Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: 203 on May 20, 2008, 06:21:24 pm

Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: 203 on May 20, 2008, 06:21:24 pm
Not to get off track and talk about actual photography  but there's a Paolo Roversi exhibit tomorrow (wed.) in NYC.
You in town J.R.? Want to meet me over there? :-)

http://pacemacgill.com/index.html (http://pacemacgill.com/index.html)

PACE/MACGILL GALLERY

 
 
Paolo Roversi: Guinevere

Pace/MacGill Gallery is pleased to announce an exhibition of photographs by Paolo Roversi on view from May 21 – June 14, 2008.  This exhibition marks Roversi’s third solo show in New York City.

 

Please join us for an opening reception with the artist on Wednesday, May 21 from 5:30 – 7:30pm.  

 

Photography, as a medium, encourages the prolonged examination and documentation of a subject over time.  To that end, the photographs on view (1996-present) exclusively depict Roversi’s friend and model, Guinevere, over the past twelve years.  Roversi’s pictures move beyond the physical facts; as his muse, Guinevere inspires Roversi to create images that are both abstract meditations on the alchemy of beauty as well as intimate studies. Whether wearing haute couture or photographed nude, Guinevere’s allure is palpable. The sum of the pictures’ parts results in unconventional, often provocative portraits.

 

Like Richard Avedon and Irving Penn, Roversi’s photographs eloquently bridge the spheres of commercial photography and fine art: they are as successful on a magazine’s pages as they are on a gallery or museum’s walls.  At the invitation of Elle’s art director Peter Knapp, Roversi moved to Paris in 1972 where he established a reputation as one of fashion’s pre-eminent photographers.  In 1980, Roversi began using Polaroid’s instant 8 x 10 film and it soon became his preferred format. As adventurous technically as he is aesthetically, Roversi has made Polaroid, gelatin silver, dye transfer, carbon and pigment prints.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
32 EAST 57th STREET NEW YORK NY 10022 / PHONE 212.759.7999 / FAX 212.759.8964 / E-MAIL info@pacemacgill.com
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 21, 2008, 03:30:49 pm
Thanks for posting this, I would have missed the show.  PR's stuff is so nice and real, it has a sophisticated edginess to it that we don't see too much of anymore.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: narikin on May 21, 2008, 04:19:41 pm
Pace MacGill seems to have had a couple of vanity fashion shows back to back, it was Lagerfeld last week (in the exact same space!). Not sure what they are doing, other than leasing out their space maybe, or getting good p.r. This used to be one of the most serious photo galleries in town, but I think they've been drinking too much kool-aid recently.

Personally I'd recommend anyone to go see the Becher's show at MoMA just 4 blocks away, over this superficial twaddle... but each to their own, I guess.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 21, 2008, 08:58:21 pm
Quote
Pace MacGill seems to have had a couple of vanity fashion shows back to back, it was Lagerfeld last week (in the exact same space!). Not sure what they are doing, other than leasing out their space maybe, or getting good p.r. This used to be one of the most serious photo galleries in town, but I think they've been drinking too much kool-aid recently.

Personally I'd recommend anyone to go see the Becher's show at MoMA just 4 blocks away, over this superficial twaddle... but each to their own, I guess.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197104\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The art/commerce overlap is, to me, fine unless it really does degenerate to pure commerce.  I think PR's stuff is on a fairly high plain, and is fine portraiture.  

I really do not care for the Bechers.  If you've seen one formalist topographic study of rusting machinery you don't need to see another, much less 40 years of this stuff.  The first two images will be great then its repetition, which is at the core of Modernism.  It is, however, impressive in terms of technique and printing.  My homseslice who heads up the A/V department says its stunning but, well, its room after room of rusting machinery.  Boring snooze snooze. I also don't like the cult they started.  Their impact on art photography and their heavy, heavy influence on German art education, especially in Niedersachsen, is really horrible.  german art students were, in the 80's, forced to conform to standards of German Art.  Anything outside of the narrow canon of the Bechers' philosophy and aesthetic was considered to be "New York" and was suppressed, often by student led confrontations with those who were off the reservation.  

In any case, PR's stuff is, to me, more honest and heartfelt than most current sogennante fine art photography, especially the new topography when it isn't really well done.  Go to an MFA show, read artist statements, its all utter bullshit.  Everyone is a little Eggelston, little Teller, little Hilde.  Its visual Kareoke.  The gallerists need to make a buck and they don't trust their own taste but I digress. But what do I know, I'm just a pud producing superficial twaddle that birds shit on two month later.    
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: LumiWill on May 22, 2008, 04:51:15 am
... Go to an MFA show, read artist statements, its all utter bullshit.  Everyone is a little Eggelston, little Teller, little Hilde.  Its visual Kareoke ...

As a student myself, I share your view that most of the MFA grad probably lack a lot of substance. I believe as the artist matures he/she can then produce work that is reflective of that growth. I didn't study photography until I was in my late 20's and I, like many, wanted to be a little bit of Mario Sorrenti, diCorcia, etc. I laughed as I observed that most of my peers(18-20 y.o.) wanted to dress like an artist more so than be an artist. I look at Ryan McGinley and how he is maturing as an artist and it gives hope that future works in art photography can satisfy both art and commence.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: 203 on May 22, 2008, 10:54:21 am
Paolo has been one of my heroes for a long time. I am really inspired by his fashion, editorial portraiture, etc.

Here is some more of his work:

http://claire.belliard.free.fr/claire_roversi/index2.html (http://claire.belliard.free.fr/claire_roversi/index2.html)

Any by the way, the party was great.

(p.s. narikin: I could not disagree with you more.)
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: richardhagen on May 22, 2008, 12:06:58 pm
Narikan,
I couldn't agree with you more.

Well, I suppose if you are bored by work that embodies understatement, subtly and patience, then you will be bored by Bernd and Hilla Becher's life work. If you are bored by objects that at first glance might look alike, but a more purposeful look reveals the enormous difference between the objects, then you will be bored by the Becher's work. If you are bored by going back in time by looking at images of the last vestiges of the industrial age, then you will be bored by their work.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: amsp on May 22, 2008, 12:23:20 pm
Roversi is one of the greatest photographers of the 20th & 21st century, period. He does fashion with a soul like few others. Pictures of decaying industrial buildings are fine, but seeing a whole exhibit of that would quite frankly bore me to death. Thinking that this is the height of "real" photography, and accusing Roversi's photography of being shallow, to me is just plain narrow-minded and pretentious.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: 203 on May 22, 2008, 01:11:22 pm
Quote
Narikan,
I couldn't agree with you more.

Well, I suppose if you are bored by work that embodies understatement,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197260\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


To clarify, when I said I disagreed with narikin, I was referring to his comments on Roversi only.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: paulmoorestudio on May 22, 2008, 02:29:59 pm
Quote
Roversi is one of the greatest photographers of the 20th & 21st century, period. He does fashion with a soul like few others. Pictures of decaying industrial buildings are fine, but seeing a whole exhibit of that would quite frankly bore me to death. Thinking that this is the height of "real" photography, and accusing Roversi's photography of being shallow, to me is just plain narrow-minded and pretentious.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197262\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

While I don't feel I can rate him, I would have to say the small selection in the show was a nice range of work, beautifully printed and displayed. Both the photographer and the subject were at the opening and it was a good night.  I have been critical in the past of the glitz and pomp of the fashion world, thinking that a lot of photographers get a free ride on the tales of the subjects.. but I feel the work that is up in the gallery was strong and showed his passion for the medium.  I was impressed and made a point to tell him. Thanks for posting as I would have not gone!
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Chris Livsey on May 22, 2008, 03:28:42 pm
At last a thread about photography and not pixels. Many thanks to all posters concerned.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Snook on May 22, 2008, 04:36:00 pm
Quote
At last a thread about photography and not pixels. Many thanks to all posters concerned.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197285\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Shooting Large Format like he does ... You better have your stuff together..:+}
No digital there.
Snook
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 22, 2008, 05:02:05 pm
Quote
Narikan,
I couldn't agree with you more.

Well, I suppose if you are bored by work that embodies understatement, subtly and patience, then you will be bored by Bernd and Hilla Becher's life work. If you are bored by objects that at first glance might look alike, but a more purposeful look reveals the enormous difference between the objects, then you will be bored by the Becher's work. If you are bored by going back in time by looking at images of the last vestiges of the industrial age, then you will be bored by their work.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197260\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It bores me because I've been looking at their "lifes' work" for 35 years.  It all looks the same in the end and what you take away is the one detail or one photograph that struck you.  The rest are superfluous.  That's my take on the Bechers.  

And as to your statement above, well, I won't comment.  I think it speaks for itself.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: bryanyc on May 22, 2008, 05:34:24 pm
Quote
Roversi is one of the greatest photographers of the 20th & 21st century, period. He does fashion with a soul like few others.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197262\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Umm, that is hyperbole.  I could name 5 fashion photographers that are better.
And a hundred other photographers of other stripes that are way better.

Sheesh..  look, I appreciate a picture of beautiful nekked girl, or in haute couture clothes, but I do keep my head on my shoulders when judging art.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 22, 2008, 05:53:03 pm
Lets keep this thread as civil as possible so it doesn't degenerate into a shouting match.  Its nice to have thread about photography.  And remember, what people write are opinions and yes they are like a$$holes.  So lets keep attacks limited to the artist under discussion rather than  the source of the [probably stupid] opinion.  This keeps death threats and bruised egos to a minimum.

Thanks!
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: pss on May 22, 2008, 08:10:04 pm
a lot of fashion photographers have art shows and if you would have said that lagerfeld's stuff is not worth looking at i might have agreed....i might have agreed if you would have called a lot of other fashion shooter's stuff "fluff" because for the most part you might be right (they still sell as art though...very well!)....but roversi is in a different league alltogether...he might not be one of the 25 best photographers of the last 50 years but has always pushed the limits in terms of using lights and printing techniques and has pretty much completely ignored any trend when it comes to fashion or commercial photography....his work is very unique and definitely worth checking out....original prints are just amazing....i have only seen a couple once and appreciated his work even more form that moment on.....the guy is a real photographer in the sense that he never stops playing with cameras, lenses, lights, film and paper....the brechers just use photography to get a point across....they don't experiment with the medium at all....i am not saying one is better then the other but as a photographer one interests me just much more then the other....
broaden your horizons....
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Kitty on May 22, 2008, 10:31:45 pm
Paolo Roversi is the great photographer. His work is art.
I wonder now polaroid stop.
How does he take photo? Switch to digital?
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 22, 2008, 10:58:31 pm
Quote
Paolo Roversi is the great photographer. His work is art.
I wonder now polaroid stop.
How does he take photo? Switch to digital?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197357\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sarah Moon as well.  What is she going to do w/o Type 55?
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Murray Fredericks on May 22, 2008, 11:00:05 pm
Quote
they don't experiment with the medium at all....

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197337\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I think the Bechers have definitely experimented with the medium and with what it can be used to say. Do you mean that they do not experiement with the technical - printing and other materials?

 I love the way Bechers have found beauty and art in the skill of the engineers and builders who made all 'their' rusty industrial constructions...I also love the way the Bechers have found beauty existing in the 'comparisons' between the images - hence the need for the repetition.

It takes longer to 'get' the Bechers while PRs work hits you much faster...I wonder which will stand the test of time?

Murray
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: pss on May 23, 2008, 01:15:31 am
Quote
I think the Bechers have definitely experimented with the medium and with what it can be used to say. Do you mean that they do not experiement with the technical - printing and other materials?

 I love the way Bechers have found beauty and art in the skill of the engineers and builders who made all 'their' rusty industrial constructions...I also love the way the Bechers have found beauty existing in the 'comparisons' between the images - hence the need for the repetition.

It takes longer to 'get' the Bechers while PRs work hits you much faster...I wonder which will stand the test of time?

Murray
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197365\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i did not mean to say anything negative about the bechers....they have their place in photography history and art history....they were also teachers to a whole generation of later german photographers (incl. gursky and struth)....
i just tried to make a point that bechers and roversi have a different approach to photography and are interesting for different reasons...if you don't like roversi's pics or "art" you can still appreciate it for its technique and creative use of light....
it really does not make any sense at all to compare the two anyway.....
and it does not make any sense to say that one' work is "fluff" because the subject matter happens to be a great model whereas old industrial structures carry much deeper meaning?

i personally consider penn more interesting then becher or roversi....but that does not make him any better or the others less important....just a personal opinion...and actually i don't really care what stands "the test of time"
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 23, 2008, 01:29:37 am
Quote
I think the Bechers have definitely experimented with the medium and with what it can be used to say. Do you mean that they do not experiement with the technical - printing and other materials?

 I love the way Bechers have found beauty and art in the skill of the engineers and builders who made all 'their' rusty industrial constructions...I also love the way the Bechers have found beauty existing in the 'comparisons' between the images - hence the need for the repetition.

It takes longer to 'get' the Bechers while PRs work hits you much faster...I wonder which will stand the test of time?

Murray
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197365\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The need for repetition is also the hallmark of the Modernism they were documenting, not just the need for comparison.  My point is that its all a one liner, so to speak.  

The arts in Germany were profoundly influenced by the Werkbund system, such that the practical arts of industrial design, photography and architechture, cross polinated.  The Bechers were building on German industrial and product photographers work from the inter-war period, which documented the construction of the great Modern facilities of the German steel and chemical industries in the Ruhr and Rhineland.  These photographers, nameless IG Farben employees, shot the vast catalyst chambers and the undulating repetitions of the BASF and Bayer facilities in the Rhineland.  The Bechers were building on this tradition created by topographers and documentarians, which is why I find it so boring now.  When i first saw it in the 70's I thought it was pretty incredible, but I also liked Scooby Doo and the Superfriends at that time as well.  I guess my knock on the Bechers is that it is a one liner.  Looking back on their lifes' work, I ask:  why didn't they move on?

As to PR, fine, fine portraiture.  Really.  The Bechers and PR will both stand the test of time, but to different crowds.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Chris Livsey on May 23, 2008, 02:03:13 am
Henri Cartier-Bresson and Ansel Adams were working at the same time. One can appreciate the quality, in a broad meaning, of what each was doing but to each other, and their individual followers, they were largely incomprehensible. Both bodies of work have survived and influence photographers today.
No one is right or wrong, there are many paths to follow but it is that "quality" we seek. Both the Bechers and Paolo Roversi, to my eye, have it.
I did see the Bechers work in person at a Venice Bienniale and was impressed by the print quality and the impact of the hanging which, in this type of work, can significantly affect your response. This is an important point, to bring back MFDB as a topic, as we can all agree that viewing MFDB files as jpegs over the web is not the optimum way to appreciate their qualities but for the ability to view a vast span of work so quickly after it is made it is unsurpassed.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Murray Fredericks on May 23, 2008, 05:51:46 am
Quote
The need for repetition is also the hallmark of the Modernism they were documenting, not just the need for comparison.  My point is that its all a one liner, so to speak. 

The arts in Germany were profoundly influenced by the Werkbund system, such that the practical arts of industrial design, photography and architechture, cross polinated.  The Bechers were building on German industrial and product photographers work from the inter-war period, which documented the construction of the great Modern facilities of the German steel and chemical industries in the Ruhr and Rhineland.  These photographers, nameless IG Farben employees, shot the vast catalyst chambers and the undulating repetitions of the BASF and Bayer facilities in the Rhineland. 

 .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197384\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

TMARK,

this is a good synopsis of their work and history,

As an aside:
I still find much of 'Modernism' fascinating and inspirational. While postmodernism was intellectually 'thrilling'  at times, I think the 'unreadable' MFA papers and artist statements referred to above are a result of that 'period' and it's approaches.

I'm eagerly awaiting the new...

Murray
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 23, 2008, 10:22:01 am
Quote
TMARK,

this is a good synopsis of their work and history,

As an aside:
I still find much of 'Modernism' fascinating and inspirational. While postmodernism was intellectually 'thrilling'  at times, I think the 'unreadable' MFA papers and artist statements referred to above are a result of that 'period' and it's approaches.

I'm eagerly awaiting the new...

Murray
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197417\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I too love Modernism.  It is inspiring but I do think that the Modern Ethos is/was an illusion.  It takes too many resources to Live Modern.  Put another way, you need a staff to keep a Modern minimalist home minimalist.  

Yes, Post Modernism is/was a mess.  It was fantastic in the early days (say, 1968 - 1976) because there was, I think, a comfortable overlap, such that people were still grounded by Modernism.  They were schooled in the Modern traditions and were producing work in reaction to the Modern.  Warhol, Ant Farm and the Cadillac Ranch, TVTV and the Video Freaks with video.  It was a special time.  Then people started taking themselves too seriously and Modernism was torn down until it, in a very Postmodern way, is a sign disconected from its meaning.

Before I really start rambling I woud say that the "New" is here.  I can feel it in NYC and LA, I can see it in the news.  I've read that Modernism is back, but that's not it.  It has to do with the passing of American power and the realization by most everyone that marketing, be it in polictics or business, is disconnected from the truth (or at least a truth people can agree on).  These will be exciting times.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: James R Russell on May 23, 2008, 10:29:04 am
Quote
The art/commerce overlap is, to me, fine unless it really does degenerate to pure commerce.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197148\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


If you work in commerce, any form of image making commerce, (including editorial) what you show, what you shoot, how you go about showing, shooting, deciding, limiting, expanding is probably the most daunting task any of us face.

The moment you load your book or website with your top 30 art images, you get a call from an agent or a client wanting to know if you can shoot, (fill in the blanks here) kids, men, sports, bras, sports bras, men's jeans, women's jeans, smiles, frowns, etc. etc. etc.

Digital has even complicated this process because we aren't completely locked in to what the final look of the image.

Today we are finishing a campaign in LA and just doing a quick overview of the images, I can take 10 images from the shoot and make a very commercial, though somewhat non unique presentation of the shoot, or just changing the selects and working them differently in post can produce 10 images that are different and more unique, maybe even "art".

The funny thing is the first scenario will get us more work, the second one will get us more acclaim.

It's dificult to do both and if you want to admire PR first admire him for his ability to hold his work at such a high and unique level.

That's a very hard trick to pull off.

JR
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 23, 2008, 11:13:32 am
Quote
If you work in commerce, any form of image making commerce, (including editorial) what you show, what you shoot, how you go about showing, shooting, deciding, limiting, expanding is probably the most daunting task any of us face.

The moment you load your book or website with your top 30 art images, you get a call from an agent or a client wanting to know if you can shoot, (fill in the blanks here) kids, men, sports, bras, sports bras, men's jeans, women's jeans, smiles, frowns, etc. etc. etc.

Digital has even complicated this process because we aren't completely locked in to what the final look of the image.

Today we are finishing a campaign in LA and just doing a quick overview of the images, I can take 10 images from the shoot and make a very commercial, though somewhat non unique presentation of the shoot, or just changing the selects and working them differently in post can produce 10 images that are different and more unique, maybe even "art".

The funny thing is the first scenario will get us more work, the second one will get us more acclaim.

It's dificult to do both and if you want to admire PR first admire him for his ability to hold his work at such a high and unique level.

That's a very hard trick to pull off.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197468\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So true. The difficulty CANNOT be overstated.  It strikes fear into the hearts of most, just look at the plethora of portfolio reviews being offered.    

Do you think PR being in Europe makes this hard trick any easier? What's your take on Paris?
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: James R Russell on May 23, 2008, 12:44:19 pm
Quote
So true. The difficulty CANNOT be overstated.  It strikes fear into the hearts of most, just look at the plethora of portfolio reviews being offered.     

Do you think PR being in Europe makes this hard trick any easier? What's your take on Paris?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197492\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I like working in Europe, but I like working in different places because it opens your mind, though don't think that any market in this world doesn't have hard edged,  over directed,  forced smiled commercial work because advertising thorughout the globe is very client oriented.

Yes, I probably agree that PR's asthetics come from a different place and I doubt seriously if he was raised in Vegas, or Phoenix that his work and view wouldn't be different and in a lot of ways more limited.

It's almost impossible to rate photographer's  because it is such a subject depended process.

this doens't mean Paolo is not a great talent because he is and it doesn't mean that with the same exact subjects everyone could produce the same result,  but his work would look a lot different with B grade commercial actresses from Van Nuys shot in a suburb.

The one thing Ive learned about working in different cities and countries is each one will only give up what they give up, in other words Paris will shoot and look much different than LA, or even New York, sometimes even if the shoot is studio based.

Photographers love to open up a magazine, a book, a website and say, "if only I had _______I could have shot that".   Maybe, maybe not, but the trick is not just shooting it, the real trick is having the ability to get into the room where you are allowed to shot it.

JR
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 23, 2008, 01:07:13 pm
Quote
Photographers love to open up a magazine, a book, a website and say, "if only I had _______I could have shot that".   Maybe, maybe not, but the trick is not just shooting it, the real trick is having the ability to get into the room where you are allowed to shot it.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197537\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Which completes the circle:  to get in that room to get that shot what do you show in your book?  Do you stay true to yourself or do you put the Verizon tear sheets in there?  

PR keeps it REAL REAL all the time, as far as I can tell from his published work.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Jason F on May 23, 2008, 01:20:27 pm
Thanks for the tip-off on the show, I happened to stop by and see it yesterday while I was on my way to a meeting to show my book.

I'd heard Paolo's name, and was vaguely familiar with his work. The show was good- there were several images that I loved, several I was indifferent to, and many which were very intriguing.

Thanks for posting the info on this guys, and the discussion- it's been an interesting read!
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: James R Russell on May 23, 2008, 01:48:35 pm
Quote
Which completes the circle:  to get in that room to get that shot what do you show in your book?  Do you stay true to yourself or do you put the Verizon tear sheets in there? 

PR keeps it REAL REAL all the time, as far as I can tell from his published work.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197542\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That's the trick, but you don't know, I don't know, only PR knows and maybe for he really doesn't know.

Until you know the exact circumstance of someone's career, it's very hard to judge.

I, like a lot of people sometimes want to clean house and throw up only twenty images of "MY" vision.  Then again I like to work and will 20 images keep me working, will 20 images add to my client base, up my client base or run everyone away?

These are very hard, diffuclt decisions and can be very costly if done wrong.

I have one nude session I love and I constantly take it off line, just because it can kill a lifestyle project and honestly not many people are waving around big checks for figure studies.

Personally, I don't try to think about it too much, I just work hard at working hard.

JR
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: 203 on May 23, 2008, 02:56:31 pm
Quote
this doens't mean Paolo is not a great talent because he is and it doesn't mean that with the same exact subjects everyone could produce the same result,  but his work would look a lot different with B grade commercial actresses from Van....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197537\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

One thing about Paolo which I find great is his apparent awe of the process. He talks about the studio and light being magic; the camera being magic. And he is thrilled by the surprises that occur each time he pulls back the polaroid. It's a real fascination with the light in his studio - even though he has shot thousands of times in the same room. (he was discussing this at the party the other night before the hordes showed up.)

I think Paulo has a way with his subjects which is absolutely special, and I don't think it is dependent on a beautiful subject (though he has plenty of those.) I have seen nearly all of his subjects shots many, many times by other photographers, and almost none of the other commercial images of these people inspire me to look and look some more at the images. Paolo's images I can look at for a long time - which for me is a rarity in the commercial realm.

My hat is off.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: rovanpera on May 23, 2008, 04:43:44 pm
Quote
Paolo Roversi is the great photographer. His work is art.
I wonder now polaroid stop.
How does he take photo? Switch to digital?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197357\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I seriously don't see that happening.

Maybe he starts painting?
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: narikin on May 23, 2008, 05:27:28 pm
Quote
Roversi is one of the greatest photographers of the 20th & 21st century, period. He does fashion with a soul like few others. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197262\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
(cough)

please go look at some books on Frank, Winogrand, Eggleston, Arbus, Robert Adams, etc. then the recent work of Judith Joy Ross, Alec Soth, Michael Schmidt, Gursky, Ruff, Wall, Djikstra, Struth... books on their work are easily found, or go to any museum /serious collection of photography and you'll find many of the names above, but not one Paolo Raversi image...

Its fashion photography, pure and simple. maybe he's good at it, and in return he gets extremely well paid for it, plus fame, nice lifestyle, through the velvet rope at nightclubs, and doubtless pretty boys/girls to hang around with. Of course that isn't enough, so most fashion photographers suddenly want to be confirmed as 'artists' too, and powerful publicists/pushy agents persuade galleries there's money to be made (probably true) so shows happen, presenting it as 'art'. Same story with Jurgen Teller - go to his exhibitions and see imitation Boris Mikhailov one show, then Araki the next... ho hum...

its fashion. end of story. enjoy it as that, and expect nothing more. I only object when someone is trying to sell it to me as profound photographic art... Mappelthorpe blows Roversi away, when it comes to meaningful portraiture, and his show of Polaroids (at the Whitney, 20 blocks up the street) is really worth looking at!
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 23, 2008, 11:01:50 pm
The list of photogs you cite are mostly great.  No bout a doubt it.  And I understand that you cannot see art in fashion in general and PR's work in particular.  That's OK too.  But, and I ask this in good faith, what do you think of Soth's Fashion Magazine?  Seems like a douchebag move, or is it brilliant because someone of Soth's statute steps down to shoot a fashion mag?  Or a fashion story for W, perhaps?  What about Phillip Lorca DiCorcia?  Fine art or fashion hacks?

This statement of yours:

"please go look at some books on Frank, Winogrand, Eggleston, Arbus, Robert Adams, etc. then the recent work of Judith Joy Ross, Alec Soth, Michael Schmidt, Gursky, Ruff, Wall, Djikstra, Struth... books on their work are easily found, or go to any museum /serious collection of photography and you'll find many of the names above, but not one Paolo Raversi image..."

is pretty weak.  Not only because it assumes that AMSP doesn't know who these cats are (he lives here in NYC, these photogs are shoved down your throat), but also, and mainly, because you are taking curators and collectors as the authority on taste.  These people are usually following the curve, not leading it.  


This statement:  "Its fashion photography, pure and simple. maybe he's good at it, and in return he gets extremely well paid for it, plus fame, nice lifestyle, through the velvet rope at nightclubs, and doubtless pretty boys/girls to hang around with. Of course that isn't enough, so most fashion photographers suddenly want to be confirmed as 'artists' too, and powerful publicists/pushy agents persuade galleries there's money to be made (probably true) so shows happen, presenting it as 'art'."

is not correct either.  PR is an older dude who lives for taking pictures.  He isn't doing rails off of model's asses at Chateau Marmot.  He got a show because the gallery can sell his images (they also sell PLdiCorcia) and his stuff is real nice.  I'm not saying the scenario you mentioned doesn't happen, but not with PR.  

The Maplethorp stuff was cool.  I've always liked it.  Those guys that got NEA grants were so real.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Murray Fredericks on May 24, 2008, 12:09:51 am
Quote
I woud say that the "New" is here.  I can feel it in NYC and LA, I can see it in the news.

Would be interested in some names here?

 I've read that Modernism is back, but that's not it.  It has to do with the passing of American power and the realization by most everyone that marketing, be it in polictics or business, is disconnected from the truth (or at least a truth people can agree on).  These will be exciting times.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197464\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yeah,

I think PM had to fall by the way, it eventually became disconnected from it's audience. Even after endless 'deconstruction' art still needed to communicate and when it loses it's ability to do so (and I hear the PM artists saying "well the audience should just have to work harder")...it dies.

I think elements of modernism are back - or maybe never left us, but now it has to be without the 'ideology'. Ideology is too rigid  - and get's people killed at its extreme.

I see a new path where intuition (that old chestnut) is allowed to play a role that sits above theory and politics....

Vision, beauty, quality and aiming for a kind of perfection (a perfection that is not 'utopian') all now seem to be back on the art agenda.

Murray
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Murray Fredericks on May 24, 2008, 12:17:40 am
Quote
Today we are finishing a campaign in LA and just doing a quick overview of the images, I can take 10 images from the shoot and make a very commercial, though somewhat non unique presentation of the shoot, or just changing the selects and working them differently in post can produce 10 images that are different and more unique, maybe even "art".


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197468\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

James,

this opens a can of worms about the 'intention' of that shoot. Is art then just a 'look' or is it more to do with purpose and aims at the time of shooting? Obviously we are all artists to some degree, but when and how does art with capital 'A' happen?

Murray
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: 203 on May 24, 2008, 10:23:32 am
Quote
when and how does art with capital 'A' happen?

Murray
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=197658\")

I think the art with a capital 'A' happens in your head. I am looking out the window right now, and I may see art in the pattern in the tree bark of a 50' pine across the road. Someone else just sees fire wood, or a target for shooting practice. Similarly, just because a curator decides to show [a href=\"http://blog.photoshelter.com/2008/05/bill-henson-at-the-opera-1.html]Bill Henson[/url] doesn't make it art, and it doesn't mean I am going to like it. (though I do happen to like Bill Henson, and I do consider it to be 'Art'...)
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: TMARK on May 24, 2008, 01:11:57 pm
Quote
I think the art with a capital 'A' happens in your head. I am looking out the window right now, and I may see art in the pattern in the tree bark of a 50' pine across the road. Someone else just sees fire wood, or a target for shooting practice. Similarly, just because a curator decides to show Bill Henson (http://blog.photoshelter.com/2008/05/bill-henson-at-the-opera-1.html) doesn't make it art, and it doesn't mean I am going to like it. (though I do happen to like Bill Henson, and I do consider it to be 'Art'...)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197710\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


What do Australians have against the Muppets?!  

The Anglo Saxon countries are out of their minds.  My father is an artist and was arrested in LA along with some collaborators for a piece they did on immigration.  This was 1991 or so.  I saw him being led away in cuffs by the Santa Monica Sheriff on CNN.  The ACLU got them off.

The Anglo countries tend to push this "outrage" every few years and it blows over.  Be it Giulliani and the elephant shit Virgin Mother at the Brooklyn Museaum, Sally Mann, Maplethorp, Piss Christ, it comes and goes.  It will all be forgeton and everyone will get good press from their respective communities.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: amsp on May 24, 2008, 01:31:34 pm
Quote
The list of photogs you cite are mostly great.  No bout a doubt it.  And I understand that you cannot see art in fashion in general and PR's work in particular.  That's OK too.  But, and I ask this in good faith, what do you think of Soth's Fashion Magazine?  Seems like a douchebag move, or is it brilliant because someone of Soth's statute steps down to shoot a fashion mag?  Or a fashion story for W, perhaps?  What about Phillip Lorca DiCorcia?  Fine art or fashion hacks?

This statement of yours:

"please go look at some books on Frank, Winogrand, Eggleston, Arbus, Robert Adams, etc. then the recent work of Judith Joy Ross, Alec Soth, Michael Schmidt, Gursky, Ruff, Wall, Djikstra, Struth... books on their work are easily found, or go to any museum /serious collection of photography and you'll find many of the names above, but not one Paolo Raversi image..."

is pretty weak.  Not only because it assumes that AMSP doesn't know who these cats are (he lives here in NYC, these photogs are shoved down your throat), but also, and mainly, because you are taking curators and collectors as the authority on taste.  These people are usually following the curve, not leading it. 
This statement:  "Its fashion photography, pure and simple. maybe he's good at it, and in return he gets extremely well paid for it, plus fame, nice lifestyle, through the velvet rope at nightclubs, and doubtless pretty boys/girls to hang around with. Of course that isn't enough, so most fashion photographers suddenly want to be confirmed as 'artists' too, and powerful publicists/pushy agents persuade galleries there's money to be made (probably true) so shows happen, presenting it as 'art'."

is not correct either.  PR is an older dude who lives for taking pictures.  He isn't doing rails off of model's asses at Chateau Marmot.  He got a show because the gallery can sell his images (they also sell PLdiCorcia) and his stuff is real nice.  I'm not saying the scenario you mentioned doesn't happen, but not with PR. 

The Maplethorp stuff was cool.  I've always liked it.  Those guys that got NEA grants were so real.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197646\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I do indeed know perfectly well who these photographers are, and for most part they are good at their game, but I'm personally not that impressed by many of them. Maybe I'm particularly impressed by photographers like PR, Avedon, Testino, Meisel, etc. because I'm in the same business and know just how much work there is behind them and how hard it is to create fashion and portraits with that kind of depth and feeling to them. So Narikin, I'm sorry that you are unable to appreciate the beauty in PR's work, but please stop shoving your narrow view and besserwisser attitude down my throat.
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: James R Russell on May 24, 2008, 01:34:31 pm
Quote
James,

this opens a can of worms about the 'intention' of that shoot. Is art then just a 'look' or is it more to do with purpose and aims at the time of shooting? Obviously we are all artists to some degree, but when and how does art with capital 'A' happen?

Murray
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197658\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Intentions.  That's a good word and it's our intentions that drive everything.

For commerce the goal is to be professional, for art the goal is to be unique and somewhere in the middle you can make a living.

Everyone makes decisions on how to move their career and their "art".

Usually it revolves around money.   Unless your start with a lot of it,  you develope your own style, sleep in your car and never budge an inch, then if the style happens to hit and your market is world wide you'll move up.  The other way is to become an investment banker, practice your photography on the side then in the second phase of your life start with everything in place.

It's a funny business but talent and effort usually comes through, though with commercial work it is always very difficult to manage that line of the artist's vision and the client's vision.

Sometimes it can be done, but usually it's done in a one from them, one for me, type of scenario, whether it be per shot or per project.

Still, your not going to get hired for a campaign of models on a pink background jumping in the air, and then decide hey, I've decided to shoot everybody topless in grainy black and white.

You can do this, but don't expect to see a check at the end of the month, so you just constantly balance the art and the commerce.

I think the most important thing is to keep moving, literally and figuratively.   I've never met a photographer that doesn't talk about moving to "another" city or country.  I just think it's in our nature to want to be stimulated by new things and maybe the thought that the grass is greener on the other side.

I've now lived and worked about everywhere and I could write a book on the misconceptions photographers have about other cities, clients and photographers.

I've seen a lot of aspiring photographers ruin their careers by constantly comparing their work next to others, and this really takes you nowhere.  

Sure it's important to be aware, but it's more important to just keep moving forward and moving forward always takes investment, risk and a lot of effort, oh yea, also to block out all the dis/mis information that you hear.

When we hire secondary crew in smaller markets, if you listen to them talk they are positive that if they lived in NY or LA they would earn double, when usually they are much more expensive than their contemparies in the larger markets.  On one shoot we invited a 3rd assistant to dinner and when we received his invoice, he charged us overrtime for being with us with the explanation, "I thought that's the way it worked in New York City".

Now as funny as that was it's quite telling.

Regardless,

The hard part of moving your art and career  is not shooting it, the hard part is deciding what to show and how to market it, or as you say your intentions.



JR
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: Murray Fredericks on May 24, 2008, 08:49:44 pm
Quote
What do Australians have against the Muppets?! 

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197735\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


lol

yes  - I thought his earlier work was better...
Title: paolo roversi exhibit wed night in NYC
Post by: 203 on May 25, 2008, 10:25:16 pm
Some interesting tidbits from Paolo:

http://www.paoloroversi.com/images/pdf/photodistrict.pdf (http://www.paoloroversi.com/images/pdf/photodistrict.pdf)

http://www.paoloroversi.com/images/pdf/sundaytele.pdf (http://www.paoloroversi.com/images/pdf/sundaytele.pdf)

http://www.paoloroversi.com/pages/reviews.html (http://www.paoloroversi.com/pages/reviews.html)