On May 7, on the heels of a star-studded induction into Cleveland’s Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, Red Hot Chili Peppers brought their funk-rock live show to a sold out TD Garden. Following an opening set by indie rock duo Sleigh Bells, “RHCP” played an energized, 15-song set (and six-song encore) spanning their 29-year career, featuring songs from their latest full-length, I’m With You,  and many of their major hits.

The “I’m with You” Tour continues through North America until June 9, wrapping up with the Bonnaroo Festival, before the band heads over to Europe. The band will return to American soil with a headlining show at the Lollapalooza music festival in Chicago this August.

Several photos of the show can be seen below, courtesy of Blast photographers Lena Mirisola and Nick DiNatale.

"Magritte’s Touchstone" by Jerry Uelsmann, gelatin silver print, 1965.

Thanks to Photoshop, unfathomable images have become commonplace in our everyday lives (my head on Channing Tatum’s body? OkCupid here I come!). Artist Jerry Uelsmann, however, works down-and-dirty with negatives in a darkroom, something that, unfortunately, has become unimaginable in itself.

"Apocalypse II" by Jerry Uelsmann, gelatin silver print, 1967.

Uelsmann’s works challenge the inherent believability of photographs–what are you seeing and why are you seeing it?–and presents the difference between someone who takes photographs and an artist who uses photography as a medium; the former concentrating on the craft, the latter more concerned with the image. With the Peabody Essex Museum only a 30 minute train ride from North Station, its “Mind’s Eye” exhibit is not to be missed.

A few months ago, top-fashion model Rie Rasmussen came out against fashion photographer Terry Richardson, alleging Richardson abused his position to exploit the women he shoots. Rasmussen’s claims have caused a slew of anti-Terry Richardson stories, by both professional and non-professional models.

Richardson’s photos have been published in outlets including Purple Magazine, Vogue, GQ and Harper’s Bazaar; among his subjects are Kate Moss, Leonardo DiCaprio, Karl Lagerfeld and President Obama. Several figures in the fashion industry have rushed to defend him against Rasmussen’s allegations.

One is Marc Jacobs. In the Wall Street Journal, Jacob  said, "I’ve worked with Terry and Terry has asked me to do some crazy things. I know that those pictures will exist if I do them. But I’m a big boy and I can say no." He went on to add, "If a girl is underage, maybe the girl’s agent or chaperon should be present on the shoot. That’s the hard part. Who’s to blame or who’s to watch."

The sad aspect of the Richardson scandal is that he will be protected by the fashion industry. He will continue shooting for high fashion magazines, despite his reputation, and he more than likely will continue his behavior. Models’ outcries against him have unfortunately seemed to bring him more prestige and attention. Models continue to contact him for photos, despite being familiar with the stories against him.

Richardson’s reaction to all this attention has included an announcement in The Journal that he is now looking to shoot male nudes, rather than female nudes. Advertisements to shoot with him have been appearing on his website and other model networking websites.

In an interview with The Journal’s Amy Odell, Richardson was quoted as saying, "I love shooting guys. Some of my favorite pictures over the years have been the things I’ve done with guys. In a commercial context too, there’s no hair or makeup with guys, which is great. I love shooting nudes of guys, but it’s harder to get guys to do full nudes, I don’t know why, but they don’t want to show their junk. I love doing guys. If there are any guys out there that want to get naked you can email: model@terryrichardson.com."

But while Richardson complains that it has been difficult in the past to get males to pose nude for him, the number of published images of female nudes testifies that he had no problem in that domain of the fashion photography industry. He’s allegedly been able to convince young models to perform sexual acts either on themselves or with him (and in most cases, with assistants present).

As Ramussen remarked to the New York Post’s Page Six, Richardson "takes girls who are young, manipulates them to take their clothes off and takes pictures of them they will be ashamed of. They are too afraid to say no because their agency booked them on the job and are too young to stand up for themselves … I don’t understand how anyone works with him. … I told him, ‘what you do is completely degrading to women. I hop you know you only fuck girls because you have a camera, lots of fashion contacts and get your pictures in Vogue.’"

Richardson’s photography, both personal and hired-work, tends to be suggestive. Shoots usually feature a scene that may be homoerotic or contain group couplings. They are starkly-lit, similar to a lot of soft-porn photography, and contain content which could appear innocent, but are highly suggestive, like an April 2009 Rolling Stone cover featuring Gossip Girl actresses Leighton Meester and Blake Lively.

It is that style which attracts some of the industry greats. Doug Lloyd, the art director for a Gucci campaign, told New York Magazine, "We wanted a rawer energy and more sex appeal and that’s what you find in Terry’s work."

As one fashion world insider told The Daily Beast, "This is an industry filled with crazy people and big personalities. The boundaries are different than they are in a purely corporate enterprise. It’s not IBM. It’s a business with beautiful girls, sex, and malfeasance. To single out one person as some sort of ringleader is absurd. We traffic women’s bodies."

But Cyan Banister, CEO of the modeling networking website Zivity.com, proposes that no, modeling is just like any other business and it should maintain the same standard of professionalism that would be expected.

"I don’t understand why the fashion industry is not condoning this kind of behavior,” Banister said. “It wouldn’t be tolerated in any other industry … so why so much tolerance in the modeling industry?"

Banister noted that this sort of behavior is typical for any kind job that would offer the opportunity to fame. She noted its similarity to Hollywood, citing an agency which requires actors to strip naked for photographs. When she inquired why they would do such a thing, Banister said, a representative from the agency explained that if they would have their talents do sex scenes, they needed to know how their bodies looked.

Banister was unconvinced. "Mixing sex with business is not a good idea,” she said.

On Zivity.com, Banister questioned some of the models about whether given the reputation that Richardson has, would they still pose for him. She was surprised at some of the responses, with many still saying "absolutely yes."

However, Banister is most concerned about how cases in which the models might not really know or understand the release form that they have to sign and the consequences that may occur from it.

"The model is asked to sign a release as soon as she steps in the door. Rarely is it sent to the model days or even hours in advance," Banister noted, adding that these girls often sign the document after looking at if for maybe 15 to 20 minutes, without the guidance of an agent, attorney, or even a friend. "If they’re not super savvy, the photographer owns the image for life and can do whatever they want.”

However, models have the right to many additional protections they might not know about. There are few resources in the model community (unless the model is protected by an agency) to find out about such information.

With Zivity.com, Banister said, the models are given a lot more power with regards to photos. Zivity has its own contract that the models sign which will allow them to give the final approval before the images appear online. The photographer may have his or her own release forms in addition to the Zivity contracts, and Banister hopes that having the models sign two release forms will get them thinking about what they are getting themselves into.

It all comes down to the contract, according to Banister. "These photographers hold this power," Banister noted, and these models want to work with famous photographers like Richardson, who could help their career. The pressure to do something that they wouldn’t necessarily do is hard to resist when they have "these stars in their eyes. (But) you have to think about what you are giving up in exchange."

In the case of Richardson, Banister said it’s “sad” that his popularity has actually increased because of this controversy. She pointed out that Richardson may not be completely responsible for the popular "sickly" look among young female models, but he is definitely a photographer that promotes it, and it is the people who hire him that want this sort of imagery.

"A lot of his women don’t come off looking powerful," Banister said, noting a recent shoot for New York Magazine in which the men from the MTV show Jersey Shore posed with a long sandwich sub, model Bar Refaeli eating the end of it. The image was obviously intended to suggest a phallic image.

"I understand that its artsy, but it’s a little bit explosive," Banister said.

Digital photography has revolutionized several industries. Photographers are no longer bound to a few dozen shots in a roll of film. Even simple things like photograph size have changed dramatically with the shift to digital.

But consumers have been slower to catch up to the new technology. A lot of people still think the best way to see their photos is to run a memory card to the corner drug store and wait for prints. That just isn’t the case anymore. A Mac or personal computer is the perfect digital darkroom.

For the average consumer, with a $200 to $500 camera, the price and the power of the software for editing and organizing photos can be intimidating. So we did some research and found four photo editing titles that will get the job done without turning your hobby into a money pit.

For the name-brand warrior, we recommend Adobe Photoshop Elements 8, a boiled-down version of Adobe Photoshop (which can cost $1,000) that won’t break the piggy bank at $79.99. If you want more of the functionality and power of Photoshop and don’t mind learning a new program, we recommend Corel PaintShop Photo Pro X3 at $99.99. For Mac users, check out Pixelmator at just $59. Finally, if you really want to save money, you must try the open source Gimp image editing software, which is free and works on Windows or Linux.

This is not a technical analysis and benchmark of the software titles, but a consumer-level look at what you can do versus how much you will spend. There are two tasks when editing digital photos. First, you need to organize your photos, sorting the good from the bad. Then you need to actually get inside each photo and edit it. A great software package will do both.

The best of the bunch was Photoshop Elements 8. While not nearly as powerful or robust as its big brother, Elements 8 is a familiar software title that comes with an intuitive organizing package that lets you rate your photos and sort them by place, event, keyword, etc. The software is family-friendly and easy to learn, with features that will correct things like red-eye, over/underexposed photos, poor lighting, and color saturation.

For a little more power, go with PaintShop Photo Pro X3, which has more of the pricey Photoshop features without the price tag. This is a good choice for a high school student who has aspirations of photography/art school. This software leaves plenty of room for tinkering with more advanced features like levels and curves. It also has a tool to create video slideshows that you can share online.

Willy King, general manager of the Bromfield Camera Co. in Downtown Crossing, recommends either Elements or PaintShop Photo Pro, giving a slight nod to Elements.

"The advantage is you can ramp it up into Photoshop Pro more seamlessly,” King said. "Although PaintShop Pro is also pretty feature packed.”

Individual titles are on Page 2.

Adobe Photoshop Elements 8, $79.99

Pros: Photoshop Elements has the name-brand recognition and reputation going for it, and the software’s stability, speed, and feature set mean it’s well-earned.

Cons: It’s definitely a consumer product. Professionals and photo students will want to explore the full version.

Final word: If you’re editing photos for any reason and are working on a budget, Elements, with versions for Mac and PC, is a great choice.

Corel PaintShop Photo Pro X3, $99.99

Pros: PaintShop Photo Pro X3 comes with tons of pro-level features priced in the bargain basement of software titles.

Cons: The software has some speed and stability issues. It doesn’t load as quickly as Photoshop or Photoshop Elements for that matter. Keyboard commands and shortcuts aren’t very intuitive.

Final word: PaintShop has been around for years. It has always been overshadowed by Photoshop, but its low price is impossible to ignore.

Pixelmator, $59

Pros: Pixelmator gives you image levels and powerful tools on the cheap. It’s also stable and fast on your Mac.

Cons: There’s no PC version.

Final word: If you can’t get a discount deal on Photoshop, you should definitely give Pixelmator a try.

Gimp, Free

Pros: It’s free. You get a powerful, portable, stable image-editing platform at no cost.

Cons: Gimp is not as user-friendly as the commercial products. There’s a bit of a learning curve.

Final word: You can’t beat free.

As a photographer, Kate Engelbrecht is like a fly on the wall. She shoots spontaneously, capturing fleeting moments in time. Her passion for photography began in her early twenties while working in advertising in New York. There, she saw beautiful images for ads as they floated in and out the door of her firm. Soon after, Engelbrecht left that job, began shooting, starting her love affair with the camera.

She fell into wedding photography and later moved into working with families and children. Approaching the family portrait as a documentary, rather than in the traditionally stiff, posed manner, Engelbrecht was able to create cohesive images that told a story. This experience created the foundation for The Girl Project.

Englebrecht wanted to create a captivating coffee table book, but needed an equally captivating subject. She found it in her fascination with the growing media content focused on teenage girls. She was curious to discover if what she was seeing on television, in shows like "Gossip Girl" and "The Hills," was indeed accurate. and if today’s teenage girls were being correctly represented. She had a sneaking suspicion they weren’t and wanted a truer portrait. She needed to discover what could have gone so terribly wrong, or perhaps catch a clearer glimpse into the culture of today’s American girl.

So, about two years ago, Engelbrecht purchased 5,000 disposable cameras and sent them to teenage girls ages 13-18 across the country, asking them to simply document their everyday lives. The only guidelines were to take honest pictures, with parental consent of course.

When asked about the kinds of pictures she received, and what was most surprising. "The most shocking thing is that there is very little shocking material at all,” Englebrecht said. “One of the most important findings was how innocent these girls actually are, which is easy to forget with all of the images that are out there in the media now." The candid images were introspective, innocent, and serious in a most revealing way.

Along with the disposable cameras, Engelbrecht sent out questionnaires for the girls which were initially created to double check herself and make certain she read the images correctly. The words and sentiments the girls sent back far exceeded simple questionnaire answers and took on a life of their own. Engelbrecht plans to use snippets from these as text in her book.

"There is a lot of beautiful candor in these questionnaires that is really, really touching," she said.

Touching indeed — so much so, that Englebrecht has said that her goal for "The Girl Project" has totally changed. A coffee table photography book will not be enough. She said needs to add some narrative, so that the girls’ stories and perspectives are conveyed through both words and images. She is now actively pursuing the concept of a traveling exhibition.

Professionals are professionals because they have studied and mastered their craft. There is another interesting aspect, however, particularly when it comes to photographs. Englebrecht has proven that sometimes the most honest and truthful images can come from the innocent and untrained eye. No special lenses, lighting, angles or direction was needed. These girls just pressed a button and created a raw snapshot of their own lives.

The project has evolved immeasurably in two short years. Starting with a friend’s two daughters, Englebrecht has now had girls from every state take part, and even has a large presence on social media sites like Facebook.

When asked if she may ever undertake a similar venture with teenage boys or even adolescents from across the world, Engelbrecht responded with bright anticipation.

"We are all living very similar and very different experiences," she said.

The Twitter-verse is getting more and more crowded with sites that want in on a piece of the buzz. For example, there are six URL shorteners supported by TweetDeck alone “" this and URL shorteners are still of arguably questionable value. Who knows how many Twitter clients are available on the App Store. Likewise, we count four services that will tweet a link to a picture. Well, now there’s one more “" but this one’s a heavyweight.

Where to click to tweet an image from Flickr.

Flickr is the Internet’s single biggest photo destination. More users upload, comment on, and download pictures from Flickr than anywhere else. It would make sense that many these highly connected, technologically forward thinking individuals would love to tweet their photos. But until now, their Twitter and Flickr photo services were worlds apart.

Last night, Flickr flicked the switch on their own photo tweeting service, Flic.kr. Now users can click “blog this” anywhere on Flickr, type in their tweet “" keeping it under 114 characters so the picture URL fits “" and Flickr will post to Twitter for them, complete with its own special Flic.kr shortened URL, like this one on our Twitter. (By the way, you are following us, right? Good.)

Our first Flic.kr pic.

Likewise, mobile users can email the photo to their own special email address, putting their tweet in the subject line of the email. Flickr, long the king of publishing APIs, has also published one for this service, meaning it’s very likely you could see Flic.kr integration in all of your third-party Twitter applications.

Of course, if you’re still scratching your head and thinking “what’s the point of Twitter anyway?” this is likely of little value to you and you probably already stopped reading. But for those still with us, Twitter could see a second Oprah-like rush of users join from Flickr, which is only a good thing for everyone else using these services.

With our sports editor hailing from Boston University so many years ago and our editor in chief graduating from Northeastern a bit more recently, Monday’s Beanpot championship game had special meaning for the Blast Magazine family.

Whether it had the intended result or not, Blast had a reporter at the TD Banknorth Garden and worked with two photographers, Kristyn Ulanday of the Daily Free Press, and freelancer Peter Keeling, to visualize the game as best we could.

Here are the photos in high resolution:

As megapixel quality increases and camera optics greatly improve, photo size greatly increases as well and sharing large photos through email can create quite a challenge, not just for the sender but the recipient as well.

Memeo Inc., a California-based company is ready to take on the challenge with a new product called Memeo Share. Memeo share is a desktop application designed for Microsoft Windows XP that allows users to upload photos to Memeo’s servers where other the recipient(s) can automatically download the full quality photos to be viewed. The service also features a setting that allows the user to upload pictures directly to Facebook and is an overall easy way to transfer photos among computers.

My experience with the photo sharing application left much more to be desired. The download and install was very quick and user friendly but I felt many other photo sharing sites such as Flickr, Photo Bucket or even Apple’s Mobile Me service offers many more options such as RSS feeds, embed codes, photo editors, comments and better photo tagging options, without the need to download and install an application. The interface of the application was designed well and very user simple and the performance of was good as well. The application ran well and seemed to work well without using hardly any system resources.

Overall I just can’t use using Memeo Share as a primary photo sharing application. Sure, it’s better than email, but Flickr and Photobucket provide far more features in a web experience and give Memeo Share a run for it’s money.  Though I’m not a huge fan of Memeo Share, you can give it a try for yourself and let others know your experience by commenting below.