This shoot went by really quick due to prior planning before hand and as they say the third times the charm. My model was peter and the goal was to shoot him and then transform him into Zeus the leader of the greek gods. This time i used a white background to contrast with his black outfit. I used a soft box and two side light behind the white boards on each side.
The second shoot went pretty well for me. I shot Willber on the black back drop. The lighting was more controlled and ominous. I had one over head light with a grid and aside light also with a grid. The aim of these too lights was to give a dark over shadowing all while still showing some portions of his body to be lit.I had trouble with the over head light because i needed his whole face to be lit but because of his height the lights gave dark shadows under his eyes so i had to add another light and a fill to solve the problem. Besides from that the shoot went swimmingly.
The Shoot went pretty well in my opinion.There were some technicalities that hindered the best possible out come of the photos. The limited space was one of then. I had originally planned for my photos to be full body dramatic lighting shot but i had to switch to medium shots. They worked better than what i had originally planed in my head. With close ups of Madus ( Tera Cunningham) so this way when i photoshop her hairs and facial features it will be easier. The shot with Aphrodite (Kelly) tuned out well also, she had to get comfortable but when she finally loosened up it all went smoothly.
I love photo manipulation and i have always been fascinated by Greek mythology. So i decided why not combine the two of them. With the help on my classmate Tera Cunningham i will transform her into the mythological beast Medusa. The intended use will be a graphic design fan based photo shoot. Im aiming to get the feel of danger and intrigue. So it will be mostly dark lighting to give that feel of danger. I’m thinking three set photos, a full body shot, an extreme close of her eyes which will over lap the snakes in her .The next god will be Aphrodite the goddess of love.The lighting for this will be natural lighting so its defused. Most of the props will be just clothes everything else will be photoshoped in. The photos will be used in my Graphic Designer portfolio because even thou my major is advertising i really like the graphics side of life.
Based on my senior project which is an Underwater Casino, I might decide to take pictures of my class make in casino themed clothes so as to make the work i need to do in photoshop much easier. Other thank that i really don’t have an idea of what i might do for the final but it will come to me soon.
The Chinese photobook exhibit at Aperture somewhat interesting. In terms of the photography it was quite interesting to see how photos where done back then. The self made edit were amusing. The way they scratched out different people in the picture to highlight and keep the focus on their main subject. The different use of paper throughout the years helped to show how the craft of photo taking and back then advertising slowly progressed to new age time. It was also evident that the main themes of the pictures of the Photobook exhibit was what took place during the war.Thus, most if not all their photos where either war or propaganda based.
I really liked the Jimmy Nelson exhibit at the Bryce Wolkowitz gallery. Unlike the photobook exhibit where they mostly focused on what was going on in the city politically, it was clear Wolkowitz main purpose was to highlight these people as a culture over all. He mainly shot close up target so as to give a deeper look into these people’s lives in my opinion. Each picture gave a different feel to the exhibit and just made a clear distinction.
The Public Eye, at the NYPL was ok. Most of the pictures that was in the exhibit i had already learned bout in my History of Photography class so they were very familiar to me. Thus, its because they are so familiar is why i can say that this exhibit was better understood. Knowing the situation behind how these pictures were taken just proves there significance to the show. Take for example “The Steerage” and the fact that the photographer had to run and get his camera below the deck of the ship and luckily he returned to the same image he had seen and was able to take the picture without a problem. SO all in all the three exhibit all had different appeals but they all had significance.
The allegory of Plato’s Cave is that photography gives a more wider knowledge in human. Photography makes it more possible to view the outside world without stepping foot outside your home. The story of the slave that escape from Plato’s cave and saw the world for the first time and return to tell the story to his friends who have not recollection of him or understood his words. This is an example of the viewing of a photo for the first time and trying to explain it to a friend that has never seen or know of it. Susan Sontag uses the metaphor of Plato’s cave to describe the role of photography in contemporary life that we learn a lot from photography over the years and the process of taking photos has greatly grown over time. Thus, its through these billions of photos that we learn and expand our horizon in terms of viewing the world. We live by the guideline we call photography.
The Dutch 17th and 18th Century still life painting uses bright colors and the essence of life and death to give the feeling of mortality. The painting style creates a metaphor for mortality by combing two different elements. from what i’ve seen so far its has mostly been through flora and fauna. So the flowers would symbolize the growth and birth and there will be other elements that contradict and represent the other side with is death. We can see this in Rachel Ruysch painting Fruit and Insects, 1711 where she painted the the fruits and she had the salamander threatening the butterfly. Hector Rene Membreno-Canalesuses the same style in his photos by using war symbols and the standard fruits and vegetables. I think headed a good job cuz he had all the right elements.
The Homewood Suites campaign,done by the Van Winkle agency and shot by photographer Dana Neibert, appears to target recruits within the military. The print ads are basically Polaroids of military veterans interacting with their families which they have been away from. The setting for the areas are set in typical family environment. Whether its their son learning how to ride a bike, thanksgiving diner or a ball game. The ads use the tagline “For all those moments you missed to serve us, its our turn to serve you” So from this and the name of the campaign its is easy to assume the literal meaning of the ads. The ads was created to advertise Homwood Suites that would be a great place for the veteran and their family to catch up during their return home. The ads also give off the feel of bonding and relaxation, as they rem anise on all the things you missed while you were away.
In terms of photographic styles, most of the print ads are lit and arranged in similar ways. All of them whether intentional or not seem to have glowing light. Except for the first and last ads, the rest are all set in the outdoors and as such would have seem to have been shot in natural light. So depicting on the location of the sun that is where the light source would arise from and even thou the first ad is set indoors, the glowing light is still present in this situation. Another visual style i noticed is that most of the pictures have low contrast and in relation to the Polaroid and picture background there is a lot of shallow depth of field. From simply viewing the ads its clear that they all are mirrors. They are all meant to give that nostalgic feeling, the longing for what you have been missing which sparks the human emotions. All in all i say this was a great set of ads and have done their work well.
John Szarkowski’s take on mirror and windows speak to me as the romantic(Mirror) and the Realist’s (Window) contrast. The romantic in terms of photography views the world to a some what metaphorically blurry lens where their photos are meant to mx what they feel with what they see. While the realist sticks to the truth in that what they shoot is what they see. We see as the “Romantic” Crewdson’s photo uses low key tones and contrast and emphasized textures and deep space perspective to show the emotions felt by his subjects. While on the other hand the realist Winogrand’s uses a full scale,soft focus with two subjects taken at eye-level as his window. This to me was meant to be as just a view into the world of these two children. All thou in my opinion the real subject of the photo is actually only the child in the foreground due to the fact that he is the only object that has high key contrast within the whole photo.