Cannot Over Expose?

[Tin Can]

Watched this youtube, where they claim the above

A VERY IMPORTANT TIP Large Format Photography with the Deardorff 8 by 10

Lots of babble, but obviously they got paid very well for the image

[Drew Wiley]

Instead of moving a piano, Laurel and Hardy decide to lug aroud a Dorff. I don't believe for a second that they got away with overexposing the film 9 stops. Probably didn't know how to correctly use a light meter to begin with. But they do seem to be fast learners, giving out advice after only two whole frames of cumulative experience. At least they had fun.

[Tobias Key]

Is this the same guy perchance?

https://www.vice.com/en/article/qbx9...is-way-to-fame

[Tin Can]

I don't know, but that is a very good exposé

Thanks for posting the evidence!

Is this the same guy perchance?

https://www.vice.com/en/article/qbx9...is-way-to-fame

[jnantz]

Is this the same guy perchance?

https://www.vice.com/en/article/qbx9...is-way-to-fame

not sure why he is a rip off artist. most every photograph has already been taken already there is very little that is new.
I did like the lady with the Kirby vacuum cleaner she was doing a good job and it wasn't even plugged into the sun.
I've overexposed film by 9 stops maybe 10 ... maybe he was ripping me off.

LOL

[Michael R]

not sure why he is a rip off artist. most every photograph has already been taken already there is very little that is new.
I did like the lady with the Kirby vacuum cleaner she was doing a good job and it wasn't even plugged into the sun.
I've overexposed film by 9 stops maybe 10 ... maybe he was ripping me off.

LOL

I don’t know, John, normally I’d kind of agree with you but some of those were clearly all-out copies. I’ll give him a pass on the biplane/crop duster because if you rip off a rip off it’s fine.

[jnantz]

I donÂ’t know, John, normally IÂ’d kind of agree with you but some of those were clearly all-out copies. IÂ’ll give him a pass on the biplane/crop duster because if you rip off a rip off itÂ’s fine.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s just the world we live in.
The author died years ago..

[lenicolas]

I find that Tyler Shields challenges some of my notions of Art, success, aesthetics...

On the one hand, his pictures often appeal to me. Beautiful people, cleanly lit, what’s not to like?

On the other hand, his work seems to be devoid of any knowledge or understanding of Art history.
Even when he obviously rips off others, his pastiche seems to miss the point of the original and always ends up a lesser work. [It is obvious in every single example shown in the article that was shared in this thread.]
Shield doesn’t have a formal training as an artist, and has been quoted saying he doesn’t look at the works of others too much, even though he presents his work as Art, and insists that he shoots specifically with the goal of making prints and books. It almost feels like a form of arrogance ; I think (my) Art is important, I have the ambition to have my work out in galleries, but I can’t be bothered to study the Artists that came before
The resulting work feels extremely shallow, and devoid of a unifying theme or unique perspective. In a word, it’s not self-aware as Art.

But then there’s a third thing about Shields :
He seems to have a sincere love of photography as a process.
He uses a lot of film cameras, from medium format to 8x10, he often has his B&W work printed on platinum/palladium, and has printed color work with dye transfer...
Even the fact that he has a YouTube channel sharing the kind of stories that sparked this thread : there’s no way videos like this help his sales in galleries, and they won’t raise his profile as a celebrity... I think the guy is genuinely excited about all that stuff and loves to geek out about photography.

Maybe Tyler Shields is the most accomplished of all forum photographers?
A guy who is passionate about the medium and the gear even though he doesn’t have any groundbreaking ideas, but he knows what the average Hollywood rich guy will like and he’s not embarrassed to give them just that.

[ColonelKurtz]

Just my opinion... but Tyler Shields is 100% a phony. Living here in Los Angeles long enough, you eventually either run into everyone who's doing things, or you hear about them through the grapevine. A (photographer) friend's girlfriend modeled for Tyler, and when he went to pick his girl up, he saw tons of Helmut Newton books, and many others by photographers that Tyler claimed to have no knowledge of. Some (not all, but at least half, in my opinion) of the pictures in the Vice article are way too close to be coincidental. I gotta give it up to this kid for copying more than a couple of those images verbatim, then saying he doesn't look at other photographer's work. It seems to me that's the only way you could go, when the plagiarism is this bad, but the critique by the Yale person that "The issue with the work of Tyler Shields isn't so much that he's copying so many artists' work—though his shouldn't be an artistic model to aspire to—but that his appropriations replace the unique vision of the original with the cheap ploys of shock or nostalgia" is spot on, in my opinion. There's no end to the amount of kids driving around Hollywood, with trust funds (rumor has it he is a trust fund kid), using art as a cover. Just look at his pictures, then look at the originals. Especially the Sally Mann. Wowzers. His success may lie in the fact that he actually enjoys this bizarre odyssey, and if so good for him (I think?) Ok, rant over. Its low hanging fruit, anyway.

[djdister]

I stopped watching about 30 seconds in - couldn't stand the pseudo-techno-babble.