They could photograph reality, but they can't picture your fantasy
July 4, 2008 1:03 PM Subscribe
'Nick Veasey uses x-ray technology to create mesmerizing and intriguing art.'
Very cool. I liked this one. My guess is the humans are added separately. Seems like the xray exposure necessary to image through metal would be a bit much for people.
posted by cosmac at 1:44 PM on July 4, 2008
posted by cosmac at 1:44 PM on July 4, 2008
...they said it was against the law to sell it to me...
Probably because that was easier than saying they didn't feel like taking the time to make you a copy. We have human patients bring us copies of various imaging studies all the time, often on CD where it would be easy to copy them. Also, think of all the pregnant women who get copies of their ultrasounds; I don't think there would be stricter limitations on the medical records of pets than of humans.
I also wonder how he gets away with exposing people to radiation for non-medical purposes; there are all sorts of regulations for that in the US. Perhaps he does it in another country. Realistically, the amount of radiation in a single X-ray is pretty small, but it is not zero. I assume he doesn't take many exposures for each picture you see. After all, all his subjects look like they're smiling, and you can't tell if they blinked. I looked through the articles to see if this was addressed, but I couldn't find it (and don't read Chinese for a couple of them).
That said, even though his images are heavily weighted towards advertising, some of them are cool. I particularly like the bus.
posted by TedW at 2:55 PM on July 4, 2008
Probably because that was easier than saying they didn't feel like taking the time to make you a copy. We have human patients bring us copies of various imaging studies all the time, often on CD where it would be easy to copy them. Also, think of all the pregnant women who get copies of their ultrasounds; I don't think there would be stricter limitations on the medical records of pets than of humans.
I also wonder how he gets away with exposing people to radiation for non-medical purposes; there are all sorts of regulations for that in the US. Perhaps he does it in another country. Realistically, the amount of radiation in a single X-ray is pretty small, but it is not zero. I assume he doesn't take many exposures for each picture you see. After all, all his subjects look like they're smiling, and you can't tell if they blinked. I looked through the articles to see if this was addressed, but I couldn't find it (and don't read Chinese for a couple of them).
That said, even though his images are heavily weighted towards advertising, some of them are cool. I particularly like the bus.
posted by TedW at 2:55 PM on July 4, 2008
I have always wondered if there were people doing this.
I would totally do this if I had the money to buy an emitter, exposure plate, film, build a radiation-safe room, etc.
posted by The Esteemed Doctor Bunsen Honeydew at 3:13 PM on July 4, 2008
I would totally do this if I had the money to buy an emitter, exposure plate, film, build a radiation-safe room, etc.
posted by The Esteemed Doctor Bunsen Honeydew at 3:13 PM on July 4, 2008
Sorry. I forgot to wipe my feet for 4chan before came in here.
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 4:07 PM on July 4, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Bathtub Bobsled at 4:07 PM on July 4, 2008 [1 favorite]
Number 5 has to be a fake. Or can you really read an LCD display by absorbed X-rays?
posted by teraflop at 4:53 PM on July 4, 2008
posted by teraflop at 4:53 PM on July 4, 2008
Why is it that every photographer's website must make it as difficult as possible to actually look at the person's pictures? No, I don't really want to change my screen's resolution and size of my browser to be able to see the entire thing. Fuck off.
Cool stuff, but I can't be bothered to try and look at it too much.
posted by Arturus at 7:31 PM on July 4, 2008 [2 favorites]
Cool stuff, but I can't be bothered to try and look at it too much.
posted by Arturus at 7:31 PM on July 4, 2008 [2 favorites]
Apparently, all the humans in the bus image are all the same man. And he was dead at the time. Probably still is.
posted by thinman at 8:11 PM on July 4, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by thinman at 8:11 PM on July 4, 2008 [1 favorite]
At first, when looking only at the 'portfolio' section, I came to the conclusion this guy is just a photoshop hack. Later though, I got to his section on dolls, clothes, and flowers, and thought, man. Not only is he capable of totally faking his art for corporations, but when he isn't, he has almost no imagination. Some of it is neat, but it seems like he is missing out on a huge potential.
You have an x-ray camera, and all you want to point it at is empty clothes laying flat on a table?
posted by rubin at 10:16 PM on July 4, 2008
You have an x-ray camera, and all you want to point it at is empty clothes laying flat on a table?
posted by rubin at 10:16 PM on July 4, 2008
I saw you baby dancin' in your x-ray gingham dress
I knew you were under duress
I knew you under your dress
-Don van Vliet, aka Captain Beefjeart
posted by flapjax at midnite at 12:33 AM on July 5, 2008
I knew you were under duress
I knew you under your dress
-Don van Vliet, aka Captain Beefjeart
posted by flapjax at midnite at 12:33 AM on July 5, 2008
oops... that's Beefheart, of course.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:56 AM on July 5, 2008
posted by flapjax at midnite at 4:56 AM on July 5, 2008
« Older Regrets? I have a few, but then again... | Jack Parsons Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by dobbs at 1:17 PM on July 4, 2008