Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Leonard Nimoy  (Read 7935 times)
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5807



WWW
« on: September 07, 2009, 11:21:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Folks:  In addition to being an actor, director, narrator, and writer, Leonard Nimoy (yes, of Star Trek fame) is also a photographer: Leonard Nimoy Photography

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
mike.online
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2009, 02:16:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Anything he can't do? Some really nice photos in there too. Thanks for sharing
« Last Edit: September 08, 2009, 02:16:48 AM by mike.online » Logged

Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2009, 08:40:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: mike.online
Anything he can't do?

The musical stylings of Leonard Nimoy.  Or as one Youtube user put it: "I like Leonard Nemoy (sic) but damn man. He should have stuck to pinching necks."    

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC73PHdQX04

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_Rqj7TqSlM...feature=related

Paul
Logged

Geoff Wittig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1017


« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2009, 04:06:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: wolfnowl
Hi Folks:  In addition to being an actor, director, narrator, and writer, Leonard Nimoy (yes, of Star Trek fame) is also a photographer: Leonard Nimoy Photography

Mike.

Here's a grumpy rant for you.
In recent years we've been subjected to an endless wave of books and exhibitions composed of photographs shot by celebrities. Just off the top of my head I can list Joel Grey, Bryan Adams, Jeff Bridges, Leonard Nimoy, Jessica Lang, Christy Turlington, Viggo Mortensen, Dennis Hopper, Bob Lilly, Kenny Rogers...and that's without googling anything. Some of the work isn't half bad; I must confess to liking some of Jeff Bridges' black & white panoramic shots. Most of it, though, varies from cliche to kitsch to just plain lousy. It's transparently obvious that celebrity status, a platinum credit card and access to other popular celebrities as subject matter, count far more than actual, you know, talent when it comes to opening doors. I mean, seriously. Can you look at the images in Nimoy's Shekhina, or the even kitschier Full Body Project, and seriously argue that a photographer lacking his name recognition would find success with them?

I live within an hour of George Eastman House, and this summer they had a substantial exhibition of photos by Jessica Lang, complete with opening gala attended by Ms. Lang for those who just can't get enough celebrity. Thing is, the photos were pretty dreadful. Mostly grainy B&W Leica shots with no central theme or vision, lots of missed focus, sort of like what you'd get handing a Leica and 50 rolls of Tri-X to a high school student. A tiny fraction were decent, but all the drab photos around them made them seem accidental.

This just pisses me off no end. I understand that Eastman House has to attract interest and donors, and the chance to rub shoulders with a celebrity is certainly a drawing card for new members. But it cheapens any pretension to "art" and curatorial integrity to make celebrity the main criterion for exhibition.

Grumble. Snort.
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4084



« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2009, 04:46:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: wolfnowl
Hi Folks:  In addition to being an actor, director, narrator, and writer, Leonard Nimoy (yes, of Star Trek fame) is also a photographer: Leonard Nimoy Photography

Mike.
I think he should stick to wearing pointy ears.

Jeremy
Logged
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 657


WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2009, 05:30:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Geoff Wittig
Here's a grumpy rant for you.
In recent years we've been subjected to an endless wave of books and exhibitions composed of photographs shot by celebrities. Just off the top of my head I can list Joel Grey, Bryan Adams, Jeff Bridges, Leonard Nimoy, Jessica Lang, Christy Turlington, Viggo Mortensen, Dennis Hopper, Bob Lilly, Kenny Rogers...and that's without googling anything. Some of the work isn't half bad; I must confess to liking some of Jeff Bridges' black & white panoramic shots. Most of it, though, varies from cliche to kitsch to just plain lousy. It's transparently obvious that celebrity status, a platinum credit card and access to other popular celebrities as subject matter, count far more than actual, you know, talent when it comes to opening doors. I mean, seriously. Can you look at the images in Nimoy's Shekhina, or the even kitschier Full Body Project, and seriously argue that a photographer lacking his name recognition would find success with them?

I live within an hour of George Eastman House, and this summer they had a substantial exhibition of photos by Jessica Lang, complete with opening gala attended by Ms. Lang for those who just can't get enough celebrity. Thing is, the photos were pretty dreadful. Mostly grainy B&W Leica shots with no central theme or vision, lots of missed focus, sort of like what you'd get handing a Leica and 50 rolls of Tri-X to a high school student. A tiny fraction were decent, but all the drab photos around them made them seem accidental.

This just pisses me off no end. I understand that Eastman House has to attract interest and donors, and the chance to rub shoulders with a celebrity is certainly a drawing card for new members. But it cheapens any pretension to "art" and curatorial integrity to make celebrity the main criterion for exhibition.

Grumble. Snort.

And don't forget Don Imus.

In general, I agree with you. On the other hand, we wouldn't want to set up barriers that keep out all but the selected few who are deemed worthy by the academy...

It seems to me that some of the visual arts have descended into a phase where one needs a special degree and a secret handshake to be part of the "in" group. It's getting to the point where there are many paintings being shown that are intentionally completely incomprehensible. Many, paradoxically, try to make one political point or another, while being entirely devoid of any representational communication. A lot of them strike me as over-intellectualized, under-executed blather. I'm afraid some of that is rubbing off on photography as well, at least in fine art circles.

So, while the Full Body Project probably won't move the photographic art in a bold new direction, at least it's somewhat amusing. Maybe sometimes, it's just interesting enough to examine how a celebrity sees the world around them.
Logged
Geoff Wittig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1017


« Reply #6 on: September 08, 2009, 06:56:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Misirlou
So, while the Full Body Project probably won't move the photographic art in a bold new direction, at least it's somewhat amusing. Maybe sometimes, it's just interesting enough to examine how a celebrity sees the world around them.

Seems to me that we already have waaaaay too many opportunities to 'examine how a celebrity sees the world around them'. And not enough to hear new voices that actually have something to say, other than "golly, see how many famous and beautiful people I know!"

I have no interest in building a fence around the officially approved 'academy'. I do have a problem with celebrities being whisked past the velvet rope ahead of everyone else. Of course, that's the way the world has always worked. We just don't have to like it.
Logged
blansky
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


« Reply #7 on: September 08, 2009, 07:34:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I've never been much of fan of marginal (or even good ) actors who parlay their questionable skills into other areas and gain acclaim  just due to access or their fame. In fact in any celebrity photograph if it can't reveal anthing interesting about the person I just mentally place it in the trash. My theory if you could replace the subject with Uncle Bob or Aunt Mary and it still stands up it's a good picture. If it's just an actor in some pretend pose, forget it. Therefore Annie L stuff to me is pretty irrelevant.

Same for people who shoot rock concerts or go backstage.  The subject is already lit, in some tortured rock pose, and the photographer only has to fire off a thousand shots to get his one or two masterpieces, he hits my garbage can too. To me, a press pass doesn't make it art.

So the people who aren't on my Christmas Card list (as if they cared) are Annie L, Jeff Bridges, Viggo, etc

I seem to recall that Roddy McDowell was pretty good though.
Logged
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 657


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2009, 07:37:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Geoff Wittig
Seems to me that we already have waaaaay too many opportunities to 'examine how a celebrity sees the world around them'. And not enough to hear new voices that actually have something to say, other than "golly, see how many famous and beautiful people I know!"

I have no interest in building a fence around the officially approved 'academy'. I do have a problem with celebrities being whisked past the velvet rope ahead of everyone else. Of course, that's the way the world has always worked. We just don't have to like it.

Well, I can't argue with any of that either.
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6514



WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 10, 2009, 02:01:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: wolfnowl
Hi Folks:  In addition to being an actor, director, narrator, and writer, Leonard Nimoy (yes, of Star Trek fame) is also a photographer: Leonard Nimoy Photography

Mike.

Mike, Let's face it, EVERYBODY's a photographer. If you don't believe it, just ask them.
Logged

bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2711


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 10, 2009, 03:48:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
Mike, Let's face it, EVERYBODY's a photographer. If you don't believe it, just ask them.
RSL, we all respect your insights.  But it really isn't helpful to make generalizations like that.

For instance I'm sure there's an old lady a couple blocks away who is not a photographer.  Oh wait...there she is, she's taking pictures of my unkempt front yard with her cell phone camera.  Never mind.
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6514



WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 10, 2009, 03:52:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bill t.
RSL, we all respect your insights.  But it really isn't helpful to make generalizations like that.

For instance I'm sure there's an old lady a couple blocks away who is not a photographer.  Oh wait...there she is, she's taking pictures of my unkempt front yard with her cell phone camera.  Never mind.

Bill, Have you checked your back yard?
Logged

daws
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 270


« Reply #12 on: September 10, 2009, 10:41:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
Mike, Let's face it, EVERYBODY's a photographer. If you don't believe it, just ask them.
I found that statement difficult to believe -- until I ran it past my photographer/mother, my photographer/accountant brother, my photographer/housewife sister, my photographer/accountant other brother (the one who lives in Portland, not Phoenix); my dental assistant/photographer/seasonal tax consultant cousin in Omaha; my roofer/photographer/house painter cousin in New York; my photographer/photographer/auto mechanic/photographer cousin in Orlando and his father, my photographer/accordionist/photographer/photographer/photographer uncle, also in Orlando.

They all said "yep."


« Last Edit: September 10, 2009, 10:45:35 PM by daws » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #13 on: September 11, 2009, 04:47:50 AM »
ReplyReply

And they are right, generally speaking, and also underline the increasing credibility gap facing those of us who claim to live by that sword. But don't let it bother anyone: we die by it too.

Rob C
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #14 on: September 11, 2009, 05:08:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Actually, the Leonard pictures were already on his website years ago, when I stumbled across his site in the Black & White Mag pages. Frankly, they were as good as these things tend to get. In the end, photography of that type depends much more on the subject than the shooter. Unless you have done it for a living you might not know nor want to believe this - myths are pretty powerfull ju-ju - but it isn't accident that gets the same few girls so much work.

In fact, if you look at model agency site - real ones - you will find that there are basically three dominant types: white, black and brown. Each is subdivided into further categories which, broady, consist of the yellow-haired, and the dark-haired with a rare red thrown in for good measure. Of the whites, you will find that they are increasingly looking like modern copies of Claudia (herself a Bardot clone but bigger); the black are all morphing into Naomi Campbell and the browns are forever approaching (but not reaching) classic Tyra Banks.

I do not, for a moment, suggest that that's how they really are, I am suggesting that if you look long enough you realise that there is a homogenization number being played out. I suspect that this is much the product of post-production where the artist is striving to achieve the respect of his peers by creating from the raw material yet a more embellished rendition of the imagined ideal, which is where we came in, all those years ago.

I suspect My Leonard didn't have, or seek, access to post-production people - that would sort of nullify the point of having the hobby...

All in all, he has nothing there of which to feel ashamed.

Rob C

Logged

ckimmerle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 442



WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 11, 2009, 08:27:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Rob C
All in all, he has nothing there of which to feel ashamed.

Except for that website. It's pretty weak.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2009, 08:28:12 AM by ckimmerle » Logged

"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeing new landscapes, but in having new eyes." Marcel Proust

Chuck Kimmerle
WWW.CHUCKKIMMERLE.COM
Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1881


WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 11, 2009, 10:06:42 AM »
ReplyReply

His work appears technically proficient, unique, at times witty, and well done. I haven’t seen so many fat girls since looking at Rubens’ work.

There are a small number of successful people who seek out success in different areas and actually get it. Nemoy is clearly one of those people. It is an interesting psychological phenomena, this need to prove yourself in different areas. It is something I bet every reader of this thread shares. It has to be a very powerful need. In Nemoy’s case, he has it all yet is still pulled towards achievement.

What do you think it is that drives people in this direction?

Once thing is certain: The lucky dog shoots a lot of nudes and evidently not only has wide range of taste in women, but likes to paint, too.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #17 on: September 11, 2009, 02:25:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Justan
What do you think it is that drives people in this direction?



Good question, and probably answered by thinking it to be the same drive that gets them up off their butts in the first place, and onto the first rung of the ladder to success in whichever field they seek it.

That drive , I'm certain, is what marks the greatest difference in people in the sense of failure or success at the game of life: some are born with it and the rest never have it. I think it has not all that much to do with the circumstances of birth, education or anything much else that's external; it's from within.

Rob C
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #18 on: September 12, 2009, 03:21:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ckimmerle
Except for that website. It's pretty weak.




May be I leaped without looking recently enough!

Out of curiosity as to why you felt that way about the site, I did return and I see your point. It has changed somewhat from my last visit, admittedly some time ago, and I see what appear to be two very bad prints - exactly what you'd get if you had mucked up your exposure/development in the days of the wet print. Justan's remark about gross birds also made me wonder what I had missed earlier times around.

Worse, the use of the overweight lady seems to me to be a rip-off of Irving Penn's ouevre with an old dancer (if I am not mistaken again), not a good idea even for him.

So many feet of clay about - I'm terrified of looking down!

Rob C
Logged

wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5807



WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 12, 2009, 12:10:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RSL
Mike, Let's face it, EVERYBODY's a photographer. If you don't believe it, just ask them.

I disagree.  Anyone with a camera in their hands can take pictures, but that doesn't make them a photographer.  Of course then we devolve into a 'what is art' conversation!    

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad