Well look who else has shot the Twilight cast:
© Peggy Sirota for Vanity Fair
Working with Peggy Sirota awhile back I was shocked by a bunch of things. Here’s a couple that are relevant to this discussion:
1. How fast she shoots. This actually kept our costs down because of her ability to shoot multiple setups in one day.
2. Her secret to shooting fast: she uses almost all natural light. Turns out it doesn’t take so long to set up a bounce card.
So what makes Peggy’s work great isn’t the gear, it’s the emotion she gets from her subjects. They look natural and the light looks natural so it all works together. And, take it from one who knows, she takes her casting very very seriously.
I think it’s pretty obvious that my personal tastes go to the un-geared (think Jaime, Grant and Frank Hoedl). But, while some of my favourite shooters use natural light (or maybe they use a lot of gear to make it look natural- regardless…), I’m keen on lots of folks who know their way around the strobes too (local young ones Adam Rankin, Lee Towndrow).
(BTW, note that I identified these as “personal tastes”. This is something that Art Buyers must do- separate the stuff we like from the work that’s right for our clients. It’s not always easy.)
If I were to hand one piece of advice to young, impressionable (I hope) shooters like James Mooney, I’d say- leave your gear at home and go shoot some photographs. Try that out. It might not be where you end up but I think it’s a worthwhile exercise.
What’s that? You want to read more on this issue? Well I’m back for a bitty freelance Art Buying stint at Leo Burnett so I’m a little pressed for time. But I’ll encourage you to click over to Jamie Kripke’s blog for a posting on portraiture, gear, Platon and Nadav.
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Yes to Peggy Sirota. She’s gifted with tapping into fun spirited results. However i would say photographing the young beautiful and rich is not a challenging ground from which to work. There is an undeniable default that makes this work successful.
Mining nearly ecstatic energy from lay people or wannabees takes levity of character and practice. You can’t learn that at school!
Of course it also takes a formidable personality to move in close on the power circuit, the likes of Abminijad or Mugabe. Platon’s account of shooting Putin is incredible for its adventure and endurance factors. Platon is also a decent guy but c’mon …..the head shot is sooooo unremarkable.
It is formulaic and banal – ESPECIALLY when dealing with a powerful figures who offer (even high profile outlets) 5-10 mins of their precious time. These pictures act like a vault – got ‘em he/she is in the vault – they show a high degree of grooming detail but little else.
They serve as a great problem solving method but they fail to be intimate even while being intimately close. Bummer.
Is it only me who is unmoved by them?
And likewise the ‘artistic scheme’ – the light the framing the lens – sails close to the wind. Did not Avedon, Pyke and Scholler (others before now…)trade on this treatment in earlier days? I am quite sure at higher echelons than I work; that authorship factors are questioned in regards to this popular style.
I think we have been sold a bill of goods on this one .
For The New Yorker to publish this series now illustrates a surprising lack of vision in relation to their history with pioneering photographers. If they published this portfolio several/ ten years ago it would have been fresh.
I’ll take Nadav’s slight turn on the head shot theme any day of the week. At least it implies a response to an individual rather than one size fits all.
I agree that it is good to keep the gear light and concentrate on your subject. It also offers a change of pace and forces you to trouble shoot in a different way.
However I suggest to all new shooters to also learn how to light with strobes. Don’t ignore it. I have encountered many junior and senior level photo students who out of convenience (not style choice) only shoot in natural light. The key to this info about Sirota is that she still modifies and controls the light even though it is just natural light. It also fits her style and subject. Ironically modifying natural light with an overhead silk can require more gear and set up time than a portable strobe set up.
Frank Hoedl ungeared? Of all the people I’ve assisted for, Frank (on location) brings, by far, the most gear. Nothing against him by any means, but lord, he brings a lot of stuff.
Bree has a point especially if this is shot digitally. The only challenging part on the photographers part of making this image was if she had shot it with film, and even then its a pretty standard portrait. The actors are doing what they do best as well as the directors of VF. Having lit this with strobes properly in studio or in a dark locale would be as pleasing as there have been nice shots of this gang done this way, but the question would be if she is diverse enough to change from different mediums of lighting and produce an ultra fab result. I take it she does not live in Seattle?
Hey assistant- just to clarify, I have worked with Frank and know what it takes to get that natural light he so carefully crafts. Frank definitely falls into the camp of my next line: (or maybe they use a lot of gear to make it look natural- regardless…).
And Bree- thanks, as ever for the scholarship but I’d add Nadav’s NYTMag shoot with the Obama peeps to my list of disappointments in a second. In this case, even the master can’t rise above the constraints of the time he had with each subject. And, without a gimic (Platon/Schoeller) it didn’t work on any level.
Soley: No, LA. Actually, the criticism against Peggy and this photoshoot can be levelled more squarely if you consider the outtakes which can be found on the Vanity Fair site. In these you see extremely contrived poses. I don’t fault her for doing them- sure, try it out (shoot that shit- see tomorrow’s post) but why oh why would Vanity Fair show these (HMAb considered) outtakes?
True dat Heather! The Obama set was superboring.
A volume deal.
Frank was in Vancouver last year for a job and I had the pleasure of assisting him. Yes, he brings a lot of gear. He’s well prepared. It can take a serious kit to make something look naturally lit in less than optimum conditions. I think I took more away from that job than any other and I know a couple of others feel the same way. I definitely have an appreciation for work that may look effortless….because it probably wasn’t.
{ 2 trackbacks }