vic_. Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 I discovered this by random. Enjoy: http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/03/flowerphotog200803 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ_britt3 Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Interesting, he understands light and shoots in manual. So different than most photographers today, they let their equipment do the work. And don`t understand light at all just figure they need more. Great read.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christoph_hammann Posted March 28, 2008 Share Posted March 28, 2008 That vanity fair story left me shaking my head. Overvalued, self-aggrandizing and one-trick- pony are expressions that come to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_hetzler Posted March 28, 2008 Share Posted March 28, 2008 How about another work: RICH. The examples were stunning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_wayne1 Posted March 28, 2008 Share Posted March 28, 2008 Do I hear Hasselblad's marketing department? Why couldn't film capture what he wanted? Singer said, "I had the best digital cameras you could ever imagine, and all of them were lousy. And film was even lousier because it couldn?t pick up nuances of color, especially in the blues; it just couldn?t do it.? "Singer stayed with his quiet voice, but now it took on a perceptible quaver. ?And then one day I came upon this camera??the Hasselblad H1D-22, an earlier version of the one he has now??and it changed my life." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerwb Posted March 28, 2008 Share Posted March 28, 2008 Now I know why my flower pictures suck, I wasn't wearing the proper wardrobe items. It wouldn't be Vanity Fair without the fashion news imbedded in the article. The six page article on Robert Frank was much more interesting, which I wouldn't have seen if this article wasn't posted. Thank You. BTW- it also mentions at length what he wore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted March 28, 2008 Share Posted March 28, 2008 The photos look great but really, and Russ Britt is right: as photographs its all about the lighting and getting the photographic technology (and the photographer's ego) out of the way of the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dweezil Posted March 28, 2008 Share Posted March 28, 2008 It would of course been really scary if the Vanity Fairies would have produced something of real journalistic value. The bottom line of this write up would be: Don't bother trying if you can't afford the right clothing and a ridiculously overpriced camera. Sorry for this harsh wording, but I'm fed up with this kind of BS that's more and more the norm as what is passed off as journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert lee Posted March 29, 2008 Share Posted March 29, 2008 "The bottom line of this write up would be: Don't bother trying if you can't afford the right clothing and a ridiculously overpriced camera." Well, here's one from a $60 flatbed scanner. The cheap ones tend to be better because of the greater DOF. The resolution is right up there too, about 33 non-Bayer MP's from a 600dpi capture on the 8.5x11 scanning surface. I dislike the aesthetics of this shot, but I'm sure that's where the right clothing would have made all the difference.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick_wilson2 Posted March 29, 2008 Share Posted March 29, 2008 Don't forget the need to drive a Hummer as important in photographic ability (and I always thought having such as thing was a serious character flaw!). The photos are sumptuous, but not staggeringly original. Nice soft light and a dark field, then very well printed up big. PS Since when are podiatrists 'doctors'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_palmer2 Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 In the US, podiatrists typically have a Doctor of Podiatric Medicine degree (DPM), which is gotten through a course of study roughly comparable to that for an MD or DDS or DO. Four year university degree followed by a four year medical degree and a two or three year residency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peteradownunder Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 The smell of green eyed jealousy in response to this post is suffocating - shame...the two roses above are an hilarious example of can't do it - have a look at his shots man!<p> Thank you for the link Vic . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dweezil Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 coincidently he made his "masterpiece" Photographing in and for the "New York Botanical Gardens" exactly the same place where the launching event for the H1D took place. Hasselblad marketing at work? You can bet, they are ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathan_wong Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 I was always taught that to be a "real" professional photographer that 10% of the time you're taking pictures and 90% of the time is spent marketing. It just sounds like this guy found a great way to market his work. We can't be jealous because he found a way to break through the clutter of all other great photographers and become known via an unconventional way or nitch. We should all be so creative. Ansel Adams had his Zone system so why not this guy with nice clothing and an even nicer camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now