Kurt Wenner

'3d Street Art', also known as '3d chalk art' is 2-dimensional artwork drawn on the street itself that gives you a 3-dimensional optical illusion from a certain perspective. It can be very breathtaking, realistic and at the same time very captivating once you get the angle right. Kurt Wenner is best known for his 3d Street Art and has made it a craze around the world. I first came across it on Facebook and now 3d street arists are gaining much popularity these days. Famous brands are already taking advantage of the public’s curiosity on 3D street paintings to create awareness for their new products. 

I decided to write a post on this 3d art because the first time that I saw it, I was totally mesmerized and gobsmacked. It is so incredibly clever and original, and I had never seen anything like it before. It makes me think, 'could I do something like that if I put my creative skills to the test?' Probably not. But worth a try one day I think... 

Some of my work - Definitely a proud moment

In March this year, I volunteered to do some event photography for a local music festival, which was organised by a 3rd year Music Journalism student. My role as photographer was to use VIP access to capture a variety of shots of each of the 10 acts. The festival was a huge success and I was really happy with the images that I got out of the experience. The festival itself was based outside the Guildhall in the town centre, and the students had set up a stage and a DJ tent for people to enjoy for no charge. 'Smile in the Square' was a brilliant day for me, as a photographer, because it gave me some extra experience in event photography. Here are just a few of the shots:

This experience was one that I will remember for a long time, and the images will all be revealed in my portfolio. I took over 600 images during the day, and  have narrowed them down to only 300-400. The guys who led the festival should be incredibly proud, as I got to see first hand all of the preparation that went into it. It really made me think about the fact that all musical acts come from small local bands - so all of the acts that I photographed could one day be as big as some of the worldwide artists that we see today.

Girls, Girls, Girls

From doing a lot of research into portraits in my Representation project, it reminded me of an exhibition that I visited a few years ago - Women of Our Time: Twentieth–Century Photographs from the National Portrait Gallery 


"This critically acclaimed exhibition is a stunning collection of photographic portraits of women whose brilliance, courage, style, and unflagging spirit have helped shape America as we know it." - National Portrait Gallery website

For me personally, this exhibition was incredibly inspiring as a woman, to do exactly what I want, when I want to do it. The empowerment of women is so important to our lives today, and this exhibition really put it into perspective. My favourite image that was up, was the picture of Marilyn Monroe, because she, to me, is one of the most inspiring women of all time. She is sexy, elegant and inspirational to everyone. In each image, the composition shows the woman in the centre of the frame, so that the eye is drawn directly to them, rather than to anything else in the image. It is almost like the women are empowering the images themselves, rather than being in a vulnerable state, like in a lot of photographs. 

100 Years Ago...

So, as it is the 100th anniversary of the sailing of the Titanic, I thought I would do a bit of research into a photographer who was actually on board the ship. Father Frank Browne spent only a small amount of time on the ship, but the priest captured some of the most iconic and enduring images of the ship - images upon which our naiive modern-day knowledge of the interior of Titanic and the atmosphere on board are based. Father Browne was so much more than an amateur photographer who snapped away. The fact that he has captured real people going about their business on board ship, and that the majority of those people were dead a few days later makes his images interesting and treasured. 


He really knew the value of what he had captured because in the Spring of 1913 he contacted the White Star Line’s advertising department to seek permission to use photographs and further materials in his lectures on Titanic. The reply he received was astonishing. “We shall be glad to obtain photographs of the illustrations to which you allude in the Olympic booklet but shall appreciate it if in any lectures you deliver you will abstain from any reference to the Titanic as you will easily understand we do not wish the memory of this calamity to be perpetuated.” In the end, a good story could not be kept down and Father Browne’s pictures were central to its telling over the past century. 

"Photographer Father Francis Browne Year 1912 Location Cork Francis Browne received two gifts from his uncle Robert that would change his life. The first was a camera, given to him when he was 17 as he left his native Ireland to tour Europe. The second was a first-class ticket for the first leg of the RMS Titanic's maiden voyage in April 1912, when he was 32. 
Consequently, Browne, a trainee priest at the time, produced dozens of photographs documenting life aboard the most famous ship to set sail. 
On his passage from Southampton to Cork, Browne was befriended by an American couple whom he met in the firstclass dining saloon. The couple, who were millionaires, offered to pay for him to continue his voyage to New York. He telegraphed his superior to ask permission to stay. The reply was short but indisputably clear: "Get off that ship - Provincial." - The Times, 2010. This was incredibly ironic and fortunate, because now we get to enjoy his fantastic photography that is now celebrated for the ship's 100th anniversary. 

Analogue V Digital

I fail to understand the big deal of digital photography replacing analogue photography. It is usually perceived as two completely different things, when they are not. Just like most things in this world, photography has evolved into a digital form. For example, music - the days where cassettes get stuck in tape players are long gone! Like different lenses have different uses, analog and digital photography have their respective places. Both have their pros and cons to the individual photographer and I do not think that one is better than the other by any stretch of the imagination.

Analogue Photography
The term analogue refers to cameras, which use film as the printing medium for photographs. They are then produced in analogue, using a chemical process.

Film cameras have the advantage of being quite cheap as compared to digital cameras of the same quality, but on the other hand, buying film and developing rolls can get expensive (as I have realized through my time as a photographer!). Analogue cameras have 35 mm film; hence the light covers a bigger area than digital cameras.

The main disadvantage of an analogue camera is for beginners; they would need to note down the camera settings, before actually taking pictures. Different effects on pictures, which result from developing, also need to be looked at.

The most important advantage of an analogue camera, the reason why most photographers choose it, is the picture quality. The picture quality that can be achieved with a film camera is incredibly high and the images turn out extremely sharp and precise. The reason behind this is the chemical reaction which takes place when light from the shutter touches the film, and as a result an exact representation of the object is created. This is not possible with a digital camera. 

For me personally, I find that analogue photography is much more rewarding that digital. Yes, it does take a lot of work and precision, but when you walk out of that dark room with a perfect print, nothing else matters.

Digital Photography
Digital photography is no different from film photography, as matter of fact the style and technique used is actually same, except for just one aspect. The distinction between digital and analogue photography is that traditional film is replaced by a charged coupled device, 'which contains tiny grids containing millions of photosensitive elements.'

Where digital cameras are concerned, there’s no clumsy process to put any film in, no fear of film exposure and no worry about wasting frames. Digital cameras store the images they capture on storage cards so you can view your pictures immediately - you could keep an image if you liked it you or else just delete it, simple! 

Beginners should be advised to start with the digital photography, and improve their mistakes in the shots. The cycle of improvement is so important to photography. Additionally, analogue is inconvenient if the photographer's knowledge is limited, and it also winds up being pretty expensive.

There are other functions in digital cameras, like 'anti-shake' which helps to take sharper imagers without a tripod. It is possible to change the ISO speed settings easily in the middle of shooting, and there is no need to worry about weather changes. On other hand, analogue photography means having new film where the ISO speed has to be loaded. It is possible to take a picture in different formats, like black and white, or sepia with or without photoshop. It is possible to just plug in a camera and shoot.

So, personally I do not have a preference, as there are pros and cons to both the style of camera. I think that to me, there are times that I can use both cameras, and times when it is not relevant to use a particular style of camera. I think that taking a quick-shot fashion shoot would require a digital camera, but for a more meaningful landscape shoot, for example, an analogue camera would be more relevant. It totally depends on the photographer and the shoot - but neither are 'better' than the other.

Diving into Photography

One of the best experiences I have ever been through would have to be my underwater photo shoot. One of the main inspirations from this particular shoot was Zena Holloway. Her work is all based on a typical fashion shoot, except it is always shot underwater. I found this incredibly interesting and somewhat different, so decided to give it a go myself. Here are a few pieces of Holloway's work: 

From looking at Holloway's work, this gave me the push to try an underwater shoot myself. I rented out part of a local swimming pool and used one model. I used a disposable underwater camera and swan behind the model as she flipped and dived in and around the water. The images came out really well, so I decided to add to them by scanning in painted paper and a variety of collage pieces to add to the photos. I was slightly disappointed with the quality of the images because some of them came out incredibly grainy. This was because I had used a disposable camera, and not a professional underwater camera. My model was incredibly patient because I wanted the photos to be unique. I decided that I did no want my model to wear any floating clothes like in Holloway's, so that I could pick up the flow of the water, rather than the eye being drawn straight to the clothes in the image. Well, anyway, here they are...

Strange?

I was recently reminded of a photographer that I researched at college. She was a slightly strange artist whose work revolved around abnormal things...Diane Arbus.

According to the Canadian Medical Association Journal, "The subjects of Arbus photos often stood alone, separate from the world, almost as icons of divergence from the norm. Even though Arbus was widely criticized for her take on her art, she actually felt her photos were lyric and tender and called her subjects "aristocrats." To me, it almost seems unfair to single people out for being 'different', and penalizing them for their slight differences. However, this sense of differentiation makes a very interesting series of work - ranging from a giant to a boy with down syndrome. Arbus often referred to her subjects as 'circus acts', however did treat them all with great respect and made sure they were comfortable in their situation. 

Arbus' work was often known as a 'freak show', but if it was, why was it so popular? It drew the audience in because it was something completely different to what people had seen before. She used a special camera that produced square shaped images and often her subjects look sad, conflicted or physically abnormal - but they do not try to hide their insecurities; they openly stare at the camera. One art expert said Diane Arbus turned photography inside out because instead of looking at her subjects, she made them look at her. Arbus learned to mix the realistic nature of photography with its other possibilities. She explored how people live with sameness and difference as well as rejection and acceptance. These combinations created very interesting art that was often disputed by fellow artists and photographers.


I for one find her work both interesting and inspiring. Although it does show a different range of people than usual photographers, I think that the world needs to see this to accept that there are lots of different people out there. People need to see a variety of different people before they completely accept that everyone varies. Arbus lets the people stay in their own environment, making them feel welcome and involved with her work, which I think is really important. To have a good relationship between photographer and subject is one of the most important things you can have in the art world, as I mentioned in a previous post. 

"A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you the less you know."

A completely different view of a photograph

David Hockney


So here is something I have ALWAYS wanted to try.......Photomontage.

I came across Hockney's work during my GCSE Art course a few years ago. Since then, whenever I have looked at composition or montage, I have always gone straight to Hockney's work. I love the way he uses a variety of images of a specific thing to make an enlarged version of that particular thing... His work is inspiring and really clever, that is why he is one of my favourite photographers of all time. When looking through a variety of his photomontage images, I prefer the images that use larger pieces to create the final image. I think I prefer these because you can see that it is a montage much more clearly, whereas in some images (such as the one above) it is not immediately clear to the viewer that it is a montage of smaller images. 

However, from a lot of research into Hockney's work, I particularly like the image above because he has not filled the whole frame with images. He has chosen a particular pattern in which to fill with smaller images. I think this looks better than the other images because he could then play around with the background, having maybe a detailed background that compliments the images. I think that Hockney's work is so visually inspiring that I will try and give it a go later in the course. 

Shattering Expectations

Guy Bourdin 


One of the photographers that I often come across when researching controversial work is Bourdin. In 1950, Bourdin met Man Ray and became his assistant; creating a range of interesting and beautiful fashion pieces. He was one of the best known photographers of fashion and advertising of the second half of the 20th century. However, he started to develop a love for controversy and stylization - but because Bourdin had such a formal narrative power, he overcame the boundaries of controversial advertising photography.

Bourdin was the first photographer to create a 'complex narrative' - then quickly take a moment - sexual, provocative, shocking, surrealistic, sometimes even sinister. That was why to the outside world, his work was so controversial. These narratives that he created were often strange, mysterious, and filled with violence and sex. I really like his images because hardly any of them include the model's face. I think this is really interesting because instead he has chosen to just photograph their feet and/or legs. The composition in all of his images is first class and the colours in every image draws the eye straight to the model. 

Although I do like Bourdin's images, I am wary that it is rumoured that he was incredibly cruel to his models during shoots. Bourdin is said to have arrived on the back of a camel to the offices of French Vogue and attempted to dye the sea a deep blue in the days long before Photoshop! He was an interesting character and this is definitely seen in all of his work...but that is why I for one love it. 

Queer...?

"Queer" by Sunil Gupta


I picked this book up by chance when browsing in the library. It has to be one of the most interesting photography books I have looked at. Gupta has looked at contemporary gay life in India and other parts of the world. He aims to tackled issues of gender and sexuality, and also documented his own experiences living with HIV.

I think what drew me to the book is the title. The word 'Queer' is plastered across the front cover, surrounded with pink and purple tones, and a man wearing a glittery mask. The front cover itself draws the reader in, and once you open the actual book, you do get sucked into the life of the men portrayed in the book. Although some images may seem almost humorous, like the ones above...the deep meaning always shines through - the tackling of inequality. A lot of the images are staged to make the models seem more 'queer' and feminine than they actually are, but I think that is the kind of picture Gupta is trying to create about the book as a whole - that they should not be ashamed of the people they are. 

As I mentioned earlier, Gupta put a section in the book about his fight with HIV, called "Love and Light". This was a series of self portraits showing his battle. This is a small, but heart-wrenching part of the book, and really touches the reader. At the start of the section, you can see how the HIV took over his life completely, but by the end of the section, the images show him smiling and getting back on track with his life. The small part of the book shows an incredibly difficult part of Gupta's life and I think that it took guts to actually produce it in a book. 

When You're a Boy: Men's Fashion Styled by Simon Foxton - The Photographers Gallery


"When You’re a Boy" celebrates men in fashion photography, particularly the men who create photographs of men. It focuses on the career of a stylist rather than a photographer, and is the first exhibition devoted to the groundbreaking British menswear stylist Simon Foxton, whose career covers the last three decades - a time of profound change in fashion and style photography.

"Galliano's Warriors" photographed by Nick Knight, styled by Simon Foxton

When I went to see this exhibition, I was particularly interested in the work of Nick Knight, so when i knew that a lot of the exhibition would be situated around his work, I was already very pleased. I think that I grew so attached to the exhibition because of the diversity of the work there. The exhibition captured menswear’s spirit and energy in some of the most memorable fashion photographs of the period, it questioned the definition of masculinity, national identity and taste. It looked at the classic English men’s tailoring and how they are combined with contemporary sportswear design, street fashion and also looks at references to gay subcultures -  to produce sophisticated fashion images for a range of brands and magazines.

Although the gallery itself is small, the exhibition definitely took advantage of the limited space, covering every wall with a variety of different men's fashion pieces. It was incredibly creative and inspiring. 

Something Different...

Russ & Reyn


I came across Russ and Reyn's work on the internet and I found it incredibly clever and interesting. I knew that this kind of shadow photography could be done, but they created these images to perfection; making them look really life-like.

Shadow Drama - Russ and Reyn

I absolutely love these images because they are so simple, yet so effective. The viewer is made to think that the mysterious hand shadows are real, and that is what makes the images so great. None of Russ and Reyn's images are really 'normal'. Each image is always taken with a simple background, and includes levitation, or strange costume, to make their work out of the ordinary. I really like their work because it does not fall into a particular category or genre. There is a snippet of every genre present in their work, and that is what makes me want to look at every single piece of their work.

The fact that there are so many different ideas in each and every photography makes the viewer want to go back and look at more and more of their images. They have definitely inspired me to look deeper into photography, and to look more at the things that aren't through the lens - but what I could add to the image in different ways. This is such a different way to approach photography, but is incredibly interesting at the same time. When searching for photographers in books and online, I have not come across another photographer who uses such bright colour, but so subtly. This is my main love for their images. The way that they are using everything that a fashion photographer would; i.e the colour, the clothes, the background - but to me, it is not fashion photography, it is deeper than that.