Blake Lively for Nylon
Emily Blunt & John Krasinski (via Terry Richardson)
Eyes (via Yimmys Yayo)
I was reading past entries on my tumblelog—something everyone should do; I often amaze myself with all the cool stuff I linked to and wrote about—when I realized I have a thing for black-and-white photography. Everything just looks classier and more beautiful in monochrome. Keep an eye out on my newly realized fetish with the new ‘
black and white’ tag.
This is entry number two in an ongoing series of random musings in what was an attempt at making this tumblelog more ‘personal’. I’ve never post any personal photos on here, nor spend much time talking about myself—it’s just not my nature, and besides, my life is not very interesting—but I do feel like I’ve succeeded in ‘personalizing’ my tumblelog by posting only on subjects I like and topics I care deeply about.
Still, I’ll be posting short, random snippets from my crazy mind to the new ‘
random thoughts’ tag, however seldomly throughout the year.
Recline (via thelovelybones)
Megan Fox (via fuckyeahskinnybitch)
Is a caption even necessary? No one’s going to be looking down here anyway.
How awesome is that? Unfortunately the physical cover won’t actually be animated—we still have a few years to go on that technological front—but it doesn’t take anything away from this technological milestone.
Greg Williams claims this is the first use of video in magazine history, and I don’t doubt that at all. Even 1080p video is often not enough to hold up under scrutiny, so Williams shot Megan Fox with Red Digital’s ultra-HD Red One camera which shoots at 4096×2304, a whopping 9.4 megapixels.
There’s something so awesome about a moving cover, like something out of Harry Potter, that made me reload the animation over and over again. Or maybe it’s just because it’s Megan Fox.
The user comments on Gizmodo were hilarious, too:
misterwho: Funny, I thought this type of photography was measured in jizzapixels.
Eauboy: I can assure you the best moment will NOT appear on the cover. Or at least, the top moment from the ten minute video of her that plays in my head.
-daddy-: I’d crawl through a mile of broken glass for the opportunity to throw a pebble at the truck that drives her panties to the cleaners.
See? The Internet is serious business. Now excuse me as I go reload this page over and over…
Jason Kottke chimes in on the long photography vs. short looping video discussion:
As resolution rises & prices fall on video cameras and hard drive space, memory, and video editing capabilities increase on PCs, I suspect that in 5–10 years, photography will largely involve pointing video cameras at things and finding the best images in the editing phase.
1. Put your 720p/1080p video on pause and really scrutinize the image. Now imagine staring at that image printed out at 600dpi on glossy stock. Now you’ll understand why even 1080p is deficient. 1080p is, at most, only 2.3 megapixels. Most movies are presented in CinemaScope these days (1920×800), which is only 1.5 megapixel. ↩