You have to pardon me, but I learned pre-visualization from Ansel Adams. I never took a class in advertising photography and I’m sure if I had, nobody would have mentioned anything about pewvisualization. Most AD’s have never taken a course in perspective drawing. In case you’re wondering, I worked in advertising when AD’s had to draw on paper and did not just open the Black Book or other guide and clip out something to steal. I can’t tell you how many times I got a clip from a directory with the directive, “Copy this!” even though it was copyright infringement. Later when my work began being clipped out of directories to direct photographers, I had to sue a prospective client for infringement of my copyright.
Unbeknownst to you, I shot advertising photographs for 20 years, and I must have been pretty good to make the money I made as well as win a slew of awards. Do you need a client list? I got into the ASMP Hall of Fame in 1985, where the competition was stiff (45k entries) and there were only 102 winners. My image is at George Eastman House in their permanent collection. Go to GEH.org and do a search.
Previsualization is important in all photography, not just a photo studio where products are shot. It is, as Ansel said, what separates the big dogs from the little dogs. Here is a clip with Nancy Newhall. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F24SHtCHeTc
It is my opinion that camera clubs do little to teach their members how to become better photographers without resorting to contests and awards. Every time I speak to a camera club, I am always bemused as how little the award winners know about producing consistently powerful images.
JAn Faul
On Aug 19, 2012, at 2:36 PM, H wrote: Jan, you make an ongoing point of previsualization and careful construction... In advertising photography, too much construction is generally a bad thing. Pics must never look like the photographer thought it out at all. Many Pics that win awards in camera clubs would be tossed out in an agency environment. They must have the immediacy and randomity of a snapshot and the perfect exposure, tonal-range and color of a studio shot. We avoid constructs. The lighting should be absolutely believable while still keeping the point of interest bright and beautiful. Putting together an unconstructed shot like that requires a lot of careful planning, construction and previsualization
Sent from my iPhone
I think the overall quality of the images in this week’s gallery is better, except for the police shot. I realize there is no definition of what is or is not a good photograph, but I’m not impressed with the shot. If a photographer wishes to show police presence, police aggression, or police interaction with the public without actually showing an attack or a violent scene, get the lead out and shoot riot cops, SWAT teams, or troops in camouflage walking down a city street. Has anybody on this list ever been to Israel, Spain, Germany, Brazil, or o country where the police routinely carry automatic weapons?
Police in the UK dress as these two are dressed in so many venues that people no longer react with fear and panic when seeing them unless the location is in or near an airport or transportation hub. Get photographs of security forces when tensions are high and then I’ll congratulate you. When the photographer is under stress, then the senses are heightened and the pictures have the sense of immediacy this shot lacks.
Dan Mitchell’s shot of the lighthouse, while more interesting due to the way it pulls the viewer’s vision into the back, is better, but still suffers a certain ’snapshot-ish’ quality due to its lack of the correct DOF or I presume, the use of a tripod. It’s a fine example of a shot which is supposed to be ‘good', but is only 'good enough'. I’m sure Dan intended it to be sharp, but was let down by not taking the equipment and camera shake into account.
I will accept ‘puzzeling’ as a compliment for my ‘Lift Accident’ shot. Thank you.
Jan Faul
On Aug 19, 2012, at 12:35 PM, Howard LEIGH wrote: Actually people were using dSLRs for the same sort of picture - and the day before I used a dSLR type bridge camera for the same purpose!! I've never had any problem with the police and photography (yet :))
Howard
On 18 August 2012 14:32, Trevor Cunningham <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm commenting with recent conversations in mind.
On 8/18/12 2:56 PM, Andrew Davidhazy wrote:
The PhotoForum members' gallery/exhibit space was updated August 18, 2012. Authors with work now on display at:http://people.rit.edu/andpph/gallery.html include:
Howard Leigh - Armed Police snapped!
Good thing it was an iPhone and not a real camera! ;) Otherwise, I doubt the police officers would have been so friendly and you'd have a Chris Strevens tale to tell.
|
