| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/28/2007 01:59:23 AM · #1 |
A controversial photographer to be sure, I am wondering your thoughts on him but I also wonder how he got such gorgeous tones on those black and white shots?
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 02:12:41 AM · #2 |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 02:16:06 AM · #3 |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 02:22:05 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by Venom:
...or his website...
Jock Sturges |
Well not really his website but some of his work anyway.
AGAIN...Links are NOT WORK SAFE
A couple of other links:
Images for sale
Robert Koch Gallery
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 02:26:16 AM · #5 |
| Okay now having had a look I can see why he is controversial! |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 02:26:30 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Venom:
This link is NOT WORK SAFE... |
Crikey! I don't even think it's "Home Safe"! Hoping I am not on some watch list now.
Only comment on the photos - other than, yes, they are top notch quality fine art portraits - is that none of the subjects seem very happy at all. |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 02:33:36 AM · #7 |
| As a father someone ought to take a hammer to this persons camera. I'm surprised he's not in prison. Sorry for those out there that call this art but ANY time you take photos of this caliber of children you should be SHOT! |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 02:45:42 AM · #8 |
| My question is....why? Is'nt there other more appropriate and less exploitive ways of getting his message ( whatever that may be ) across.... |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 03:31:14 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
but I also wonder how he got such gorgeous tones on those black and white shots? |
I don't see anything really special about them. What stands out about them to you.
My somewhat educated guess is that he used Tri-X film for most of them, if that helps.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 03:57:15 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by joynim:
My question is....why? Is'nt there other more appropriate and less exploitive ways of getting his message ( whatever that may be ) across.... |
I know of a more exploitive way... shoot children that aren't raised with nudist values.
Have you ever seen a naked African child in National Geographic? Did you think the photog was a pervert? I see these as about the same. Or is it because these kids are "us"?
None of the shots were near sexually suggestive. On the contrary, most were about as unsexy as they can be. Most were documentary of the nudist lifestyle.
All that said, I'd be royally pissed if some guy photographed my child nude nor would I even consider shooting underage nudes. Hell, I don't even shoot fully clothed children without a parent or three within 2 feet.
Now, since I wasn't born a nudist, I'm gonna go flush my browser cache and histories.
Message edited by author 2007-11-28 03:59:56.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 05:08:03 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Have you ever seen a naked African child in National Geographic? Did you think the photog was a pervert? I see these as about the same. Or is it because these kids are "us"?
None of the shots were near sexually suggestive. On the contrary, most were about as unsexy as they can be. Most were documentary of the nudist lifestyle.
|
exactly!!! |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 11:58:11 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by smardaz:
but I also wonder how he got such gorgeous tones on those black and white shots? |
I don't see anything really special about them. What stands out about them to you.
My somewhat educated guess is that he used Tri-X film for most of them, if that helps. |
Well I just wondered where he stood in the opinion of mainstream photogs, i cant really tell what i like other than his shots seem to have an almost ethereal quality to them and i just wanted to see if there was a way to duplicate that (not necessarily with the naked,underage kids) but the look of those skies and the skintones are great |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 04:36:15 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
Well I just wondered where he stood in the opinion of mainstream photogs, i cant really tell what i like other than his shots seem to have an almost ethereal quality to them and i just wanted to see if there was a way to duplicate that (not necessarily with the naked,underage kids) but the look of those skies and the skintones are great |
I'm probably going to regret bumping this thread after it has left the front page, but...
What you are seeing is skillfully processed Tri-X film . The skin tones and sky are likely the result of a yellow filter.
It can be somewhat duplicated in digital, using one of the numerous B&W conversion techniques, taking time to simulate a yellow filter. I think the CS3 B&W filter could get very good results.
Also, Alien Skins Exposure has a really good Tri-X setting.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 05:22:20 PM · #14 |
Come off it. Anyone who's ever heard of Jock Sturges knows that bringing up his name here is like stirring a hornets nest. Together with Sally Mann, it's a very controversial subject. There are a thousand other top photographers you could mention if you want to discuss skin tones and lighting.
When someone opens a Jock Sturges image they're not going to be drawn to how the clouds look in the background or what film he used.
This doesn't reflect my own opinions of Jock Sturges, I just detect some 'playing the innocent' in this thread. If you wanted to discuss the merits (or otherwise) of his work, why not just be up front about it? |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 05:39:29 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
When someone opens a Jock Sturges image they're not going to be drawn to how the clouds look in the background or what film he used.
|
I agree. He's good, but nowhere near what I would consider great. Nothing is particularly outstanding about his images, other than his choice of subject matter.
I'm not a big fan. Now, I won't say I dislike his work, I find some of it rather tastefully done. But, if I were going to name "greats", his name would not be on the list.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 06:18:16 PM · #16 |
That's great, now I have a cache full of underage nude girls.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 06:23:26 PM · #17 |
|
|
|
11/28/2007 07:53:53 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
Come off it. Anyone who's ever heard of Jock Sturges knows that bringing up his name here is like stirring a hornets nest. Together with Sally Mann, it's a very controversial subject. There are a thousand other top photographers you could mention if you want to discuss skin tones and lighting.
When someone opens a Jock Sturges image they're not going to be drawn to how the clouds look in the background or what film he used.
This doesn't reflect my own opinions of Jock Sturges, I just detect some 'playing the innocent' in this thread. If you wanted to discuss the merits (or otherwise) of his work, why not just be up front about it? |
I beg your pardon but i was quite up front in my original post:
"A controversial photographer to be sure, I am wondering your thoughts on him but I also wonder how he got such gorgeous tones on those black and white shots?"
I am certainly not playing the innocent, i personally think his work has merit and do not consider it pornography anymore than i would conider nudes on this site porn
ETA: in my second post i made the same comment:
"Well I just wondered where he stood in the opinion of mainstream photogs, i cant really tell what i like other than his shots seem to have an almost ethereal quality to them and i just wanted to see if there was a way to duplicate that (not necessarily with the naked,underage kids) but the look of those skies and the skintones are great"
Message edited by author 2007-11-28 19:55:59.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 08:01:10 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
i personally think his work has merit and do not consider it pornography anymore than i would conider nudes on this site porn
|
I agree. Like I said, I don't find it outstanding, but it is well done and does have merit. I don't find any of the images anywhere near pornographic. "Got Cheese" is more seductive than any of these shots.
Edit: changed shits to shots.
Message edited by author 2007-11-28 20:01:50.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2007 08:53:59 PM · #20 |
Richard Wollheim states in his Painting as an Art:
"So, there are house-painters: there are Sunday painters: there are world-politicians who paint for distraction, and distraught bussiness-men who paint to relax. There are ... psychotic patients who enter art therapy, and madmen who set down their visions: there are little children of three, four, five, six, in art class, who produce work of explosive beauty: and then there are the innumerable painters ... who once, probably, were artists, but who now paint exclusively for money and the pleasure of others. None of them are artists, though they all fall short of being so to varying degrees, but they are all painters. And then there are painters who are artists. Where does the difference lie, and why? What does the one lot do which the other lot doesn't? When is painting an art, and why?"
The same could be said of photographers. Not only are there few artists on this site, there are few that even recognize art. |
|
|
|
11/30/2007 12:38:31 AM · #21 |
Ok, First off, This is not a discussion about morals or your feelings on Sturges' photos. It is about his print quality. Lets keep it that way.
Three quarters of Jock's photos are shot on Naturist beaches in France during the summer months. All of his models are very close to him, like extended family.
Jock is a portrait artist. He photographs people as they are. These subjects are unclothed, so he photograhs them that way.
Most of his photos are shot either very early in the morning or later in the afternoon. It is at that time that the light is to his liking.
All images are shot with an 8x10 Kodak Master View Camera with Tri-X film. He overexposes his negatives sometimes up to 3 stops, then underdevelops everything quite a bit. By doing this, he burns the highlights in during exposure, but by underdeveloping, he never lets the highlights get to an "unprintable" state.
His prints are Silver Gelatin prints on warmtoned paper. Because of his shooting techniques, almost all of his images print very easily.
I hope this answered the original question and maybe some others. |
|
|
|
11/30/2007 01:07:43 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by photopro81:
Ok, First off, This is not a discussion about morals or your feelings on Sturges' photos. It is about his print quality. Lets keep it that way.
Three quarters of Jock's photos are shot on Naturist beaches in France during the summer months. All of his models are very close to him, like extended family.
Jock is a portrait artist. He photographs people as they are. These subjects are unclothed, so he photograhs them that way.
Most of his photos are shot either very early in the morning or later in the afternoon. It is at that time that the light is to his liking.
All images are shot with an 8x10 Kodak Master View Camera with Tri-X film. He overexposes his negatives sometimes up to 3 stops, then underdevelops everything quite a bit. By doing this, he burns the highlights in during exposure, but by underdeveloping, he never lets the highlights get to an "unprintable" state.
His prints are Silver Gelatin prints on warmtoned paper. Because of his shooting techniques, almost all of his images print very easily.
I hope this answered the original question and maybe some others. |
that is quite authoritative and might i add some bossy overtones for your first ever post on this site
|
|
|
|
11/30/2007 01:08:00 AM · #23 |
| Great answer and very good info - thanks! |
|
|
|
11/30/2007 01:13:23 AM · #24 |
I wonder if photopro81 is Jack? :-)
Could be a big fan I suppose, but wow, if so, he knows his stuff.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2007 02:04:58 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
I wonder if photopro81 is Jack? :-)
Could be a big fan I suppose, but wow, if so, he knows his stuff. |
Looks like there's some connection to Sturges, judging by the name in his profile. Article. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/05/2025 10:10:21 AM EDT.
