Chase Finlay and Laura Love in April Issue of Paris Vogue
#1
Posted 24 May 2011 - 04:14 PM
Bruce Weber photographed Chase Finlay (of New York City Ballet) and Laura Love (of Los Angeles Ballet) for a 16 page photo feature in the April issue of Paris Vogue [Gisele cover]. The photos are only OK . . . it's not Weber's best work.
#2
Posted 24 May 2011 - 06:33 PM
http://dustyburrito....f-new-york.html
#3
Posted 25 May 2011 - 07:59 AM
miliosr, on 24 May 2011 - 04:14 PM, said:
Bruce Weber photographed Chase Finlay (of New York City Ballet) and Laura Love (of Los Angeles Ballet) for a 16 page photo feature in the April issue of Paris Vogue [Gisele cover]. The photos are only OK . . . it's not Weber's best work.
Yes, and BW photographed Roberto Bolle for German Vogue. What do you consider his best work? His book of RB? LOL :>
#4
Posted 25 May 2011 - 08:26 AM
I own the Bolle book and the photos in that are light years better than the ones of Finlay and Love in Paris Vogue. (Some of this may be the fault of the sittings editor for the Vogue shoot. The styling is odd -- Chase Finlay wearing glittery capes???)
#5
Posted 25 May 2011 - 08:48 AM
miliosr, on 25 May 2011 - 08:26 AM, said:
I own the Bolle book and the photos in that are light years better than the ones of Finlay and Love in Paris Vogue. (Some of this may be the fault of the sittings editor for the Vogue shoot. The styling is odd -- Chase Finlay wearing glittery capes???)
Can one make bad art out of perfection? I think the subject matter of the book is, visually, infinitely more interesting and capable of effective styling and studies in different settings. To me, CF has a single look, and certainly is not appropriate for the story Vogue is trying to portray.
#6
Posted 25 May 2011 - 11:06 AM
puppytreats, on 25 May 2011 - 08:48 AM, said:
#7
Posted 25 May 2011 - 12:15 PM
#8
Posted 25 May 2011 - 12:50 PM
Quiggin, on 25 May 2011 - 12:15 PM, said:
Didn't BW shoot Chase before, or am I remembering someone else?
I think he is a good photographer and generally does not trivialize, even if, at times, he does not ennoble (sorry, I did not copy the reference above). He can create noble images. Many of his images are very moving. I think a photo that is beautiful or interesting, or that showcases a beautiful or interesting subject, is not trivial merely because it is not significant. And sometimes things are appropriately trivial and light-hearted.
Sometimes, he seems disorganized, particularly in his collections. For example, why were the photos of the gymnast included at the beginning of the book about RB? Maybe he was in the middle of a panning a sequence of athletes in tights, or running through a series of linked thoughts, like Robert Altman (see other thread of today). I don't know if he is making a statement by his lack of editing (which could be the interpretation) or if the editor made an error. However, I found it took away from the whole.
#9
Posted 25 May 2011 - 01:21 PM
Quote
Bruce Weber's photobooks are a little like commonplace books, and they do run in series of thoughts. I don't know the Robert Bolle book (though I like one picture of him which runs against the grain and shows that his teeth aren't perfect). BW's earlier books such as "O Rio" are runs of black and white images, some monochrome color and a few low-keyed color - all on matt paper. He did a good series on Cy Twombly's studio that ran in a recent book.
Weber's weakness I think is for an over-heroic, Leni Reifensthal-like take on the young male of the species. And Balanchine's Apollo is supposed to be a bit of a scamp, perhaps a combination of Apollo & playful Mercury who tricked Apollo, as much a Villella as a Peter Martins.
#10
Posted 25 May 2011 - 02:48 PM
puppytreats, on 25 May 2011 - 08:48 AM, said:
#12
Posted 25 May 2011 - 05:48 PM
-Yes, Quiggin, it is one of his greatest charms.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
members, guests, anonymous users
Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases:



