Terry Richardson - Photographer

[Zimdor]

Seeing a "male's DNA" (as a previous poster put it) does not necessarily mean its p*rn. Rankin does it, others do it as well. There is much fine art out there featuring nudity. Those who claim that "all fashion sexuality must be suggested instead of shown for it not to be p*rn" are usually cultural conservatives.

Of course, how you compose a picture affects its artistic merits. Terry Richardson often crosses (or comes close to crossing) the line between artistic nudity and "true" p*rn. Except in all ad campaigns I've seen done by him, which often are "raunchy" but really aren't p*rn.

What gets me personally about Richardson is his continual use of a 35mm auto-focus pocket camera . In a Fashion Television interview, he makes the comment that he does this "to show that anyone can do this". Whether its an indication of his technical photographic skill or not is the real question.

Anyway, he does do some impressive ad campaigns. And I'm sure the Richardson family name has opened several doors for him in the fashion industry. Just hope we can eventually see some work from him using a real camera some day .

 

[leloop]

TR is just so boring. His pictures pretty much look all the same. I used to like these sisley pictures(and I still do) but I dont think that its Terrys achievement that this campaign looks great. Nikko Amandonico did a great job by choosing the pictures and directing the postproduction. If my grandma would take a thousand pictures with a professional model and great styling and good postproduction she would produce a few great pictures as well. I dont think that anybody will be interested in TRs pictures anymore in a year because he`s just repeating himself and he is not as interesting as Teller who has more substance in his work. (Actually I dont think that TR has any)

 

[hugobossdaria]

to me terry is not an talented artist

 

[morgan38]

Honestly, I don't see that his stuff as art. Fine line between art and p*rn my ***, seeing a male's dna (for lack of a more polite terminology) in a photograph is not art, I repeat is NOT art, it's p*rn. The photos he does take that aren't of graphic sexual situations look like friggin polaroids to me, where's the skill? Where's the technique in that? Sex in fashion and photography is only effective when it is suggested or subverted and he obviously has no talent for inuendo.

I heard that an agency in London took polaroids of it's girls and then said that Terry Richardson took them.

 

[.francesca]

i would like to comment on this guy but i can't see any of the images you guys posted and i can't get into his website on any of the 3 servers i tried (safari, explorer and the one i'm on now, firefox)

are there any other sites that have his work or do you know how i can see it?

this is weird.

 

[.francesca]

well, i found some sisley ads he did.

i remember seeing this one ^ and thinking, wow, those pompoms are sure strategically placed!

i like this one ^.

i also think these are pretty ^.

 

[morgan38]

I like a few of his Sisley ads, but like someone else said, the photography itself isn't very inspiring. With a great sylist and production team, alomst anyone could have produced some pictures like that.

 

[.francesca]

^ i totally agree with you, i think his pictures (that i've seen) are pretty boring. but by that rationale, you could say that exact same thing about almost anything/anyone.

 

[satinella]

Am I the only one who cannot access to his website? It says "forbidden" or "you don't have access"?

 

[hugobossdaria]

his website is disgusting anyway

 

[motaman8165]

HE AMAZING he has a style and look all his own.I love his book

 

[arlekindearrabal]

i love his point-and-shoot style (he is, after all, blind as a bat ) ... i also like his twisted, semi-perverse view on sexuality

 

[Spike413]

The one time I can say I actually liked Terry's work was his s/s 02 campaign for Gucci. It was very atypical in many ways. The quality of the photographs were much better then his other stuff in terms of technique, lighting, poses etc. The landscape was quite beautiful which was a big part of their appeal, and there was no dirtyness to it, none of his seedy signature that always seems to resemble kiddy p*rn no matter what the content.

probably the only decent pictures he's ever taken.

 

[satinella]

his website is disgusting anyway

Well, this is your opinion, me I liked it. But it seems to not work anymore.

 

[sofialuv]

I am with you Satinella.
I also like the website...I like photos that are more erotic and sexual and i think that he does it very well. He has a semi-perverted look on things that works really well in my opinion.
I think that there is nothing to be schocked, it´s a bit heavy seen in pictures but it´s just sex really...

 

[henriette]

well, i found some sisley ads he did.

i remember seeing this one ^ and thinking, wow, those pompoms are sure strategically placed

i like this one ^.

i also think these are pretty ^.

I love his work! I have that sisley ad with the ***/grass on my screensaver slideshow. he is an artist - there is thought behind his work, and it certainly pleases my crtitcal eyes...

 

[coralmilk]

I like Terry. I don't think he's pretentious, at all. I think he sucks and he knows it. That's why people actually care for his work. It's like kitsch, or mary kate olsen.

He can actually take great photographs but he chooses not to. He chooses to do what he wants to. Take crappy p*rn-like photos and sleep with 14 year old models.

A lot of people would like to do that, but they just don't think it's correct and they don't admit it. Well he doesn't really care, because he's bad anyway.

I mean, look at him. His face explains it all. Seriously, that man is so bad that's he's great.

IMO. of course.

x

 

[Estella*]

if anyone is interested, he was talking to artist vanessa beecroft for the recent issue of german vogue and here's a link to a showstudio.com discussion:
http://www.showstudio.com/forum/topic.php/1063

 

[helena]

I like Terry. I don't think he's pretentious, at all. I think he sucks and he knows it. That's why people actually care for his work. It's like kitsch, or mary kate olsen.

He can actually take great photographs but he chooses not to. He chooses to do what he wants to. Take crappy p*rn-like photos and sleep with 14 year old models.

A lot of people would like to do that, but they just don't think it's correct and they don't admit it. Well he doesn't really care, because he's bad anyway.

I mean, look at him. His face explains it all. Seriously, that man is so bad that's he's great.

IMO. of course.

x

I am sorry but I really don't understand your post. so he can take great photos but he chooses not to - ok so why do you like his photos? Thats just makes no sense as I see it. ...and whats is the analogy with mary kate olsen....how is he like kitsch or mary kate olsen?

 

[hugobossdaria]

I like Terry. I don't think he's pretentious, at all. I think he sucks and he knows it. That's why people actually care for his work. It's like kitsch, or mary kate olsen.

He can actually take great photographs but he chooses not to. He chooses to do what he wants to. Take crappy p*rn-like photos and sleep with 14 year old models.

A lot of people would like to do that, but they just don't think it's correct and they don't admit it. Well he doesn't really care, because he's bad anyway.

I mean, look at him. His face explains it all. Seriously, that man is so bad that's he's great.

IMO. of course.

x

What are you talking about ?