A Fashion Photographer's POV

[Joeys61]

http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/01/norman-jean-roy-digital-ruined-fashion-photos.html

 

[Murchu]

Interesting read, thanks for sharing

 

[Jockos]

Personally I don't like topics with only a link in the first post. Please give us a short comment on what the content is about and your own thoughts on the article or the reason you choose to post it.

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

okay Jockos:

Norman Jean Roy thinks Digital Ruined Fashion Photography.

16 of his most iconic pictures are shown.

Quote:

"Part of a perfect image is that it is imperfect. With digital
photography, it's very easy to perfect the image. You kill the
image when you perfect it. You basically suck the life out of it. An
image, to me, lives when you can look at it and it's just slightly
off. Like, when you put a primary red and primary green
together, you have that vibrancy between the two. A great
photograph, not a great picture, needs to have that vibration. It
would be very easy to take any one of my photographs and I can
tell you where I could have fixed this and fixed that."
"
http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/01/norman-jean-roy-digital-ruined-fashion-photos.html

 

[Bille]

thanks, reblogged

 

[barnwulf]

A great article. Since I am mostly a film shooter it hit the point on the head for me. Thanks! - jim

 

[Joeys61]

Digital makes chimps out of all of us

 

[lam]

brilliant share, thanks.

 

[user237428934]

This guy seems to be in a position that he can still afford to use a slow film style he once learned. Very rare in that business and especially in that genre. Nice for him. But to say that the 99.999% of the other guys using digital ruined fashion photography is amazingly arrogant.

 

[FrankS]

Perhaps not impossible to change, rather no desire to change. That sums me up as well, though I imagine in advancing years when it becomes difficult to stand over a darkroom sink, I may succumb to the convenience of digital. For me, convenience is the only thing digital has going for it.

 

[lynnb]

thanks for the link - I enjoyed the article. Loved the portraits in the gallery.

 

[raphaelaaron]

my favorite quip:

"I think, with the advent of digital photography, the dictatorship aspect of photography became democratized and over time became a group effort, which I think is bull****. I'm sorry, but photography is a dictatorship; it's not a democracy. At the end of the day, I don't sit here and tell the hairstylist to move the hair a little bit this way when they're working. I'm sure as **** not going to have someone tell me what to do with photography. With that said, as a photographer it's your responsibility to fulfill the needs of your client. You don't want to be a dick about it; there are plenty of people who do that, which, I think, is equally bull****."

i did a little fashion type work and definitely relate with this. one of the many reasons i was happier on a shoot when the stylist or makeup artist didn't direct me around to get their own vision. you get thrown out of your zone, as they say. it really is crummy to say the least.

and concerning his comments about digital ruining fashion, i believe he has a point, because many people i am in contact with are still in that area whereas i moved onto different things due to career changes. and their work seems to not have the human touch as much as the images i've seen in the gallery here.

now im not knocking down digital as a whole, but i am just saying what the guy said definitely happens.

thanks for sharing

 

[jwicaksana]

My favorite part:
That space in time between [taking the photograph] and looking at it after is a really important thing. It's kind of like counting to ten when someone makes you really mad.

Thanks for sharing!

 

[FrankS]

For me, that space of time is dream/hope/pray time.

 

[grapejohnson]

For me, that space of time is dream/hope/pray time.

For me, my favorite is spending too much time between taking and developing and forgetting you took a picture that you end up really liking.

 

[x-ray]

Digital doesn't have to be any more perfect than film. Digital is nothing more than an electronic negative vs film which is silver halide. To make it perfect is a choice. The camera doesn't make it perfect, it's a technician at a computer. Basically the same refinements deing done to digital can be done to a digital scan from film.

In the end, film must be converted to a digital file no different than the file Tom a digital camera. Both can be over manipulate if the photographer / retouched desires.

Non argument IMO.