Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 91

Thread: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    66

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Quote Originally Posted by Chester McCheeserton View Post
    Have you seen those iphone billboards? They look pretty good....But kidding sort of. Yes I'd agree that if you want to make a print that size especially if it's landscape picture with sky, or lots of subtle detail then 8x10 negative is still king...I had never seen the 'ibiza' picture it's nice, seems like a return to his early style...does it matter what camera was used if it's a compelling picture? if i had to guess it looks more like digital that's been cropped to 4x5 aspect ratio and grain added, something about the highlights and grain seems too smooth and sharp for film...but I could very well be wrong.

    I didn't see those particular Crewdson prints in person but I think the differences have gotten much subtler and that few people care how it originated...I've done some tests of the exact same picture with the a7r3 and 5x7 and I think the digital can more than hold a candle...but of course you're right it will always look a little different. A friend compared it to using a tube amp vs a solid state amp. both have unique qualities.

    Yea, I think Crewdson is considered 2nd tier to Jeff Wall, even if they now show at the same gallery. Crewdson has the technical chops but his idea is much indebted to Wall's earlier work, and Crewdson makes kind of a watered down version of what Wall did much earlier and more complexly - Crewdson references Spielberg and American TV angst while Wall is in dialog much more deeply with nuanced and ambitious issues within the history of representation, filmmakers like Fassbinder, and lesser known figures in the history of photo like Wols. The collector's who buy the Crewdsons can't afford the Walls. Crewdson's work looks like illustrations for a really good HBO series, but Wall's best pictures are weirder and have multiple layers of reference.

    also many more reputable institutions and critics/historians have backed or written on Wall then Crewdson...but then Wall still shoots film so maybe I'm shooting myself in the foot here...
    I completely agree with what you said about Crewdson and his references to Spielberg, David Lynch, American TV, and especially how his work looks like illustrations for a really good HBO series. Wall is much more nuanced... but I'll still always love Crewsdon's "Beneath The Roses."

    Also, Wall has an insanely strong grasp with speaking on photographic art theory. Even though Crewdson is the head of Yale's Department of Photography and presumably very smart on the subject, Wall could easily talk circles around Crewdson. Listening and reading Wall is a trip for sure.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    66

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Wiley View Post
    Some of the better known early works were stitched together from 5x7 film then heavily PS altered. I suspect that much of the initial pioneering impact of this kind of methodology will wear thin as it increasingly becomes routine and passe. I happen to like the rather unique compositional strategies of both Gursky and Burtynsky, but scratch my head at the kinds of prices being paid for a fugitive medium. It's even more ironic when very expensive currently trendy "paintings" involve cheap art store tissue papers glued on with $1.99 tubes of acrylic caulking. At least that will leave curators and conservators the option to flush the whole fragile thing if they don't wish to store it. But I suppose spending obscenely large amounts of high-brow money on art is no worse than the billions of dollars a year of low-brow money being spent on meth. A passing high.
    Probably a crazy question to ask, but I'll ask anyway: Would you happen to know which works were made with a 5x7 or a 4x5? I know that he did many, if not most, of his major works with a Linhof 4x5 camera. Nowadays, I have no idea. Specifically, I would absolutely love to know what he used to make this absolutely phenomenal photograph: http://www.andreasgursky.com/en/works/2017/tokyo

    I figured that some of his works titled "Mobile Nr. 1, Mobile Nr. 2, and Mobile Nr. 3" were simply taken with his iPhone:

    http://www.andreasgursky.com/en/work.../ohne-titel-12
    http://www.andreasgursky.com/en/works/2016/mobil-nr-2
    http://www.andreasgursky.com/en/works/2017/mobile-nr-3

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    66

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Quote Originally Posted by Chester McCheeserton View Post
    Not sure if it the Rhein picture was 8x10 or 5x7...Initially, as I'm sure the OP read in the Gursky moma catalogue essay,the students at the Dusseldorf school used 5x7 (or prob 13x18) because that was the size of the enlarger the school had...I know the 99cent store was 5x7-13x18...but I also think that he used 8x10 for a lot of the well known ones after he was out of school too. But maybe they were all 4x5? i'm not sure.

    Drew by 'fugitive' do you mean because they are face mounted C-prints that won't last?

    If so, what do you think of Struth's or the Becher's black-and-white work printed in the darkroom?

    I'd guess there's way more more money in ultra rich collectors using multi-million dollar art collections as tax write-off scams then in meth....
    While Gursky definitely used a 5x7, I strongly suspect that he used a Linhof 4x5 for many, if not most of his photographs. What I'm really after is what he's using nowadays, but apparently it's super top secret... which, honestly makes it all the more interesting to me.

    Check out this video where Gursky brushes off a reporter for presumably asking too many questions about his technique (1:02 - 1:26): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p876xhLfQGs

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Posts
    104

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Quote Originally Posted by manfrominternet View Post
    Specifically, I would absolutely love to know what he used to make this absolutely phenomenal photograph: http://www.andreasgursky.com/en/works/2017/tokyo
    I don't know anything about how he took that photo, only that the badly out of focus foreground strongly suggests (to me, anyway!) he was not using a proper view camera...

    I know this thread is not a referendum about his photos per se, but as much as I like a lot of his work -- and I like the subject matter and composition of this photo, too! -- if I had taken it and this was the result, I definitely would have binned it instead of featuring it.

    Which is perhaps one of the (no doubt many, many) reasons why I'm merely a humble hobbyist after all these years instead of a world famous photographer / artist? <shrugs>

  5. #15
    Corran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North GA Mountains
    Posts
    6,799

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Going out on a limb here - it's likely he did use a view camera, but used too much tilt (intentional?). The blurred area looks like a tilted plane of focus to me, and the foreground is far enough away that I think it would be mostly in focus with no movements (perhaps just slightly soft if not within the DOF).

    The aspect ratio is rather longish, so 5x7 (cropped slightly still, from top/bottom) would make sense.
    Bryan | Blog | YouTube | Instagram
    All comments and thoughtful critique welcome

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Posts
    104

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Quote Originally Posted by Corran View Post
    Going out on a limb here - it's likely he did use a view camera, but used too much tilt (intentional?). The blurred area looks like a tilted plane of focus to me, and the foreground is far enough away that I think it would be mostly in focus with no movements (perhaps just slightly soft if not within the DOF).
    That is definitely a possibility, but in my experience, excessive tilt almost always reveals itself at both the top and bottom of the photo. Of course, my experience has been using axis tilt, not base or asymmetric tilt, and a significant portion of the top of this photo is sky, which likely won't look much different whether it's in focus or out...

    But what do I know?

    P.S.: You have a nice blog, with some very nice photos!





    The aspect ratio is rather longish, so 5x7 (cropped slightly still, from top/bottom) would make sense.[/QUOTE]

  7. #17
    Corran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North GA Mountains
    Posts
    6,799

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Thanks!

    Also maybe the top part with more obvious tilt artifacts was cropped? I'm just guessing here really.
    Bryan | Blog | YouTube | Instagram
    All comments and thoughtful critique welcome

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    99

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    That shot is a composite of several images shot from a high speed train https://www.southbankcentre.co.uk/bl...andreas-gursky
    ________________________
    www.robstephenson.com

  9. #19
    Corran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North GA Mountains
    Posts
    6,799

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Well there you go, the weird OOF area is actually lateral motion blur. And manipulation.
    Bryan | Blog | YouTube | Instagram
    All comments and thoughtful critique welcome

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    66

    Re: The Camera and Technique of Andreas Gursky (Then And Now)

    Very interesting. And to think that now wed probably be criticized if we used a bunch of pictures and create a composite in Photoshop using the blur tool to create something like this (Im saying if it was a new concept, not just imitating him).

Similar Threads

  1. Andreas/ South of Munich
    By pandreas in forum Introductions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 9-Jul-2015, 13:39
  2. Gursky Giant Prints Technique
    By Dvenosa in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 29-Jun-2007, 04:33
  3. Andreas Gursky
    By David A. Goldfarb in forum Announcements
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 29-Jul-2002, 01:27
  4. Andreas Gursky: buying a reproduction
    By Rob Green in forum On Photography
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 3-Dec-2001, 13:52
  5. How does Gursky do that?
    By A. Ricke in forum On Photography
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 14-Mar-2001, 16:51

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •