You've all witnessed the recent phenomena that is 'secret London', right? In fact, you were probably part of it; every day the week before last "...[another handful of my friends] have joined the group 'secret london'" was the the update Facebook posted to my news feed. I was intrigued because, like everyone, I want to know all the secrets, so I took a look. I wasn't particularly moved by anything posted to the group and the recommendations were so hit and miss I felt certain it was conceived by young, naive and impressionable types, so, needless to say, I didn't join.
What did capture my imagination, however, was the huuuuge photo album that accompanied the group; a mammoth reel that ranges from badly composed phone camera shots of famous landmarks (ssssshhhhhhh, don't tell anyone about the red telephone boxes by the Houses of Parliament...it's a seeeecreeeet!) to abstract and colourful appetite whetters to a London I'm not (yet!) fully acquainted with.
So this got me thinking about what really is 'secret' about this much-written-about and over-photographed metropolis I live in; is there anything left that hasn't already been blogged, photographed, contextualised and uncovered? There's nothing more frustrating than 'discovering' a winding path, an intricately carved statue, a comically defaced street sign or a café with uncharacteristically friendly staff only to find that Time Out did a feature in issue 10538, there's a Wikipedia entry or a whole Flickr group dedicated to it. Is it the discovery of experiencing the place itself that attracts the populace in their droves or is it the discovery of the possibility of the place? Can places, experiences and events really maintain their anonymity and elusive aura in the digital age? Will these uncovered places be flattened in the stampede or will they merely be bandied about in endless similar conversations in pubs all over The Smoke as talking points, turned over for a brief moment only to be returned to whence they came a moment later and never actually 'experienced'.
I'm sure the people at Secret London are enjoying their moment in the spotlight and good luck to them, say I. It remains to be seen, however, whether including 'secret' in their name will entice new readers into their fold or whether in time it will become a misleading misnomer, easily replaced with 'helpful', 'expensive', 'student's' or any other possibilities.
Well, in the absence of any answers to those ponderances, I thought I'd share with you my own little fragments of secrets London has shown me. It's not so much the transience of a new fabulously cosy restaurant 5mins from your house, bespoke advice on African Drumming classes near Finsbury Park or tips on vintage dress purchasing around Shoreditch but rather it's the way the light illuminates familiar buildings on certain days, squinting at the Golden Jubilee Bridge to reveal shapes and patterns, seeing double decker buses over Waterloo Bridge against a grey sky pregnant with rain, watching tourists photograph their families in front of St. Paul's....that kinda thing....
One set here
And another set here
Plus my Black and White at Night set here
These are my favourite London discoveries and they're the secrets I want to share with you. Wink wink.
Monday, 22 February 2010
Monday, 7 September 2009
Is it just me or does this reeeeeally not make sense?
As part of my summer shoot, I had to take pics at Camp Bestival at Lulworth Castle in Dorset. Haaad to, I mean; what an absolute CHORE. Not. It was the last shot on the list and I'd been in touch with the PR people (much to the distaste or the book's authors, but that's another story) way in advance in order to get press access.
Although I knew full well the shots I would supply my picture editor with would most likely be ones of the crowd, the vibe, the quirkiness of the festival goers, the scenery etc., I couldn't let the opportunity to take live band shots pass.
There's just something about the raw energy, exhibitionism and the unpredictability of live performances that I can't resist. You get three songs and usually have to wrestle with the other photographers for the best position but the pace is always electrifying. Camp Bestival was quite pop-oriented so that meant roughly 10-15mins shooting each band before the burly, earplugged bouncers move you on your way. My first experience of festival photography, however, was at the Dirty Three-curated ATP last year and, owing to the bouncers not quite understanding the concept of the segue, (or 15-minute post rock pieces for that matter) quite often got the whole set to shoot through.
You can usually rely on festival stages being well illuminated thereby rendering flash unnecessary. This is great for my fucky-ISOed D2Xs however this time around I was lucky enough to be able to borrow a D700 which made things a whole lot easier. I alternate between a 50mm f/1.4 and 24-70mm f/2.8 but, must confess, prefer the flexibility of the zoom to the fixed focus. It depends how much the performer moves around a too; the 50mm is great for the slow build of post rock performances but I prefer the challenge of photographing pogoing teenage indiepop bands.
I digress. Camp Bestival was a family-friendly festival which meant kids EVERYWHERE. I jest not; we were the odd ones out for NOT having designer babies or hippie, flower-haired children. It seemed, somehow, to mean that music choice wasn't high on the agenda and that every other performance was Beardyman.Interesting to begin with but a leeetle dull after a while. I was pleased to note Wild Beasts on the bill and, here's where we get to the point of today's post....
I got to the stage just before they were about to start. I needn't have worried about not getting through the crowd to the front; Will Young was performing on the main stage so no one wanted to see Wild Beasts. Fools. Barely even any other photographers. Double fools. Lucky me, thought I. I'd photographed Wild Beasts before so I knew what sorts of shots to expect; a screwed up face of the bassist, pained expressions, that kinda thing. I took my shots, tried to get a little inventive by utilising the funny shrubbery around the stage to see if that made it more interesting. It didn't. The bouncer politely asked me to leave the pit area after three songs. I did as I was told and rejoined the crowd. It just so happened that my friend was right at the front and there was virtually no one in the tent owing to the aforementioned Will Young so I was still in pole position for great shots of the band. I saw no reason to stop shooting so I kept my camera out in case a photogenic moment occurred. And it's at this point a bouncer – a different one to the one who'd seen me snapping the band I must point out – decided to tell me I wasn't allowed to use my professional camera to take any more shots. If I had a small camera - a point and shoot - I would be allowed to take pictures. If I had been using a cameraphone, I would be allowed to take pictures but because my camera is large and professional-looking, I am no longer allowed to take pictures. I said "But I have a press pass", he said no. "So....anyone else can take pictures and do what they want with them...but I can't?" Right....
Does this sound reasonable? Or am I being completely unrealistic here?
Although I knew full well the shots I would supply my picture editor with would most likely be ones of the crowd, the vibe, the quirkiness of the festival goers, the scenery etc., I couldn't let the opportunity to take live band shots pass.
There's just something about the raw energy, exhibitionism and the unpredictability of live performances that I can't resist. You get three songs and usually have to wrestle with the other photographers for the best position but the pace is always electrifying. Camp Bestival was quite pop-oriented so that meant roughly 10-15mins shooting each band before the burly, earplugged bouncers move you on your way. My first experience of festival photography, however, was at the Dirty Three-curated ATP last year and, owing to the bouncers not quite understanding the concept of the segue, (or 15-minute post rock pieces for that matter) quite often got the whole set to shoot through.
You can usually rely on festival stages being well illuminated thereby rendering flash unnecessary. This is great for my fucky-ISOed D2Xs however this time around I was lucky enough to be able to borrow a D700 which made things a whole lot easier. I alternate between a 50mm f/1.4 and 24-70mm f/2.8 but, must confess, prefer the flexibility of the zoom to the fixed focus. It depends how much the performer moves around a too; the 50mm is great for the slow build of post rock performances but I prefer the challenge of photographing pogoing teenage indiepop bands.
I digress. Camp Bestival was a family-friendly festival which meant kids EVERYWHERE. I jest not; we were the odd ones out for NOT having designer babies or hippie, flower-haired children. It seemed, somehow, to mean that music choice wasn't high on the agenda and that every other performance was Beardyman.Interesting to begin with but a leeetle dull after a while. I was pleased to note Wild Beasts on the bill and, here's where we get to the point of today's post....
I got to the stage just before they were about to start. I needn't have worried about not getting through the crowd to the front; Will Young was performing on the main stage so no one wanted to see Wild Beasts. Fools. Barely even any other photographers. Double fools. Lucky me, thought I. I'd photographed Wild Beasts before so I knew what sorts of shots to expect; a screwed up face of the bassist, pained expressions, that kinda thing. I took my shots, tried to get a little inventive by utilising the funny shrubbery around the stage to see if that made it more interesting. It didn't. The bouncer politely asked me to leave the pit area after three songs. I did as I was told and rejoined the crowd. It just so happened that my friend was right at the front and there was virtually no one in the tent owing to the aforementioned Will Young so I was still in pole position for great shots of the band. I saw no reason to stop shooting so I kept my camera out in case a photogenic moment occurred. And it's at this point a bouncer – a different one to the one who'd seen me snapping the band I must point out – decided to tell me I wasn't allowed to use my professional camera to take any more shots. If I had a small camera - a point and shoot - I would be allowed to take pictures. If I had been using a cameraphone, I would be allowed to take pictures but because my camera is large and professional-looking, I am no longer allowed to take pictures. I said "But I have a press pass", he said no. "So....anyone else can take pictures and do what they want with them...but I can't?" Right....
Does this sound reasonable? Or am I being completely unrealistic here?
Thursday, 23 July 2009
Tweeting Hell!
Love it or hate it, Twitter has entered our vernacular with a Twallop and it's sure to be the greatest addition to online social networking till, er...at least the end of the next cup of tea. I must confess, I've grown rather fond of it in the eight months or so I've been glued to it but, let's be perfectly honest, when you've run out of internet links to share or cool things to retweet, it's just another platform to wallow in a little bit of self indulgent narcissism, isn't it?
And we all like a little bit of self indulgence, don't we?
Yes we do.
Humour me.
Please. Just a bit.
Thanks.
So I've come up with a new Twitter identity with which to revel in a spot of that aforementioned self indulgent narcissism but with one very specific aim; regaining a little creativity.
My summer shoot was amazingly good fun, I learned a lot about being a professional travel photographer (well, I WAS a professional travel photographer for two months), and I took some guidebook-worthy shots but, towards the end, however, I realised my approach was becoming formulaic and even I was a bit bored of the way I framed subjects, levelled horizons and combined elements.
One of the great things about Twitter is that you can access your Twitter stream on an iPhone and upload images directly to your profile. 'Hark!' I hear you cry, 'Why would you want to use a few-mega-pixel, grainy camera to share shots with the world when you have several thousand pounds worth of top-notch Nikon machinery?' Well, that's exactly my remit, innit. I'm readdressing the balance before I get way too hung up on coveting a bag full of primes and insist on colour managing every image on a huuuge screen in a room of D50 lighting. Oh too late.
Yep, the new challenge is to upload one shot a day taken on the iPhone. The shot won't be an editorial or descriptive account of my day but it will be something that is visually interesting in one way or another. For a photographer with, in all, a focal range of 18-300mm and apertures from f/1.4 to f/22, it's extremely limiting to be reduced to a mere point and shoot with inbuilt focussing and metering but at least it will make me think about what makes and image appealing and stimulating from the ground level rather than relying on camera trickery and photoshoppery to enhance it.
Anyway, if you want to have a look at what I've done so far; www.twitter.com/di_decahedron. Do let me know what you think. After all, it's not up to me to decide whether my shots are interesting or not. That's your job. Or Twob.
And we all like a little bit of self indulgence, don't we?
Yes we do.
Humour me.
Please. Just a bit.
Thanks.
So I've come up with a new Twitter identity with which to revel in a spot of that aforementioned self indulgent narcissism but with one very specific aim; regaining a little creativity.
My summer shoot was amazingly good fun, I learned a lot about being a professional travel photographer (well, I WAS a professional travel photographer for two months), and I took some guidebook-worthy shots but, towards the end, however, I realised my approach was becoming formulaic and even I was a bit bored of the way I framed subjects, levelled horizons and combined elements.
One of the great things about Twitter is that you can access your Twitter stream on an iPhone and upload images directly to your profile. 'Hark!' I hear you cry, 'Why would you want to use a few-mega-pixel, grainy camera to share shots with the world when you have several thousand pounds worth of top-notch Nikon machinery?' Well, that's exactly my remit, innit. I'm readdressing the balance before I get way too hung up on coveting a bag full of primes and insist on colour managing every image on a huuuge screen in a room of D50 lighting. Oh too late.
Yep, the new challenge is to upload one shot a day taken on the iPhone. The shot won't be an editorial or descriptive account of my day but it will be something that is visually interesting in one way or another. For a photographer with, in all, a focal range of 18-300mm and apertures from f/1.4 to f/22, it's extremely limiting to be reduced to a mere point and shoot with inbuilt focussing and metering but at least it will make me think about what makes and image appealing and stimulating from the ground level rather than relying on camera trickery and photoshoppery to enhance it.
Anyway, if you want to have a look at what I've done so far; www.twitter.com/di_decahedron. Do let me know what you think. After all, it's not up to me to decide whether my shots are interesting or not. That's your job. Or Twob.
Friday, 10 July 2009
Winchester Hat Fair
It's not *actually* a fair about hats (which is a shame because I need a new one) but rather, called the Hat Fair in homage to the tradition of sending round a hat to collect money in after a performance.
I arrived in Winchester mid-way through the afternoon so the town was already buzzing with activity. As soon as I saw a map of the performance areas I knew exactly the composition I wanted. As soon as I saw the sun, however, I knew it was going to be tricky.
To immediately communicate that the performance was taking place in Winchester I decided the Cathedral had to be in the shot. Having already spent several days in Winchester earlier in the trip I knew my lens didn't quite get the whole building in (it's longest nave in Europe, I believe) and I still hadn't invested in that oh-so-coveted wide angle lens I've been banging on about for months. The evening sun illuminates the cathedral from the front which, rather irritatingly, meant the afternoon sun was coming straight at me when I sat down to my perfect composition. Darn you sun, you allow and scupper my plans in equal measure!
So...I chose my spot and camped out for most of the afternoon to see what I could get away with.
I had to sit through an excruuuuciatingly dull turn by an Australian woman called Shirley who was dressed up like a bee and whose performance mostly involved trying to persuade (male) members of the audience to be her husband. She did it with none-too-impressive attempts at acrobatics while holding on tightly to the prey she'd hauled from the audience. It was half way through her act before she pointed out it was supposed to be a co-me-dy show. FAIL.
It was hot and the sun was bright but even if she'd hovered in the right place for a moment or two, there was NOTHING photogenic about her act.
I wandered over to another stage to see Punch Drunk doing The House That Jack Built. Their wordless, movement-based (with more than a nod to Steven Berkoff, if I am not mistaken), soundtracked show, more dance than theatre, was far more entrancing. But, sadly, not very photogenic; the bloody cathedral was way too far away to get in shot and there simply wasn't enough audience to create the vibe I was after.
I wandered back to the first show area and when I saw her outfit, I knew I'd have to watch this next act. I don't really need to describe it, you can see from the picture she'd gone for the burlesque look. Oh man, I want that dress! AND those heels!!! I don't want a fire-breathing, dagger-juggling husband so it's ok, no competition, lady. Oh, but I had just found my very photogenic subjects and in the right place too. Now all I needed was to master the tricky lighting conditions.
The sun had moved and created more shade for the performers but this had meant all the light was behind them and on the bright stone-work of the cathedral. Dosey Di Di's rechargable batteries were not charged so fill-in flash was not an option.
I took lots and lots of shots using different slightly different exposures. I tend to use the Aperture Priority setting for this kind of thing and meter on the moving parts of the shot but because in this case they were so dark as well as in the shadow, the light behind kept being blown out and the figures still looked too dark. I switched to matrix metering to see how that would fare and it gave me a lot more to play with back at the computer.
This shot was originally quite unbalanced with some parts over exposed and some parts under exposed. I was able to bring much more colour into the shot using the psuedo-HDR techniques of upping the 'recovery', reducing the fill light and adding about 12% clarity and vibrance. I've slightly over saturated it, too, to give it a bit of Martin Parr look which, let's be honest, is de rigeur these days when it comes to articulating The British and their antics.
The resultant image is a lot better than it would've been without post-processing but there is a little bit of fringing around the highlight areas owing to the huge shifts in 'recovery' and fill light. The light throughout the image is much more even now but I wonder if it looks a little on the fake side? I wouldn't mind if I was just editing a set of stylised shots to stand alone but for RG, as previously mentioned, I need to supply very real looking imagery.
Their act was pretty darned good too. I shall leave the pictures (more on my Flickr) to show you what they got up to. That's the point after all isn't it? ;)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
