US Vogue September 2024 : Blake Lively & Hugh Jackman by Baz Luhrmann

[alwaysademo]

@tigerrouge I get where you're coming from.

I don't think it's necessary to even defend him, we all love the guy. I'm just going to say that so much of what is relevant today is still under his influence and should be rightfully accredited to him. He's been fashion's ghost editor for a good 3 decades now. The casting trend you see on the runways with throwback casting? Meisel did it first in the early 90s with Twiggy, Veruschka, Lauren Hutton, etc. The post that got the most interaction that EJG did recently? A Meisel tribute. After Karl passed Meisel got his Chanel campaign with Marine Vacth, Marion Cotillard and recently he replaced Jean Paul Goude for Chance. The other American I could think of who did a Chanel fragrance campaign was none other than Avedon, Catherine Deneuve, No 5. Sure he's copied Avedon and Penn if we're talking purely photography. His originality isn't photography though, it's fashion. He's more engaged in the actual fashion in his photographs than the both of them combined and that's just a fact.

Except for his recent exposition 1993 (which was very focused) I'm against the idea of a retrospective, it's for people who can't drive numbers anymore. He still does and churns out new work every other month and this is his 4th decade. All his contemporaries have been cancelled left and right, and here he is. I just want him to put out something brand new. Give him the right girl, the right budget, clothes that match his level of expertise, the same way they treated Penn for example and see what he gives.

 

[avonlea002]

I just want him to put out something brand new. Give him the right girl, the right budget, clothes that match his level of expertise, the same way they treated Penn for example and see what he gives.

Penn's work never declined in quality. He has kept his standards incredibly high till the very last day, even if that meant less work. Same can't be said about Meisel who keeps churning out lazy, badly retouched images. I don't think budget or clothes is the issue here, he is charging a lot and can probably ask for any garment. He simply doesn't care anymore.

 

[GivenchyAddict]

So why not mention the name of person who took the photographs and credit Meisel as the creative director?

Exactly what MAS does as an example or even Carine. It hurts nobody and truly promotes the person who did the job.

 

[alwaysademo]

Penn's work never declined in quality. He has kept his standards incredibly high till the very last day, even if that meant less work. Same can't be said about Meisel who keeps churning out lazy, badly retouched images. .

Penn was committed to his artistic pursuit, but if you refuse to engage with what's actually going on in fashion, the commerce side, you're NOT a fashion photographer.
They all looked down on fashion when they all benefitted enormously from it.
Penn's best fashion work, it has to be said, was his work with Phyllis Posnick. Someone who cheered and walked through glass for him. I love Penn if it's not already clear, but his work in the late 60's-70's though had all the key elements of high fashion, weren't the best. If all you do your whole life is take pictures of girls and dresses, at some point your enthusiasm starts to fade. All the greats went through an ennui period.
Meisel gave fashion a directive. From casting to styling, the attitude of fashion today, much of it was distilled through the eye and work of Steven Meisel. His view was 360 degree and his control on the final products was total. The ecosystem that flourishes under his watch, no other photographer in fashion has ever achieved.

I don't think budget or clothes is the issue here, he is charging a lot and can probably ask for any garment. He simply doesn't care anymore

You can tell he does care when he's excited. He just doesn't have anything left to prove. I take into account the amount of backlash he has received ever since the 80's. And he has maintained his spot for how many years, not pretending to be anything more than he is. Didn't put out a book or a show for decades, he exists firmly within the rectangular frame of the magazine page and that commitment to fashion... sorry but Penn could never.

 

[blueorchid]

You can tell he does care when he's excited. He just doesn't have anything left to prove.

Maybe I'm just not on the correct wavelength to get Meisel in 2024, which is weird.. because he and Avedon really got me into fashion/fashion photography (I still remember frantically hunting for that totally random 317 And Counting book he released in 2009, to this day I have no recollection of how/where I bought it lol). But I don't think I can remember the last time I felt he was "excited" in an editorial? When would you say that was and how do you notice it?

To me, in 2024, Meisel has become a parody of himself. It's even started to tarnish how I view how older work.

 

[alwaysademo]

Maybe I'm just not on the correct wavelength to get Meisel in 2024, which is weird.. because he and Avedon really got me into fashion/fashion photography (I still remember frantically hunting for that totally random 317 And Counting book he released in 2009, to this day I have no recollection of how/where I bought it lol). But I don't think I can remember the last time I felt he was "excited" in an editorial? When would you say that was and how do you notice it?

To me, in 2024, Meisel has become a parody of himself. It's even started to tarnish how I view how older work.

I know that book but it's more a Vogue Italia thing than a Meisel thing. You wouldn't need the book if you actually have the bulk of the issues.

I got excited earlier this year with the very plain images he did with miss Lulu Tenney for Dolce & Gabbana. I find them very confident simple images. I like his work with Toteme moderately, a new collaborator. I still love his first British Vogue cover with Adwoah, it's one of the most glamorous images I've ever seen. I loved one of his last editorial for VI that no one seems to care about, with the older Italian ladies and Erin and Yasmin, it's very mature for him. I like that Meisel learnt from European collaborators, therefore his work although very straightforward & American has that luxe feel to it that is more about attitude than product.

I respect your opinion. I just don't agree. He does put out bad referential work, but at this point I'm okay with that if that's what it takes to push him to the next level.

 

[blueorchid]

I know that book but it's more a Vogue Italia thing than a Meisel thing. You wouldn't need the book if you actually have the bulk of the issues.

I just mentioned the book because it proved how "devoted" I was to Meisel at that time. There's no way I definitely could have had purchased any of the back issues in my life before then. Most were before my buying years. For me, there was a genuine pleasure learning about fashion history via Meisel's editorials, seeing his editorials and then the actual inspirations were major a-ha!! moments.

I agree that Adowah's cover for Vogue UK was great, I was very happy to see that cover. I also forgot about that particular issue of VI you mentioned... and I own that too and I'm sure I bought it for that editorial. I'm much less into fashion advertisements these days, so the Toteme and Dolce & Gabbana ones aren't things I'd try to purposely notice, but they are nice enough.

Something else that has (unfortunately) cheapened Meisel's work for me, which isn't actually his fault, are the sub-par imitations of his work by photographers like Luigi & Iango, Ethan James Green, etc. Copies of copies of copies... each copy gets worse and worse with each transmission. It's not his fault, but that's how it is. The "real thing" is cheapened by that, too.

 

[alwaysademo]

Well we agreed on something there trickle down makes you more popular but less potent for sure.

EJG's images show he's a great student and he himself seems quite earnest so I don't want to discredit him either. But like you say, if all the best things we're offered on the market is a non-superior imitation of someone who's still working, I'd take the original. I think Hugo Comte actually interpreted Meisel with audacity, too bad his 'tude got in the way.

I think one thing that never gets mentioned on tfs is how a lot of his collaborators get turned off by him because of his outsized success. I think within the industry the problem with him has always been ego. I assume that's why I think Vogue US is giving him very core content to shoot and not the cover.

 

[JPineapple]

1000% sure Meisel is going to produce content for March, May, September and December issues, mark my words. And all the editions will reprint those contents, Pat as usual will be part of it, and his favorite fashion editors and models. I'm sure that was the condition to get him back.

 

[alwaysademo]

1000% sure Meisel is going to produce content for March, May, September and December issues, mark my words. And all the editions will reprint those contents, Pat as usual will be part of it, and his favorite fashion editors and models. I'm sure that was the condition to get him back.

Heaven. Vogue needs more than Norman Jean Roy to get out of this endless tunnel for sure.

 

[Lola701]

I just want him to put out something brand new. Give him the right girl, the right budget, clothes that match his level of expertise, the same way they treated Penn for example and see what he gives.

I think it’s unfair to Meisel to expect from him to do something new at this stage of his career.
Even Avedon, Penn or Newton weren’t doing « new » in the last few years of their careers.

However, the fact that they were interested in something else than « fashion » gave more depth to their work.

When you look at Avedon’s Dior Homme campaign in 2001 or 2004´s Hermes campaign, they weren’t « new » in concept but he wasn’t doing that much commercial work so it felt fresh. And Avedon was doing only studio work, much like Penn.

Maybe Newton was a bit more interesting in concept because his work was less linear. But at the same time, his commercial work allowed him to do his portraits and things like that.

Meisel is a fashion photographer, doing mostly fashion photography. He doesn’t travel anymore and only work in studios. So at this point, you are happy to get a Meisel photo because he has acquired a legendary status and you work under his conditions.

And so, his work will be formulatic. It can be frustrating because as he is still active, there’s this feeling of intense repetition but it is what it is.

Exactly what MAS does as an example or even Carine. It hurts nobody and truly promotes the person who did the job.

I think there’s a difference in appreciation in terms of fashion photography though.
That idea of a signed work of art. Styling is not appreciated or viewed as an Art form yet and it has been mostly seen as a supporting act to photography. So, stylists can credit as many people as they want.

When Jeff Koons does a piece, he has barely touched it. But it’s signed Jeff Koons and the value is through it.

A Meisel photo, art directed by Meisel but credited as « photographed by Assistant 5 » has no value…

That’s why Hedi is crediting himself on everything after all.

 

[Conbothsides]

Meisel usually credits everyone involved in a shoot if possible. In all those big editorials for Italian Vogue, Makeover Madness for example, there's always a page with a long list of names from the team, Creative & Art Director included, even down to the assistants. If I remember correctly, his recent shoot with Sofia Coppola for W also has the full credit listed. I don't think US Vogue does this.

 

[TomBlanksFullFatMiuMiu]

No offence but after Gossip Girl, her best relevant works are being a supporting cast to her husband and rubbing shoulders with Gigi Hadid or Taylor Swift

 

[alwaysademo]

I think it’s unfair to Meisel to expect from him to do something new at this stage of his career.
Even Avedon, Penn or Newton weren’t doing « new » in the last few years of their careers.

However, the fact that they were interested in something else than « fashion » gave more depth to their work.

When you look at Avedon’s Dior Homme campaign in 2001 or 2004´s Hermes campaign, they weren’t « new » in concept but he wasn’t doing that much commercial work so it felt fresh. And Avedon was doing only studio work, much like Penn.

Maybe Newton was a bit more interesting in concept because his work was less linear. But at the same time, his commercial work allowed him to do his portraits and things like that.

Meisel is a fashion photographer, doing mostly fashion photography. He doesn’t travel anymore and only work in studios. So at this point, you are happy to get a Meisel photo because he has acquired a legendary status and you work under his conditions.

And so, his work will be formulatic. It can be frustrating because as he is still active, there’s this feeling of intense repetition but it is what it is.



I think there’s a difference in appreciation in terms of fashion photography though.
That idea of a signed work of art. Styling is not appreciated or viewed as an Art form yet and it has been mostly seen as a supporting act to photography. So, stylists can credit as many people as they want.

When Jeff Koons does a piece, he has barely touched it. But it’s signed Jeff Koons and the value is through it.

A Meisel photo, art directed by Meisel but credited as « photographed by Assistant 5 » has no value…

That’s why Hedi is crediting himself on everything after all.

How is it unfair that I'm asking him to be better? That's pure, unadulterated respect. I want to acknowledge what he has done unlike others who like to dismiss him as a has-been and what not. That's not how I personally see it. I want the best from him and for him.

I agreed re: Newton. He had his own vocab, fashion was a tool for him. He was also very intellectually curious and productive, every phase of his work since the start of the 80's was a good phase.

Avedon and Penn, I see differently. Avedon's strengths were many things but mainly, he gets across the sitter's energy. He became increasingly a portrait photographer later on, plus his ambition was really to be an artist using fashion as a vehicle, so his best works weren't in fashion later on, it was in the New Yorker and Egoiste. I know 1 person he was really watching out for in the 60's was Bob Richardson, because Bob's work had the most authentic energy of the 60's, that raw explosive thing. Every classical fashion photographer's ambition was to capture the zeitgeist.

Penn, I think is his own case. He was even more difficult than Meisel (!!) if you read the insiders' accounts, for example Grace's memoir. He chose the clothes and yesed or noed the girl, instructed her on how to pose for hours, no noise, the set & light, the way it was laid out on the page etc. and much more revered for his difficult process maybe because of his seriousness/ lack of financial interests. Also reserved, unlike Avedon and Newton, and was extremely influenced by Alexander Liberman in his early years... I'd say 2 most notable periods of his fashion work was in the 50's and his last 15 years. The latter resonated in a way that was completely original: layered and nuanced but laser focused, rich but not decorative, pictures of a girl often referenced life: a shrinking flower, a social worker, etc. without ever spelling it out like Avedon. They were metaphorical, which was rare for any fashion magazine. This is why I never share the ageist attitude when it comes to creatives.

So, with Meisel, I want him to enter that period of Penn's. I completely agree with your point that most of the time a good fashion photographer almost always has their own interests elsewhere far from fashion. But that is also my point: Meisel is an anomaly in that his fuel for fashion is fashion and fashion photography. His point of view really is somewhere between an illustrator's, an editor's and a model's. He borrows chiefly from fashion and its cultures and more than anyone expands it. maybe he's inspired occasionally from music, arts, the news too, but essentially his presence on a magazine page or a billboard stops you because it has that aura that sucks you in. Skip the last 10y, but before that he made every single person look their best, every single time. I think it's genius. So I want a real patron to approach him and give him that platform, tell him: "Here, grab the best materials you can find, money is not an issue. now cook. Now paint." Meisel is in his own league, that's why he asks for the things he asks for and gets away with it. I just want him to be excited again to reinvent himself and make us go wow.

The whole "he didn't even click the shutter" well the image is his. I always know a Meisel picture, like 9 times out of 10. that Jeff Koons comparison is spot on.

 

[Lola701]

How is it unfair that I'm asking him to be better? That's pure, unadulterated respect. I want to acknowledge what he has done unlike others who like to dismiss him as a has-been and what not. That's not how I personally see it. I want the best from him and for him.

I agreed re: Newton. He had his own vocab, fashion was a tool for him. He was also very intellectually curious and productive, every phase of his work since the start of the 80's was a good phase.

Avedon and Penn, I see differently. Avedon's strengths were many things but mainly, he gets across the sitter's energy. He became increasingly a portrait photographer later on, plus his ambition was really to be an artist using fashion as a vehicle, so his best works weren't in fashion later on, it was in the New Yorker and Egoiste. I know 1 person he was really watching out for in the 60's was Bob Richardson, because Bob's work had the most authentic energy of the 60's, that raw explosive thing. Every classical fashion photographer's ambition was to capture the zeitgeist.

Penn, I think is his own case. He was even more difficult than Meisel (!!) if you read the insiders' accounts, for example Grace's memoir. He chose the clothes and yesed or noed the girl, instructed her on how to pose for hours, no noise, the set & light, the way it was laid out on the page etc. and much more revered for his difficult process maybe because of his seriousness/ lack of financial interests. Also reserved, unlike Avedon and Newton, and was extremely influenced by Alexander Liberman in his early years... I'd say 2 most notable periods of his fashion work was in the 50's and his last 15 years. The latter resonated in a way that was completely original: layered and nuanced but laser focused, rich but not decorative, pictures of a girl often referenced life: a shrinking flower, a social worker, etc. without ever spelling it out like Avedon. They were metaphorical, which was rare for any fashion magazine. This is why I never share the ageist attitude when it comes to creatives.

So, with Meisel, I want him to enter that period of Penn's. I completely agree with your point that most of the time a good fashion photographer almost always has their own interests elsewhere far from fashion. But that is also my point: Meisel is an anomaly in that his fuel for fashion is fashion and fashion photography. His point of view really is somewhere between an illustrator's, an editor's and a model's. He borrows chiefly from fashion and its cultures and more than anyone expands it. maybe he's inspired occasionally from music, arts, the news too, but essentially his presence on a magazine page or a billboard stops you because it has that aura that sucks you in. Skip the last 10y, but before that he made every single person look their best, every single time. I think it's genius. So I want a real patron to approach him and give him that platform, tell him: "Here, grab the best materials you can find, money is not an issue. now cook. Now paint." Meisel is in his own league, that's why he asks for the things he asks for and gets away with it. I just want him to be excited again to reinvent himself and make us go wow.

The whole "he didn't even click the shutter" well the image is his. I always know a Meisel picture, like 9 times out of 10. that Jeff Koons comparison is spot on.

You made great valid points.
My point is just this one: I think at some point, photographers, much like designers arrive at that stage of their career where it’s about the essence of their style or also that weird phase where they are experimenting, doing their own thing.
From our POV, it’s always about the zeitgeist, the evolution, the what’s next. And maybe to those people, their approach to newness is not the same.
Those series of Meisel portraits and editorials looks the same and are a bit formulatic. But at the same time, they have became the essence of Meisel in a way. And maybe for him the newness is working with new models, is shooting clothes in a different way.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m always for talents experimenting. I loved what Meisel did with Loewe because it was like a creative manifesto. It was weird but it was a platform that allowed more creativity. I think Prada was for a longtime his outlet of creativity. I loved the Prada campaign shot remotely because finally, location shots!
I loved the Chloe campaigns under Natacha when they build sets.

Is the fashion publishing landscape a welcoming environment for experimentations and creativity? Not really. Can a publication like Vogue really afford the kind of productions we loved from Meisel today considering that the master doesn’t travel or shoot himself outside? Is the climate nowadays open to experimentation and controversy and creativity? Can the way we consume images today may have an influence on the way a legendary photographer approach photography?

At the same time, a Meisel edit is an event as it will be more rare.

Tbh, I’m totally fine with this precisely because as you said, I always know a Meisel picture. Because it’s really about the vision of a photographer, that goes from make-up to lighting.
Meisel’s work has the quality of great masters. I take his photoshop over Annie any day!
It will look good in an exhibition…

 

[IndigoHomme]

It’s a heist themed shoot and every photo looks more ridiculous than the previous. What happened to good September covers?

Saw a reel on Facebook a few days ago when explain the history behind the shoot, if can follow the history of the images, everything has sense

 

[IndigoHomme]

Nicolas Ghesquière by Justine Triet:



A Louis Vuitton story photographed by Steven Meisel, styled by Grace Coddington:

Ahh, another "Jumps and textures issue"

 

[iriswills]

I love Lulu and I’m still sore that she wasn’t the cover girl for the August issue of Vogue France, lol. As for the Blake covers… they look like lower quality jewelry ads. It’s so distracting seeing something… almost Nordstrom-esque? Or those ad-inserts from back in the day? Lol. I just can’t with these covers!

 

[Fiercification]

Why am I not surprised that the second this woman gets given a new project, Anna will throw her a cover like that?

This is proof that directors need to stop trying to shoot fashion imagery or just still imagery full stop. You can't capture the stylistic touches evident in film/motion in a still. That's why whenever W does this blasted project with the directors every year, the best results are always collaborations between the film directors and fashion photographers, who shoot the final pictures.

As for Meisel, well my heart still kind of skips a beat when I see his name these days but the level of his output is often very disappointing and unexciting. I've realised that I only rate his current work when he works with Mary Howard, who can at least throw some texture into even the simplest of his pictures with some props or backdrops. Shame that this Vuitton editorial pales in comparison to anything produced in their August issue, like Malick Bodian's Chanel edit that Lulu also starred in. Particularly since he hasn't worked with Grace since 2016 IIRC.

 

[MagFan]

Without this Veruschka by Avedon reproduction it is basic jumping David Sims ed from decade ago.
Is it sponsored content? Why requesting Coddington then when it is runway styling once again
olga-romanova.livejournal.com