Skip to main content

Nick Knight

 1. Initially, I was mostly surprised and a little bit appalled by Knight's work. It is unique in a shocking way, because he is not afraid to use what I interpret as sci-fi or dystopian-like elements, whether they be prosthetics, editing, etc.

Nick Knight

2. I would categorize Knight's photography as fashion surrealism, as he focuses on clothing/the style of his subjects, but does so in an unorthodox, often dreamlike and unnatural way.

3.  Commercial photographer David LaChapelle's work shocked me in a similar way to Knight's, as both photographers are fearless in their unorthodox depictions of subjects, often with maximalist style. The main difference I've spotted between their respective works is their backgrounds: LaChapelle draws attention to the backgrounds as well as the subjects by making them bright, unusual, or a contrast to the subject/s, while Knight solely focuses on his subjects, utilizing a plain, neutral background to make his subjects stand out. I respect their creativity, but I do prefer Knight's work due to the sole focus on his subjects.


David LaChapelle's Best Music Photos: From Britney Spears to LizzoNick Knight

4. If someone remade Knight's work, it may take his previous works one step further by incorporating a background that isn't plain or neutral, and perhaps just as shocking to the eye as his subjects.

5. The point of Knight's quote is that it doesn't matter what type of equipment you use. What matters is how you take the picture, what your vision is, and if you get your point across to the viewer.

Nick Knight | A New Dimension

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more