Categories
Photography

Light Graffiti

light graffiti

Some incredible light graffiti by a photographer called Michael Bosanko. [Link]

update: The photographer had this to say:

Hi folks. Thanks for the kind words about my work 🙂 Somebody pointed this link to me, and it made my day 🙂

All of the images are done in one take, maximum 30 second exposure, no photoshop involved in any of them. I pre-determine the images before I mark them out with light. I’ve started introducing a secondary light into my work, which means I need to be extra fast, as you can see on the example in the cornfield I did.

Anyway, just thought I’d pop in and say thanks!

Kind regards,
Michael

22 replies on “Light Graffiti”

Hi folks. Thanks for the kind words about my work 🙂 Somebody pointed this link to me, and it made my day 🙂

All of the images are done in one take, maximum 30 second exposure, no photoshop involved in any of them. I pre-determine the images before I mark them out with light. I’ve started introducing a secondary light into my work, which means I need to be extra fast, as you can see on the example in the cornfield I did.

Anyway, just thought I’d pop in and say thanks!

Kind regards,
Michael

Patrick the example you did isn’t counted as light graffiti, its more like what I did for Miskan which is just playing with a light in front of the camera
https://www.flickr.com/photos/miskan/5607857/

Light graffiti is when you blend the light design with the surrounding, not just black space. Thats what makes Michael’s special is that he was able to take something simple and use it with his surrounding.

By Post Author

umm oui, I did not say what I have done is Graffiti, I said its similar, close to, “shi metel”.
Similar in concept> slow shutter & long exposure with an idea (drawing a real shape with the light).

What YOU have done on flickr is playing with light (abstract), what I have done is an idea, its an Xmass tree, there’s creativity involved, what we actually CANT compare is your abstract light work with my idea.

Hi Mark, Patrick.

Many people have asked me to get into a debate about what constitutes light graffiti, torch play, or whatever people want to call it, varying from abstract through to integrated and constructed ideas. I have never been able to enter such a debate comfortably because one thing I have learned is interpretation is often an individual emotive one, therefore the most important thing is what does the work mean for the artist, first and foremost.

I’ve always received warm reviews for my work, but it would mean nothing if it did not please me to create such pieces. I have never considered my work to be masterpieces by any stretch of the imagination, but I get so much pleasure creating them, and it is this one single thing that’s the most important.

If I were to comment on Patrick’s imaginative Xmas Tree or Mark’s visually strong red abstract, it would only be to say define it in a way you see fit, because other people will always have their own interpretation anyway.

I have been creating light pieces for a while now, and I have still yet tried to define in a word what I do. As long as theres batteries in my camera and torch, I am a happy man. 🙂

Kind regards to both,
Michael

^Exactly. The Xmass tree is a close approach to light Graffiti, thats what I think and thats what was the main idea.

If its executed poorly or perfectly is not the subject.
Thanks for your time Michael and keep up the good work.

Of course art is subjective and every piece will mean different things to different people with different tastes. Like Michael said, the most important thing is what the piece means to the artist who creates it, and then each viewer will have his or her own opinion of it. However, in the current discussion taking place here, I personally don’t think you can compare Patrick’s Christmas card idea with Mark’s red light abstract. Sure, they are both playing with a light source, but comparing the two is like comparing apples to oranges. Patrick’s work actually stemmed from a creative idea, and it was innovative and actually took some effort. Mark’s on the other hand was not actually aiming towards a specific idea when he started shaking the lights around like a kid in a dark room who just discovered glowsticks (certainly not a bad thing, just a very different different approach). And I certainly do not agree that the Christmas tree idea (very condescending and petty of you Mark to put the word “idea” in quotes) was “executed extremely poorly.” I think it is an excellent and innovative piece. (Then again, I don’t think a criticism coming from someone who created that disastrous “I am hungary” ad is something that an artist/designer as talented as Patrick’s online gallery proves he is should really take seriously.)

Having said that, you can’t say that one thing qualifies as “proper” light graffiti or whatever you want to call it, and another piece doesn’t. When looking at certain types of works, you can certainly find some pieces that seem similar, and others that are different. So Michael’s work is different in that he uses the background in the scene, while Patrick’s uses a dark background to create a specific conceptual idea, and Mark’s was simply an abstract piece that didn’t start with any particular conceptual aim. Three different concepts using a similar technique. Is one more “right” to be classified as light graffiti or whatever term you want to use than the other (as Mark tried to say that Patrick’s work didn’t “count”)? No, of course not. I’m surprised that someone who calls himself a designer (Mark) would even try to pigeonhole artists and their work into such narrowly defined categories. In our post-modern world, most artists have moved beyond the notion that a piece of art “counts” or satisfies a particular set of stylistic criteria or definition (be it “light graffiti” or any other type of work). Just as Michael so accurately said, “interpretation is often an individual emotive one”.

Anyway, keep up the great work Michael – you are a talented artist and the work you do will forever change the way we look at both graffiti and light. Patrick, after browsing your Deviant Art gallery and website I can see that you experiment with a variety of different photographic and design techniques. Excellent work. You are also extremely talented and are by far the most innovative designer I have come across in Kuwait to date – a major breath of fresh air.

Patrick your choice of lights and colors for your xmas tree are inappropriate and the result is visually dull and depressing image.

Looking through your deviantART portfolio I see many issues with your execution, colors and terrible typography. The typefaces you use are comparable to the mainstream fonts commonly found on free font websites and your shapes and illustrations taken from free vector sites like https://www.vecteezy.com/. Even the colors and splashes of paint on your portfolio are taken from here https://www.vecteezy.com/vf/80-Vector-Pack-2

You have potential and a passion for design but at the moment thats all you have. Work hard and stop copying. ****REMOVED BY ADMIN****

Yours truly,
TheArtInspector

Artinspector, my shapes are not taken from the site u mentioned or any other site. Its clear, I have seen them and its not the same, no argument about that. Now the fact that its similar is also clear, so saying similar is the right thing, its not that I am copying it, its a vary popular style of graphic design known as dirty, grunge with a mix of floral and paint and ink splashes, a style that is variously used by popular designers and its spreading.

About the Free font issue, I dont know what is your background dude, but it seems you dont know that it is ‘okey’ to use free fonts, they are FREE, free ware to use and share. You get it?

Now if you think the typography looks bad in most of my artworks, that is fine, but they look good to me and for the ideas they represent.

Regarding the Xmass tree, I dont see whats inappropriate, the colors match with themselves, if they don’t match the Xmass tree, but…so?

Last but not least, I know who is behind THE ARTINSPECTOR, and I think its lame to try such a thing. Im not gonna say anything further then that, but I can show clearly and share that to the audience, and that, could turn into some fun, embarrassing moments. So dont you try your failing methods towards me again, unless you want to be really embarrassed.

Art Inspector: Based on your comment, you obviously have no background in art or design. But if you think you do, why not show us some of your work so that we can see whether YOU have any “potential”? Your comment was completely uneducated and shows that you simply do not have much knowledge about the design world. The only way anyone reading this could even take your comments into consideration would be for you to qualify them by showing your own work, to see what kind of an “art inspector” we are really dealing with here.

Patrick: Personal attacks against you and your work from such ignorant, talentless, and jealous types are the biggest compliments you could get. Keep up the great work.