My fingers multiplied and dancing.

I usually try to be playful with most of my camera's and other tools. Ok to be honest: some tools do not survive this ;-)
This one is fun because it is totally unexpected and it looks funny. Look: instant dancing fingers. I find instant also very attractive ;-) It's also fun because I abuse a program to do something it's not designed for ;-)
It uses the normal function of any panorama stitching program. A stitching program will look for a part of one picture that is more or less like another part in another picture and it will stitch these together. Some programs will do this horizontally only. I'm not sure if programs that allow non horizontal stitching are better or not. Certainly they are more fun! This will not help you if you want a perfect pano of your building. On the other hand: if you use a tripod, set level, everything is easy and no panorama program will have any trouble producing a nice linear picture.
This one is done with pictures of my own fingers. Three at a time, the stitchin algoritme will match fingers 3 and 1 (of the following picture).
Every repeating object will produce some string. A fence; buildings; row of books, everything can become endless. Make it into a QTVR and you can spin it with no end.

As often with my playfulness: there is a serious side to it. Have a look at the explanation of the title. I used to think my work did not need titles at all. Date and place would do, thank you. Since my work seems to veir back to a more concerned kind of art, with references sometimes as many as in your regular poem, I prefer to steer the perception with a title.

Now where does this title come from? It is german and it means the body part in the age of its technical reproductability . The obvious reference is of course to the way I produced this picture. But there are more references: One of the most influential texts about whether photography can be art, or whether anything made in series or editions can be art, is by the german philosopher Walter Benjamin. Its title: Art in the age of its technical reproductability (its official title in english seems to be: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction - hmm); Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit.
Another reference is to cloning: I am not categorically against it. No Bush doctrine for me. But am I for it? Hmm, I am not sure about that either. Look ma: 15 fingers! Just by playing with some software. Using it to an end it was not designed for. Now what kind of an analogy do we have here?
An alternative title maybe could have been: The Sorcerer's Apprentice.
- it sums up my life ;-)