Medium Format For Fashion Photography

I am starting a career in high fashion photography. I hear a lot that

it's the photographer not the equipment that counts, etc., etc., I

realize that; but I also realize that the type of equipment used

makes a difference. I will be specializing in high-fashion work,

predominately taken in the studio. I just purchased a Bronica 6x4.5;

but I am wondering if I should trade it in for a 6x6 or 6x7 format

instead, since a lot of people balk about how 6x4.5 is so close to

small format. There will be a lot of time put in each shot; and

quality is utmost important. Also, most of the choice photos will

need to be made into very large poster size; and will need to be

reproduced for ads. Should I even think about going into large

format? I have no issues with cost; and I'm not interested

in "convenience", but quality. What is the best choice for ad quality

fashion photography; without making too deep a dive, (ex.: spending

$13,000 + dollars for a Hassleblad)? Help I'm new to this! Any

suggestions on Brands etc., is appreciated if anyone has worked with

a Bronica vs. other medium format brands. Thanks so much. Tina Lee

Get the most expensive & prestigious brand you can. The world of high fashion is transparently cluttered with poseurs, wannabees, pretenders & credibility in that world comes at least as much from "image" as substance.

Can you tell me where to find some of this transparent clutter?

All of my clutter is far far too solid and opaque. I'd like to trade it in

for some of the new transparent version.

at present, transparent clutter is special order only at b&h. however -- surprise surprise!! -- both robert white and badger have it in stock (and priced considerably lower than b&h). one word of advice: keep it frozen. the stuff is VERY easily fogged.

If you need the glitter, get good used Hasselblad equipment and have it completely overhauled by Hasselblad USA. This should get you started for less than $13K. That's how I got into Hasselblad without mortgaging the house. Also, there are people selling new Hasselblad on e-bay and the net for 70% of what a pro dealer will want. www.deltainternational.com is a good source.

If you need glitter; buy 'Blads in each of the new bright colours, yellow and RGB. Never use the same one consecutively. Each one will be the 'new black' at a particular point in the space time continuum.

In fashion photography, style and connections are your most important assets. To be successful, you need good business management skills. Many of the larger names I know don't even bother with the brand of cameras that much, obviously medium format helps. The really big name fashion photographers don't necessarily shoot, they manage a team of staff that does shooting, makeups, art direction, logistics, etc. Hence, if you don't know business management you won't be able to keep the easy money you earned. It's a very small circle and could be very hard for many to break into. Some had to go to Europe, to learn and come back to show off the "European" styles. If you do have a strong will to be in high fashion business, buy a technically advanced Rollei 6008i with a few of those Schneider lenses. If you want to be really successful, buy two Rolleis so you'll have every reason to force yourself to get ahead. Good luck.

On a more serious note, you can shoot fashion with any of the formats (35mm up) for most purposes. I know professional, successful shooters who never budge from 35mm and they do very nicely in the New York fashion industry.

 

Larger formats do have their advantages, particularly if you are doing covers. 6x4.5 is a nice improvement over 35mm, though it has one problem. Since you are frequently shooting verticals, you have to flop the camera over. They are smaller than their 6x7 SLR cousins, but I still find it a hassle. It's terrible if you are using a waist level finder. 6x6 is basically the same size negative as 6x4.5 if you are cropping for a rectangle, but it avoids that problem (at the expense of fewer shots/roll). 6x7 is great (especially with a rotating back) if you are on a tripod, but a bear to handhold. With studio lighting, it's quite reasonable to handhold the other two since camera shake is usually not a big problem, but many people (particularly with smaller hands and bodies) will find a 6x7 unwieldy off a tripod. You may be ok with using a tripod for all your fashion shots, but I find that handholding gives a lot of life to the resulting images since I can compose so much more freely and move around. I find a Hasselblad quite reasonable to handhold with an 80 or a 150mm lens (the 180 is a bit much, though).

 

The other big advantage (and this is *huge*) is that you can use a Polaroid back with a medium format camera and you can see the resulting image quite well to check shadow placement, etc. As you learn lighting, you will find this to be an absolutely crucial learning tool and it is a major help during a shoot to see exactly what you are getting. For this reason alone, I would encourage you to think about MF for fashion. Over time, digital may supplant the need for Polaroids because you get immediate results, but I don't think we are quite there yet (especially for a beginner). Quality is a very secondary issue for most purposes, in my opinion - 35mm with slow film is damn good and you will take a long time before this is your limiting factor.

 

I shoot Hasselblad (and have used Mamiya, Pentax, etc); it is wonderfully suited to this purpose, and although expensive you don't have to spend anything like $13k. You can do just about everything with: the 501/CM kit that includes an 80mm lens, a 150mm lens, a short extension tube, a Polaroid back, and an extra back or two (and make sure you have shades for all lenses!). This is not cheap, but you can find them used for a lot less than new. Again, I definitely don't encourage you to immediately drop a ton of money on gear. Make sure you rent before you buy to decide what handles well for you.

 

Good luck.

and most importantly...

 

you'll need to hire me as a PA... or at least adopt me so I can inherit yer gear when you become dead and thusly famous.

 

yer soon-to-be son,

 

trib

Tina,

 

You are on the track whe you said "I hear a lot that it's the photographer not the equipment that counts, etc., etc., I realize that; but I also realize that the type of equipment used makes a difference." Establish yourself first, beofre you leap forward in giant steps! The Bronica 6.45 is a great first camera to start off. It iwll allow flash synch up to 500 sec. That's better than the Mamiya 645. Make some money firsthand, before you go up in price and quality. A well know female photographer who has shot for the magazine that I work for, started with the Minolta 35mm AF Maxim and used a Pentax 6 X 7 as her studio camera. I wne tot her studio for a shot and spoke with her afterward. Basically she got the jobs in by showing what she could do with the camera. Afterwards, when she was rolling in the money, she upgraded. She is currently using Minolta 35mm AF, Pentax ^ X7, Pentax 645AF and a Sinar 4X5. Now if you still find that you must have a cmaera to "project a certain image: to your clients, then go for the Mamiya RB67 OR the RZ67. One of my photographer friend did this. He "thought" that he was losing jobs because his clients wanted either Hasselblad or Mamiya 6 X 7. Well to make it a short story, he asked for my opinion and I reccommended the Mamiya RB or RZ67. I eventually bought his previous system, which happens to be Hasselblad. I own two bodies (500CM & 553ELX),5 lenses, and an assortment of backs and filters and accessories. There wasn't any need to sell the Hasselblad, but he felt that the customers wanted 6 X 7 chromes or negatives. So the idea that "having no issues with cost; and I'm not interested in "convenience", but quality", is the wrong approach to take as you are starting out. My opinion, make some money and contacts first before you go the next level.

The fashion photographers I use over here n Madrid use Pentax SLR 6x7, they are pretty famous, get published everywhere, and know all the technical stuff, sure there are Hassys with polaroid backs lying around the studio, but what gets used is the Pentax.

Evan,

 

You wrote:

 

"He "thought" that he was losing jobs because his clients wanted either Hasselblad or Mamiya 6 X 7. Well to make it a short story, he asked for my opinion and I reccommended the Mamiya RB or RZ67. I eventually bought his previous system, which happens to be Hasselblad."

 

???

 

;-)

Hi Q.G. de Bakker,

 

To clarify what I wrote,my photographer friend had several issues at hand regarding getting work.

1. Several Photo Editors and also Art Directors "dictated" that they wanted either Hasselblad or Mamiya 6X7 to be the main camera used.

On several occasions, although he told them that he was using Hasselblad and did the shoot, he eventually wound up re-shooting the same job over. For some reasons that he couldn't explain to me, he had to rent a Mamiya RB 6X7, just to satisfy his clients. Other times, he sold them on reshooting with 4 X 5.

 

2. He had a "problem" with the repairs of his Hasselblad. TO him, it was never done fast enough nor did it stay repaired for long.

 

3. He had a big shouting match with the former President of Hasselblad USA. Hence, he just got ticked off and decided to sell his entire Hasselblad system outright.

 

I was the one who suggested the Mamiya to him in the first place, so he "offered" the system to me at what the dealers was going to give him on the trade-in monetary amount. It was worth to me and also to him. We both got satisfy in the end.

SOrry for the confusion, hope this clears it all up.

Tina,

 

A few years ago the October issue of Italian Vogue had a free

videotape which illustrated how the fashion shoots inside were

done. What was interesting was the wide range of formats and

cameras that were used.

 

Bruce Weber, as per expected, photographed on location using

a Pentax 67 or should I say 67s. As the problem with this camera

is that it's not as easy to re-load compared to a camera that

features loading backs. Photographers, like Weber, get around

the problem by owning, literally dozens of these cameras and

lenses. The Pentax 67 is a highly popular choice of camera

amongst many fashion photographers. As is the Mamiya RZ67.

 

On the video you can also see Craig McDean photographing

models running across streets in NY on a 10"X8"! Not

necessarily the obvious choice of camera for that kind of shoot

but the results were great. Paolo Roversi also used a 10x8 but in

the studio. Finally, I can recall Miles Aldridge working in the

studio but with a Rollei 6000 camera.

 

Your choice really will be dictated by what kind of fashion

photography you want to do. If you think you want to work more

on location with a lot of energy and movement in the shots then it

tends to make sense for you to look at a 645 SLR with a motor

drive. For instance, I know that Terry Richardson uses a Contax

645 as you can often see it reflected in mirrors and so on. If you

think you want to more to work more in a studio than the

versatility of something like the RZ is more useful.

 

As for 6x6, about 8 years ago I asked the photo editor of British

Vogue about this and he replied that more and more fashion

photographers were using 6x7 or 645 simply because of the

cropping issue. Hassies are beautifully made but I would

suggest you steer clear of them. They are hugely expensive and

nearly every time you use it your are going to have to crop your

image quite significantly.

 

Ultimately, you should remember that the choice of camera or

format is nowhere as important as your personal vision or style.

If you have a powerful style like,say, Terry Richardson (not a

personal favourite) then it is wholly irrevelant what camera is

being used. In fact, I gather he shot one major ad campaign on a

Yashica T4. Personally, I think one of the best fashion

photographers around is Tim Walker and his camera of choice

tends to be a 35mm Pentax. Also remember that although I have

listed what some of the bigger names in the business use they

have so much money floating around that they can afford to

either rent or buy a new system for virtually every shoot. Patrick

Dermachalier, for instance, chops and changes cameras the

whole time.

 

I would suggest that you take a look at a lot of the magazines out

there and find out what kind of shoots stimulate you and which

ones you hate and then take it from there. Most of the time the

camera used is not an issue.

 

Really, it is up to you to come up with your own style and then

you would realise what a waste of time my reply has been......

 

Andrew (RZ user)

My choice is not the cheapest but will fall around the $10.000 mark mostly new with careful shopping around. After brain busting research and comparisons these seem to be the ideal allrounders for fashion work in my opinion.

 

In the Studio? Get the RZ monster out(with 'real' 67, 66 and 645!). On location, snappy shoot or small printing size? Bring the Contax along as well (happy happy but heavy with both)...

 

But for some strange reason I'll try to keep my Pentax 67II...just a luxury although I know it will come out much less. It's cool and it will see specific action.

In this Wonderful World of MF just don't forget the sweet little 35mm. I have a Contax SLR (ST and 167MT)...Tiger Camera! and those Zeiss optics have a sharp bite!

Happy shopping!

Evan,

I can't imagine what art director would "dictate" what camera a photographer would use. You get jobs in this business on your portfolio, not on your equipment. Equipment is just a tool. They're buying you, a photographic brand, if you will.

 

Tina,

Go test out some cameras, find the one that feels right to you in the medium format realm that meets the price you can afford and buy it.

 

It's not the camera that makes the photographer, it's what the photographer can do with the camera that's important.

 

Best,

James