David Alan Harvey/x-t1 in Rio

[gavinlg]

http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2014/07/crazed-in-rio/

Fantastic stuff as always. He has been using the x-t1 and 35mm lens (not that it particularly matters) for this recent Rio based work and plans on making some sort of tabloid style publication from it.

 

[Michael Markey]

Is that what he`s using ... I follow him on FB.

 

[gavinlg]

Michael, I always make sure to read through the comments on his Burn Magazine website as he generally answers most of the questions people ask him. He said in this one he left his d800 at home for this coverage as it was too big.

 

[Michael Markey]

Ah ...more thorough than me then 😱
I`ll check them out ...thanks.

 

[kbg32]

""i love the D800 as almost the perfect camera….YET, it sits at home!! it is just too big for the streets of Rio….here i really need something unobtrusive…all of this work is with the XT-1….i am working 90% of the time with the 50mm equivalent (35)…i also have primes 28 and 35 equivalents, yet in the last couple of years i find myself going for the “normal” 50mm look….i will be making 2 more trips to Rio before i publish my zine/book BEACH GAMES….one of those trips could involve simply doing classic portraits..if i do that , then maybe the D800 will be the one to use…by the way, with the D800 i also use only the 50mm lens…"

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

I'm going to be the contrarian here. Sorry to hijack the thread. I've liked DAH for a long time. I have a book or two of his. I once won one of his website's contests.

But, since his change to digital, i haven't seen a single image from him that i like. The composition may be there. The subject matter is still there. I've spent a lot of time in Rio and the 'spirit of the city' is there. But, the photographs just don't have any of the appeal of the old stuff. His old film work had spectacular color — vivid slide film, and mixed color temperatures.... The grit of some grain.... There was Texture and Atmosphere. These are just pictures. I feel the same way about McCurry, Gibson, etc....

Sorry.

I keep coming back to the same analogy: it's like classic painters who, with new technology, were able to suddenly paint without the physical characteristics imparted by a brush.

 

[Lauffray]

I don't disagree with that, but frankly I find his approach to gear much more laid back than any other professional right now

 

[Jubb Jubb]

Someone should probably tell him not to upload his hi resolution images. They could get ripped off.

 

[gavinlg]

I'm going to be the contrarian here. Sorry to hijack the thread. I've liked DAH for a long time. I have a book or two of his. I once won one of his website's contests.

But, since his change to digital, i haven't seen a single image from him that i like. The composition may be there. The subject matter is still there. I've spent a lot of time in Rio and the 'spirit of the city' is there. But, the photographs just don't have any of the appeal of the old stuff. His old film work had spectacular color — vivid slide film, and mixed color temperatures.... The grit of some grain.... There was Texture and Atmosphere. These are just pictures. I feel the same way about McCurry, Gibson, etc....

Sorry.

I keep coming back to the same analogy: it's like classic painters who, with new technology, were able to suddenly paint without the physical characteristics imparted by a brush.

I'll actually agree with you. I was watching a martin parr documentary the other day and was taken back at how much more I liked his photography with film. I'm only 26 years old so it's not a nostalgia thing for me - his digital work is far less interesting - like the medium takes away a certain dimension from the photos.

I'll note though that David still uses film in the way of fuji 6x9 and gf670, and also a mamiya 7. As said above, he tends to use all sorts of cameras and speaks openly about gear. I will agree that maybe his old slide work was beautiful, but I still very much love his new work shot on digital. To me he's one of the few old school photographers that has kept his most of his 'persona' with digital cameras. It's different for sure, but it's still good.

 

[__--]

Gotta love the energy of this Rio series and also the enthusiasm in the late work of a great photographer who puts up for the public, more or less in a diary fashion, his work before he edits it onto the book that he will publish. On the digital vs film thing that's being raised here: I haven't felt it about his slide film vs digital work, but this B&W series doesn't hit the higher contrast note that I would have liked to have seen; but I wonder whether it's a question of post-processing — is he using out to canmera JPGs? — rather than inherently an issue of film vs digital.

MITCH ALLAND/Potomac, MD
Do You Know What is Really Real?
Download link for PDF file of 15-shot portfolio

 

[jsrockit]

I'm going to be the contrarian here. Sorry to hijack the thread. I've liked DAH for a long time. I have a book or two of his. I once won one of his website's contests.

But, since his change to digital, i haven't seen a single image from him that i like. The composition may be there. The subject matter is still there. I've spent a lot of time in Rio and the 'spirit of the city' is there. But, the photographs just don't have any of the appeal of the old stuff. His old film work had spectacular color — vivid slide film, and mixed color temperatures.... The grit of some grain.... There was Texture and Atmosphere. These are just pictures. I feel the same way about McCurry, Gibson, etc....

Sorry.

I keep coming back to the same analogy: it's like classic painters who, with new technology, were able to suddenly paint without the physical characteristics imparted by a brush.

So in other words, you are biased against digital?

 

[bobbyrab]

It's quite interesting to bring the images into photoshop, when you bring up the levels only the footballers have a spiky histogram that I would associate with a jpg previously worked on, the other two I brought in, the girl flicking her hair, and the couple with the jumper behind have solid histograms. It may be of course they are jpgs from an adjusted raw file, but it could be they're straight from camera jpgs yet to be adjusted.

 

[gavinlg]

It's quite interesting to bring the images into photoshop, when you bring up the levels only the footballers have a spiky histogram that I would associate with a jpg previously worked on, the other two I brought in, the girl flicking her hair, and the couple with the jumper behind have solid histograms. It may be of course they are jpgs from an adjusted raw file, but it could be they're straight from camera jpgs yet to be adjusted.

He also states in the comments that he shoots RAW and converts to BW.

 

[willie_901]

Speaking for myself. I consider images I post on line as proofs. When they are printed or even used for digital display on my web site, I revisit the post-production process and make significant improvements.

 

[shadowfox]

So in other words, you are biased against digital?

I think what he's saying is that digital is lacking (to him).

DISCLAIMER: Not trying to speak for anyone, just offering an observation.

 

[x-ray]

No issue with him using digital but his images are lifeless and muddy. He lost the feel of sunlight. There's no sparkle and they look like bad conversions to B&W from unadjusted in camera jpg's.

 

[finguanzo]

I agree, his stuff hasn't been up to par, comparing it with his older stuff.. Not sure if digital has anything to do with it.. 🙄

 

[semilog]

No issue with him using digital but his images are lifeless and muddy. He lost the feel of sunlight. There's no sparkle and they look like bad conversions to B&W from unadjusted in camera jpg's.

Don't fret.

He's posting work-in-progress as he shoots it day-by-day. I have seen his recent and older stuff (35mm, 6x7, D800, µ4/3 etc.) printed big (1.5 m long edge) by his master printer, Mike Courvoisier, and it absolutely sings.

 

[Pherdinand]

blame it on rio.
😉

 

[Mark C]

Don't fret.

He's posting work-in-progress as he shoots it day-by-day. I have seen his recent and older stuff (35mm, 6x7, D800, µ4/3 etc.) printed big (1.5 m long edge) by his master printer, Mike Courvoisier, and it absolutely sings.

But I imagine this is the only way the vast majority of people are going to see it.

I'm afraid X-ray summed it up pretty well, for me anyway. Lifeless was the word that had popped into my head when I looked at them. It baffles me since there are some nice shots. I'd personally have rather looked at color jpegs from the camera.