Salvador Dalí's costumes for Leonid Massine's ballet Bacchanale, 1939 © Condé Nast / Horst Estate
#3, 8,11 and 12 - just perfect pictures.
8 and 11 are dazzlingly masterful! ^_^
"He frequently used four spotlights, often one of them pointing down from the ceiling. Only rarely do his photos include shadows falling on the background of the set." source: Wikipedia
Wait a minute, didn't Amazon just patent that set up?
To be true, this doesn't seem like much. Not even for that time. Just being honest here. Poor job. But I guess the competition wasn't so hard back then.
Oh God...Please stop me from telling this kid to go and read a book, for he doesn't know what he's talking about...Anyways, there are no longer good photography books around to LEARN, for now, with all the new digital paraphernalia, EVERYBODY is a photographer. No concept of style, lighting ratios ( real hardship when using flood light), audacious perspective, REAL B&W all over the 9 zones, mastering of the HYPER-FOCAL distance with relative primitive, single focal glass.Not forgetting the primitive color techniques of that era.Developing, cutting & editing film, paper & image, took ALL night. Those were times when some were born to shoot and some where born to do lab work.Competition was fierce.Ignorance is still honest, yes.There's ART DECO here
You don't like it - fair.
However, the fact that this work was, and is, profoundly influential contradicts your claim that it was a "poor job".
This might have passed in its time, when it was kind of new to do this kind of clumsy photography. But now, come on. Just look at it. It is really clumsy. Pretty poorly lighted, and the persons in pictures are stiff and unnatural, compositions stiff and unnatural too.
I'm sorry but I have eyes, and that's what they see.
Let's see. Just look at this. http://1.static.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS345x442~articles/8998153708/8._Dress_by_Hattie_Carnegie_1939__Conde_Nast_Horst_Estate.jpeg
wtf is that all about?
Or this. Wouldn't say there is anything here to write home about:
The first photo is great and it would take a snapshooter like yourself to miss that... I guess it doesn't have over saturated HDRed enough look for you?
Now, lets take a look at the composition, the light, shadows, colours and lines. The lines on the wall are horizontal, just like on top of her dress. There are two vertical lines running at the edges of the photo which complement the vertical lines of the bottom part of the lens. I will not even go into the rule of thirds and golden ratios. Or the complementary colours...
From all I can see they have more going for it than any of your photos on your none existing website and galleries.
Uneducated trolls should go back to their troll hole and stay quiet there.
Hmm. Can't you see how clumsily he has used those stripes. Awful.
Your comments are just ridiculous.. It's just awful to see happy snappers like yourself to miss great works by famous photographers and disrespect their talent..Sure, you might not like it, but you clearly do not understand anything about how great these images are.I am no great photographer yet, but I did study photography in school. Horst P. Horst is one of the greatest photographers and have inspired many other famous photographers including Richard Avedon.I'd like to see you try using these tungsten lights with the large format cameras on film.
From our school, one of the task was to replicate H.P.H lighting, and it's not a simple task like you would think.
Next time you want to comment under a great photographer's image, take time to actually look at them and respect their talent.
The dogs bark and the caravan keeps on going...
Stiff yes. Please have a look at image 11. I have the tech specs for this photograph, from "THE ART AND TECHNIQUE OF COLOR PHOTOGRAPHY" ALEXANDER LIBERMAN, 1951.
"Figure with Color Planes". The entire background interest here is in pieces and various colored background paper, cut out and tacked on the walls. CAMERA, 8 X 10 Ansco View. LENS, 12" Zeiss Tessar, f/6.3, FILM, Kodachrome Type B. LIGHT, 5000-watt spot, 750-watt spot, 1500-watt flood, 3200º K lamps. EXPOSURE, 1 second at f/11
ASA would have been 10, ISO 10. Not exactly fast by todays standard.
Rage Joe:I think some historical context does help to explain some of the "stiff and unnatural" that you describe. Placing figure(s) in unnatural positions found some precedence in the play of surrealistics (e.g. Man Ray - much earlier). The stiff angularity of figure in certain instances relates to deco, and its motif of geometric shapes and patterning. The body and clothing used in this manner become formal elements in service to this aesthetic and underlying concepts. In so far as the majority of the work is fashion or publicity, it was subject to certain commercial demands, yet Horst found (in many images) ways to dialog with high art of the time. It really did inform contemporary editorial fashion of the latter half of the twentieth century, and I'm sure continues to. [Admittedly, this is not my expertise] I can say, from a fine art perspective, such work did influence my early photography.
Dear b craw,Your exposition is gold.But trying to make Rage Joe understand it is like trying to explain the Grand Canyon to your dog.
Oh my god guys. Of course I know my art history. Talking about Dali and Man Ray here. I would add Edward Weston. But they were in a way different league than this clumsy Horst guy.
Papa natas, I'm sure you'd try to explain the Grand Canyon to your dog. But could be that your dog understands the canyon already without your explanations. Could be it understands it better than you.
Dear BkJP, only because he is "famous"...
But like I said the pictures are nothing special ...stiff and unnatural.... and in an unpleasant way. Clumsy backgrounds and lighting. That's about it.
You can see how Horst got lost in the technique he used. Just compare his stuff to someone like Weston or Man Ray and you see the difference. Big difference, between an artist and a commercial photographer struggling to be artsy,
"stiff and unnatural"
Yeah, like those useless Greek guys - and didn't they produce some terrible, clumsy, stuff? Horst was very into classical art, which even with your vast knowledge of art history you would never be able to appreciate for its beauty of line and form.
In a time when photography struggled to be seen as a legitimate art, Horst and others produced strange and beautiful images in the interstice of fine art and more popular culture.
Horst had wonderful control of the craft of photography, yet the ultimate reward is found in an astute understanding and application of illusion and abstract potentials, those principles so important to the trajectory of art in the wake of surrealism. And, while the images speak of that time (or times), they still feel fresh and, I imagine, still inspire in terms of playfulness and elegance.
I couldn't have said it better.Lots of Surrealism & Art Deco here.The mastering of lights is incredible.
"The mastering of lights is incredible"
Great - I hope the exhibition comes to Berlin as well.