we never would have even attempted. But, as I said, "Chuck" was always unique. And, sure enough, Zach Levi and Adam Baldwin were "conveniently" leaving from a scene rehearsal right as the girl and her tour were leaving one of the adjacent soundstages. I was standing next to Adam, both of us silent as we watched Zach make this little girl's dream come true. As they all took pictures together, it felt like the perfect moment, and a perfect example of their time here on the lot. Holding that girl on their shoulders for photos, Zach and Adam were just as they had always been: friendly, positive, and extremely fun to have on the lot. It was their last day, but they had been doing this for as long as I had been working with them on the lot. That's just how they were.

As if the moment couldn't even get any better, the tour was loading back on their tram and driving away from their stage. Right when the tram and the girl on it were next to the door, something we had not planned occurred: the rest of the cast started leaving from their rehearsals inside. Including Sarah Walker.

To all the fans who supported our studio's little show over the years, thank you. You were the best tours and some of the most genuinely friendly people I've had the chance to meet. The fanbase isn't just a collection of fans, it's a great community that has grown and connected in a way only yours could. But, of course, the most thanks to you, "Chuck," both as a fan and coworker of the studio. Thanks for so many great years and allowing us to follow you through your adventures. You've proven that it's not just ok to be a nerd sometimes but that it's actually pretty "awesome."

Digital Darkroom

One of the more difficult aspects of becoming a photographer of our generation is dealing with the slew of new technologies being thrown our way. With the advent of digital cameras, programs such as Photoshop have drastically changed the way that photographers create the visions they had in their minds upon pressing the shutter. While this new shift in dynamics has certainly ushered in some great aspects in the world of file storage, faster editing, and creativity, they have also forced the medium to ask what exactly defines what is photography and what isn't.

Such is the topic of the newest exhibit at the Annenberg Space for Photography: Digital Darkroom. The display focuses on 17 artists who have decided that extreme Photoshop and manipulation was necessary to achieve their artistic vision. Everything from people with dogs' faces to fantastic lenticular holograms are on display for the general public and connoisseurs alike. As with all exhibits at the Annenberg, there are a couple of short films to accompany the main gallery.

The Digital Darkroom feature was a particularly difficult one for me to visit, though not for any reasons due to the Annenberg. As a beginning photographer, I have tried to shy away from mass processing my photos. While just about any professional with adjust things like color balance, fill light and other basics, processes like HDR and cloning just do not feel like photography to me. They use multiple images or tricks to change a great deal about what the camera saw at the time of the shutter's close. So, to gather a great deal of photos featuring exactly those elements seems contradictory to something I would enjoy.

Indeed, the photographs themselves were probably the least favorite of the exhibits I've had a change to see so far. The quality ranged from professional advertising photography to pieces that would easily be trumped by the forums at Something Awful. Granted, the digital nature of the prints made some of them absolutely marvelous to look at with crisp, clear tones due tot he high megapixel count used. Jean-Francois Rauzier's "Abandoned Bicycles" and "Racines" pieces come to mind as favorites due to rich colors and print quality. However, when coming to the animal-headed portraits I found the quality dipped sharply. While funny and cute, an exhibit focused on Photoshopped art could have done better or found pieces where the manipulation was not so obvious.

On the whole, though, I did find that other aspects of the gallery made it one of my favorite exhibits so far. Where the art itself was lacking, the Space found other ways to make the exhibit entertaining and engaging. Probably the most obvious would be the inclusion of 3D artwork and a 3D film in addition to their main gallery. The 3D was impressive for being shown on what was essentially a high school projector screen, though several moments o the film were blurry. They did cover how the 3D works by using toned lenses to sync each eye up with a left or right image. I especially loved the almost moving piece in the middle of the film showing historical photos that had been made in stereoscope from the early 1900s, including a fantastic shot of early Yosemite. The film even mentioned the famous Viewmaster that many, including myself, had growing up. From there, viewers can also pick up a pair of red/blue 3D glasses for the still photos near the restrooms. I recommend checking out Christopher Schneberger's slideshow of "ghost stories."

Also included are a few pieces from Chris Levine using lenticular prints. These are essentially holographic prints similar to the ones usually collected by children as promotional items. These were much higher quality than a child's plaything, and to see Queen Elizabeth staring back at you is something that really must be experienced.

What I really enjoyed about the exhibit is that it did remain neutral about what should and should not be photography. Throughout the main film, it is echoed by the artists that what they do is certainly not traditional, but that they were more focused on the end result more that trying to define what medium they were in. For most, everything was about that final image and making great artwork that just so happened to use photographic elements. A common theme, such as those found in the work of Brooke Shaden, is that of trying to recreate fantasies and elements we cannot experience in real life. For some of the artists, like Khuong Nguyen, the gallery mentions that they mostly use their work as an advertising tool, which is certainly understandable. I don't think anyone would be surprised knowing that high-end shoes are using ads that are heavily manipulated. The gallery also made sure to note the display for Jerry Uelsmann near the front, an artist who has been using traditional darkroom techniques to manipulate photos since well before the advent of Adobe, showing that this is not necessarily a new phenomenon.

Overall, I did enjoy the exhibit. I found it to be entertaining and insightful, as well as even-handed about a topic that inspires a lot of great debate. It was educational about the subject of manipulation (I had no idea that Photoshop was created from ties to George Lucas' Industrial light & Magic), and while the artwork is hit-or-miss, the artwork that works is great to see in person. Whether you are skeptical about the use of digital programs or have already embraced them, Digital Darkroom will certainly open up plenty of discussion.

The gallery will remain on display until May 28, so I would recommend going to see it while there is still plenty of time. Also, the gallery now has guided tours at 3PM Wed-Sun and additional 1PM tours during weekend.