So, over the two months off school that I've had, I've come to understand a few things about the medium I've chosen. I have come to understand the inherent limits of photography, and now know that you simply cannot replicate real life experiences. I now understand my own limits within the medium and understand the basic, fundamental, and irrevocable limits of photography itself.

Often times photographers will try and capture the decisive moment, a vast landscape, or a particularly significant moment in time. While I have only been photographing for approximately 4 years, it is only now that I really understand the fact that these things can't be replicated. Any amount of shock and awe value in a photograph is multiplied by at least 20 times in a real life situation.

A photograph will bear a striking attachment to a photographer, someone who understands the background details of the image, and experienced the real life situation that produced the image. In almost every photograph I have produced I have always preferred the real life situation, and experiencing first hand the making and production of the photograph, whether it be studio work or traveling towards a destination and photographing a landscape. Also, unfortunately the same goes for other media, like film and music. The unfortunate truth is that the end product of the media cannot possibly replicate the real life experiences of creating and capturing the moment, sound, or time.

At this time, I feel I should point out the work of Jackson Pollock. The controversy surrounding his very large canvases of splashed, dripped, and splattered paint, and whether or not they can actually be considered art. The fact of the matter is whether or not Pollock wanted his canvases to be seen as art, the real artistic merit was in the actual creation of the paintings. The entire canvas is a testament to his emotional states as he painted. His work was really more of a performance art than an actual method of painting. The canvases we see now are simply remnants of a performance that cannot be understood outside of the artist's mind, sparking controversy.

Aristotle viewed art as an imperfect imitation of an imperfect subject. With the reality we know being an imperfect imitation of a perfect celestial existence. In a way this makes sense in my current interpretation of art and the limits of the medium that I have chosen. Unfortunately, I don't believe that any medium can break from these limitations, not in modern society anyway.