Assignment #5: Food and Still Life Photography

While searching endlessly for interesting photographs of still life and food, I’ve come to realize that they are few and far between. Anyone with some basic knowledge of photography and lighting can take a few items, rearrange them aesthetically and produce a nice photograph that is appealing to a general audience. However, ‘interesting’ food/still life is a whole other genre that I would probably classify more as Fine Art. These photographs are meant to be artistic, stirring in the viewer a curiosity – they are studies of light, shape, pattern and form whereas general, fluffy, pretty food photography is meant to stir appetite and assault the eyes with color.

There were a few photographers I found who’s photographs caught my eye and they are mostly recognized and established artists: Irving Penn, Laura Letinsky, Paul Outerbridge, Edward Weston, Jan Groover, Edward Burtynsky (although he doesn’t necessarily shoot still-lifes per-say since he doesn’t arrange the objects, I still find that what he photographs are ‘found’ still-lifes, if that makes any sense, and would still consider him in this category), and a few randoms I found on flikr.com.

Here are examples of Still Life and Food photography that I find interesting:

10 Examples of Still Life and Food Photography that I find interesting

5 Examples of Still Life and Food Photography that take it to another level

Special Project – Dawson Alumni

Alumni Photos

Assignment 3

After looking through a ton of photography by many different shooters, you come to realize how important the background and foreground is in relation to the subject you are shooting – provided that the aim of the photograph is to maybe say a little something about the person you are photographing or to create a certain mood or feel. Aside from standard portrait or glamor shots with a plain seamless background, I found that the portraits that made me stop and stare were ones with relevant surroundings in comparison to the subject. Whether the photograph was staged or shot candid, the ones that always grabbed my attention were ones that told an intriguing story. The ones with irrelevant backgrounds proved to be quite boring and the ones with a too-photoshopped background or a really busy background proved to be really distracting and annoying to look at. The goal of the image was taken away in a flash, despite the fact that it may have been technically correct, or really nice lighting.

Here are some examples:

Portraits with Good Background and/or Foreground

Portraits with BAD Background and/or Foreground

And here are 3 examples of my own environmental portraits:

Assignment I: Joel Peter Witkin

Witkin’s work is something that definitely makes you stop and stare, do double-takes or slightly tilt your head, slack jawed and all. He takes extreme imperfections (to which we are rarely ever exposed to) to a whole new level and still manages to express beauty and balance. His studies in deformities, amputation and hermaphrodite conditions open your eyes to a whole new art form.

Aside from obvious collaging techniques and other superimpositions using the ‘limitations’ of negatives and darkroom printing, it is very clear that Witkin’s photographs are very painterly. He has a vision, he draws it out on paper and then executes through use of camera, film, and darkroom. They often have characteristics or slight immitations of historical renaissance paintings from various famous artists, all playing with ideas of beauty and serenity. His lighting is very well thought out; it’s mostly studio lighting and often pretty contrasty.

Assignment I: Jock Sturges

Jock Sturges’ photography is intriguing to say the least. I chose him because no matter where else I looked for other photographers’ work, his images kept popping up in my mind. It seems like they’ve marked me, and with good reason. Looking at his portfolio, you will come to understand why he has had so many lawsuits in the past and will still continue to undergo attacks and accusations against him by a number of organizations.

Sturges’ primary work involves photographing nude, young adults and children on the brink of puberty or undergoing puberty. They convey messages of maturing, sexuality and innocence. He uses large format cameras to photograph them and natural light which is carefully used and observed. His sense of composition and background vs foreground is very interesting and seductive. In my opinion, his images are beautiful, tasteful and intriguing – I do not see the perversion that many people are so up in arms over; they were diliberately photographed with artistic intention and purposely controversial.

Assignment I: Richard Avedon

Richard Avedon was a master in many genres of photography: fashion, photojournalism, documentary… however, his most stunning work lies in his portraiture. Anyone who has ever seen his work will forever remember it. He often photographed famous celebrities, stars and socialites (however he has done a number of portrait documentary work across the united states and beyond, photographing your every day individual). His style of portraiture seems awfully simple: a white background (most of the time), flat natural lighting, and the subject, dead centre, usually in a square frame; he will often introduce props as well. His props are well chosen to the individual: a gun, a snake, a dress, a hat… I find even if the subject is wearing an item of clothing, I can still consider it a prop because it usually seems carefully chosen to suite the character of the model posing.

What’s so striking about his images are their simplicity… and how the subject’s character and life story seems to glow from within the frame. Like Diane Arbus, Richard Avedon does not pose his models, does not direct them. He photographs them unaware, right when they tend to be showing the most of themselves. These photographs are windows into their souls.

Assignment I: Diane Arbus

Diane Arbus’ work is one of the most original types of portraiture I have yet seen. What sets her apart from the majority of portrait photographers is that she does not shoot to flatter her subjects- not in the least. It is very clear that that is not what she is after.

She tends to generally shoot head-shot type photographs,  the shoulders are sometimes visible but not often. So they are pretty close up, in you’re face. It definitely seems like she shoots when her subjects are caught off-guard, either they are looking a little past the camera, or straight at it but with the ‘deer caught in headlights’ type of expression. There isn’t even any type of controlled lighting, she just seems to shoot with either natural light or with a mounted flash.

What she is after is the very character and nature of her model. They are stripped of their outer layers and left stark naked for everyone to see. You almost feel like a voyeur when observing these photographs, they are so raw and real; every single one of her portraits are striking, they make you stop and stare.