Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Pirelli calendar 2011  (Read 11330 times)
ctz
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179


« Reply #20 on: December 07, 2010, 03:29:01 AM »
ReplyReply

it's even more disappointing that Karl's photos for Pirelli are mediocre at best.

+1!
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #21 on: December 07, 2010, 04:58:37 AM »
ReplyReply

I'll admit that it pisses me off when celebs use their money and connections to take away work from more deserving people who have spent a lifetime perfecting their art and get to the point they're at. There's been a whole bunch of people like this in photography lately. It's not too hard making good photographs when money is no issue and you can pay the best talent to do everything but snap the picture for you, that's why it's even more disappointing that Karl's photos for Pirelli are mediocre at best.
Gentlemen, I understand the reactions but I'd like to disagree based in my limited experience in big prod. At least trying to open a different path. What basically pisses you off is seeing a clientelism. But to be honest you are painting the photographic pro world as a ideal craftmenship where the poor masters are spoiled by naughty well positionned stars that would not deserve best the part of the cake.
In short, they are robed by mediocre talents. (like a model sundenly become a singer).
Let me tell you that the professional photographic world stinks like politics. Yes what you are saying happens and always happened, this is not new. Now... the same think also happens inside the profession itself. We are not in wonderland at all. It's competitive, unfriendly, disorganised and sometimes talented. Sometimes right? 90% at least of the profession is pretentious and average. I do not see the world you are describing, but I might be then on the wrong places. Possibly...or not.

Do you really think that the most talented photographers in the world today are the one who really do the most important assignments? The practise you criticize are actually the common practises I'm seeing in the photo stratosphere. It's all about relation and a little about talent, knowledge and creativity. All they have to do is technically reliable, wich can be done (and wich is done) by the army of assistants.
The super all pros you are talking about are just framing and pressing the shutter, basically. But IMO this is the key question.

What you consider mediocre at best sounds in a way, without provocative intention, pretentious. I mean, it sounds like Robin Woods who defends the "real" photographers, but how many "real pros" are actually understanding and more importantly feeling in their bones, what fashion is about? How many super pros have real knowledge from inside the houses?

We could define or redefine what an outstanding work is about. IMO, there are too many fashion photographers who simply do not know a lot about fashion, or couture. Anybody, included me, included you, included G. Bush,  would obtain honorable results with the top teams and models involved. Anybody. I was smiling when I saw the Peter Lindberg movie where he does not even care or bother about settings etc...assistants are doing it for him while he's shooting. But he is the one who frames, choose the lightning and press the button. But if the moment you press the button is disconnected to the goal, to the brand essence etc...then there is no good photographer.

To me the good photographer is not the one who has 2000 years experience and have passed by all the required steps (that is the profile of a top assistant) but the one who understand and anticipate the momentum the shutter has to be pressed, and it does not have to have specially very high technical skills. History gave us example of those many times. As someone said, it could be a monkey if surrowded by a great tech team.

All you have to have is vision, and that, is not the privilege of a little group called photographer.

IMO.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2011, 02:35:32 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2508


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #22 on: December 07, 2010, 05:36:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Commerce <> Art
Logged

Gigapixel
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #23 on: December 07, 2010, 06:09:45 AM »
ReplyReply


people who have spent a lifetime perfecting their art and get to the point they're at is a vaste group, most of those guys totally unknown and fighting to pay their bills.
Who are those people then? How do we define them? What are the paremeters to have the supreme privilege to belong to that selected club? that really knows what the craft is about. I don't know what you are talking about, I don't see such a thing. All I see is politician's mentality in commercial photography. In what those "masters" differ from the unknown really good photographer that also spent his entire life dedicated to the craft with passion and talent? I look arround everywhere and don't see any trace of what you are talking about.


+1

"Experience means nothing. One can do his tasks badly for 35 years." (Kurt Tucholsky; free translation)
Logged
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2508


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #24 on: December 07, 2010, 06:56:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Time spent <> Experience

Some people never learn - some people learn very fast ....
Logged

Frits
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #25 on: December 07, 2010, 07:01:56 AM »
ReplyReply

+1

"Experience means nothing. One can do his tasks badly for 35 years." (Kurt Tucholsky; free translation)
Right on!  Grin
BTW, I really enjoyed watching this. I for one do believe that Karl is a bit of an icon in the fashion industry. Photography is also more than just a passing thing for him, not to say that he could rival top professionals of course.
Logged

Frits
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2349


« Reply #26 on: December 07, 2010, 09:19:12 AM »
ReplyReply

I cannot believe some of the negativity towards KL.  The images? Maybe you like them or maybe not. Quality of photography is from a certain level very subjective say whatever you like but he is doing the things most of us can only dream of. He also has more insight and feeling for fashion than probably all of us here which is why he has been on top of the industry for so long. Whatever you think of him, his designs or his photography nobody can deny he has been very successful.

I wish I could look back in 35 years and see that I have accomplished something similar. Still working on it, but for now I rather keep my mouth shut instead of putting his work down.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #27 on: December 07, 2010, 10:54:02 AM »
ReplyReply

I think Fred's long post says much, but I also think that we have to be careful what we think defines fashion photography. Even a broad definition of just pictures of new clothes is far from simple; there are at least two main, and huge, differences in what's called fashion photography: editorial and advertising.

My own experience in fashion lasted from, say, '66 until the late 70s, by which time the local scene had almost vanished - well, as a money spinner, that is. It wasn't simply that I was replaced, it was that companies went out of business, some abandoned their Scottish factories in last-ditch attempts to survive by moving manufacture to Hong Kong, which killed them as surely as if they'd stayed at home. They, as most businesses, couldn't buck the financial problems making themselves felt at the time.

I did quite well out of advertising fashion photography; magazine stuff (advertising), including Vogue, paid very little, even for multi-page shoots that I did around Europe. It was far more profitable to forget the lure of the magazines and work for the local guys actually selling something. And money is what keeps you in business.

When I was doing it, advertising fashion was strictly see-every-stitch and make sure that size ten girl can wear that size 14 sample. The irony was, I got work because of my portfolio which was intended to look 'editorial' but I was seldom allowed to work that way for money. Which is understandable, in the end. The people selling want to show all that they can to the woman flicking through the magazine or walking past the display stand in the shop. Also, I have met no photographer who gives a shit about fashion in the sense of the mainstream clothes he shoots; any single one that I knew was into the women and the far out stuff that had not a lot to do with what walks down the High Street on its way to lunch.

I guess that many of us might envy KL's success in money terms, but do we really want his job? I sure wouldn't! So-called editorial styles of shooting were very seldom used in my world - one saved all that for model test sessions and portfolios, proving one was always hopeful despite a fairly cool grasp on the reality.

Trust me, it was no pain moving sideways into calendar production, and much more profitable for a few years.

Rob C

Logged

jsch
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 420


« Reply #28 on: December 07, 2010, 03:19:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

is that true?
- Mario Testino's father owns a bank?
- Pro photographers work (almost) for free for magazines and hope for paid jobs in advertising?
- Some of the best photographers were amateurs?
- How much contribute the model, make-up and hair stylist to the fashion photo - not to forget the retoucher?
- Photo artists pay the gallery that they can show their work there?

If you think the world is fair, read WikiLeaks.

Best,
Johannes
« Last Edit: December 07, 2010, 03:20:58 PM by jsch » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #29 on: December 07, 2010, 04:13:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Johannes

Don't know about owning banks, but in my experience, as above, magazines thought photographers should pay them; I remember watching Jocelyn Stevens, publisher of Queen magazine, speaking on tv - I think about Patrick Lichfield, but I could be mistaken which snapper - and saying that he never paid more than a couple of notes for prints because the shooters got so much publicity... It's all business, that's why people get angry and confused when they lose track of this vital fact.

Being an amateur has no bearing on being good or bad as a photographer, other than in specialized situations where the amateur might not have the knowledge needed.

The contribution of a good model, good with the particular photographer, is crucial.

Galleries do expect a commission - how else can they keep the business going? It is a business. It seems there are no set conditions - it varies from place to place.

Wikileaks. I would shoot the mother.

Rob C
Logged

Alex MacPherson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292



WWW
« Reply #30 on: December 07, 2010, 06:33:20 PM »
ReplyReply

I quite like Karl Lagerfeld.  One thing a good fashion photographer needs to do is understand fashion. Karl has that one
wrapped up. I think he has a good eye for photography too.

We were all non-photographers once... don't be hatin' on Uncle Karl.  Grin
Logged

Alex MacPherson

Visit My Website
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #31 on: December 08, 2010, 03:02:21 AM »
ReplyReply


- Pro photographers work (almost) for free for magazines and hope for paid jobs in advertising?
if photography collective was less stupidly selfish and competitive and organised like cine industry it would not happen so easily



That, Fred, has been a sort of Holy Grail, but the personality failings prevent us from taking advantage of something the air traffic controllers in Spain understand very well: collective might! The difference, of course, is that nobody else can do their job... if I had gone on strike perhaps my wife might have noticed, but the competition would have laughed all the way to my clients' laps.

Rob C
Logged

Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2010, 10:20:14 AM »
ReplyReply

I quite like Karl Lagerfeld.  One thing a good fashion photographer needs to do is understand fashion. Karl has that one
wrapped up. I think he has a good eye for photography too.

We were all non-photographers once... don't be hatin' on Uncle Karl.  Grin

I think KL is a pretty cool guy, just a lousy photographer .
But he got another gig, he's getting away with his act, more power to him ! Wink

His Pirelli shots are mediocre in any respect, superficial concept and boring execution, I don't see how that could be up for discussion, but that's not the point, it's just a fashion world thing .
I was cringing a little though, when in the video, KL linked Roman and Greek mythology to Italian history.
He even called himself the 'visual Homer' , can you believe it ? Wink
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2010, 01:35:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, I don't think it's KL alone who falls on his face with Pirelli, if indeed he has.

Any brief study of the series post Feurer will reveal that as many emperors have been stripped of their photo credentials as have models of their knickers.

I can't think of one later 'name' who has survived the jink of that calendar. I wish I knew what or who is to blame; whether there is terrible interference with the photography, whether the photographers allow themselves to become intimidated by the opportunity.

Since your guess is at least a good as mine, here's mine: the idea of a theme gets pushed to the company in an effort to show that they, the people making the pitch, are amazingly cultured and have something unique to offer Pirelli. Then, once accepted, they find themselves crippled by the preconceived monster they have created for themselves. Maybe they become dependent on the same story boards that get to shape movies, exactly what happened with the disaster by poor old, late, Duffy: he thought he'd been given ideas for interpretation by himself, whereas it turned out they were exactly what he had been meant to shoot! Madre de Dios. Come to think of it, I'm sure that KL video of 'making of' did show the orchestra consulting drawings...

An artistic calendar? By numbers?

Rob C
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #34 on: December 09, 2010, 09:13:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Why don't we make a Lu-La calendar?

You want Michael to faint?

Rob C
Logged

BenNorton
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


« Reply #35 on: December 13, 2010, 09:48:30 AM »
ReplyReply

He even called himself the 'visual Homer' , can you believe it ? Wink

Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #36 on: December 13, 2010, 12:20:34 PM »
ReplyReply





Careful; you might replace Mr P as the king of one-liners!

Where is Dark, anyway, haven't read a line of his in zonks! I assume it is a 'he', but with penguins, you never can tell; even their mothers get confused.

Rob C
Logged

Czornyj
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1308



WWW
« Reply #37 on: December 15, 2010, 05:16:17 PM »
ReplyReply

He even called himself the 'visual Homer' , can you believe it ? Wink

I think it proves he really has a sense of humor - Homer was blind Wink
Logged

Marcin Kałuża
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #38 on: December 17, 2010, 02:39:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I think it proves he really has a sense of humor - Homer was blind Wink


That really surprises me; I've seen bits of the show on tv from time to time - only bits - but nothing indicated blindness. Guess it would be politically incorrect for family viewing to make it obvious...

Rob C
Logged

sid_v
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


« Reply #39 on: December 18, 2010, 01:02:06 AM »
ReplyReply

All this talk about KL understands fashion like no other, makes me wonder why nudity is considered fashion. Huh
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad