Anton Corbijn Reflection

1. I was initially a bit surprised at Corbijn’s work, because it is unconventional in a way that made me feel slightly uneasy. However, as I looked at more of his photos, I grew to appreciate the beauty in the oddity.

2. Since his work is slightly unorthodox, it’s hard to place in a specific category, but I would say most of his work fits among human portraits.

3. Damon Baker is a photographer of people, as Corbijn is, and they both manage to capture the life of the people in their shots. However, Corbijn tends to lean more on the gritty, raw, and frankly a bit odd, side of people, particularly celebrities’, personas, whereas Baker captures the glamorous angst of modern day celebrities. I like both of their works, and appreciate both for their raw quality.

- SADIE SINK Anton Corbijn | David Bowie, London (1993) | Available for Sale | Artsy

(Sadie Sink!) Baker (David Bowie!) Corbijn

4. If someone tried to replicate Corbijn’s work today, it would incorporate more aspects of modern day technology as props that the models interact with, and perhaps would feel busier and more chaotic because of it. I believe it would still maintain its raw, exaggerated realism.

5. I love the quote at the end of the slideshow because I agree with it wholeheartedly. Corbijn states that the realism in his photos stems from its imperfections; instead of getting down on himself because of his mistakes, he embraces them. This way of thinking is something that should be embraced itself.

Comments

Michael Kenna

1. I immediately fell in love with Kenna's work when I first saw it, because it is simple and yet stark. I love the mysterious and sometimes a little spooky energy it has due to the shots being in black and white. His work has a peaceful, almost nostalgic energy due to the long exposure that makes it feel like the viewer has been suspended alone in time and space. 2. Michael Kenna is a monochromatic landscape photographer. He often finds simple objects, natural and manmade, and captures them in a way that makes them stand out, despite (and perhaps because of) being in shades of gray, black, and white. 3. Michael Kenna and Ansel Adams both captured the beauty of black and white landscapes, utilizing the contrast between light and dark to emphasize certain elements of their photos. Adams gravitates towards impressive, sprawling landscapes in places like Yellowstone National Park, or Yosemite, while each of Kenna's photos tends to focus on one complete subject, like a tree, rathe...

Josef Sudek

1 . The work is calming and a little whimsical. In my opinion, it perfectly captures the calm after the storm and the beauty in abandonment/isolation. The shots have a beautiful, dark gray aesthetic, which I enjoy a lot. 2. Sudek's work is classified as neo-romantic, but if I had to categorize it I would say it is melancholy life photography, just based on the gray tones, solitary objects, and places relatively void of bustling city life/people, etc. 3. Fan Ho and Josef Sudek have some similar shots in the way they capture rays of soft sunlight filtering between buildings/architectural structures, as shown below. Sudek has less work featuring this motif, but Ho often focuses on that. Overall, I prefer Fan Ho, but between the photos shown below, I enjoy Sudek's more. 4. If someone made Sudek's work today, it would more heavily focus on ruination and abandonment, really honing in on the decline of our world in terms of the current conflicts and division we face globally. 5...

David LaChapelle

1. The only way I can describe my initial reaction to LaChapelle's work is "weirded out". His work is of good quality and it's compositionally interesting, but it's incredibly bizarre, and just not the type of art I typically enjoy. 2. David LaChapelle is a commercial photographer because he photographs mainly celebrities for magazines to promote their image and allow the magazine to profit. 3. Marino Testino's portraits of celebrities are very tame compared to LaChapelle's. He has also worked for popular magazines such as Vogue and Vanity Fair, but his images follow the mainstream: they capture celebrities in all their glory and glamour, perhaps adding a bold feauture or two. LaChapelle, on the other hand, magnifies the bold features and makes them the theme of his work. I'm not a huge fan of either of their works, but I don't hate them, either. There is clear craftsmanship involved for each, and I respect that, even if LaChapelle's is a litt...

Shown to the Stars

Search This Blog