Annie Leibovitz and the Queen's 90th Birthday Portraits

Poisson Du Jour · Apr 22, 2016

RobC said:
Since they are colour they wouldn't last more than 20 years max printed as c-prints. At least with digital they can be printed via inkjet which might actually last a bit longer. The media, i.e. the sites you are all giving links to, expect the images that are released to them to be in colour. So frankly I thinks it makes 100% sense for her to shoot digital for the media. And how many of you actually know whether she shot some B&W or transparency film for private images for the Queen. My guess would be none of you know.

What?
C-types e.g. RA-4 will last many, many years longer than 20 years, and many more still conservation framed (e.g. cotton rag mat). Giclée prints on art stock have a similarly legendary span and the German manufacturers are the trailblazers in that regard. "20 years max printed" does not reflect the reality.

It is the Royal staff who decide who shoots what, with what, when and for how long. Who gives too shakes of a ram's curl whether it is analogue or digital. Material/media concerns are not on their agenda, just getting the images, some very high quality prints and then out the door, quietly and without fuss. That AL should be chosen over the more established figures such as Lord Snowden illustrates the high regard the Royal house has of the professionalism of Leibovitz. Previous "dramas".

Poisson Du Jour · Apr 22, 2016

pbromaghin said:
But Harry is Capt. Wales to the Army.

Because Harry is from Charles' first marriage (Diana) — Prince of Wales, not to be confused with the second to Parker-Bowles (Duchy of Cornwall).

CropDusterMan · Apr 22, 2016

MattKing said:
And that "Riiiight" comes from a loyal Commonwealth subject of the Queen"

I like the shots - particularly the Corgis.

The Queen is, of course, "my" Queen.
.

My Queen too Mate...grew up in Canada, been here in the U.S for 16 years...we all used to sit down together on
Christmas Day and listen to her address on T.V...Queen Elizabeth is a great gal...drives herself (maybe not now at 90, although I wouldn't doubt it!)
around her estate in her Land Rover...tough as nails, loved and respected.

I know Annie thinks very highly of her.

I must admit, I find it amusing how so many bash Annie and her images...most bashers out
there wouldn't understand half of what and how she does things...the level of thought and production
involved in a high profile shoot...shes been active in her career for 45 years+....only the last
8 or so were using digital. She could easily pick up her trusty RZ with film and produce the
same quality tomorrow if she wanted.

removed account4 · Apr 22, 2016

RobC said:
Since they are colour they wouldn't last more than 20 years max printed as c-prints

fuji crystal archive are at least 75 years ( digital c print ).

Poisson Du Jour said:
What?
C-types e.g. RA-4 will last many, many years longer than 20 years, and many more still conservation framed (e.g. cotton rag mat). Giclée prints on art stock have a similarly legendary span and the German manufacturers are the trailblazers in that regard. "20 years max printed" does not reflect the reality.

It is the Royal staff who decide who shoots what, with what, when and for how long. Who gives too shakes of a ram's curl whether it is analogue or digital. Material/media concerns are not on their agenda, just getting the images, some very high quality prints and then out the door, quietly and without fuss. That AL should be chosen over the more established figures such as Lord Snowden illustrates the high regard the Royal house has of the professionalism of Leibovitz. Previous "dramas".

RobC said:
Since they are colour they wouldn't last more than 20 years max printed as c-prints

fuji crystal archive are at least 75 years ( digital c print ).
i have machine prints made 30 years ago that look as good
as the day they were printed. and ink jet prints made 15-20 years ago
that look PERFECT. and they were made with consumer ink and paper
not pigment and cotton.

Poisson Du Jour · Apr 22, 2016

jnanian said:
fuji crystal archive are at least 75 years ( digital c print ).
fuji crystal archive are at least 75 years ( digital c print ).
i have machine prints made 30 years ago that look as good
as the day they were printed. and ink jet prints made 15-20 years ago
that look PERFECT. and they were made with consumer ink and paper
not pigment and cotton.

75 years?? Oh jeez, I wouldn't be happy on that at all. I want at least a century. None of us will be around then off course, but hey, there's no reason not to leave a lasting image...

EDIT: I have original wet darkroom RA-4 pearl prints from 1981 (my first triumphant darkroom efforts!). Unframed 8x10s, simply stored in archival slips — I get emotional looking at them! They are still beauties to look at (Gondwanan rainforest trees of South West Tasmania). The modern-era RA-4 prints are a visaul tour de force; the first were done in 2003 and things got better and better. Still the stuff to knock your knickers off... I wonder of Leibovitz has access to slender stock of Ilfochrome Classic for printing? But I guess she wouldn't take any shortcuts in getting the very best quality prints done.

hoffy · Apr 23, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
So, it doesn't look like the Queen is anywhere near giving out in time for her son to be king, so it's looking more like the next one to land the job is going to be Bill Windsor.

I'd be very happy if when she decides to be our "ruler" that she is replaced with no-one.....

"Born to rule over you....."

Diapositivo · Apr 23, 2016

hoffy said:
I'd be very happy if when she decides to be our "ruler" that she is replaced with no-one.....

"Born to rule over you....."

Could she? Even if she abdicated, could she "dissolve" the monarchy? That would need an act of the Parliament. But such an act of the Parliament would not need the consent of the queen in any case (if it's a "rupture" of "constitutional" form) although it could have it (if the low dissolving the monarchy is undersigned by the king/queen).

MattKing · Apr 23, 2016

Not just one Act of Parliament.

An Act of all the Parliaments - Canada and Australia included.

Diapositivo · Apr 23, 2016

MattKing said:
Not just one Act of Parliament.

An Act of all the Parliaments - Canada and Australia included.

The UK Parliament might dissolve the monarchy without all other states of which the queen is queen dissolving it, so Canada might remain a monarchy for instance, independently of the choices of the UR (the United Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland). Or Canada might become a Republic without the UK to make this step.

I don't think any of this will happen, though, until the UK becomes a Republic or until the monarchy makes some brutal and fundamental blunder that delegitimizes it in the eyes of the subjects of other kingdoms of the Commonwealth (very hard, because the queen basically doesn't do anything if we exclude cutting ribbons and reading speeches written by somebody else, and if you don't do anything, you don't make mistake, so I think the prestige of the British monarchy will remain very high).

Normally a monarchy falls when they bring the country in a lost war or into dictatorship (think Yugoslavia, Italy, Russia, Habsburg empire, Germany, Turkey, Greece, France in Europe). Now that kings and queens would not be kept responsible for a dictatorship or a lost war (because their power is entirely nominal), they could potentially last forever. That applies also to Danemark, Sweden, Norway, the Granduchy of Luxembourg.

Doc W · Apr 23, 2016

CropDusterMan said:
My Queen too Mate...grew up in Canada, been here in the U.S for 16 years...we all used to sit down together on
Christmas Day and listen to her address on T.V...Queen Elizabeth is a great gal...drives herself (maybe not now at 90, although I wouldn't doubt it!)
around her estate in her Land Rover...tough as nails, loved and respected.

I know Annie thinks very highly of her.

I must admit, I find it amusing how so many bash Annie and her images...most bashers out
there wouldn't understand half of what and how she does things...the level of thought and production
involved in a high profile shoot...shes been active in her career for 45 years+....only the last
8 or so were using digital. She could easily pick up her trusty RZ with film and produce the
same quality tomorrow if she wanted.

+1

I love the Queen and I love these photographs. Long may she reign.

Ko.Fe. · Apr 23, 2016

Doc W said:
+1

I love the Queen and I love these photographs. Long may she reign.

+1. God safe the Queen.

And "no time for losers cause we are the champions"

hoffy · Apr 24, 2016

I'd be happy with an old fashioned revolution..... but I'd be happy with a referendum and decision for Australia to become a republic.

munz6869 · Apr 24, 2016

I'm with Hoffy on this one... The fear then is that nothing really changes, and we just get an undemocratic 'local' as head of state instead :-(

Marc!

DREW WILEY · May 9, 2016

If those prints were made when she was first coronated, they'd probably be all yellowed by now, even if they were protected from light fading.
"Archival" is a relative term. Yes, I print RA4 Crystal Archive paper too. But I would NEVER go around making longevity claims about it that are probably more related to the BS Marketing Coefficient than any real track record. Same goes for Stinkjet. Ciba seems to be more permanent in dark storage at least, but is sensitive to strong UV.

David Wilson · May 10, 2016

besides this being an Analogue forum, I do not understand the distaste for an photographer choosing a digital format. it is a choice, but does not degrade the visual expression - whether I use Polaroid, Bergger BW, found an old box of Kodachrome or a Hasselblad with a digital back, it is about an expression created by a photographer with her client.

I like to watercolour paint too, but my daughter prefers acrylics and my father oils. do we slam each other, because each express ourselves with different mediums.

I enjoy the grand children picture and represents what I believe Annie L does best. I need to think hard about my thoughts on Anne's portrait with her Mom. The others, I am lukewarm about.

cowanw · May 10, 2016

Re Anne's no touch technique; No one is supposed to touch the Queen.
Mountbatten-Windsor is the personal surname of some of the non royal descendants of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh under a Declaration made in Council in 1960
The Royal Line ie future King or Queen is to remain the House of Windsor. Persons holding royal titles have no surname except as a "latent image" to pass on to non royal descendants.

CMoore · Apr 2, 2018

jnanian said:
yup,
same old same old / SSDP

Keeping in mind that this post is Two Years Old.......this can be a "Fine Line" to walk i suppose.
I recently posted about a series of "Masterclasses" that Miss Leibovits was part of. Being new to photography, i was not aware of her "history" on The Forums. I was a bit shocked at some of the responses.
Race car drivers
Guitar players
Tennis players
Television personalities
.....it makes no matter.It seems people in the lime-light get undue criticism.
Most forums have "Anti-Bashing" rules.
If you are a Guitar/Amp forum, you do not allow members to bash professional guitar players.
It is cheap, low class, ugly, and (Ironically) drives away they very people that have made a professional "Success" out of the Forum Topic.
The question is , of course, when is somebody "Bashing" a professional, and when are they giving their "opinion".
Discretion Is The Better Part Of Valor may not be the best phrase here .......but perhaps, as a community of photographers, we could pause for a moment, before we make disparaging remarks about Successful/Famous/Well Known Photographers. Sometimes statements like...beauty is in the eye, or.....not my cup of tea...etc etc are a better way of saying that somebody:
Sucks
Is past their prime
Never deserved their notoriety
Are not half as good as your students
Etc etc etc
Often, it is the people that are being Bashed/Criticized that are making a living ( very good living) at the thing we discuss and are simply employing their talents as society has demanded and allowed them to.
Business, Celebrities and Magazines have been knocking on the door of Annie Leibovits for a LONG Time. How often have they contacted you.?

Richard Man · Apr 2, 2018

As a martial artist, this would be known as "keyboard warrior symptom", which we see a lot on the internet. Perhaps this is the equivalence - keyboard photographers? keyboard art critics?

Toyo · Apr 2, 2018

CMoore said:
Keeping in mind that this post is Two Years Old.......this can be a "Fine Line" to walk i suppose.
I recently posted about a series of "Masterclasses" that Miss Leibovits was part of. Being new to photography, i was not aware of her "history" on The Forums. I was a bit shocked at some of the responses.
Race car drivers
Guitar players
Tennis players
Television personalities
.....it makes no matter.It seems people in the lime-light get undue criticism.
Most forums have "Anti-Bashing" rules.
If you are a Guitar/Amp forum, you do not allow members to bash professional guitar players.
It is cheap, low class, ugly, and (Ironically) drives away they very people that have made a professional "Success" out of the Forum Topic.
The question is , of course, when is somebody "Bashing" a professional, and when are they giving their "opinion".
Discretion Is The Better Part Of Valor may not be the best phrase here .......but perhaps, as a community of photographers, we could pause for a moment, before we make disparaging remarks about Successful/Famous/Well Known Photographers. Sometimes statements like...beauty is in the eye, or.....not my cup of tea...etc etc are a better way of saying that somebody:
Sucks
Is past their prime
Never deserved their notoriety
Are not half as good as your students
Etc etc etc
Often, it is the people that are being Bashed/Criticized that are making a living ( very good living) at the thing we discuss and are simply employing their talents as society has demanded and allowed them to.
Business, Celebrities and Magazines have been knocking on the door of Annie Leibovits for a LONG Time. How often have they contacted you.?

It is an old thread, and I am surprised that it has been revived to be honest.
However I agree with CMoore .
The images from Annie Leibovitz are very nicely crafted and a credit to her and the subjects.
Too many of the respondents have forgotten to focus upon the quality of the imagery and have decided to disparage the author or the medium.
A real pity
T

WilmarcoImaging · Apr 2, 2018

Nice series of portraits, the British royal family by Leibovitz. The lighting is archetypically Annie and the poses create connection with the viewer. The Queen in regalia is outstanding.

cowanw · Apr 2, 2018

Now that they have "developed" two years, I still think they are very good portraits.

Annie Leibovitz and the Queen's 90th Birthday Portraits

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency