What makes a fashion photographer great?

[Mchunu]

^ I agree, if he/she is a fashion photographer.

I don't get what you mean. Could you explalin?

This post is going to sound a little all over the place..I was organizing my thoughts earlier then my internet froze, but I just needed to get this out of my system when it was on my mind. Like iluvjeisa, I can't really put my fascination with fashion photography into words, but I think that one thing that doesn't make a fashion photographer great is a signature style. I think that on the one hand, a signature style can be an advantage as much as it can be a hindrance.

About the idea of loving fashion to be a great fashion photographer, I think it's irrelevant simply because there are many photographers who have created some of the most iconic fashion images without fashion photography being their main forte: Richard Avedon (portraiture) , Herb Ritts (celebrity portraiture), Helmut Newton (nude woman studies) , etc. Their best fashion photographs had little to do with the fashion and was influenced so much by something greater-it's an unexplainable intuition. They may not have a passion fashion, but boy did they have a passion for what they were doing and what they were seeing. There's something so hypnotic about looking at Richard Avedon's portraits of Jean Shrimpton, Domiva, China Machado and Meisel's latter work for Italian Vogue (1999-2008), I'm not comparing the two..but it's like these guys were just soooo in love with the glamour, the WOMEN. How they could just make her look the best she's ever looked..and redefine the ideal. You could see it in the photographs..It just does something to me...and I cannot explain it...

 

[RoRa]

Mchunu, you have a point here. I think maybe because fashion photographers are indutsry-oriented and as commercial photographers, they always intend to sell the clothes they're photographing, they sometime lose the artistic eye and touch to make the photo unique and stand on its on, as a piece of photography art, not commercial and selling-oriented ad hoc.

on the other side, the portraiture / artistic photographers give themselves more freedom to play with the craft and create an honest, powerful image. and this is why when stumbled across a fashion shoot, they might create a surprising magnum opus that will last for decades.

 

[Mchunu]

^beautifully said, RoRA.

 

[softgrey]

i just think that a lot of these guys have been doing it for so long that they are no longer passionate about what they are doing...

they are bored...
...

wouldn't you be?!....
it's like bruce springstein having to sing 'born in the USA' every single time he gets on stage...
it gets old!...

...

fashion needs a new perspective...
but not just a new one...
a BRILLIANT new one~!


the brilliant part is the hard part...

 

[Mchunu]

I'm not really sure if I think that a new "BRILLIANT" perspective would make a fashion photographer great. The problem I think that the fashion world's (& i mean its audience) is facing is that they think it's still so much greatness and originality to be seen. I'm not saying that originality no longer exists, but I do think that originality and greatness are two things many of the executives are no longer very interested in. If you look at the most successful photographers of this generation, you will see that many of them are not entirely original and reference earlier "art" photographers.

This may seem pretty obvious (and maybe that's why it hasn't already been mentioned), but I think that flexibility and versatility can take a fashion photographer very, very far-the ability to work with themes and in totally different conditions, and perform with expertise is highly commendable. Perhaps that's reason behind my fascination with Meisel, but when you see any artist with an oeuvre that envelops such dramatic range while still having a signature look (whether it's a finishing touch or particular mood)-that, for me, is true greatness. As RoRa mentioned, portrait photographers give themselves that freedom to play with the image, to experiment and try something daring, even faulty, just to see what will come of it. Great fashion photographers are artists and artists must go above and beyond to set their limit. I've said this before and I'll say it again- for me, I think of Meisel as a portrait photographer, before I think of him as a fashion photographer. The fact that he has the ability to make his models give him the picture (whether it's through channeling him or a certain something within themselves) and capture an it factor that is so fabulous it makes you take that second look, makes you wonder if that is indeed really her- that for me, is great.

(Illustrating my point)

all pictures from picasaweb, modelina, flickr and models.com

They don't look like typical models, yet we know they are not celebrities. It's a Meisel-Girl and she is a celebrity in her own right.

I don't want this to turn into me rambling on how great I think Meisel (or any other photographer) is, but could that be one of the most crucial parts of what makes a fashion photographer great? The ability to capture an essence in her beauty, that is her own, that only he can obtain? A gift so special that he could make even you that beautiful?

Though fashion photography is a sub-genre used commercially, it still is photography and it does take talent. Originality is not just seen through style, but also through execution and precision. There is nothing wrong with referencing past artists. When you bring your own insight, one that is honest and true, that's greatness. And when passion translates clearly with beauty and style, it's something even greater. But of course, nothing is ever so simple. Of course they become bored-it would be frightening if someone could do such a thing for decades and not tire at some point. Maybe the new perspective that soft-grey speaks of, is a new fashion, a new model, a new muse, a new inspiration. Fashion reflects the times-and the photographer can only be as great as the time he is living in. Which is why many of these photographers go to other sources for inspiration, with no limitations: the internet, politics, cinema, other artists etc. When asked what makes a great fashion photographer, the answer wouldn't be "the fashion", but the times-it's everything.

 

[Zazie]

I can see what you are saying with the last bit....but it all comes down to if your ideas resonate with the style of the photographer. The very best ones are quite recognizable, yet never repetitive.

One mystery to me is why I find fashion photography so fantastic. I really think some of the best art of the last century came from Vogue and Bazaar. I was never too much of a fashion person...so I don't really understand why the imagery would be so striking to me compared to all other art forms. Is it the fashions itself or is it something about the dynamics of the situation? Or is it the beauty of the people - the minds of the creators, the bodies and, I would argue, feelings of the models?

Obviously, considering my cluelessness about what makes me like fashion photography at all, I can't explain what makes a good fashion photographer. It just looks right or it does not, and for every case I could give a detailed opinion as to why, but I do have a hard time coming up with a general rule.

I like what MulletProof said about capturing a soul. Or capturing the ideal person who should be waring that particular dress.

Photography should be an art but when necessary, it can be boiled down to a sort of "science", and that's where I spent a lot of effort as I didn't always have the privilege to work with a true photographer artist, the Guy Bourdins who already have a powerful and original composition/image/concept in his/her mind before they shoot. I am lucky if I get one who will wait with me for half an hour to capture an unusual image, eg. a huge wave or a larger than life plane flying overhead.

I hope I don't sound rude as Mulletproof is one of the posters here I respect tremendously, but a stylist can't be too abstract (eg. "Rob, please capture the soul of Sasha for this shoot.") about what he/she is trying to achieve with the shoot or the photographer will not have a clue, especially if it's a bread and butter job for them, and many of the entrenched ones at magazines have lost their enthusiasm years ago. That's where the stylists who care really have to develop their own "methods" to get the shoots they want. That's what I meant by science, but the result could actually have a quality that is spontaneous. Hope I have made the travails of a shoot better understood.

 

[softgrey]

I hope I don't sound rude as Mulletproof is one of the posters here I respect tremendously, but a stylist can't be too abstract (eg. "Rob, please capture the soul of Sasha for this shoot.")

...i'd like to see that!

this made me smile...


really- i often wonder how some stylists do it...
grace coddington is someone i'd really like to watch on set...
she always comes back with great images...
without fail...
no matter who she shoots with...
(not that she shoots with anyone who isn't pretty amazing...but still...)

i wish they had shown a little more of her on set in that vogue movie...
i kept waiting and waiting for it...but it never happened...
...

i really do think it helps if the photog gets the clothes though...
ie- "the dress is amazing from the back so let's find a way to shoot it that way"...
OR- "i have an amazing idea for a rear view shot- do you have a dress that works better than this one that she is wearing..."

the best photogs that i've worked with always get that and their pics are always better...
that's what i mean that it has to be about the fashion first...

 

[agee]

I don't know if it belongs here or if it is its own thread, but a question that has been bouncing around in my head is is Steven Meisel still the top fashion photographer? If I go by recent history, say the past two years I would say that he has been eclipsed by Mert and Marcus. However, he is still the top dog if I go by career body-of-work, however again if I go by career body-of-work, then Patrick Demarchelier and Peter Lindbergh are contenders for the distinction.

 

[ched]

Count how many times editorials in Vogue Italia were shot by specific photographers in the last 12 months. Those are the top shooters. The editors there don't screw around when it comes to great images and setting international trends, and the designers know it.

 

[agee]

To be sure VI is top tier, but it also has a signature look so there are photographers whose work is not regularly featured in VI because their aesthetics do not necessarily align.

Another barometer, although it is not the be all, end all are campaigns and in recent seasons it has been Mert & Marcus, Meisel and Testino (based on my memory and scan of the campaign thread). I am not a big fan of Testino but I can't deny that he has been booked for some high profile work. I also remember reading that Demarchelier was the most booked photographer in 2009.

 

[hiven]

variety but still being able to tell who it is...

 

[Chloe Parks]

Energy, being in the moment, being in charge, energy, and creativity...no need to even have great technical skills

 

[ched]

I think being able to communicate is the most important thing for any editorial photographer. You have to be able to tell a story and get your point across.

 

[fraiseap]

Why do they have to love fashion - to produce beautiful photograph or to intuitively know what separates a specific garment from another and present that aspect?

Or is it more that they can't have a complete disdain for fashion because that leads to that the editors and photographer can't communicate well...?

I think there is a difference between "loving" fashion (devouring information on fashion, knowing all the best designers etc)

and "loving" the look.

The former is not necessary for a fashion photographer, the latter is essential. I do not have an in-depth knowledge of fashion as such but I do love the way clothes look on a good model - it is a type a beauty that cannot be found anywhere else . I try to capture that look in my images and it doesn't matter if I know the name of the designer or not.

On the other hand I am definitely not a "great" so take this with as many grains of salt as you want.

 

[VullixEf]

.. also a bit of luck