wattsy Posted June 20, 2009 Share #21 Posted June 20, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I see, a limited edition of 10000 at a price of £7,500 each. She is quite striking, though. If I recall correctly, the book was originally about £1500 when first published. It came with its own Philippe Starck designed stand to put it on. A friend/client of mine bought a copy when it was originally published and later (about 3 years ago) asked me to sell it for him on eBay. I think it sold for something like £1800 so I guess he probably sold it at the wrong time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 20, 2009 Posted June 20, 2009 Hi wattsy, Take a look here Nice LFI article. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share #22 Posted June 22, 2009 Did you notice btw, how the model has been depersonalized by looking past the photographer. I have often seen that in nudes, exactly the opposite from portraits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10dreamer Posted June 22, 2009 Share #23 Posted June 22, 2009 Did you notice btw, how the model has been depersonalized by looking past the photographer. I have often seen that in nudes, exactly the opposite from portraits. She has eyes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikasmg Posted June 24, 2009 Share #24 Posted June 24, 2009 The picture on the back of the (green) issue - 05/2009 - did attract some comment at the breakfast table this morning... Well, fortunately my son is old enough to take it in his stride and is away at university anyway. I've put the magazine on the coffee table (front) face up to see what happens. I don't expect much reaction in this day and age though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 24, 2009 Share #25 Posted June 24, 2009 I went to a Newton retrospective in Berlin a few years back. They had a bunch of his gear on display. Amazing what simple beat up camera gear he used - nothing fancy at all. Just goes to show and asks the question - does anybody really need a $20K camera to make good photographs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted June 24, 2009 Share #26 Posted June 24, 2009 I went to a Newton retrospective in Berlin a few years back. They had a bunch of his gear on display. Amazing what simple beat up camera gear he used - nothing fancy at all. Just goes to show and asks the question - does anybody really need a $20K camera to make good photographs? He's a classic example of a decent photographer far more interested in and concerned with the stuff in front the camera (location, light, models, clothes, etc.) than with the camera itself. It's a terrible generalisation but the kind of photographers who feel they 'need' a £20K+ camera are often the ones who are most likely to be taking shots of rocks, moss and driftwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 24, 2009 Author Share #27 Posted June 24, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, he does not seem to be too interested in clothes.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted June 25, 2009 Share #28 Posted June 25, 2009 He's a classic example of a decent photographer far more interested in and concerned with the stuff in front the camera (location, light, models, clothes, etc.) than with the camera itself. It's a terrible generalisation but the kind of photographers who feel they 'need' a £20K+ camera are often the ones who are most likely to be taking shots of rocks, moss and driftwood. I wish there were more rocks, moss and driftwood around here personally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulmoore Posted June 25, 2009 Share #29 Posted June 25, 2009 Well, he does not seem to be too interested in clothes.... you are so unhip.. fashion is never about the clothes. and btw I would take a weston print of a rock on a beach over any fashion shot..just looking at the dollar value.. but it isn't about money is it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 25, 2009 Share #30 Posted June 25, 2009 you are so unhip.. fashion is never about the clothes. and btw I would take a weston print of a rock on a beach over any fashion shot..just looking at the dollar value.. but it isn't about money is it? Yeah, but do you think while he was alive Weston could have afforded the equivalent of an S2? I think not.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 26, 2009 Author Share #31 Posted June 26, 2009 you are so unhip.. fashion is never about the clothes. and btw I would take a weston print of a rock on a beach over any fashion shot..just looking at the dollar value.. but it isn't about money is it? Nobody noticed yet the shoes seem to be Pradas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.