George Hurrell and the Golden Age

[samstevens]

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/how-magic-man-of-hollywood-captured-golden-ages-biggest-stars-180984011/

[inoneeye]

Very Impressive!

[mikemorrellNL]

On 4/8/2024 at 7:53 PM, samstevens said:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/how-magic-man-of-hollywood-captured-golden-ages-biggest-stars-180984011/

What a wonderful article, Sam! Many thanks for the link.  (As a Brit) I'd never heard of George Hurrell. It was truly fascinating to read (and see) just how innovative and creative he was in his use of 'lighting'. He obviously had many other (social?) talents in becoming a preferred photographer of Hollywood stars. But his innovative ideas about 'lighting' were truly transformative.

[samstevens]

6 hours ago, mikemorrellNL said:

What a wonderful article, Sam! Many thanks for the link.

Glad you got something out of it. A photographer friend/mentor recommended I look at Hurrell's work when I first started doing portraits and people photos. I actually had taken one photo that seemed to lend itself to a Hurrell "treatment", and spent time studying details and trying to pay homage to a Hurrell-like approach. It taught me a lot. I generally don't do traditional studio work, preferring mostly natural lighting and shooting people in their home or other comfortable environments. Something significant I take away from Hurrell is the expressive use of a sculptural approach. There's an interesting plasticity to Hollywood glamour work and I've long felt that plasticity can also be used toward conveying very real expressions, via appreciation of persona and the emotional power that a created look, if genuinely approached, can accomplish. There's a lot of territory in the contours of a face, which hold rich potential in a visual art such as photography. Perhaps counterintuitively but also challengingly and rewardingly, artifice can actually be an inroad into expressive depth and authenticity.

[c_watson1]

Liking it depends on your taste for taxidermy. Madame Tussaud anyone? Ghastly.

[AlanKlein]

On 4/8/2024 at 1:53 PM, samstevens said:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/how-magic-man-of-hollywood-captured-golden-ages-biggest-stars-180984011/

A lot to learn studying his beautiful work. 

[c_watson1]

Bette Davis once complained that Hurrell's hyper-stylized look made her look like "a piece of shiny waxed fruit." His lighting and retouching rendered looks that seem a bit too close to religious iconography. Not sure "study" of his work says much in 2024.

[samstevens]

5 minutes ago, c_watson1 said:

Bette Davis once complained that Hurrell's hyper-stylized look made her look like "a piece of shiny waxed fruit." 

Then again, as the article relays, "At their first meeting, Crawford reportedly found Hurrell’s directions overbearing. 'You can’t talk to her like that,' the actress’s publicity assistant warned Hurrell. 'She knows how to pose.' Two days later, Hurrell was having lunch when a woman ran up to him and kissed his hand, 'Please forgive me, Mr. Hurrell,' said a remorseful Crawford. 'Ive just seen the proofs. They are so very, very lovely.'"

Of course, Bette and Joan couldn't agree on much, so who knows whose word to take. 😊

 

[c_watson1]

The contemporary industry standard launched by Hurrell rendered women as either floozies or "our Lady of Perpetual Indulgence." Kissing Hurrell's hand? Seriously? Think your apocrypha detector needs fresh batteries, Fred G!