Now that's type-casting based on a specific period in my life. It also shows that people remember what they see and not what they might have read. In my website I do remark that I regret the loss of pretty well all my fashion pics, sold to past clients or destroyed by myself in the final clean-out before leaving for the Mediterranean and pastures new.
The idea that one's negatives might, in some future years, have a personal value, never crossed my mind back in late '80 when the move was being planned (planned - now that's a certain amount of artistic licence!). There may have been examples of such in the States, but the tiny Scottish world was devoid of such values apart from a few historically important images of life as she was lived, but that was all about ships, houses and slum kids. Consequently, the public image of yours truly is represented by more or less a single genre, which I think is a shame, but too late for tears, as the honey trap said when it closed.
No, my liking for Russ's image is increased in b/w now that I can see it. And the reason isn't at all to do with thoughts of the lady sans clobber; it is all to do with the half-hidded face under the brim of the hat; the air of mystery and the shadows of Sarah Moon that I detect, which just goes to show that even a shooter with little interest in fashion, per se, can venture into its atmosphere, as innocent as the day that he was born. But of course, all that Sarah, myself or Russ does is react to the ambience. But first we have to see it.
Really, the difference that divides the colour vote from the b/w is one of genre perception: I see fashion where others see indoor street; where I don't want to see detail, the others do.
I would love to hear Fred's take on this, being both artist by training and fashion photographer by current professional experience.
Rob C
