Eolo Perfido

He's five years older than me (I'm 24) and I really like his style.

-- edward kang (ekang@cse.nd.edu), February 19, 2001

Answers

Not so hard:

1. Go to commercial photography school.
2. Find one really gorgeous model willing to do TFP (time for prints)
3. Find a really good makeup artist.
4. Find a really nice daylight studio.
5. Make a mint in the fashion photography world. :)

This is obviously oversimplifying a bit <g>, but looking through this guy's portfolio, that was the impression I got.

Once he starts showing his portfolio around Rome and Milan, he should be made-- that's some quality fashion/beauty stuff he's got going there.

-- Josh Wand (josh@joshwand.com), February 20, 2001.

Oh, I forgot to mention:

• Shoot everything with a Mamiya RZ 6x7 system (>$6000).
• Crop liberally as needed.

:)

-- Josh Wand (josh@joshwand.com), February 20, 2001.

Hey Josh, whats up? Edward- this guy is good, isnt he?- I think it's that you can tell he loves this stuff- and he can make you love it too- Good luck E.K and E.P.-

-- Chris yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), February 20, 2001.

Nice stuff, but the horizontal scrolling crap makes his site suck, though.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), February 20, 2001.

Hey guys! The funny thing is this:

1) Eolo has never gone to commercial "photo school". He's been taking photographs for two years by his own admission. 2) Eolo uses a 35mm Nikon shooting Ilford XP2 for B&W and various standard color negative emulsions. His only lens is a sigma 105ex macro. 3) He shoots his stuff in random places and doesn't have anything akin to a real studio. 4) Most of his stuff is merely done with reflectors, hardly any flash.

That's what really impresses me about his work - it's almost entirely based on his raw vision. He's just a really talented guy, and it's not like he has anything better in terms of circumstance over what I have at this moment.

It's work like his that makes me think about what I'm doing - always telling me in the back of my head: he can do this with an nikon 35mm SLR on film you have and one macro lens. Why aren't you doing the same?

-- ed (ekang@cse.nd.edu), February 20, 2001.

Hmm, he's a little more accomplished than he lets on, a little hacking around found me his real home site:

http://www.necron.com/content.htm

even more amazin stuff, not to mention a gold mine of links.....

But yes, probably B&W and a medium long 35 mm lens is all you need.... PDN is forever profiling young photographers who just use an old K 1000 or a Rollei TLR, they love that shit. Sooner or later though, even they are gonna want a bigger negative...

-- Chris yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), February 20, 2001.

Models who look like that don't have to test for prints. (And won't unless you can already prove that you can do work like that.) Day rate for a short (5'7") model with a look like that here in Orlando is about $600. A good makeup artist/hairstylist is $300. A small studio for the day, about $250 (including insurance). Figure on at least $200 for film and processing. Props, clothes, assistant, or location fees are extra. A realistic budget is $1500-$2000.

As for style, it's pretty much generic fashion advertising. When you've mastered that, then you can make a living and start to work on your own style. But it's nothing you couldn't do with a bit of practice - as long as you are actually interested in the shot and not just the model.

(And I'd bet he has a good incident meter too.)

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), February 20, 2001.

Hello guys....is Eolo from Rome writing...I received an email about this discussion and I'm quite surprised about it...:-)

So I'll try to give some info about what i'm doing. I hope it can help...please forgive my not so perfect english.

First of all as you may imagine I love photography. When I discoverd it 3 years ago I discovered what I really like to do.

Photography now is for me a lifestyle....I dedicate all my time to it...trying to improve my style, my technique and my printing capabilities....at the same time I choosed not to make photography my work (now i'm working for an italian web agency) and at the moment I'm living this situation with a great pleasure because I feel I need to do a lot of experiments to become the photographer I hope I will be one day.

Few American friends told me that I should already transform that in a business...that I should have the capabilities to do that....but well..I'm not in hurry....I'm quite lucky to have a good work and....I would like to have some more time to study photography ...they told me that this is....an European approach :-)

If you navigate the internet a little bit or you go to the nearest bookstore you will find incredible photographers....giants of photography that create incredible images. I admire their work and i'd love one day to be able to be as good as them.

I dedicate to photography all my spare time and i'm a lucky guy....I have a small team of supporters that helps me every time I organize a shooting session (they have fun) and a lot of people that would like to be photographed. This helps me to "simulate" a working enviorment.

If you want to have a look to the way (and where) we work have a look to

http://www.smallstudio.com/eolo/backstage/

while here there is a small selection of images

http://www.smallstudio.com/eolo/

I know that the gallery is really slow to download...and that as a webdesigner I should do something a little bit more friendly.

Please forgive me...at the moment I'm really so busy...in the near future I hope to be able to make a new site.

As you said i work with a 35mm camera and I mainly use my 105mm while i also have a 24mm...a 50mm and a 180.

Do not get surprised about that...giants of photography such as Lindbergh works mainly with the 35mm

the format do not make a photography.

give to a good photographer a compact camera and he will be able to took a nice photogaphy.

Of course as much powerfull is your equipment more potential you will have in your hands.

by the way i normally do not dedicate to much time to my equipment while i love to think to the different photographic situation i may try to create.

I'm trying to improve my tech skill as always....but Style is my goal...... buy style is difficult because is not something you learn...is something that comes out with time....with experience and with culture. So I suppose is something i may be able to archieve in the future....starting to work on it now. I'm studying a lot and I hope to be able to transform what I'm reading in good images.

The "models" I'm working with are all friends...just a couple of them works as a pro model...while other are just beautifull. They dedicate me some of their time and this has an incredible value for me.

Now a couple of big agencies contacted me to make some tests....I'm very happy...even if entering in their offices i saw their photographic archives and I found myself so small....:-)

So is time to work hard (well is fun so is not so hard) and see what the future has behind the corner.

90% of the time I work in ambient light while as you can see from the backstages few weeks ago i rented a garage and got a couple of flash to start to study artificial light. The place is quite "underground" but works well and for the moment is ok.

External Locations are places near my apartment. I normally like to go around looking for nice places where to make a photo session.

All the photographic sessions I do are organized to be as much cheap we can...photogaphy is already a so expensive discipline that I 'm spending all my pay in that....:-) makeup is made by a guy that is studying and that is creating his small portfolio. So he has the models and a photographet that works form him while I have a makeup artist that helps me....a good way to collaborate i feel.

He also manage to do some hairstyle but this is not his job so....for the clothes we always ask to all our friends or we buy used stuff in the sunday market.

I used for a lot the Ilford Xp2 beacuse was fast to develop and now i know it quite well. By the way I'm becoming to experiments different films and dia trying to understand the one that fits my way. But is so difficult...as you know...there are billions of variables...so i continuw with the Xp2 while sometime i shoot few new film.

I love (really) fashion photography but may be I shold try to be a little bit more "fashion oriented" in my shooting. I also love portrait..and I'm considering to try some streeth photography in the near future. I love people. That's all.

www.necron.com is my old site. I made it when 3D graphic was my hope for the future...but then...photography took all the space in my heart and now i found this site a little bit to "old fashion". I keep it cause it generato so much traffic and I love contacts. As soon I'll be able to define a design I like www.smallstudio.com will become my new presence on the net.

Well...i hope not to have been too boring. Thanks a lot for the discussion and ask if needed. I'm here.

I hope a fantastic light for all of you and to have always fun with photography.

ciao.

-- Well....here I'm :-) (eolop@hotmail.com), February 21, 2001.

I'm glad others are starting to notice Eolo's work. I bookmarked his site more than a year ago and return weekly to see if there are new updates. I sent Eolo an email some time ago, and he very kindly returned a reply, though he's busy, English is not his first language, and, as he says in the above message, he dedicates much of his spare time to the pursuit of photography.

I'm a little surprised at the dismissive and negative slant of some of the posts concerning Eolo's work, though. I usually find posters in this forum much more supportive and thoughtful. Just taking a moment to read what he's posted on his site (and here, I'm talking about necron.com) gives the visitor enough information to know that he's a) not a professional photographer (insofar as that's not how he earns his living), b) not using hired models, and c) not using a lot of technical tricks to achieve his look. Saying the "horizontal scrolling crap makes his site suck" is not only bad manners, but it's also a matter of opinion. So the guy's trying to do something different with his site -- what's the harm, except to people with archaic browsers and Pentium .5 computers?

I second Edward's vote: I think Eolo is astoundingly talented. Granted, he's got a lot of gorgeous friends, but I do, too, and they don't look like this when I photograph them. Eolo's got the goods, the sense for "the decisive moment" -- he knows just when the look in the eyes is there, the connection between photographer and subject. The eroticism is palpable. It's not generic fashion photography by a long shot -- try the a future contemporary of Herb Ritts and Matthew Rolston. And that's only if he decides he wants to pursue photography as a career! Oh, to have that be a choice.

I'm with you, Edward. I'd give my right arm to have the natural and intuitive skill this guy has. Bravo, Eolo!

-- Matt Keller (matt_keller@yahoo.com), February 22, 2001.

"Saying the 'horizontal scrolling crap makes his site suck' is not only bad manners, but it's also a matter of opinion. So the guy's trying to do something different with his site -- what's the harm, except to people with archaic browsers and Pentium .5 computers?"

Everything here is a matter of opinion. You're correct about my statement being bad mannered, especially now that Eolo is here among us, not that the fact that he wasn't among us before was any excuse.

But, as novel as it appears to be, horizontal scrolling design is bad design. It just ain't no good, no matter what version of browser you have. My mouse doesn't have a horizontal scroll wheel.

I will restate, however, that Eolo's work is really nice stuff! I love it. And that's all that counts in the long run. And that, my fellow photographers, is my personal opinion.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), February 22, 2001.

"But, as novel as it appears to be, horizontal scrolling design is bad design. It just ain't no good, no matter what version of browser you have. My mouse doesn't have a horizontal scroll wheel."

As I sit here using a mouse without a vertical or horizontal scroll wheel can I then surmise that any web design that requires scrolling in either direction "ain't no good"? Duh....that's what the scroll bars (you know, those big fat areas on the side and bottom of windows) are for.

-- Mickey (Scroll-Less@nomouse.com), February 22, 2001.

Oh, I get it: Use the scroll bars! What a riot! ROTF-LMFHO

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), February 22, 2001.

If I appeared "dismissive" earlier it was because I didn't have the further information from the rest of his site (which is not linked from his portfolio). It was just my initial impression based only on looking at his portfolio.

With the additional information provided by his website (that "backstage" page was particularly useful) and by his posting, I have gained an enormous amount of respect for Mr. Perfido-- he is a "natural" and has a tremendous gift (as well a particularly dedicated group of friends for models, assistants, and makeup artists-- we should all be so lucky).

About the side-scrolling portfolio-- I have no problems with it at all. I agree that clicking the little arrows on the bottom of the scrollbar would be tedious versus a scrollwheel, but I find the best way to traverse horizontal pages is to just grab the scroll widget iteslf and drag to the right a page or so at a time, never letting go of the mouse button. It's much less click-intensive process and is much more fluid-- almost tactile.

I think I agree with Edward-- I'm definitely going to raid Eolo's bag of tricks (lighting-wise, anyhow) over the next year, and no, it doesn't make you (or me) lame. :)

-- Josh Wand (josh@joshwand.com), February 22, 2001.

I don't believe in anyone being a "natural." Eolo's training in graphic arts is what has given him his foundation. And he has mastered (at least some) of the basic techniques you need to do fashion and advertising work at a professional level (though he's going to need to be able to work in a studio). He could make a living now, and will undoubtedly go on to continue to grow and become a great photographer. But open up any women's magazine to any random page and you'll see similar shots (though, admittedly, quite a few not up to his standard). Featured photographers have developed - or at least advertised - unique styles.

(And I wonder just how many people who respond so viscerally to his work really desire to emulate it - or rather are just fantasizing over his perceived lifestyle?)

As a web-design aside, horizontal scrolling (though not quite the way it's implemented on Eolo's site) is going to become the standard in the future. We see in panoramas (something photographers should be aware of), and wide aspect-ratio screens will soon be commonplace.

Vertical scrolling is a vestige of text-oriented days (and still fine for that application). All that current web designers have done is take two-dimensional text-based magazine design and put that online - with a bunch of javascript in lieu of true interactivity. The next generation of web designers - the ones who have grown up with high- bandwidth interactive multimedia will turn to metaphors which explore the possibilities of visual design and interactivity in much more imaginative ways - and the widescreen panorama is going to be a major part of that (though the scroll bars are going to have to go away!).

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), February 22, 2001.

"As a web-design aside, horizontal scrolling...is going to become the standard in the future."

A prediction; one I'm not so sure of. At least not in today's world.

"...and wide aspect-ratio screens will soon be commonplace."

Probably, but we have no evidence of this so far, and we've been at it for a decade or so already.

"Vertical scrolling is a vestige of text-oriented days... All that current web designers have done is take two-dimensional text-based magazine design and put that online..." I guess when it goes beyond two dimensions, it'll be crazy, huh? I'll sure love it like crazy if I'm still alive.

The next generation of web designers...and the widescreen panorama is going to be a major part of that...will turn to metaphors which explore the possibilities of visual design and interactivity in much more imaginative ways - and the widescreen panorama is going to be a major part of that "

Hmm... and the hardware? I wanna see it. It'll be cool! But this obviously means wider displays. Right now, I have to squint to see my screen at 1024x768. 800x600 seems pretty nice, but I can't open many windows with such a modest resolution. Are we talking Phillips HDTV style monitors? Hope so. Cool. Can't wait. But for right now, please give me the up and down, and not the sideways stuff. I'm used to going up and down. Yeah, I can grab that thick, gray scroll bar on the bottom and shove right side, but it's unnatural and uncomfortable to do so. Or I'm just getting old.

I ran across another web site recently (I think Kyle C's Leica Slacker) that has the horizontal scrolling thing. What is it with horizontal scrolling, or am I the only one on greenspun.com who thinks it's weird? In both cases, though, the photography is mighty fine. But presentation has to make a difference.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@alaska.net), February 23, 2001.

Just out of curiosity, did anyone else react first to a stereotype? I mean, Eolo's work seems very "Italian" in that everyone appears to be having lots of fun and doing it with grace and flair? Yes, I'm fully aware that there are grim and depressed Italians out there, and all sorts of other flavors too, but that's not what I think of immediately when I see and hear a Ferrari or Ducati winding up through the gears.

-- Will Perlis (wperlis@hotmail.com), February 23, 2001.

There are grim and depressed Italians? Where??

-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), February 23, 2001.

The new Apple Powerbook has a wide-aspect-ratio screen. (Only a bit wider at 1152, but still noticeable.)

And about a year ago, I started the design for an online magazine - which was to be completely designed around horizontal panoramas (panels approximately 3 normal screens wide). For a low-bandwidth version I was intending simply to mix headlines, thumbnails, and graphics. Clicking on one would open up a popup with the full text or high-res version, or launch a separate video. Not too different from what we have now, but better suited to the web.

A high bandwidth version would be where the idea would be fully realized. It would have full-size - but static - graphics right on the panel. (No annoying self-running ones.) Mousing over one would activate it in place (launch a preview slide show, video, or animation). Clicking on it would allow you to interact with it there or to open up a new popup that you could move as you wished or dock so that it didn't scroll. (Of course, it might link you to an entirely new panel as well - of which the video or graphic was just a teaser.) A nonscrolling frame at the top would provide a consistent top-level menu, while a non-scrolling frame at the bottom would provide a panel-sensitive one.

To fully implement something like this, however, requires features not implemented (or not implemented well) in current browsers - in particular the ability to embed video and animation seamlessly on the page, positional scrolling (as in many computer games or even Microsoft Office applications) so that scroll bars can be done away with, live overlapping windows (so that you could be watching a video in a popup as you scroll through a panel that it overlays), transparent overlaying of text and graphics on video, as well as hotspots on video itself - so that, for example, you could click on the shirt your favorite rock star is wearing and buy it instantly.

Panels would be thought of as being layered on top of each other, so that when you clicked on a link you would go "up" or "down" to another level (or "over" to another related location). (It's really much closer to the spatial metaphor of a computer game.) The user would also be able to create his own panels, by clicking and dragging bits of content onto them. The idea is to combine a much more natural type of interactivity with more personalization. (It's also much more suitable to adaptation to a minibrowser - such as might be found on a cell phone or pda.)

Most importantly for business purposes, the banner ad is done away with through these techniques and replaced with what is essentially an interactive version of the full-page magazine ad. The boundary between advertising and content becomes problematized: "advertisements" are interactive and (hopefully) informative, and both "articles" and "entertainment" provide instant links to the people and products featured (becoming just different entry points into our society's materialist space).

Anyway the future of the web doesn't lie with you or me, it lies with the generation who currently doesn't have to squint at the high-res screens and who will grow up with not only the internet, but with enough processing power and bandwidth to be able to do anything they can imagine - rather than only what current technology will allow.

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), February 24, 2001.

Response to I want to spend the next year of my life emulating this guy's work. Does that make me lame?"

First off let me say that Eolo's work is first class. Second is it just me or has the majority of comments been about his work his site etc and not the origional question. It does not make you lame emulating his work, but as long as through out the year you begin to bring out a style that is yours, and not mearly a carbon copy of his. And by the way, it is not too hard getting beautiful models to work for prints. You simply have to know where to look. For example one model that I am doing PFT for I located in an Ad she placed in my college darkroom noticeboard, makes a nice change from paying fees or bribing with the promise of alcoholic beverages to friends. Also a nice change from my work at WWW.SOULGREED.COM - mainly action shots at their gigs.

-- David Kirk (david_j_kirk@hotmail.com), February 24, 2001.

Well I'd say concentrate on learning the basic techniques until you have them mastered - then worry about how you turn that into a personal style. And the best way to master a technique is to work at copying a specific shot until you can do it exactly (and understand why). So emulating someone else's work is the first necessary step.

As for models, I was, in fact, very lucky to find my first model through the internet: a Russian girl who had the chance to go to Milan to do runway modeling, but chose to come to the US to go to college. But she's the only one I've run across that had a high- fashion look as well as the height. Anyone who has that combination is probably already modeling (and has been since age 14). Of course, if you do have some good shots to show them, I'm sure they'd be interested in TFP. But if you don't, you're in a catch-22. And that goes for makeup artists too. It just happens that I had a couple of shots that this girl liked - even though she had shot with some established photographers before.)

But remember, swimsuit models are not high fashion models - and neither are local catalog models, fetish models, cheerleaders, homecoming queens, or exotic dancers. The best you can hope for from these are some editorial or beauty shots.

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), February 24, 2001.

Just an aside on the issue of "less equipment is more" inspirations... I was surprised to learn recently that Joyce Tenneson shoots much of her personal (and very successfully exhibited/published) work on 35mm with a cheap variable- aperture "consumer" zoom...of precisely the sort Phil G and others routinely rail against. End result: portraits of the sort in "Light Warriors", with luscious tonality. The end justifies the means, in a very inspiring fashion.

-- Jonathan Van Matre (jvanmatre@calmco.com), February 26, 2001.

If I am not wrong, Eolo heavily (and I mean HEAVILY) Photoshops his photographs. Am I right Eolo?

-- Willie Lim (williamlim@subdimension.com), February 26, 2001.

Retouching is critical for professional level work. Three issues ago, Design Graphics had a feature article about Helene DeLillo, a professional retoucher for the fashion industry. The before and after shots were very impressive: a technically perfect photograph became a completely perfect finished product. See www.dancingicon.com.

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), February 27, 2001.

Is it just me, or do I hear a lot of sour grapes bitching behind the comments about this guys site? All these wry, sarcastic comments like, "Just be rich and have a fantastic studio and expensive gear...extensive retouching"

On the other hand...That's what really impresses me about his work - it's almost entirely based on his raw vision. He's just a really talented guy, and it's not like he has anything better in terms of circumstance over what I have at this moment.

What few of you have addressed in your envy and sour grapes is that HE IS NOT a "raw talent." His illustrations on the Necron site make it obvious that he has been working visually for years --- I would guess he probably has been interested in art most of his life. THAT investment of time and study is worth more than all the monolights and expensive system cameras.

The thing I find objectionable is people want to talk, talk, talk about what he does and find something sinister in the fact that he uses photoshop -- but what image in fashion magazines hasn't been altered in some way?

I look at his site and see really nice work by a talented guy who works hard and enjoys what he does. Edward Kang --- Take Eolo's portfolio and site as an inspiration -- if you like what you see, make it your self assignment to copy him for a while --- but shoot it with what YOU have availible...eventually, your own pictures will come through. Eolo -- very nice work.

-- alan dale (adale66@excite.com), February 28, 2001.

Well, I'd say "just be rich and have a fancy studio" or move to a fashion capital of the world and make friends with others trying to get in the business. A portfolio of shots of the girl next door, is going to look just like that. Whether you pay for it or your friends provide it, you need professional quality models, hair, makeup, (and retouching). We provide the professional eye.

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), March 01, 2001.

...A portfolio of shots of the girl next door, is going to look just like that. Whether you pay for it or your friends provide it, you need professional quality models, hair, makeup, (and retouching).

Portfolio shots of the girl next door are going to get you further than NOTHING which is what you will have if you sit there and wait for supermodels to show up and beg you to shoot them even though you are a total unknown without a single portfolio piece. Portfolio shots of some kind -- any kind -- can get you at least an assisting job. Assisting a photographer who is shooting a job will teach you 10x more than online forums and fashion magazines and will help you make the contacts that are so important in every profession. You need more than a "professional eye" and I take issue with the phrase "professional eye" when one is not earning money from photography...the phrase "We provide an advanced amateur photographer and fashion photography afficianado's discerning eye" would be more accurate. Start with the girl next door to learn about light, move on to the wanabees - then maybe someday, the professional talent.

-- alan dale (adale66@excite.com), March 01, 2001.

Assistants learn one thing: how to shoot someone else's work. It's great experience if you're willing to blow 5 years of your life only to be always known as someone's ex-assistant.

As in any profession, you can shoot for the bottom, the middle, or the top. Plenty of people make great livings doing technically good work; some make decent livings shooting portfolios for "girls-next- door" who will never get any real modeling work. And some are good enough, ambitious enough, or lucky enough (notice I said "or") to make it to the top. (And that goes for any sub-field, from table-top to weddings.)

Photography, although a broad discipline, isn't difficult to master technically. There's no magic or mystery in setting up and lighting a shot. Training and experience are required to master the broad range of techniques you'll need in order to make a day-to-day living, but the creativity comes in doing what art directors usually do for the photographer (as we're discussing on the Fashion Only Forum): visualizing an exciting way to meet the client's needs.

So there are two stages to building a portfolio. Showing that you can handle the work technically, and showing that you have some creativity.

But if you're shooting fashion and use a glamour model (or worse), you've proven that you don't understand one of the basic elements you have to start with to get a quality result. (You don't light, interact with, or shoot a high-fashion model the same way you do a glamour model.) The same goes for hair, makeup, and retouching. (No one would have even noticed Eolo's work if it weren't for the quality of the models and, to a lesser extent, the makeup/retouching).

And anyone can shoot a supermodel - if they've got the bucks to hire them for a day. Once you've mastered the basics (like how to load the camera and point it in the right direction), I'd say stop wasting time shooting your girlfriend and save some money to hire a decent model and makeup artist. And if you're really serious you'll leave Topeka as soon as possible.

(And I am a professional wedding photographer. I'm not yet a professional fashion photographer - though I certainly could be charging to do headshots and model portfolios. However, they wouldn't be up to the standard I have set for myself, so I choose not to do them yet.)

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindpring.com), March 01, 2001.

Sorry - John - seems we've had this conversation before? Two years ago I was an assistant. Today I'm a working pro -- I'm not in the top of my field, but this year I signed on a house in one of this nation's largest cities...so I maintain that I am doing something right. I guess I could be making as much or more money if I trained to do something else, but I didn't want to. I'm in a position that I could never imagine two years ago. I think I know what I'm talking about from direct experience. Stop making excuses/explanations for why you aren't a big success while holding other forum participants to a higher standard than you hold yourself. I guess one could get lucky and just "be discovered" or one could play the lottery -- personally, I think your chances are better if you are a little more proactive.

In photography, as in all professions, there are a lot of factors that contribute to financial success. Only one of those is knowing how to work the camera and that is probably not the most important.

Your assesment of Eolo's portfolio is dead wrong. The pictures are good not because the people are pretty but because he has an eye. Look at it again -- where he places people in the frame, how he uses the 4 edges of the frame to dramatic effect with his subject, light and dark, story telling. Its a world away from what I do (product photography) but when you shoot for publication the single rule applies: make every inch count. He does that very well. Personally, I'd set up his site differently and edit it down to 12 or so shots with the chance for visitors to view high rez versions but that's me.

-- alan dale (adale66@excite.com), March 01, 2001.

And anyone can shoot a supermodel - if they've got the bucks to hire them for a day. Once you've mastered the basics (like how to load the camera and point it in the right direction), I'd say stop wasting time shooting your girlfriend and save some money to hire a decent model and makeup artist. And if you're really serious you'll leave Topeka as soon as possible.

This is a special question for John...

Now in NYC, where I live and shoot, what you say is clearly untrue. If an agency wants a model to shoot for someone, they will, even if there's no pay at all and if they don't think a photographer's skills are worthy of the agency's models, no amount of money will change that.

But is it true where you are?

Because if it's true that shooting the right models will build a person's career and all it takes to shoot the right models is money, this might be the right way to go.

Is this something we should be looking into?

Brian

-- Brian Yarvin (byarvin@nyc.rr.com), March 02, 2001.

Eolo, you kick ass.

-- Andy McLeod (andrewmcleod@usa.net), March 02, 2001.

Edward, pack your packpack, go to Rome and hang out with Eolo for a while. Check in with us when you get there. He seems like a cool guy with a cool crew....

-- Chris Yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), March 02, 2001.

> Now in NYC, where I live and shoot, what you say is clearly untrue. If an agency wants a model to shoot for someone, they will, even if there's no pay at all and if they don't think a photographer's skills are worthy of the agency's models, no amount of money will change that.

You obviously can't be some hack, but there are few models in the world who can afford to be so choosy.

> But is it true where you are?

Yes. Convince the agency that you're serious and aren't just looking for an opportunity to hit on the model and you can shoot anyone you want. (In our society, money is the greatest equalizer of class.)

> Because if it's true that shooting the right models will build a person's career and all it takes to shoot the right models is money, this might be the right way to go.

Shooting the right models (with the right makeup artists) only builds a portfolio. But without that, how are you ever going to get someone to give you a chance at a decent assignment? That's how assitants build their books.

> Is this something we should be looking into?

As opposed to wasting time making the same "girlfiend" shots, obviously.

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), March 03, 2001.

I don't get it John -- are you just being contrary or what? Reading over the thread, I can't decide what you want to say -- first you say making portfolio pieces under less-than-ideal situations or with less- than-million-dollar talent is a waste of time, then you seem to be suggesting that all of us work on our portfolios. Then you say working as an assistant is a waste of your life, then you almost seem to be endorsing it. I think success in fashion photography is like success in anything else...work hard, make yourself known and if you are talented AND lucky AND in the right time AND in the right place then perhaps you will enjoy some success. If you are a no one at ground zero, then you have to start off with what materials you have at hand - - in Eolo's portfolio he transforms a wooden railing into a very graphic set for his picture...he didn't sit at home whining that he didn't have a studio! The first step to success is ACTION.

-- alan dale (adale66@excite.com), March 03, 2001.

almost forgot to add -- Eolo said this that I like very much:

I'm trying to improve my tech skill as always....but Style is my goal...... buy style is difficult because is not something you learn...is something that comes out with time....with experience and with culture. So I suppose is something i may be able to archieve in the future....starting to work on it now. I'm studying a lot and I hope to be able to transform what I'm reading in good images.

He makes apologies for his english, but I think I get his meaning load and clear...

-- alan dale (adale66@excite.com), March 03, 2001.

No no, I didn't mean to say "retouching" when I said that he uses Photoshop heavily. A lot of the photos you saw were heavily Photoshop-ped to give it the look he wants (my point is that it's not a matter of just lighting and placing the model, or composing the picture). So, Edward, if you want to create images as good as Eolo, you need to be a Photoshop expert as good as he is, camera skill aside.

And, all credit to Eolo, this guy *is* talented! As Alan points out, the key thing is that he has the EYE and he is able to have a great rapport with his subjects.

-- Willie Lim (williamlim@subdimension.com), March 03, 2001.

"first you say making portfolio pieces under less-than-ideal situations or with less- than-million-dollar talent is a waste of time, then you seem to be suggesting that all of us work on our portfolios."

If you find yourself taking the same mediocre pictures over and over again with the same second-rate models, you are fantasizing about being a professional photographer - not working towards becoming one. Once you have the basics of a technique down, you need to start thinking how to get a "professional-looking" shot for your portfolio to show (another professional) that you can handle that technique. And you can't get a professional looking shot without professional quality help - whether you pay for it, or convince them to trade their time for yours.

"Then you say working as an assistant is a waste of your life, then you almost seem to be endorsing it."

I think it is a valid option if you're 23 - not 43. And not for more than a year. In that amount of time you'll lean all the basic technique you are going to from that photographer; you'll also get to know all his/her contacts; you'll have a reference, and a few shots for your portfolio, and yet you won't be pigeonholed as just an "assistant."

The biggest problem is that people who work as assistants think that it is a stepping stone like any other entry level job - when it's really just basic training. The creative arts of any kind are a type of show business. Skill and creativity are the basics that everyone in that field has. It's assumed you have them too. And if you do (and want to make it to the top), what you need to do is to promote yourself better than the other 99.9%.

"I think success in fashion photography is like success in anything else...work hard, make yourself known and if you are talented AND lucky AND in the right time AND in the right place then perhaps you will enjoy some success."

That's exactly right. 99.9% of the _talented_ people in a profession don't ever realize their potential. The young and naive ones think that they are going to make it to the top - and when they don't, and find out it takes a tremendous amount of work just to make ends meet, rationalize it the same way you do - partly because of our Capitalist- Protestant work-ethic which says "work hard and you will be rewarded" and partly because they think that "breaks" just happen.

It goes without saying that you have to be skilled (a much better term than talented), but you can make your own breaks (or, rather, maximize the opportunity for them). So would you rather maximize your chances or just rationalize why you aren't as successful as you'd like to be?

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindpring.com), March 07, 2001.

This very cynical view of life in general and photography in particular you describe may be true from your perspective, John -- but it does not describe how I live my life. Call me naive, but I'd rather give up photography altogether than spend my time and energy scheming and strategizing on how I am "going to get to the top of my field." I'm in photography because I like working with photography, I like working with images, I like to draw and paint and hang out with people who like that kind of stuff... My perspective on commercial photography (based on a couple years first as an assistant and now as a shooter) is that it DOES matter what you do...there are a few shooters in every community who have their clients snowed and who shlock through the work, talk themselves up, employ spin and damage control to great effect when things go wrong and they seem to do okay -- but who wants to do that? The difference between you and I is that I want to do photography well -- I want to take pictures that please me and make my living...you seem to see photography as an incidental in gratifying your ego...I don't know how else to interperate phrases like, It goes without saying that you have to be skilled (a much better term than talented), but you can make your own breaks (or, rather, maximize the opportunity for them). So would you rather maximize your chances or just rationalize why you aren't as successful as you'd like to be?

Don't put me in "wants to maximize" category or in "rationalize"... I think I belong in "probably doesn't give a shit whether most other people consider him a hack or a hero -- wants to take pictures and get paid, wants to enjoy life and art." And while we are "maximizing our chances" or "rationalizing why we aren't as successful as you'd like to be?" please tell us where you fit in? You have revealed a little info about yourself but you don't seem to be currently working on getting commercial photography work. So at what point do YOU start to be a force to be reckoned with in fashion photography? If it seems I'm beating up on you, its because I think you are offering people irresponsible, destructive advice...they come to the forum with an enthusiasm for photography of people and you are actively discouraging people from shooting --- it makes no sense to me. Personally, my advice to anyone who will listen is "shoot as much as possible..."

-- alan dale (adale66@excite.com), March 07, 2001.

What I admire about Eolo even more than his images (which, as someone else already noted, kick ass) is his passion. What's great about his work is not the techinique or the beauty of the models or the clothes or the makeup--it's the passion for creating powerful images that's evident in each one.

It's not a matter of commerce or of ego (try re-reading Eolo's post). It's a matter of love. If you don't have that, you're just bullshitting.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), March 08, 2001.

Alan, John, if you two can't behave we're going to have to separate you...

-- Chris yeager (cyeager@ix.netcom.com), March 08, 2001.

Alan, the point is that you are content with where you are in life and what you are doing. I am not. I have worked in several different fields and what I often see are people (not all, but many) that are not truly content, but instead rationalizing their current lot in life rather than attempting to change it (which is much harder). They have found a balance between their work, their home life, and their ambition and settle for that (capitalism encourages it). Whether they are truly content or merely rationalizing, only they can say.

What I've been attempting to do in this thread is to counter the impression that what Eolo does is somehow unapproachable by mere mortals. He is very skilled (with at least one type of photography), but work like that on his site is only the starting point for a career in this field. Anyone on this forum could create images of the same technical quality with only a few weeks of practice - given the same "raw materials." (It's his eye for composition which is above average for most photographers - but not for most people with a background in graphic arts.) To unduly valorize another's skill (in particular to characterize it as an inborn "talent") is just another way of rationalizing your current situation. (On the fashion photography forum I've been complaining about people doing that with Richard Avedon.) Edward's original stance is a better one: work on copying what Eolo does until you learn how. Then set your sites a bit higher and go on from there.

But the other side of the equation, of course, is that skill (or even talent if you wish to believe in that) is not sufficient by itself get you to "the top" (however you define that). Skill is merely another raw material that a good capitalist knows how to exploit. You wouldn't run a business by merely creating a product on the off- chance that someone might a) find out about it, b) like it or need it, and c) offer you enough for it to make a profit. You'd have a plan. You'd do market research, product development, and figure out how to advertise your product the best way possible - partly on its intrinsic merits, and partly on the impression you want people to have of it. (Sounds sort of like the fashion industry itself, doesn't it?) Why wouldn't you approach your career the same way - particularly in a creative field where you can actually have control over all these parameters yourself? The point is that if you don't do this, you are merely casting your fate to the winds. (It would be easier and cheaper just to buy a lottery ticket each week - and give you about as much chance of long-term success.)

As for me, I am attempting to work towards fashion photography as best I can, but I have both limited resources and other commitments which make it difficult. The first step for me is to become self- sufficient in wedding photography. Then I will have the time, opportunity - and hopefully the money - to both work on my other skills and to cultivate other opportunities. (But don't think I don't have a plan - and one that I constantly revise.)

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindpring.com), March 12, 2001.

By the way, I just posted some scans of some shots from this month's Vogue on the Fashion Photography forum. I thought it would be a good idea to actually start talking about published work - both good and bad. We might learn something.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FashionPhotography

-- John Kantor (jkantor@mindspring.com), March 12, 2001.

Does anyone know other photographers who are using 35mm professionally? I'd like to see their work.

Thanks, Darren

-- Darren Holmes (darren.holmes@thinkup.com), April 06, 2001.

Open national geo, pick one at random, all 35mm.

-- Altaf Shaikh (al@nyc.rr.com), April 07, 2001.