I have had a long love affair with Comte's work, and I wonder if anyone call tell me anything about him or his techniques. I know he uses Pro 100, which incidentally is my favourite colour neg film, and that he also uses LF often. I have been looking for his work for a couple of years, but it is never in the stores...shawn

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), February 25, 2000

Answers

Hi Shawn

You can find rcrosing@dds.nl), February 26, 2000.

Woops, did something wrong there, I guess... But anyway, what I wanted to post: You can find Michel Comt on the internet at:

http://www.michelcomte.net

although his site is still under construcion... But there's already some info & work available

-- Rolf Rosing (rcrosing@dds.nl), February 26, 2000.

Hi Shawn

You can find Michel Comte on the internet, although his site is still under construcion... But there's already som einfo & work available

-- Rolf Rosing (rcrosing@dds.nl), February 26, 2000.

Thanks Rolf. I found a site like this in similar order several months ago, but I forgot all about it. If it's Mr. Comte himself putting it up, he doesn't seem very enthused, eh?

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), February 26, 2000.

I just got a blank screen with a password box - anybody know what it is?

-- stuart phillips (stuart.phillips@umb.edu), February 28, 2000.

So we have managed to get the URL right, but I wonder:

Why do you like him, Shawn? I had a look at the (very much under construction) site and wasn't terribly excited... What did I miss? Was it perhaps because I know nothing about any of the models?

-- Allan Engelhardt (allane@cybaea.com), March 01, 2000.

I think he is one of the best colour techicians around, way favour him over LaChapelle who has none of Comte's finesse and subtlety. MC mutes his pallate just enough for me to show that he really understands the way human's see when their hearts are involved, not their dicks, like happens with much of LaChapelle's work. I know I'm just making a comparison here, but in that case I think it's like comparing Rembrandt to Ribera, or Rothko to (uh I'm gonna get in trouble for this) someone like Still.

MC is also very painterly in a number of ways, most obviously his classicism as regards composition. As a portraitist, he pulls his models in just enough to make me want to 'get to know them' but so much as to leave me thinking I know them...I love that dynamic, that mystery which never goes away like it does with someone like Avedon (who I also love of course). Avedon brings the actor out, whereas Comte brings out the 'real' little girl...Sometimes I get the sense he is disgusted in the trend towards extremely young models...sometimes...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 01, 2000.

I meant: but NOT so much as to make me THINK I DO know them...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 01, 2000.

If anyone's interested, there's a great section with quite a few of Comte's colour photos in French PHOTO this month...But I don't polywog-da-dingdong (as my Hull Quebec gramma used to call it when I looked at her queerly for speaking French..."guess ya gotta learn to polywog-da-dingdong, eh shawnie?") so I don't know how the article is...shawn

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 15, 2000.

The link to the article Shawn mentions in PHOTO is http://www.phot o.fr/portfolios/comte/index.html. (Warning: nude images.)

The article talks to M. C. on his "secret garden": nude images.

-- Allan Engelhardt (allane@cybaea.com), March 15, 2000.

Thanks Allan, I didn't realize it was online. Cool. shawn

ps what do you guys and girl think...?

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 15, 2000.

ps again: My favourite image is, by far, the one which is here. It's also probably the most tame, which might say something about me, who knows...tu mutch Buddah?

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 15, 2000.

Hmmm - strange, that happens to be my favourite too :) I generally don4t get a big kick out of nudes, but this guy most certainly has a special style which is more interesting than most. Thanks for enhancing my photographic experience :)

PS: On my way out to find URLs for a couple of photographers who have impressed me - stand by!

-- Christel Green (look.no@film.dk), March 15, 2000.

Shawn, Thes images don't look like either 1) what you described or 2) the "personality" pics (thumbnails only, as of now) on his website. These girls seem to be portrayed as junkie love slaves. The red smears imply the menstrual thing (what is this... a trend?) like these girls haven't washed up yet after a rousing good time (pay per veiw?).

His light seems very simple (adequate but not inspirational) and the sets are sort of offhand (deliberate but not illuminating... like... Why?) implying crash pads or the kidnapper's lair, and some of the girls look like concentration camp survivors (the various [inconsistent] palettes help with this, skin tones and sheen like used latex).

Tell me more about what's to aspire to, here? This is kind of combined Helmut Newton and Jan Soudek but it has the slick contrivance of commerce in spite of itself, whereas Newton's is so deliberate and Soudek is so anti-. I'll go back to his website when it's finished and try again. At this point he looks like a fashion photographer who wants to be an artist but can't get away from the skinny girl sex thing ("how vacuous, manipulated and stupid can I make these girls look, without making them go away?"). I got some of the message from the polywog-a-ding dong, but I wish I was fluent, I might get a clue... t

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 16, 2000.

OK, Tom already mentioned Jan Saudek so I4ll give you Victor Ivanovski - a Russian with imagination and humour.

-- Christel Green (look.no@film.dk), March 16, 2000.

Well a couple of his model's had eaten that month, at least...

I like his technique (obviously borrowed from the 'flat fashion' books), and his colourcasts to all his prints. The colour really speaks to me.

Compte is definitely a fashion photographer to the end in these photos, I agree. But maybe one of the reasons I like him is because he is sort of tame, compared to Newton for example. Art is an escape for me sometimes, especially when viewing someone else's art, and if nothing else M.C.'s art allows me to escape, with what are obvious idealizations hinged on a Nan Goldin sort of backdrop. I love Goldin and Newton, but I can only look at their images for so long because they draw me in too much. As I sort of noted in my earlier post, Comte allows me a 'distance of objectivity and lack of true emotion', if I can put it like that, which I find appealing and which 'takes me away'...wicked witches and wonderful wizards aside.

shawn

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 16, 2000.

"one of the reasons I like him is because he is sort of tame, compared to Newton for example"

I'd say insidious as opposed to tame. Newton is honest in his delivery, his women are deliberate participants. Comte seems more subversive in delivery of an indistinct message, those women seem inspecific as to their motivation. And unmotivated as to the specifics of their condition. Lethargic and indifferent.

I have my own assumptions, as he gives us plenty with which to work. Would you comment on the environment/feeling he creates in this portfolio? What do you see happening there? What dialog transpires in your head when you're participating in Comte's art? And I don't mean "one light, cross processed, dirty matresses, bad paint, what format? How did her nipples get that color?" photographer type thoughts... I mean (as a man, or woman) what do you think those girls are up to and why? (these questions are for anyone, not just Shawn).If we are to comnsider this as art, these are some valid questions to ask... t

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 16, 2000.

Christel, thanks for that link to Victor, that's some of the best work I've seen in years. Check it out Shawn, and a damn fine website, too... t

Got any more good links, Christel?

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 16, 2000.

Well, I can identify personally with lethargic and underweight, because I'm physiologically both (at over 35 pounds underweight since forever...). I also find complete identification with the attitudes of the models. They LOOK the way I FEEL.

Tom, many of your posts had led me to realize there are (on one level) two kinds of artists: those who hope to identify something objective WITH the objective world, and those who hope to identify something subjective TO the outside world (and I guess there are those who could care less if they identify anything with anyone at all). I am starting to think I am most interested in seeing myself in other's work, rather than using others' work as a way of expressing something objective objectively (if that makes sense). Which isn't to say I "do art" for the same reasons, only that what I seem to look for in others' is a piece of myself...which for me is a great way to 'connect', to see that, in a world where you yourself are constantly trying to mold yourself to another's (society's?) vision of "you", that someone somewhere is holding up a mirror...

Comte does that for me, as do all those skinny, lethargic, heroiny tools of the large machine, and I can never apologise for that any more than I could apologise for being born shawn gibson.

shawn

ps I checked out the site. I like the work a lot.

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 17, 2000.

I think what I'm trying to say is that I find these fashion images beautiful, not because the women are beautiful, but because they are very, very ugly.

now that'll get me in it deep...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 17, 2000.

no no no trouble from me, we are deep together. I can relate very well to that understanding. I am attracted to those images for much the same reason, they illuminate a part of my psyche that informs my concious mind in disturbing ways. It's the same reason I appreciate Joel Peter Witkin's work without liking it, in fact being repulsed by it. Forewarned is forearmed, I will hold myself back from this and knowing of it's presence (my capability for and seduction by these images) is an important part of knowing myself and supports the choices I make. If I come to make images like this for any reason, I will speak volumes in whatever media/language I know to show the beauty of them, for it is not only in the looking that that beauty can be known. Am I clearwise now? (I always liked that language the kids spoke in Mad Max: Thunderdome)... t

I read somewhere that we "create to make sense of experience" is that kind of what you're getting at?

I also read an interveiw with Alan Watts in which he quoted Walt Whitman " do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself. I am multitudes."... I see myself in everything, I am nothing, I am god.

and a skinny one, too. Over six feet and close to 150# with boots on... (that's me with the eggplant) ha!

please never apologise for being

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 18, 2000.

If I come to make images like this for any reason, I will speak volumes in whatever media/language I know to show the beauty of them, for it is not only in the looking that that beauty can be known.

That's precisely where I have been fooling myself, or rather DENYING myself lately. I've been trying to take pictures with 'beautiful' women, rather than being true to myself and making beautiful pictures. I WANT to editorialize against fashion, but how do you do that when the eighteen year-old model, who is working with you and has absolutely no freaking clue about the 'reality of things', is going to be the one so editorialized?

I promised myself a long time ago I'd try to never hurt anyone, and now I am in THAT so deep, I can't even say to someone "I'm editorializing on this subject; I want you to be an actor here", because I firmly believe most of the world will not see the model as an actor, but as a model tramp/anorexic/slut/Unfortunate who got caught up in a dirty-or-otherwise-suspicious-minded photographer's obsession.

Take a copy of Elle to your local restaurant/club/supermarket and sit down with a stranger, leaf through it, and watch with amazement how "real" the person thinks everything is, how literal the description of the model...I couldn't do that to my models, couldn't risk doing it, and sleep at night...

But I'll get over that someday...or I'll start making enough money to hire TRUE professionals who THEMSELVES are aware of the difference.

Or are too junked up on heroin to care...shawn

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 18, 2000.

As I've talked about a lot in the Philosophy of Photography forum, art can't speak for itself. Just because you know what you are trying to say and the model knows what you are trying to say, doesn't mean that your message will get across. Once you disseminate it, it will be interpreted (and appropriated) in ways you can't predict. The only answer is to use your position as the creator of the work to publicise your view of it. In other words, if your art is political, you have to be political. That is particularly important in ironic imagery - where it is easy to have your message mistaken for its exact opposite! I'll post a reading of these Comte pictures that shows what I mean.

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), March 18, 2000.

Rather than rage against the machine, make pictures of real people (even if they're pretty) that show them as interesting human beings, not an android mannequin clothesrack. Put clothing on them that accentuates who they are, not the other way around and show them in situations that their peers can relate to. Bag all the hyper fantasy supra-normal role playing that creates self loathing in those who cannot achieve that current absurd "standard".

Get the Feb 14th issue of New York magazine, and read the article about young women fashion photographers. Here's a quote: "There's an effort to try to get at the real character of the model and a sense of individuality rather than something statuesque. There's a sympathy between them (photographer and model) not the full on message of sexual frisson. That's not what the 21st century is about". It's worth your while to read and it's made me think I might be able to work within that sort of context (If only I was a young girl [smiley face, here]). I had never been able to get any interest in making young girls look like cheap hookers (BeBe), this new sentiment/attitude gives me hope...

how do you do that when the eighteen year-old model, who is working with you and has absolutely no freaking clue about the 'reality of things', is going to be the one so editorialized?

quit working with models. I'm sure you have friends who would like to be photographed. Don't ask them to be a model, don't ask them to "pose"and don't let them "pose", ask them to let you photograph them. Put them in cool clothes that they really like, put them in cool context/environment to make a relevent image (with good light, of course) and make some well composed, clean and graphically put together images. Reinvent fashion photography, 'cause it ain't goin' away and if you go "against" it, you probably won't go anywhere... t

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 19, 2000.

This is kind of what the gap has been doing with those ad's on TV that show all those kids speaking the words of songs (while the soundtrack plays). No heavy makeup, no crotch shots, no smeared blood, no push up bras, no silicon implants, no spike heels... t

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 19, 2000.

Shawn, have you seen the new grrl magazine "Simplicity"? check it out... t

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 22, 2000.

No, I'll check it out. I keep hearing about Dazed and Confused as well, but I looked for it the other day and I guess I missed it. Too bad.

Thanks Tom. shawn

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 23, 2000.

I don't think that those GAP ads are any less manipulative. They are just aiming at a different demographic.

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), March 23, 2000.

well i found a 'saving grace' today: a woman i work with (a beautiful Filipina) is pregnant, and glowing beautifully. she also has 2 children. i'm doing a shoot with her and her 2 kids (hope she doesn't want papa included...i'd be lost) in a "GAP for kids" kinda shoot. this sure as hell blows away the crap i've been shooting lately. well, it's not crap, really, just kinda empty. don't take that the wrong way, i'm glad i feel this way...it's liberating. does anyone understand where i'm coming from?

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 23, 2000.

What a great opportunity! I'm all the time buggin' pregnant women to let me photograph them. It's a rare and special gift to be allowed there. The one time I made nude images of a pregnant woman was the most intimidating photo session I ever had... What's with the "pappa" hesitancy?

John, advertising is manipulative by it's very nature. My issues are with destruction of the self created by induced longing for the unobtainable. Anybody (in the indusrial world) can make the money to buy pants like other cool people have. It's the desire to own a new body or to mistreat the one you have that some advertising induces, compounding that "buy me" manipulation and doing psychological harm to individuals and cultures... t (bad sentence structure, no time to fix, c'est la vie)

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 24, 2000.

What's with the "pappa" hesitancy?

I dunno really. Just seems kinda wierd or something. Must be me. It's just a lot easier for me to be natural in front of women and children, both of whom I am completely myself with, whereas with men (in general) I kinda feel this pathetic mask of He-Man creep in, and my guard goes up. I guess I'm worried that the beautiful opportunity might be lost based on my perceived and completely ridiculous worry here...which is suddenly gone...shawn

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 24, 2000.

You can never instill too much confidence in your subjects. With a pleasant initial experience, additional sessions might really blossum into much more fruitful experience, especially with the blessings of Dad. And if he's like most guys I know, one photo session with Mom and the kids will be enough to hold him for a long time. You'll probably need wild horses for a return engagement with him... t

For a clue as to what potentials abound in these conditions, check out:

heylloyd.com

an amazing body of work done with 1 camera, 1 lens, 1 film, 1 chair, 1 window and an incredible array of friends/aquaintances.

-- tom meyer (twm@mindspring.com), March 24, 2000.

my favourite is here. Nice link Tom. Thanks. More beautiful than pretty...

-- shawn gibson (SeeInsideForever@yahoo.com), March 25, 2000.