what film is wall using?

Hi

 

what kind of film is Jeff Wall using on his outdoor pictures where there is

people involved ...and a lot of movement.

just wondering

can someone tell me?

 

Petter Garaas

Dunno what film, but does a lot of digital manipulation -- I recently read an article about him that mentioned this specific photo and claimed it was made over the course of more than a year and was supposedly a digital composite of over 100 photos. Many of his photos are also very carefully composed (constructed) so what passes for frozen movement may actually be people holding poses.

Michael is right. This is a very famous Jeff Wall piece, "A Sudden Gust of Wind (After Hokusai) (1993)", it's very big, 4 meters x 2,5 meters and it's a transparency display case about 30cm thick. This photograph was inspired by a print by the nineteenth century Japanese artist named Hokusai. They both depict a group of people watching sheets of paper being blown away by the wind. As a lot of recent Jeff Wall work it is a digital composite, it took them months to get it all just right; especially the pieces of paper. For a lot of his recent pieces he shoots the 'little scenes' (the postures of the individuals for instance) in the studio and then composites it all digitally. But I'm a little dissapointed in your question, out of all the questions you could have asked about this piece of modern art, you choose the blatant, photoclub-dude-like one: "what film did he use". Does it matter? He could have used almost any slide or negative film or any digital back, it doesn't matter, it's not about the material, it's about the art.

Here comes another of those blatant questions. I know its about the art,

 

But i wonder how do he make them that big? some one said his later work was a series of many pictures stiched togheter, is this technique used here to? or is it just a really well scanned 4x5 negative (i dont know if he still uses 4x5, saw an old picture with him and a linhof 4x5 camera)

 

Cheers Johannes

Saw his exhibition at the Tate last year. Very underwhelming and really not worth the train fare. Mind you, presentation was good, with those big lightboxes.

thanks for the contributions everyone:)

 

photoclubish?

thats a strange way to answer a technical question.Quite childish i must say.

Geert, seriously, this is a Photgraphic web-site where the VAST majority of people are here to share ideas, and how to achieve them TECHNICALLY. It's not an Art web-site.

Im sure petter had his reasons for wanting to know the film type.

I don't even like the shot.

I think there's one sheet of paper positioned very slightly out for my artisic nuance.