Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Discussing Photographic Styles => Topic started by: jjj on October 19, 2015, 07:14:53 am
-
Dougie Wallace AKA Glasweegee has moved on from cheap Blackpool to the far more upmarket location Knightsbridge in his series Harrodsburg (http://www.dougiewallace.com/harrodsburg/).
Not everyone is a fan (http://www.bjp-online.com/2015/10/qatar-responds-to-dougie-wallaces-photographs-of-britains-wealth-tourism/) of his work.
-
He has balls.
-
Odd how the 'hate the rich' thing can't help rearing its envious head on LuLa.
Thank goodness some folks have the disposable income; how sad and more ugly a world sans Rolex, Ferrari, Riva etc. and how many more very skilled craftsmen would be out of work or left to repaint some effin' bridge from dusk until dawn. Oh, might as well ban Leica, too, not to mention beheading Lik.
I despair of this bloody world of hatreds.
Rob C
-
How cruel - mocking the sub-humans like that.
But what superb photography.
-
Martin Parr on Steroids.
Or more Bruce Gilden ?
-
I'm all for mocking those who suppose to be our betters because they stole or inherited lots of money, it's the tradition of satire that goes way back (if I say Rabelais and Swift or even Chaucer, I'm sure someone with a classics education will trump me with an ancient Greek).
Referring to anyone as "sub-human" however, makes me very uncomfortable indeed.
-
Good photography? I think it sucks. The only talent on display is a brass neck. But hell, soon he'll be rich too...
Rob C
-
Odd how the 'hate the rich' thing can't help rearing its envious head on LuLa.
Thank goodness some folks have the disposable income; how sad and more ugly a world sans Rolex, Ferrari, Riva etc. and how many more very skilled craftsmen would be out of work or left to repaint some effin' bridge from dusk until dawn. Oh, might as well ban Leica, too, not to mention beheading Lik.
I despair of this bloody world of hatreds.
Actually Rob, this is nothing to do with hating the rich.
Wallace's previous works include Hen + Stag nights at Blackpool and taxi drivers in India, subjects that are polar opposites of this recent work.
He's just documenting aspects of the human condition. Not all of it to my taste, but interesting none the less.
-
Putting aside the moral/philosophical question, who would buy the prints? They're not flattering, so the subjects aren't going to want them (unless they get the negatives!) and I can't see myself wanting any of them on my wall.
-
Just because you don't like them, does not mean others do not.
His previous work ended up in book sand he gets exhibitions of his work and lots of attention.
I'd be surprised if many of the LuLa crowd liked them to be honest. The preference here is for traditional/pretty photographic work.
This is more fine art, which doesn't seem to go down so well.
-
Actually Rob, this is nothing to do with hating the rich.
Wallace's previous works include Hen + Stag nights at Blackpool and taxi drivers in India, subjects that are polar opposites of this recent work.
He's just documenting aspects of the human condition. Not all of it to my taste, but interesting none the less.
http://www.bjp-online.com/2015/10/qatar-responds-to-dougie-wallaces-photographs-of-britains-wealth-tourism/
I repost your link.
Rob C
-
Just because you don't like them, does not mean others do not.
His previous work ended up in book sand he gets exhibitions of his work and lots of attention.
I'd be surprised if many of the LuLa crowd liked them to be honest. The preference here is for traditional/pretty photographic work.
This is more fine art, which doesn't seem to go down so well.
I can't decide if that's a paradox or an oxymoron; however, as the 'work' is artless, in-your-face junk, I feel you're stretching the meaning of fine art a little far.
Rob C
-
I can't decide if that's a paradox or an oxymoron; however, as the 'work' is artless, in-your-face junk, I feel you're stretching the meaning of fine art a little far.
That's the kind of reaction I expect from most LuLa members when it comes to fine art. As I said above, such work is usually not to people's taste on here.
-
I'm not much of a Glasweegee fan…IMO his apparent contempt for his subjects is too blatant. Martin Parr, I think, negotiates the amusement-bemusement-disdain nexus more effectively.
Even better is Edward Burtynsky. Now much of his work is "landscape" but his aim is very different to most photographers working in that arena. His current book, Water, is a fine case-in-point. Striking, often quite beautiful, photos of…pollution. He just takes the photos & presents them, leaving it up to you to realize what they are and what you think—if anything—about the larger issues involved.
-Dave-
-
Seems to me that it is well above in your face junk. Many of them seem to have strong underlying composition which underpins the in your face side. Personally I don't much like the very strident colours, the constant use of flash (at least I believe that's the case) but I do admire how in a twinkling he gets good composition as well as some social commentary or a comment on the human condition.
I can never understand how these guys decide when to press the button. A seemingly random shot is in fact quite carefully composed. I assume the flash frees him from worries over exposure.
I think his biggest weakness is that he is part of the image being so in their faces but he works well with it :)
Added later: No doubt this known to others but new to me http://www.ideastap.com/IdeasMag/the-knowledge/dougie-wallace-shoreditch-wild-life
-
What great in-your-face style, they're almost paparazzi in feel.
Well done.
-
What great in-your-face style, they're almost paparazzi in feel.
Well done.
No, they are paparazzo in feel, and that's the trouble. Intrusive, designed to make the subjects victim. In fact, everything that makes me ever-doubtful about 'street'.
Rob C
-
The couple in the orange car are victims? They are revelling in the attention. http://www.dougiewallace.com/0f07pk7lx34xzyj22m7ii7yufm3eqx
This group shot which I think is wonderful - they're not victims http://www.dougiewallace.com/uhorue9hdpmhsib1pcpa68gcs228t7
But I do know what you mean some are might be seen in that way although I'm not sure just how much sympathy I have for some of them which I suppose is my character flaw.
-
No, they are paparazzo in feel, and that's the trouble. Intrusive, designed to make the subjects victim. In fact, everything that makes me ever-doubtful about 'street'.
Why would one photographer's work which is actually fairly atypical of street photography, make you doubtful about an entire genre?
-
The couple in the orange car are victims? They are revelling in the attention. http://www.dougiewallace.com/0f07pk7lx34xzyj22m7ii7yufm3eqx
This group shot which I think is wonderful - they're not victims http://www.dougiewallace.com/uhorue9hdpmhsib1pcpa68gcs228t7
But I do know what you mean some are might be seen in that way although I'm not sure just how much sympathy I have for some of them which I suppose is my character flaw.
I think what is actually most interesting about this particular project is that the subjects are very different from the usual ones. Usually it's the poor and disadvantaged that are featured, rarely does anyone complain those people are being taken advantage of.
-
Ever visited the range finder forum? They seem to agonise over this quite a bit.
-
Glad to hear it.
Not a rangefinder fan myself, so wouldn't hang out there.
-
The couple in the orange car are victims? They are revelling in the attention. http://www.dougiewallace.com/0f07pk7lx34xzyj22m7ii7yufm3eqx
This group shot which I think is wonderful - they're not victims http://www.dougiewallace.com/uhorue9hdpmhsib1pcpa68gcs228t7
But I do know what you mean some are might be seen in that way although I'm not sure just how much sympathy I have for some of them which I suppose is my character flaw.
All these people are victims because of the context into which they will be placed.
Being very rich doesn't bless you with great physical looks; especially for a woman, knowing full well that with all that money sloshing about, your 'mate' is going to be hunted with a vengeance by every little glamour puss with an eye on a bigger bank balance, whatever she might be required to do to get it, the pressure to do whatever you can to compete with said tart is irresistible: men being men, and the rich even more so in many cases, a girl has to do what a girl has to do. That the results can be grotesque is par for the course, especially as the years roll on.
Perhaps a more fitting emotion would be one of sympathy. Being very rich isn't all rose petals; the higher you get, the harder the fall.
Revelling in the attention: who can tell why people wear the expression they do; it could be something on the radio, a joke just heard or exchanged... a pap who appears out of the blue doesn't seem to be the likely cause... though perhaps derision for the lowly job and occupation of the guy with the camera might be reason enough. Who knows? I don't any more than does anyone else not privy to the moment.
Rob C
-
Hmm, not sure I can agree with all this. Focus on the couple in the orange and very expensive car. If you don't want to be 'seen' and have others notice that badge of wealth then don't drive it around in the worst possible environment for them. In the nicest possible way they are revelling in their affluence as indicated by the car, they surely want to be noticed and hence looked at. I know it's a generalisation but I think as such it's likely to be true.
I have an old Jaguar which is worth at best 800 quid but it attracts attention as it's lovely and it always puts a smile on my face to drive it. I know it will possibly prompt a reaction and if I don't want people to look I use my other car. The reaction is usually a benign 'nice car' sometimes what a prat for driving a lump like that and I sometimes get cut up on the road. I should care? Maybe I'm projecting my own feeling onto others.
As for the bit about women I'm not qualified to comment but once again - don't be ostentatious if you don't want the attention or as our American cousins might say - suck it up. I don't actually understand that expression but I think I have used it correctly.
I don't accept that they are victims and if they feel they are then there are simple things they can do to avoid attention. They do at least have a choice whereas the homeless do not and I do feel that they are sometimes victims.
-
Perhaps a more fitting emotion would be one of sympathy. Being very rich isn't all rose petals; the higher you get, the harder the fall.
Really Rob, really? :o That sort of comment is what you expect in satire of those the extreme right who despise poor people.
Those who never get to bottom rung of the ladder through circumstances beyond their control they are the ones who deserve sympathy, not those who had everything and blew it. The rich tend to stay rich as money begets money on the whole.
Heck if you are rich and not happy, then give the money that is doing you no good to worthy causes.
-
I'm intrigued by the photo of the woman with the bandaged had and the Sotheby sack. She doesn't seem to fit in really.
It's interesting to think about what people get from people photography:
-esthetic pleasure (Weston, Minor White, Mapplethorpe)
-some sort of percieved insight into a famous person (Annie Leibovitz of John Cleese)
-memory of a friend/lover/family member
-fantasy/lust (Helmut Newton... of Charlotte Rampling for eg)
-empathy/sympathy (Dorothea Lange's depression era photos
-Curiosity (Paparazzi)
I have a feeling the Harrodsburg fall into another category: moral superiority. Ie, "you may have more money than me, but you've got bad taste and you're fat"
Which is why I wonder who would want these on their wall.
They may of course be "art", which justifies all.
-
Driving a Lambo may be something huge for you - it certainly would have been for me when I was young enough to make having one a worthwhile thing rather than a liability, but either way, an impossible concept for me. However, driving a Lambo when you can buy any number of them is far from being the same thing. It's a similar thing with yachts: had a close friend who owned a 25m Italian yacht. We went from here in Mallorca down to Gibraltar in it, and I thought it wonderful; however, tied up in Torrevieja, I watched as a couple in a smaller yacht half the size at around 42ft came in: she was doing her thing with lines up front, and he was doing his with throttles up on the top. To me, that smaller boat was where it was at: big enough to go most places along the European coast in reasonable weather, handled by two, whereas the bigger boat required crew and the attendant loss of privacy... But the point is this: the same owner didn't want to take those 25m of glamour to Porto Cervo, because there, he felt he would have been the equivalent of the smaller yacht in Torrrevieja... you see what I mean about the relatively cheap Lambo?
On that level, what the 'poor people' might or might not think of someone in a Lambo hardly register on the Lambo owner's radar: they don't exist, are practically invisible. Unless they leap out of the gutter and hit them with a couple of flashguns. On the other hand, I'm speaking about old money. Nouveau might fit your typecasting better, but is there much of that in the Middle East?
At least, that's the lesson life seems to have taught me.
-
Really Rob, really? :o That sort of comment is what you expect in satire of those the extreme right who despise poor people.
Those who never get to bottom rung of the ladder through circumstances beyond their control they are the ones who deserve sympathy, not those who had everything and blew it. The rich tend to stay rich as money begets money on the whole.
Heck if you are rich and not happy, then give the money that is doing you no good to worthy causes.
jjj, you are just playing devil's advocate.
Rob C
-
I'm intrigued by the photo of the woman with the bandaged had and the Sotheby sack. She doesn't seem to fit in really.
It's interesting to think about what people get from people photography:
-esthetic pleasure (Weston, Minor White, Mapplethorpe)
-some sort of percieved insight into a famous person (Annie Leibovitz of John Cleese)
-memory of a friend/lover/family member
-fantasy/lust (Helmut Newton... of Charlotte Rampling for eg)
-empathy/sympathy (Dorothea Lange's depression era photos
-Curiosity (Paparazzi)
I have a feeling the Harrodsburg fall into another category: moral superiority. Ie, "you may have more money than me, but you've got bad taste and you're fat"
Which is why I wonder who would want these on their wall.
They may of course be "art", which justifies all.
That's the best last word, at which point I surrender! Irrefutable logic.
;-)
Rob C
-
Well RobC I suspect we won't agree but I'll bow to your greater experience but when I have met decently wealthy people they seem quite keen to let everyone know their 'status'.
If driving a Lambo is not something huge then why on earth would you do it? Not an easy drive, not a practical drive and I'll bet they're not that comfortable so why would you have one in London especially if not to wear as a badge of wealth?
I'd have said all the oil wealth is nouveau riche unless I have missed your point. The richest man I knew could trace his title straight back to Somebody or other Grey around when Henry the Eighth was monarch.
-
It's a similar thing with yachts: had a close friend who owned a 25m Italian yacht. We went from here in Mallorca down to Gibraltar in it, and I thought it wonderful; however, tied up in Torrevieja, I watched as a couple in a smaller yacht half the size at around 42ft came in: she was doing her thing with lines up front, and he was doing his with throttles up on the top. To me, that smaller boat was where it was at: big enough to go most places along the European coast in reasonable weather, handled by two, whereas the bigger boat required crew and the attendant loss of privacy... But the point is this: the same owner didn't want to take those 25m of glamour to Porto Cervo, because there, he felt he would have been the equivalent of the smaller yacht in Torrrevieja
Obviously a somewhat insecure person.
I've met the rich and/or famous on plenty of occasions. They are just humans like everyone else, except with more money.
-
Obviously a somewhat insecure person.
I've met the rich and/or famous on plenty of occasions. They are just humans like everyone else, except with more money.
Probably we are all insecure, but only in relation to those even richer.
My point, really, in that driving those Lambos in England isn't to impress you and me, it's to keep up with the rest of the M.E. lot, and that takes a lot of money. When all of them can buy those toys, it creates its own problems, too. What can you do next to stand out?
Rob C
-
Probably we are all insecure, but only in relation to those even richer.
Why would someone having more money than me make feel insecure?
My point, really, in that driving those Lambos in England isn't to impress you and me, it's to keep up with the rest of the M.E. lot, and that takes a lot of money. When all of them can buy those toys, it creates its own problems, too. What can you do next to stand out?
That's very easy, don't do the same cliched and boring things as everyone else.
-
That's very easy, don't do the same cliched and boring things as everyone else.
If it were easy, not everyone else would be doing them. Humans are subject to their compulsions.
-
If it were easy, not everyone else would be doing them. Humans are subject to their compulsions.
Not to mention that those same 'boring things' like ownership of nice goodies can be very satisfying on its own account, regardless of how it does or does not impact on those without those goodies...
For example, in this borrowed image of unknown source (used only for reference!), I find exactly the same little Fiat X1/9 that I had for almost two years, until I discovered corrosion on the wheels due to badly-fitted factory balance weights: cathodic reaction due to contact between two different metals and delightful Scottish winter road salts! I got rid of it when Fiat advised they had been giving free replacements, but that the dealership hadn't bothered to tell me, and the offer had ended. Sweet.
Anyway, I could put two monoblocs and stands in the front trunk, along with tripod and camera case. The rear trunk was very good for cooking your food in, and just as long as you didn't mind the melted mat, it would probably have tasted fine. Only problem was there was no room for a radio anywhere and the thing should have been given the Alfa Sud Boxer engine instead of the sewing machine one it had. But it looked beautiful, and would have been perfect for the slow driving I now do here in Spain. Of course I'd have been forced to move away from the coast or find it a pile of dust in the car park one morning.
Maybe that was one of the 'boring things' then.
;-.)
Rob C
(http://www.roma57.com/uploads/4/2/8/7/4287956/9553888_orig.jpg)
P.S. When you removed the targa top and stowed it away under the front hood, it kept you free of draughts even in winter. Pity Fiat screwed it up; should have been built properly and then give the right power plant. Delorean looked the wrong way.
-
You may, or may not, disagree politically with Glasweegee's essay which takes the pish out of "conspicuous consumption", but his use of photography to make his point has, in my opinion, been done exceedingly well. He makes what he obviously considers to be sub-human morons look even more ridiculous than they really are. In terms of pure photo-journalism, that has to be adjudged a success.
-
He makes what he obviously considers to be sub-human morons look even more ridiculous than they really are. In terms of pure photo-journalism, that has to be adjudged a success.
That's a particularly modern definition of "journalism".
Rob: I had a Toyota MR2, the first version that was only about 5% bigger than an X-1/9. Similar issues, had to drive with the sun-roof popped open in order to have room for my head, easiest way to get out in some circumstances was on all fours. One of the few cars to which I felt any emotional attachment though.
-
If it were easy, not everyone else would be doing them. Humans are subject to their compulsions.
It's very to not follow the crowd. Just don't do/wear/buy the same thing.
Most people prefer to be like everyone else though, which is quite different.
-
That's a particularly modern definition of "journalism".
Rob: I had a Toyota MR1, the first version that was only about 5% bigger than an X-1/9. Similar issues, had to drive with the sun-roof popped open in order to have room for my head, easiest way to get out in some circumstances was on all fours. One of the few cars to which I felt any emotional attachment though.
I remember those! My nephew had a red MR2 which he kept a short while - I think he found it difficult to understand the dynamics of mid-engine weight distribution. In reality, despite the X1/9's rotten power output, it was the car which I drove the fastest I ever drove any car. Took a motorway to get there, but it eventually did. I wouldn't have trusted a 911, even had I been able to afford one. Engineer however you may, a heavy tail is a pendulum in waiting. IMO!
The Fiat had plenty of headroom - I was 5'11.75" in those days. I am not today. ;-(
Rob C
-
It's very to not follow the crowd. Just don't do/wear/buy the same thing.
Most people prefer to be like everyone else though, which is quite different.
So if you're loaded, what, apart from Ferrari, Lambo, Maserati, Aston Martin, Koenigsegg do you buy? Bugatti? Now that is ridiculous, as much so as McLaren! Obviously, you can't buy Mercedes, and Porsche is a little, well, pedestrian at best.
;-)
Rob C
-
So if you're loaded, what, apart from Ferrari, Lambo, Maserati, Aston Martin, Koenigsegg do you buy? Bugatti? Now that is ridiculous, as much so as McLaren! Obviously, you can't buy Mercedes, and Porsche is a little, well, pedestrian at best.
Why even buy a car? That's the most obviously banal thing to do when you get rich. Besides, they're all a bit useless for putting my bikes in.
Also if I want some speed thrills, a car is a bit lame when you are used to two wheels.
-
I remember those! My nephew had a red MR2 which he kept a short while - I think he found it difficult to understand the dynamics of mid-engine weight distribution. In reality, despite the X1/9's rotten power output, it was the car which I drove the fastest I ever drove any car. Took a motorway to get there, but it eventually did. I wouldn't have trusted a 911, even had I been able to afford one. Engineer however you may, a heavy tail is a pendulum in waiting. IMO!
A 911 is a triumph of engineering over design. ;)
-
A 911 is a triumph of engineering over design. ;)
The very worst Triumph design of them all was the TR7: front half half-designed by one person and the rear completely forgotten until too late.
Yuk! Worse yet in yellow.
Rob C
-
That's a particularly modern definition of "journalism".
Not really.
There is no reason why photo-journalism should not be satirical. The writers of the fortnightly magazine "Private Eye" are every bit as much "journalists" as their contemporaries who contribute to the "straight" news media. (I placed "straight" in quotation marks because, obviously, it is as bent as a twisted kilt-pin.)
-
Not really.
There is no reason why photo-journalism should not be satirical. The writers of the fortnightly magazine "Private Eye" are every bit as much "journalists" as their contemporaries who contribute to the "straight" news media. (I placed "straight" in quotation marks because, obviously, it is as bent as a twisted kilt-pin.)
Indeed. Satire can get to the heart of the truth more adeptly than 'straight' journalism can most of the time.
-
Jimbo; jjj
I think 'satire' is a very euphemistic (if not optimistic) word for this stuff.
Rob C
-
I was talking about satire in general, not Glasweegee.
-
So if you're loaded, what, apart from Ferrari, Lambo, Maserati, Aston Martin, Koenigsegg do you buy? Bugatti? Now that is ridiculous, as much so as McLaren! Obviously, you can't buy Mercedes, and Porsche is a little, well, pedestrian at best.
;-)
Maybe you understand that accumulating stuff & peacocking with it is an absurd & pointless activity. Not all men—and it is overwhelmingly men who engage in this—are 13 year olds in adult bodies.
Pro tip: for every wealthy fool with his Ferraris there's at least one more sensible person driving well under the radar.
-Dave-
-
Maybe you understand that accumulating stuff & peacocking with it is an absurd & pointless activity. Not all men—and it is overwhelmingly men who engage in this—are 13 year olds in adult bodies.
Pro tip: for every wealthy fool with his Ferraris there's at least one more sensible person driving well under the radar.
-Dave-
Oh well, must be nice to be poor like me and have a Fiesta; didn't know I was so lucky and accidentally hip. But, if I still had the X1/9 I could have driven under anything...!
;-)
Rob C