[ Post New Message | Post Reply to this One | Send Private Email to John Kantor | Help ]

Response to The Fashion Question

from John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com)
"...I rarely think about the models as people"

Which is the point. Instead you are to see them as images that you wish to identify with.

As I've argued before, catalog photography is product photography; fashion photography is advertising. It's purpose is to create an image that people will come to identify with a brand.

And it's all about idealized images of people - not the people themselves. When I'm shooting a model, I'm very aware that I'm not shooting the person. And that to me is one of the aspects I find so interesting about this kind of photography. It's very difficult to have both the rapport with the individual that's necessary to make them a partner in the creation of the image, and yet be objective enough to not lose sight of what you are ultimately trying to create. As I've mentioned to models, I like doing fashion because I get to create my ideal image - not of them, but through them.

"Celebrity" portraiture (defined as not just pictures of celebrities, but pictures designed to create the image of a celebrity) is somewhere in between fashion and "true" portraiture. My picture of Vick, while informed by his personality, philosophy, and sense of style in a number of ways that fashion isn't, is still a created image and not a portrait as this board usually defines it. (Of course, personally, I don't really think that "true" portraiture can exist anyway.)

To tie this in with my views on celebrity (don't forget to read the new posts in You've got to have a gimmick!) the ultimate in fashion photography (as indeed with any other kind) goes one step beyound merely creating an identifiable image for the brand (as defined by some faceless art director), but capitalizes on the celebrity of the photographer just as it does on the celebrity of the model. The brand image becomes a confluence of the created image with that of the photographer, model, and the publication that carries it.

Rather obviously (and exceedingly ironically), the problem with celebrities is that they often misrecognize the image that others have of them as being "real."

As to why there are few comments on fashion, I think it's a combination of factors, but the main reason is the lack of context (which is a problem with almost any photo post). Unless you understand the purpose of the shot, you can't really make any suggestions except purely technical ones - which may or may not be relevant. Tom's suggestions about my photograph of Vick (in Not quite a portrait) were valid ones - if I had been attempting to create a standard portrait. It was really only when I explained both the purpose of the shot as image and showed its use as graphical element that there was enough context to critique it meaningfully.

I'm still working on basic techniques (and slowly since I can shoot so seldom), but I think that I actually have an advantage coming to photography so late. I think I have already have a good eye along with my own sense of style that I have developed over the last 20 years. Both of these I can start to build on immediately. Technique is the easy part. (And I'm finding that shooting weddings is helping a lot with some of that.)

(posted 8518 days ago)

[ Previous | Next ]