I don’t remember seeing these videos when the big Terry Richardson, Belvedere Campaign came out several years ago so I’m posting them now. Even though I know there are plenty of haters out there I still think it’s fascinating when any photographer at the top of their game talks about their craft.
115 Comments
Let the haters hate. He’s just confirming what every good photographer knows which is that it’s about the content in the photograph, not all the fancy equipment, cameras film or digital or whatever. It’s about who is behind the camera and what do they do with it. Nothing more, nothing less.
Seen these videos before but it’s always great to watch them again and again and again because he has something to say.
Thanks for posting those.
Mike
@Michael,
True. It irks me when potential clients ask to see my equipment list.
@Michael, amen. I totally agree. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a wave of revolt with a push for more photography like this. DSLR’s are great and more people can get better shots but you are absolutely right about the eye through view finder and the finger on the shutter that makes the photo.
@Michael,
thats the thing tho, not every photographer does know that, they think too much about technique etc. when really the beauty of a perfect photograph for me, would include some kind of wonderment, wanting to know what it was really like to be there at that specific time.
thats a good picture.
Terry, Knows what its all about :)
The fact that this guy has a career and is making so much money is insulting to real professional photographers.
He’s a freaking hack,
Too bad he didn’t inherit his father eye or talent.
“Who said you were in heaven Mr. Valentine?”
@Sean876,
I won’t say anything of the guy’s talent, but the guy’s pretty likable and beyond that, his work brings name recognition and controversy; precisely the two things that sell content or products.
I know great photographers who will never make a buck doing what they do, and I know equally many photographers who do quite well on more marginal talent.
The pictures themselves are only a small part of the equation.
most photographers I know are full of shit… what makes you any different? Being loose in your craft will get you further than whining about someone’s success(es)
@jimmy, best statement yet.
@jimmy,
Yeah jimmy. A Creative Director told me once “it’s all bullshit you know.” The different design elements that made the layout so fantastic were a result of her good taste and years of experience but the meaning of it all had to be conjured out of thin air to satisfy the editor who demanded an explanation of what it all meant. So, we always came up with bullshit stories to the meaning behind it all.
@jimmy, I totally agree. The simplicity and the directness of his photography are truly amazing.
@Sean876, While I believe talent seperates us from others and using better gear to get “there” I don’t think he’s a hack. He speaks like all the other artists/photographers I know. He’s honest, unpretentious and has never changed his approach. I never would have had the balls to show up with a tiny point and shoot. the shots have a lot of life and energy. they are rough and real; lacking polish…cover-up. Good for him.
@chuck h w, “honest and unpretentious”? He’s a hillbilly who got lucky. He says it himself, he doesn’t even think about it and uses a basic camera. Very professional, no? He’s the annoying guy at the party with the disposable Kodak who just got lucky.
@IrlG, LOL, ain’t that the truth. I wish I thought of it first and ran with it. He’s made himself a success for it. How can you blame the guy? He’s the Kim Kardashian of the photography world!
@Sean876, I do not think your looking at the same work then. His use of tone, form and mood is one of the best. His work says things.
@Luca Lester, If you can write me a 40 page dissertation about exactly how he uses form, mood and tone, then I’ll believe you’re not just another pretentious twat who believes everything he reads in high brow art magazines and Vogue.
The question isn’t whether he’s a hack or a genius – -that is just a matter of opinion and if you’re a photographer, YOUR opinion of him or MY opinion of him doesn’t mean squat.
The question is: Does his photography as incorporated into an advertisign campaign or on a magazine cover help sell that client’s product? That is the sole job of an advertising campaign or magazine cover, including the photography used in it.
If clients can see that customers they want to reach are responding positively enough to the campaign (by spending their money) , then it works and Richardson –or you or me — is going to continue to get work.
“The question isn’t whether he’s a hack or a genius – -that is just a matter of opinion and if you’re a photographer, YOUR opinion of him or MY opinion of him doesn’t mean squat.”*
*Unless of course his photography is being used to sell tools photographers buy.
@Ellis Vener, I’m sure that Custom Brackets could sell more Mini RC flash brackets by advertising that Richardson uses them.
@c.d.embrey,
They are probably are either unaware or are too cheap to pay him for the endorsement.
@Ellis Vener, not necessarily. I work in advertising and there’s no surefire way to calculate exactly how much revenue is generated by something like a billboard or by a magazine spread. It’s just not trackable. You can see general increasing trends but not exactly how much money came from that exact billboard.
What’s happening here is big companies are looking to the fashion “experts” like Vogue and asking them for advice on photographers. That’s where people like Terry R get their referrals.
But you have to ask the question, does Vogue know what they’re talking about when they hire someone like Terry R? He’s pretty much just a high class pornographer…
Great work I say Genius!
Who cares how much this guy is making, it’s a fad and there will be another fad next year. His images are not very memorable and will be forgotten in a year or two. Other, real photographers such as Avadon, Penn, Roversi will always have their work sought out.
Let the donkeys brea.
@Dicky Maddoff,
“Who cares how much this guy is making, it’s a fad and there will be another fad next year. His images are not very memorable and will be forgotten in a year or two.”
I’m far from being a fan of his work,closer to your opinion probably Mr. Anonymous, but people have been saying that about Richardson for about ten years now. BTW: People also said the same thing about rock & roll, Hank Williams, Elvis Presley, The Beatles, and I’m sure about Avedon’s work as well.
@Dicky Maddoff,
Is Juergen Teller also a fad?
@Dicky Maddoff, LOL
He has been going over 10 years!
Haters probably hate him because HE gets hired for what he does, taking snapshots. If a company hires him for that, they must have had a good reason. What he does fits what they want to accomplish, with him.
I watched this interview and saw nothing but someone who spoke honestly about what he does and what his style is.
Gosh – I agree with everyone. “Yea he’s a hack” I think because he doesn’t used P\”pro” equipment. Then I think, hoo-fuckin-rah for him. He went into a stuffy industry with nothing but a point and shoot and got work! I love that! It’s reminds me of Willie Nelson, who was a good singer when he “dressed” the part, but became a “great” singer when he let his hair down and was who HE was. I gotta get some balls like that, I admire Terry!
Yeah, I’m with you on that.
@tus, Willie Nelson was a very fine songwriter long, long, long before he went on stage to sing in public.
@Ellis Vener, if by “long, long, long” you mean less than 5 years, then yeah, you’re right… really, the story is he tried to make it as a performer, found success as a writer, then went back to performing. All in the 60s.
@Ellis Vener,
Performer, by your definition is what I meant. The point here is, conforming gets you lost, standing out gets you noticed. That has happened to both.
@tus, point and shoot doesn’t sound like a lot of professional and technical expertise to me…I’ll bet Terry R is laughing at the fashion industry all the way to the bank.
A guy with no real technical expertise goes to the top of the fashion world. Just goes to show how much the fashion world actually knows about things like photography.
Thanks for posting this, Rob. Hadn’t seen it, and like Emon said it is nice to hear someone just talking very honestly about their work. What strikes me is that despite the fact that his style is seemingly very amateurish and random, he obviously puts a lot of thought into it.
In my mind, any photographer who was willing to step out and try something others aren’t doing (or weren’t doing at the time), who doesn’t default to hiding behind technical wizardry and mountains of gear while he hones his style, is worthy.
-talk about standing by your vision and sticking it out until it sticks..
Terry Richardson is a pioneer who obviously connects with other like-minded artists and clients. There is a place for everyone and you can find a teacher in the most unexpected people.
Definitely NOT a pioneer.
@Lise, when I think about pioneers, I think about Christopher Columbas, Neil Armstrong, Sigmund Freud…Terry Richardson? Nope, definitely not.
And when you say “like minded artists and clients”? Are we including the impressional models who he asks to give him hand jobs in the middle of a shoot?
Terry Richardson has that one trait that many great artists have, and that is to “do their own thing” and do it well, no matter what the haters, critics or detractors say. In that regard he is an artist, on the most basic level.
Is he a genius?
Terry certainly took a lot of risks coming up. He also had a lot of help, with regard to who his father is and what that must have provided to him. Knowledge and understanding of the business. Did it get him work? I’m sure it did. But that alone, can not sustain a career. There had to be something about him or his work that kept editors interested and eventually want to hire him. We all know what that was. S E X! The snapshot camera thing was a novel idea and in my opinion, a bit lazy. The work itself ? ehhhh. What sets him apart from his contemporaries, is his ability to know the right people and talk them into hiring him for major advertising campaigns. He must have worked hard and invested a lot of time and money into schmoozing the right people, to get to where he’s at today. Though sex and fashion have always had a close relationship, he’s still a modern success story. Today’s generation, which he identifies with and relates to most, is concerned more with promoting their personalities and lifestyles, than their actual work or talent. In today’s world….. that’s what really counts. Terry Richardson has taken risks where others dare not, and knows how to get people to like him for it. Genius!
@Dean, ‘What sets him apart from his contemporaries, is his ability to know the right people and talk them into hiring him for major advertising campaigns. He must have worked hard and invested a lot of time and money into schmoozing the right people, to get to where he’s at today.”
Here’s the problem with that myth:
Big advertising agencies and magazines don’t hire you based on well you schmooze. Getting to know people will get you in the door but actually getting hired is another ball of trouble.
You then get hired by the second or third client or campaign becasue someone has some numbers to prove that your approach and images reach the demographic their client is selling to.
@Ellis Vener, “You then get hired by the second or third client or campaign becasue someone has some numbers to prove that your approach and images reach the demographic their client is selling to.”
Yes, and as I said, “Though sex and fashion have always had a close relationship, he’s still a modern success story.” Someone liked Richardson more than Richard Kern or 100 other soft pornographers and the rest is history. it’s really that simple, if you ask me. His work is not so special as it is, when attached to his personality.
@Ellis Vener, “Someone has some numbers”…wow that’s very vague. When you get down to the nitty gritty, there’s no way to calculate exactly how much revenue comes from a magazine spread so this isn’t how he gets his work.
He gets his work when some wannabe hotshot in American Apparel says, “Who can I get to impress my boss? I know…Terry RIchardson works for Vogue…he must be good. Perfect!”
Pick up Purple Magazine 10-12 for the “Terry Richardson life story” — his style is heavily influenced by episodes in his youth…the first camera he received…his father and mother…the counter culture that shaped him…he has an incredibly personable style and candor.
Whatever your opinion of Richardson, he WILL be iconic and referred to as a staple of American decadence and fashion.
Right on Mike. There’s more wisdom in that 4 minutes than a month in most photography schools.
I am happy for anyone who manages to have a successful career in this ever more difficult business, whether I like looking at their work or not. I am, however, often amazed at what kind of work can be successful. Just proof that there is a very wide range of what can be considered appropriate by potential clients, whether you, I or anyone else thinks it’s “good” or not.
Video of the Rolling Stone “Gossip Girl” cover shoot. http://www.rollingstone.com/videos/player/26763759 Richardson is like a movie director who gets people to go outside their skin — a skill few people have. BTW when was the last time you had a pillow fight at a shoot?
Why he shootsthe wat he does http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8i3VETLflk
Even with his success, he’s still buying point-and-shoot film cameras! He recently bought one from me at eBay, and it was *not* the point-and-shoot camera (the Yashica T4/T5) he’s best known for. He’s a funny guy, and I think he’s an inspiration–regardless of whether you like his stuff. Even though you hear established photographers say: “It’s not the equipment that makes you a good photographer, it’s your ‘eye'”. Well, easy for them to say; they still use their expensive pro equipment for their “serious” photography. Richardson lives/does what other photographers give hollow lip service to…
@Mike,
Ok, I got to know…what kind of camera was it?
@Christopher Bush,
Made by Ricoh during the same era as the Yashica T4/T5…;-)
@Mike,
Ahhh…I have three of those (if we mean the same thing – the coolest camera they’ve made). A good chunk of my portfolio is shot with them.
@Christopher Bush, I think you probably have it right. I hate to name it outright because: 1) even though I own one too, I may need to buy another because they’re not made anymore; and I really don’t want the demand/price to go up just cuz TR uses them!
2) it seems I should honor seller-buyer confidentially, at least to some degree..:p
IF I got the all of the models wasted during the shoot , i think anyone would be able to get a special unobtainable object he is pointing out.
What a fucking idiot… more so the ones PAYING him ….
I think there is a king who has a whole wardrobe line made for him to shoot
@Robert, I agree! A 21st century version of the Emperors New Clothes.
Haters,
TR is proof that photography goes beyond the camera. Who gives a fuck if he uses a snapshot camera. His work is great for his clients and your work is not or you would be hired and he would not.
The craft of photography has changed so much over the last ten years. When I read the comments from the haters all I can think of is people that are grasping on to their interpretation of this industry as if their life depended on it all the while their business is sinking into an abyss.
Camera and technical skills dont mean shit its about the end result. Some people super retouch images and for their clients it works. Terry is on the other end of the spectrum and it works great.
Maybe instead of hating you can learn something before your business ends up in this shit and you end up working at walmart portrait studio.
@Giulio Sciorio,
Amen.
@Giulio Sciorio, but … i love walmart portrait studio.
plus, the perks :i could ruin a family based off of my judgement call that their family photos are child pornography.
bam!!
rocksteady,
danno~
@Giulio Sciorio, you said “photography goes beyond the camera” and Terry R said himself that he doesn’t think about it, he just points and shoots. So if the camera isn’t professional equipment and the guy behind the camera just points and shoots…well where exatly is the talent and expertise? That’s pretty much what my 2 year old daughter does. How do I get her a meeting with some top fashion magazine??
@IrlG, “where exatly is the talent and expertise?” is a good question. I think it’s in the timing, the moment that is frozen. Once that shutter releases that’s it.
Speaking of your daughter. Kids will often take the coolest photos. They have a fresh, unpolluted perspective on life. I think there is another article on APE about a seven year old girl and her photos.
I think if you could get your daughter seeing and shooting now she could probably turn into a great photographer.
Now getting a meeting with big potential clients? Well that’s anybodys guess but I would say stay away from all magazines. When your daughter is our age how different is it all going to be?
Is it possible that point&shoot is all he’s capable of? That would make him a genius at making a good living with a limited skill set…
@dbltapp,
In the Belvedere videos it looks like he’s using a high-end DSLR (Canon 1Ds maybe). So he can use something other than a P&S.
He claims that he started using the Yashica T4 because of his bad vision. I can relate to that
@dbltapp,
He shot GQ covers that were the complete opposite of the P&S. It’s just a style he’s decided on.
@dbltapp,
He’s known for the P&S style, but he has quite a range. He’s plenty of work that would be considered more conventional.
I don’t understand the idea that a snapshot approach is somehow “lazy”. It took me years to let go of the obsession with fancy lighting and big negatives, and just start focusing on the content. I found that an elaborate shooting method prevents you from breaching certain barriers with your subject. Once I got beyond the production, the really difficult challenges began. Nothing lazy there, except less stuff to carry. Best pictures I’ve taken recently were with an Instax 200 fujiroid.
I’m also of the opinion that production value makes photos stand out less. My eyes tend to gloss over the more polished a photo looks. It’s boring, but that’s just me.
@Christopher Bush, To me, those shots from a basic camera have the same quality as the ones I took at my sisters birthday party. But what do I know…I’m just the ordinary Jo Soap who all of these advertising campaigns are targeted at.
Love these two videos. He’s a big reason I got into photography myself, he like Dean Collins, supporting the notion that you don’t need to have thousands of dollars worth of equipment to produce what’s in your head.
Ooo, yeah, he’s a fad, and Juergen teller, and The Cobra Snake. No, sorry, no fad, just style and if its not to your taste, then so be it.
Sayings his images aren’t memorable is a hard assertion to support, more likely you don’t know what you’re looking at is his work.
@Kurt, T-Bone and Jurgen Teller are in a different league than the Cobra Snake. This is, I think, the line between greatness disgarding production in favor of spontonaity, and aesthetic.
Some thoughts.
In my mind, Terry is an honest and likable guy on top of being a good photographer. He does what he does and he does it well. He’s making photographs, fulfilling a need and allowing his personality into his works as well as being able to get what he wants from his subjects.
You’re welcome to your opinion of him and his work, strong as it may be. But it seems to me that more people dislike him because they don’t like the look of 35mm point and shoot on camera flash. Ok, so you don’t like it, it doesn’t make him a hack. There is far too much talk of “craft” in this industry, far too much cross over and far too many genres of “photography”. Personally, I don’t give a fuck if the blacks are plugged up, highlights are blown, how much tonal range you have or how noiseless or fine grained your prints or jpgs are. A good image is a good image, especially when it comes to commercial photography – it hits the mark, says what the client wants to say. You show me master printer/capture photographer Ansel Adams and I’ll show you someone bored to fucking tears. That’s me. I don’t get off so much on the technical aspects of photography, the science. It just doesn’t move me. I have my look, Terry has his and you have yours. Now go take your technically perfect picture of an lcd television and make sure to show all the details and then stfu.
Btw, I’m not a fan of Jurgen Tellers’ work, but I don’t hate it nor him because of it.
I think Richardson explained himself very simply in terms that really anybody could understand, agree with him or not, in or outside of this field. Particularly the notion that a lot of production value, on a lot of levels, really serves to make generic the message. He said it really so simply, common-sensically…
I guess the question is do you feel like those people in the belvedere ad are really being free and loose and human like Richardson says he wants, or are they just posing like we have all learned to do for the camera, — which by extension asks what do you think of “those” people, the people in the fashion crowd, his friends, his subjects etc. Are they genuine, or are they a little soul-less, the criticism he applied to advertising photography? And what is “posing” for a camera today compared to 10 yrs ago, 20 yrs ago, etc?
We all see it differently I am sure.
I think this is interesting ground because it goes a lot to intent and what photography “does” by nature. If you are shooting an event for example, in a snapshot style we can say, if you are working for someone you tend to flatter, you want people to look good. If you are working for yourself you might not be interested in flattering, you might be interested in what the camera sees or reveals maybe.
For me, photography is about revealing in a kind of objective way, so TR’s work is not doing that for me, it is almost 100% pure advertising and surface style, at least what I know of it. I can’t tell you how I hated going into Broadway-Lafayette station all those months seeing VG’s ugly mug plastered everywhere!
But the method per se I feel is very unlimited and very close to the essence of photography-this is what it looks like. So I appreciate wanting to work that way.
He really understands lifestyle, and as long as lifestyle sell, then he will keep getting projects. That doesn’t mean I like his shots, but I can admire his passion for sticking to his ideas.
@Gordon Moat,
Exactly; I don’t like his work but I have a lot of respect for his approach and outlook, plus it’s always great to see someone shaking up the status quo.
@Gordon Moat,
You nailed it!…if he used a Leica M-6 would it make the work more valid? Passion is a good thing!
@Gary Miller,
I read that he used an M8 for the Belvedere campaign
@Christopher Bush,
If you get a chance and the new mags come out soon check this guy out. Uses a beat-up m-6 and 50mm on b&w…old school his connection with subjects is amazing.
http://roadcoursemagazinetypething.blogspot.com/
Genious. He’s just what photography needed.
If anyone is still confused by TR’s success, pick up Malcolm Gladwell’s book “Outliers.”
Great read. Very enlightening.
But the Yashika T4 Super has a great lens. It is pro equipment. You can make 30×40 enlargements just fine from the negs.
Does anyone with these low opinions of Terry’s work actually shoot celebrities? It is nearly impossible to have an original point of view. Fact is, between the agents and the publicists and the stars themselves, getting anything remotely interested is hard as hell. The fact that he makes everyone look like they’re having the times of their lives is a testament to his ability and his process. You may not like his work, but calling him a hack? Take a look at your own work. If he’s a hack, what are you?
I’ve photographed many, many of the same people he has, and believe me, he gets things out of his subjects that is absolutely amazing. Technical aspects of photography are vastly overrated, and this is coming from someone who uses lots of lights and lots of crew and lots of production.
@Anon,
It’s difficult sometimes even with the non-famous. Fashion models are largely trained to pose and be very unnatural, and it can be difficult to get them out of that habit. Because of this, the biggest skill I’ve learned since I’ve started shooting fashion is very careful casting.
Cheers to what Anon said.
It’s interesting that all the haters post without revealing their url so we can look at their work but people who are pro Terry do. Just an observation. I’m with Chris here. Just forget about the camera and CREATE a photo. Seems most people just take a photo.
Mike
One of the most invigorating things I’ve done in recent years was to buy a Canon G9 and have some fun. Sometimes it’s a very good thing indeed to step outside your own skin. And if you find a way to make a few bucks while doing so…
Hmmm, I wonder if I can use an Etch-A-Sketch® for my next gig….?
@marco patino,
well, george has : http://www.gvetchedintime.com/gvetchedintime/index.php
rocksteady,
danno~
love his work, hate his work. he’s still gonna keep on being terry.
i for one think he should ride the wave he’s on for as long as he can and should extract as much money as he can. good to see someone in the industry really stirring shit up.
rocksteady,
danno~
What Anon said.
To those who think he is a “hack”, I’d highly encourage you to go take a look at his agent’s website and look at his other work besides the snapshot aesthetics. See what he is capable of.
Then I guess…you will all just shut up.
These videos are great. And it’s something that too many human beings, not just photographers, have forgotten.
We need human connections.
I met Terry briefly at a casting in Paris and he was probably the most real, unpretentious person in the room. Being shyness-prone, with him I was comfortable and open, reciprocating his own direct honesty.
He has something. He is uncompromisingly his integrated self and maybe that’s why there is some jealousy, not so subtly masked, in these posts.
While his aesthetic isn’t quite my own, I find him (and these interviews) refreshing as hell.
Everyone keeps harping about the small on camera flash snapshot technique.
There are excellent production values in the talent, make-up, hair and clothes. The way he directs his subjects and makes them open up is admirable.
I do not believe that the subjects would open up this way if there was this huge crew with tons of lighting and props behind the photographer.
Think about art directors and clients hovering around a thirty inch cinema display and making suggestions as he shot. I think that may change the mood of the shoot a bit.
He is very good at what he does, He is a director and it works for him and his clients.
Must be pretty empowering to be shoot with no screen or lcd on productions these days. Like Cameron says, on bigger sets everyone is chipping in their 2 cents about how to make it better. This way the photographer has more control and ultimately is the master of the final image.
Thanks Rob – I’ve been preaching this point of human connection since my time at Hallmark Cards so it’s great to see someone with a higher profile make it work. Clearly I don’t take it as far as Richardson does – I never had that much courage.
Much Respect Terry!!!! Screw the Haters!!!!
is a point and shoot any different from a M8 ?? no and if he shoot it with that and little flash like Bruce Gilden every one would be kissing his ass.
love him or hate him but don’t him unoriginal
Two options:
Bitch about what someone else has done
or
Put your energies into making some kick-ass work of your own
@Julian Baker,
3rd: imitate
For fuck’s sake, if you whiners all spent less time jerking off on blogs and got to work, maybe you could achieve something too. I bet Terry has more assignments in a month than most of you get in a year!
BTW, if you’re *that* hung up on the whole camera thing, I’ve assisted Terry and he’s shooting with a Nikon D3 at the moment and he’s also been known to use a Hasselblad H2, mainly for covers, because he hates how slow it is.
To those who love the work of Terry Richardson:
I see the same thing you do: bold, more honest than most and shot in a style that is true to the artist.
For those who think Mr. Richardson is a hack with way too many great opportunities:
Probably true that, but he’s an authentic hack who took those opportunities and made the most of it with a point and shoot. Next question?
A few questions.
Why is a person expressing feedback with an opposing POV, a “whiner” or “hater”?
Are there only a limited amount of appropriate opinions?
Why is honest feedback taken so causticly?
What do TR’s photographs communicate?
I’m not a fan. I wish him no harm, but I find little to like in his images.
The overwhelming message or communication I read is not how well he “connects”. Certainly he does connect.
I read self absorption, narcism, hype. His images sell products and identity. Is there a redeeming value to fashion and celebritism? How important are fashion and celebritism in our daily lives? Seems the hype is out of proportion. Even historically as a portrayal of American pop culture today, are these important and significant models to emulate? As art does the message or meaning step outside expectations for theses genres of communication? I find the communication of his images (including the tech) pander to expectations.
Advertising and PR doesn’t have to be truly GREAT to sell stuff. Selling stuff doesn’t make commercial art great, even if it does pay well. The best of any communications is great because it truly resonates with people. This is much deeper than hype.
I like that video. I like his honesty, and his thoughts. His photography is great. A painting is never about a brush, not really. A painting becomes an object in its own right. Photography, in the same way, is never about the camera. A cursary glance at Flickr will tell you that. N0r is it about the light (ok, it’s all about light, but …). It’s about a vision, what someone sees, and how they make it work. I think Richardson’s work is full of energy, life and imagination. Knowing the right people helps of course. But it’s all about his vision. That’s what makes it work. F*ck the camera
Mind you, Mario Testino shot the book “Let Me In!” snap shot style using a small, point-and-shoot autofocus camera. And the images in the book are pretty cool! Sure, Testino has done a lot of great work with higher budget set-ups, but if he and other great artists can get the job done using something simple, then so be it.
Sorry but I can’t help but hate the hate. I’ve met Terry several times, he’s an easy going mellow guy with a good sense of humor. I respect his work and his style. He provides a service many art directors want through lighting/style lens and the interaction with talent/celebs. Note he prefers to use the point and shoot with the zeiss lens.
Terry has been around photography on a professional level his entire life. I mean really u think he’s a hack when his father shot successfully? I guarantee Terry probably knows more about lighting and hasselblad than some of the people who post here, why does it irk you so much that he uses a cheap camera and flash?
Probably because he is successfully providing image buyers with what they want and you are not. Terrys interaction and ease with his subjects is what is incredible and that is the beauty of his work.
Wwowzers, going to a shoot with only one camera? Lucky nothing ever broke?
Something I like though about te video is that he knew his style- his asthetic. He wasn’t trying to be anything other than who he was. He didn’t cave to peoples expectations, but persevered and it worked.
Props to him
Hey there, I got one spare Yashica T4 for sale. Interested? email me –
tonio_ml (at) hotmail.com
Yeah, and I have two I’ll probably be selling. Why? I like my Leica Mini II–also with a 35 f/3.5 lens–better. The Yashica T4/T5 is floating on a ridiculous cloud of hype!…:o
TERRYWORLD!!!
Whew! There, I said it. I just didn’t want this post to go below the crease before I got in on the most interesting conversation in awhile…
I had a chance to work with Terry Richardson many years back and he inspired me along with other well respected photographers who focused on the story not the technical. I posted part of the story of how I first met Terry on my blog and how it inspired me.
/////
Many years ago in the mid 90’s I remember watching a Sports Illustrated swimsuit special on TV, one of the photographers featured was this wacky guy who shot the supermodels with a point and shoot camera. I laughed so hard. Here was this nerdy guy who looked like he was auditioning as an extra on Starsky & Hutch thumbing his nose at all the fabulous high priced photographers. A few years later I did freelance PA work on film sets to get by. One day I got called to work on a photo shoot at Rye Playland. Before I arrived on set the production team were making a big deal about the photographer doing the shoot. When I arrived it was the same guy I saw many years earlier on that TV special, his name was Terry Richardson. The thing I remember most about that day ….
This is too long to post here so you can read the rest at this link.
http://blog.thenewpop.com/2009/10/01/the-godfather-of-us-all-terry-richardson/
I think most people who don’t like Terry’s work, don’t like hipsters… Which is fair enough.
[…] A Photo Editor. AKPC_IDS += "1941,"; Categorias: Fotógrafos, Video | Tags: Entrevista, […]
[…] Via A Photo Editor. […]
It works.
He is still working after all these years.
He has also done many art shows.
It works.
I’m not sure what else there is to say.
http://www.advertography.com/backstage-terry-richardson-lacoste/
This guy has all of you talking about him and his work.
I would say that is success.
:-)
As a UK resident and a follower of all things simple. the arguments about what’s right or wrong with Richardson’s work is crap! the man does his work and if they pay him for it so what. I’m a great fan of photographer Pogus Caesar’s work, he also uses a basic Canon Autofocus camera – judging by the types of scenarios he works in I’ve always been impressed with the grainy quality of his black and white prints.
In the end it’s all about individual taste!
A link to Caesar’s show on musicans called – Muzik Kinda Sweet
http://www.birminghampost.net/life-leisure-birmingham-guide/postfeatures/2009/03/20/photo-exhibition-of-black-music-legends-in-birmingham-65233-23187558/
I agree what you are saying about Pogus Caesar, he get’s close to subjects, that’s a consequence of the Canon with outstanding results. my motto is ‘whatever it takes to capture the moment”.
What’s is a photographer? A film/digital image processing tech man, or somebody that see emotions, visual ideas and capture them with some tech equipment? This is an art concept that image will transfer it.
Image is done by subjects and light.
The camera is only the media. The smallest part of the job.
I had a fashion assignment some months ago. I putted lights models in my interpretation and i shoot with high res 24mp d3x. than putted my old leica III and with flash adapter and shoot.
The client choose the leica shoots !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
An artist has a strong sense of the image he wants and any media he will use
the result will be stunning.
it’s not important if you can count or not the hair of the model.
Art is an emotion not a resolution grid.
Same words were spent for Henry Cartier Bresson that was using leica in the 40ties.
Thnks Terry gooD joB!
In the end it’s kitsch, and ironic. Its is true that the photog makes the difference. But the MUA and the stages and props are hugely responsible for the imagery. And this style in the fashion context draws everyone in.
The oxymoron approach always draws positive attention.
Shoot high end fashion models with a point and shoot or shoot homeless people on the street with a 4×5, its gonna get your work noticed.
I really do like his work, I don’t like how this aesthetic is taking over. Everyone with a camera these days is a photographer. You might not need all the lighting equipment but you better know how to use it!
Terry makes images that demand attention. He inspired the
early image that we took of Sacha M’Baye. These images were
on demand and maybe made him a bigger star because they had energy!
Comments are closed for this article!