Where?
It was nice of the British to protect it for the rightful owners all these years from all those thieves and plunderers.
She is great, often depicting women in a strong feminine presence.
Off coarse some don't like that.
Women make the best photographers.
View attachment 326661
National Portrait Gallery, aforementioned.
Victoria and Albert.
For industrial art, Science Museum.
For literary art, British Library.
For funerary art, Westminster Abbey and Highgate Cemetery.
For culinary art, Rules.
For gemologogical art, the Crown Jewel collection at the Tower of London… although they may be currently in use.
And if you are fortunate, you might see Annie Leibovitz at one of these places.
You think she did justice to Gainsborough with that photo?
Can someone point me to a good photograph by her? Because her images leave me cold.
Thanks for responding in a positive way; it makes me want to converse with you
- and so...
If you google Thomas Gainsborough and images you will see many of his paintings which show darker blueish pale skinned portraits (after all he painted The Blue Boy) with brooding skies and natural backgrounds. From a colour tone point of view the Queen Photograph references them quite well (insofar as my computer screen deals with both paintings and photographs). I am sure the queen had many Gainsboroughs in her collection. This portrait was one of a collection of family portraits all done in the same style. So Leibovitz had a goal of finding commonality in this style.
Similarly Gainsborough would often produce singular images of unique and solitary female figures. Leibovitz sought to reference this. Few women were as unique, solitary, and powerful as the Queen.
The transposition of the background also references the common placement of individuals in a country background and additionally looks back to Cecil Beaton's Queen's coronation photos with the painted backdrop of Westminster abbey.Another Beaton reference is the use of Garter Robes. Although Leibovitz (in an interview) seems to be unaware of the difference, Beaton's portrait of the Queen in her Admiral's Boat Cloak is one of the best ever portrait's of the Queen and one of her favorites.
So did Leibovitz accomplish what she wanted with the portfolio of photographs, was the Queen happy with them, did they reference the past as well as presenting the present, does this show us something about the Queen? I would guess yes.
Do you like it? I would say no. You speak to the use of filters on an iPhone several times here. I conclude you think this photograph does not look like how you think a good photograph should look. That's fine; but referring to Post 17, I just don't think that is what criticism is about.
Nixon's departure.
That is sort of how Liebowitz got her start. As a student at the San Francisco Art Institute, she managed to get an assignment to shoot an event for Rolling Stone Magazine. She found herself surrounded by other photographers shooting the stage, and turned around and shot the crowd. The magazine ran the photo.Everyone else is looking at the chopper but A.L. is looking elsewhere and making a statement. Excellent shot.
That is sort of how Liebowitz got her start. As a student at the San Francisco Art Institute, she managed to get an assignment to shoot an event for Rolling Stone Magazine. She found herself surrounded by other photographers shooting the stage, and turned around and shot the crowd. The magazine ran the photo.
Her portrait of Meryl Streep is one of my favorites. Ms Streep pulling her painted face out of shape, characterizing and charictaturing how malleable she is as an actress.
View attachment 326882
Also, Ms Liebowitz seems to often reference classic paintings in her work, such as this one of George Clooney with a broad wink at Gericault's The Raft of the Medusa.
View attachment 326883
View attachment 326884
So I'm not going out on a limb saying that I like her early grittier work over her later processed look.
That story of her shooting the crowd, that's the kind of thing I'd do instinctively. That resonates with me.
Nixon's departure.
Her earlier work is more journalistic, she moved on to portraits (more cover shots, more exposure and more money in that), which lead to commercial assignments with more production value, large crews and post-production. It's the evolution of one's career and style. In the commercial world it helps to keep one getting work and commanding higher fees, especially with today's onslaught of photographers. When Ms Liebowitz started out, only a small number of people had cameras and could produce a technically good shot. Now with automation and digital (not to mention smart phones) everyone has a camera that can produce a decent photo. Obviously, she has decades of experience, a clear vision and the skills to direct her subjects, but she needs to stay ahead of the pack. There are thousands of camera-wielding wannabes who would love to get some of the action.
Having a name and/or a referral, to get you in the door is worth gold when you're trying to get business. Any business. Sending a resume just doesn't do it.
Her earlier work is more journalistic, she moved on to portraits (more cover shots, more exposure and more money in that), which lead to commercial assignments with more production value, large crews and post-production. It's the evolution of one's career and style. In the commercial world it helps to keep one getting work and commanding higher fees, especially with today's onslaught of photographers. When Ms Liebowitz started out, only a small number of people had cameras and could produce a technically good shot. Now with automation and digital (not to mention smart phones) everyone has a camera that can produce a decent photo. Obviously, she has decades of experience, a clear vision and the skills to direct her subjects, but she needs to stay ahead of the pack. There are thousands of camera-wielding wannabes who would love to get some of the action.
Nokton, you're probably correct about camera..
I've seen pictures of her shooting with a Mamiya RB/RZ.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?