In the cultural epicenter of New York, Gagosian is honored to unveil “Richard Prince: Early Photography, 1977–87.” This exhibition, previously shown in London, revisits the formative decade of Prince’s oeuvre This comprehensive showcase delves into more than eighty of Prince’s seminal works, including pieces from his renowned cowboy, girlfriend, and advertisement series, alongside pieces previously unrevealed in this metropolis.

The Entertainers: A Reflection of Time and Place

A focal point of the exhibition is ‘The Entertainers’ series from 1982–83, featuring a compelling set of manipulated photographs set against the backdrop of Times Square’s nocturnal vibrancy. This series captures the raw, untamed spirit and the so-called ‘sleazy glamour’ of the era, spotlighting Prince’s adeptness at encapsulating the zeitgeist through his lens.

Rephotography: A Philosophical Undertaking

Prince’s innovative engagement with rephotography in the late ’70s and early ’80s marked a pivotal shift in the discourse on authorship and originality. His strategic appropriation and recontextualization of existing images, including notable works like “Untitled (Self-Portrait)” (1980) and “Untitled (Cowboy)” (1980–84), challenge the viewer to reconsider the boundaries between creation and compilation. Prince’s method, devoid of the ‘decisive moment,’ reinvents the narrative potency of the photographic image.

A Legacy Unveiled

This exhibition offers a rare glimpse into Prince’s creative sanctum, showcasing an array of archival materials and writings that illuminate his conceptual and methodological rigor. Noteworthy is the inclusion of source materials from his tenure in the tear-sheet department at Time magazine, offering an unprecedented glimpse into his artistic genesis.

Cultural Chronicles and Thematic Explorations

Prince’s work serves as a cultural chronicle, weaving together strands of American vernaculars and subcultures to interrogate the construction of national identity. Through his exploration of themes such as alienation, masculinity, and the celebrity-infamy dichotomy, as seen in works like “Criminals and Celebrities” (1986) and “Untitled (Fainted)” (1980), Prince invites a discourse on the representational power of photography.

An Invitation to the Vanguard

“Richard Prince: Early Photography, 1977–87” is more than an exhibition; it’s an odyssey through the transformative years of a visionary artist. Having graced Gagosian’s London locations in Davies Street and Grosvenor Hill in 2023, this exhibition now invites New York audiences to traverse the evolving landscape of art through Prince’s pioneering lens. Gagosian extends a warm invitation to both connoisseurs and newcomers to immerse themselves in the narrative of an art form reborn under Prince’s evocative gaze.

RICHARD PRINCE
Early Photography, 1977–87
March 9–April 13, 2024
522 West 21st Street, New York

Determined to preserve the Ukrainian town’s memories amidst the ruins, Alia O intricately embroiders her photographs, capturing the essence of a once-thriving community.

ADVERTISEMENT

The eastern Ukrainian town of Soledar was once a thriving hot spot, boasting Europe’s largest salt deposits and a population exceeding 10,000.

But the tranquility of this town was shattered two years ago by the invasion of Russian forces, resulting in widespread destruction and depopulation. Since January 2023, the ruins of Soledar and its surroundings have been under Russian occupation.

Prior to the invasion, Alia O, a Ukrainian artist based in France, with a background in international affairs and war reporting journalism, carried out an art residency in Soledar.

Her intention was to capture the town’s essence, its rich history, and the lives of its inhabitants. The project, titled “Not sure how anyone else does it” has since evolved into a powerful reminder of what has been lost.

“I am convinced that everybody who is separated from their home in Bakhmut, Soledar, and Kherson carry every inch of their native place inside them. Even when the photographs are lost in the fire, our consciousness goes back to those memorable anchors,” states Alia O.  

Her artistic approach involves meticulously stitching colourful embroidery onto her own photographs.

“I intuitively create the embroidery, drawing from my emotions and impressions of the place and weaving together the stories I wish to convey – memories of a future that is gone.”

Remarkably, Alia O captured her photographs through the prism of salt crystals, a unique perspective that mirrors the experiences of the people of Soledar.

“Every person I met would give me a salt crystal as a souvenir. So I thought I would also see the world through people from Soledar looking through salt. I took one of those crystals I was given and I started taking pictures through it. The town was flooded with them. It worked metaphorically for how people see life here”.

Alia O says: “These works are created in constant dialogue with the deepest memories of places, transformative hopes, life-changing meetings, and everything that constitutes the peaceful life we lost.”

The New York Times demanded Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs cease making claims that one of their freelance photographers had connections to Hamas and knew about the October 7 attack on Israel in advance.

In a scathing letter written to the Israeli Consulate General in New York by the Times’s deputy general counsel David McCraw, he accused Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs of making “provably false” claims about the photographer, Yousef Masoud.

The letter came after Masoud won a Polk award alongside another freelancer for the Times, Samar Abu Elouf, for photojournalism. In response to the award, a spokesperson for Israeli Consulate General in New York sent a letter to the George Polk committee claiming ties between Masoud and Hamas.

The spokesman, Itay Milner, claimed Masoud had “public connections to Hamas and well-documented foreknowledge of the terror group’s plans for invasion mortally compromise the integrity of his reporting.”

The Times fired back at those allegations, which McCraw called a “fabrication,” in his letter on Saturday. McCraw noted that the claims about Masoud “can be traced back to the reckless posting by the advocacy group Honest Reporting,” and pointed out that the head of the group later said his claims were speculation.

According to the letter:

I have written to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the past to ask that the Ministry cease perpetrating the provably false claim that the freelance photographer Yousef Masoud was embedded with Hamas terrorists on October 7. He was not. Yet your recent letter to the administrators of the Polk Awards once again repeats that falsehood. You do a disservice to your office and to the public by joining in what is nothing more than a smear campaign.

The false accusations against Mr. Masoud can be traced back to the reckless posting by the advocacy group Honest Reporting that insinuated — without any evidence — that Mr. Masoud, a freelance photographer who has done work for The New York Times, may have had prior knowledge of the Oct. 7 attack.

The basis for Honest Reporting’s claim is a fabrication: that Mr. Masoud began shooting pictures at 5:30 a.m. when the attack began an hour later. Wrong. Mr. Masoud, we know from the photographic evidence, began shooting photographs after 6:30 a.m. – from his home’s rooftop with the fighting visible in the distance – when the noise of combat awoke him.

Let me be clear again: the accusation that anyone associated with The Times had advance knowledge of the attack or was embedded with Hamas terrorists at any time is simply false. Mr. Masoud was not even working for The Times on October 7. But even if that were not so, there is no credible evidence that Mr. Masoud was somehow complicit in the attack.

McCraw continued that the “attacks” on the photographer are a threat to the press more broadly:

These attacks on Mr. Masoud are an attack not just on The New York Times but on photojournalists who are doing essential work in conflict areas. They put their lives at risk daily, working under conditions that often require them to rush into danger to bear witness and document important events. The world came to know more fully the horror of what happened to innocent Israelis that day as a result of such journalists’ work. Being a witness to such events is one of the essential roles of a free press in wartime. Yet, by adopting and perpetuating unsupported accusations of criminal behavior against journalists, you not only endanger them but undermine the journalistic work that the world depends on to understand the realities of the war.

——

Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com

/*! elementor – v3.19.0 – 07-02-2024 */
.elementor-heading-title{padding:0;margin:0;line-height:1}.elementor-widget-heading .elementor-heading-title[class*=elementor-size-]>a{color:inherit;font-size:inherit;line-height:inherit}.elementor-widget-heading .elementor-heading-title.elementor-size-small{font-size:15px}.elementor-widget-heading .elementor-heading-title.elementor-size-medium{font-size:19px}.elementor-widget-heading .elementor-heading-title.elementor-size-large{font-size:29px}.elementor-widget-heading .elementor-heading-title.elementor-size-xl{font-size:39px}.elementor-widget-heading .elementor-heading-title.elementor-size-xxl{font-size:59px}

I made a TikTok after months of being nagged by my friends and colleagues. There’s a ton of behind-the-scenes content that I am slowly uploading there. Sometimes, at about 3 in the morning when I finish my work and get slightly depressed, I go on TikTok and scroll through videos tagged #photography. While this won’t be an article targeting TikTok photographers, or an article shaming people for following trends, it will be an article discussing what trends there are now, and what’s possibly dangerous with them.

The Upgrade Wave

The trend that has been consistent since day one is the upgrade trend. Photographers seem to be insatiable when it comes to what gear they have and what they could have. I am one of them, frankly. While my upgrades are slightly odd, they are very much in line with the trend. A few weeks ago, I decided I want to own a medium-format system. A quick search online revealed some really juicy options when it comes to this: namely, a fantastic camera going for EUR 4,500. I would get an XF body, 80mm blue ring lens, and an IQ250 back. While I am the first one to shout that what you have is enough, and you can shoot on a 5D Mark II without a noticeable problem, I am also the first one to go and try to justify an upgrade to a medium-format system.

Other photographers may not be looking to upgrade to a Phase One, but they will be looking at things such as the new global-shutter Sony, or any of the new mirrorless cameras. The upgrade seems like the next best thing that will unlock new possibilities that your current camera doesn’t offer. This trend is perpetuated by camera reviews, marketing material, and the inner feeling of not having enough. Let me ask you (and myself) this: When was the last time your clients said that your camera is not enough? I’ll be the first one to say never. My clientele is fully satisfied with the still images I deliver. They might be unhappy with the lighting or the visual direction, but never the files themselves. Even a Canon 5Ds is overkill, frankly. I could do my work on a 5D Mark II and nobody would bat an eyelid. The requirements for delivering stills have largely not changed. You will know when you need a better camera. Unless you are doing some mad fast action photography, what you currently have is more than enough, assuming your camera is made later than 2010.

Lenses are a bit of a tricky one, but largely the same principle applies. Take me as an example. For now, I am shooting on a Canon 5Ds with either a 50mm f/1.4 or a 24-70mm f/2.8 generation 1 lens. Sure, maybe in a few months, I will be stupid enough to buy a Phase One, but 95% of my work has been done on that 5Ds and a 24-70mm f/2.8 that can’t resolve enough detail. That setup alone has been more than plenty to do 99% of my jobs, and when it wasn’t enough, I either rented a Phase One or shot on my 5D Mark IV due to faster burst speed. Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. You can fully get away by shooting on mid-range EF lenses, which have become super cheap now. The reduced flange distance and improved sharpness are really nothing to lose your mind over. It is tempting to buy it, seeing that every cool photographer shoots on it now. However, if you look beyond YouTube and find real working pros, chances are they will be rocking the old EF glass, which is enough.

Visual Style Trends

The other trend that I keep seeing pop up is the visual style trend. This is a useful trend, as knowing what’s in and what’s out can help you a lot to build a viable portfolio, but you still should be careful with what you shoot and how you shoot it. The main thing is that you need to have the foundation of your style down before adjusting it to the trends. Moreover, your visual style will be relevant if you are taking the right references in. What do I mean by that? This is all assuming you are looking to make money with your photography in the commercial market. The right references would be looking at websites such as Creative Review, or reading the British Journal of Photography. The wrong references would be whatever “commercial” means on social media. If there’s a photographer showing how they did a commercial, chances are they were never hired to do the actual shoot. If it’s behind the scenes of an actual commercial, it will be shared on the page of the brand, or on the page of the photographer, and the same still will also be on the Instagram of the team that worked on that production. However, most commercials are kept under wraps, as sharing behind the scenes would immediately mean that competing brands can copy the style, which harms the photographer. There are strict rules about this. I don’t allow sharing behind the scenes from my shoots for those reasons. My work has been copied, even without behind-the-scenes, so if I give away my actual setups, I will find myself being booked less. Copying is a real problem, and my clients care about their visuals being authentic. But I digress.

There are a few visual trends that you should be aware of. The most important one is the trend for slightly imperfect photography. In 2024, any kid with a phone can produce a nice soft light. Most makeup artists have a ring light and can do a fantastic job at getting a good picture. The knowledge of how to set up a softbox is not unique to you, like it was a decade ago. Most campaigns have left this style of lighting as well. For example, if you look at the latest Schiaparelli campaign, you will find that they are using direct hard light. This is the nostalgia for the pictures from point-and-shoot cameras that is coming into play. The ’90s style of very simple photography is popular now. What this means for you is that you need to have images that represent that time period. The greatest thing is that you don’t need to replicate the style to the pixel; you need to have some elements of it. One such element could be that you use direct flash, or hard light in some form. Perhaps the composition of your image is nostalgic of that period. Just look at what’s going on with wedding photography now: clients are asking for pictures reminiscent of ’90s photography. Soft light and gorgeous tones are no longer popular. Clients want a black and white picture with head-on flash.

Of course, I can’t discuss all of the trends in photography in 2024 in one article. The article would be simply too long to read. But you know the ones to avoid and the ones to follow, in your own way. To close off, I will say that I will probably get a medium-format system at some point, despite it having no effect on the number of jobs I am getting. Why? Well, that’s best saved for another article.

Scarlett Page is one of the featured speakers at The Photography & Video Show next month, taking place March 16-19 at the NEC in Birmingham England.

For the first 15 years of her life as a music photographer, Scarlet Page succeeded in making her mark without, as she says, “using my dad’s name to get on.” So adept had she become at keeping the name of her famous father to herself, that the picture editor of The Sunday Times commissioned her to shoot him without making the family connection. 

That man is legendary Led Zeppelin guitarist and founder Jimmy Page. Scarlet has now chalked up nearly 30 years photographing rock stars, including her father’s contemporaries. Many feature in her book and exhibition Resonators, a collection of guitar heroes including Paul McCartney, Mark Knopfler, Peter Green, Brian May and Jeff Beck to name but a few. 

Naturally, I ask her if being the daughter of Jimmy Page has been a help or hindrance. Quickly, she answers: “I never went in there saying, ‘Oh, do you know who I am?’ It’s really not my thing. The only time that I did present myself as my dad’s daughter was when I was doing the Resonators project because it was
a way of introducing myself, and saying: ‘I’ve been a photographer for this long and, also, this is my father.’ I shot him almost last in the project as I wanted to do everyone first.” 

In every other respect, Scarlet’s life as a photographer has followed the typical path of learning the craft the hard way, starting with a year as an assistant to Ross Halfin… 

Scarlet Page

 Scarlet Page is the daughter of Led Zeppelin guitarist Jimmy Page and the French model Charlotte Martin. She studied photography at the University of Westminster and worked the following year as an assistant to rock photographer Ross Halfin.

Scarlet shoots for major record companies, working with artists such as The Rolling Stones, Spandau Ballet, Brian Ferry, Foo Fighters, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Stereophonics. Her first book, Resonators, in 2015, followed an acclaimed touring exhibition of her portraits featuring over 30 rock guitar heroes. 

She is a member of the Association of Photographers’ women’s group, f22. In 2020, she was a winner in the Portrait of Britain Awards. She has worked extensively for charities including Teenage Cancer Trust, Scope, CALM, and Warchild. 

Image 1 of 3

Alpha Males: Working for a mental health charity, Scarlet produced a striking collection of portraits to support a suicide prevention campaign

Alpha Males: Working for a mental health charity, Scarlet produced a striking collection of portraits to support a suicide prevention campaign

Alpha Males: Working for a mental health charity, Scarlet produced a striking collection of portraits to support a suicide prevention campaign

This interview first appeared in N-Photo magazine. Scarlet is a headline speaker at The Photography & Video Show. You can find out about his talks at the Show website, and you can get 20% off tickets with our exclusive discount code.

You might be interested in the best Nikon cameras along with the best Nikon lenses – and particularly the best Nikon Z lenses designed for its mirrorless cameras. 

Did artificial intelligence technology take over photography? No, it hasn’t, and it probably never will. But here is how AI might have been helping you behind the scenes all along.

Artificial intelligence, or AI, is perhaps the biggest buzzword in the world of photography and tech for 2023, and it continues to be a widely discussed topic in 2024. This stems from the fact that the industry has had mixed reactions about the emergence of AI tools for photography and raised the question of whether this kind of technology puts photographers’ jobs at risk. However, much of the alarm and resistance towards this kind of technology often comes from photographers who have not fully understood what AI actually is and what it actually does. The discussion on that can go way too deep into technicalities, but for the benefit of a simple discussion, let’s start by saying that AI will not mean robots will be taking over our jobs.

The video below is a discussion among myself, landscape and travel photographer Elia Locardi, and portrait and wedding photographer Jiggie Alejandrino, where we talk about how AI has affected our post-production workflow.

Artificial Intelligence in Different Forms

AI comes in various forms that have current applications in a photographer’s workflow. But from a wider perspective of technology, artificial intelligence can be seen as just a more advanced and more intricate level of computing processes that can be applied to anything and everything we do on digital devices. In a sense, the technology is not new at this point; at most, it has just matured to become more capable. AI was introduced in smartphone cameras at least seven years ago as a form of enhanced image processing through scene detection and local adjustments. This early form of AI in smartphone cameras was an improved version of the automatic mode that almost every camera has. It offered better metering and color processing through scene detection, which in effect just made it easier for smartphone photographers to take better photos without having to edit or refine so much as it uses cues to detect the scene and match applicable settings and adjustments for the detected scene. In recent months, AI-backed editing features have been made on smartphones, such as Samsung’s new S24 series, where one could easily remove objects and even subjects from the photos taken by the phone.

In conventional interchangeable lens cameras, Sony introduced AI processing in its focusing system, which first appeared on the Sony A7RV. From personal use, it was apparent that this form of AI boosts the capabilities of the processor to detect and track the selected subject through eye-AF tracking. Instead of simply detecting where the eye of the subject is and subsequently focusing on it, the AI processor is now able to predict and anticipate the motion of the moving subject to be able to track and focus faster, thereby reducing the probability of missing focus on some frames. This has been made available on other cameras that were released after it and is also now being offered by other camera brands.

AI in Post-Production

On the other hand, AI takes more diverse forms in post-production. Various tools have emerged that introduce AI processes into different steps of post-production. Some tools use AI to automate the process of developing raw images. These tools use AI-powered scene detection to apply exposure, color, and contrast treatment that is appropriate for the specific shot. Some tools use AI to detect commonly removed skin elements in the retouching process to reduce the amount of time spent editing portraits. Some tools offer exponentially greater precision in cloning out and filling in identified spots on a surface.

What needs to be said about AI in editing is that almost none of these tools are actually new. For decades now, photographers have been using tools like content-aware fill, which is just a more intuitive version of older tools such as the heal tool or the patch tool. With smarter AI capabilities, this has now evolved into the remove tool, which is just a much smarter version of the earlier tools that is more effective in preserving the details and continuity of visual elements that it is being used on.

As a landscape and architectural photographer, I personally experienced having to trace out the sky in images using tools like the pen tool, the magic wand, or the lasso tool for hours on a single image just to be able to selectively edit them or blend in a new sky. In the past couple of years, this was made easier by a smarter “select sky” option or a semi-automated sky replacement module that allowed the user to select any image and use it as the sky on the photo being worked on, and that includes images (supposedly) legally acquired to be used for that purpose. This ultimately automated the process that used to take hours and compressed it into a few seconds. Now with the use of those tools and with generative fill, the process is made much more efficient and infuses options generated from what are supposedly consensually referenced images. All of that said, all of these were technically possible with Photoshop in the past; the difference lies in the speed and precision with which the tasks are performed.

Generative AI and Photography

Perhaps the form of AI that causes much of the worry would be the generative form of AI that has the ability to create illustrations either as standalone images or as part of a photograph that is being edited. It is undeniable that there have been instances where AI-generated images were maliciously used in photography competitions. There have also been instances where commercial campaigns were called out for using AI-generated illustrations, specifically for brands that sell tools for digital artists. It is undeniable that, in the wrong hands, AI can be used to cheat, mislead, or undermine photographers and, on a larger scale, it can be used for spreading disinformation.

However, at this point, it does not seem like AI tools can do anything that human creatives cannot. If anything, they can only do them faster but not necessarily better. The core of AI is to emulate human responses to automate what was previously only doable by human work, but it seems (at least from how I see it) that the effect of what is done with AI depends entirely on the intention of whoever creates with it or whoever uses the images. That then simplifies this sophisticated artificial intelligence technology created from learned neural responses as merely a tool. In the same way that a hammer can be used both to build and to destroy, AI tools, from this perspective, remain to be what they are — tools. This is where laws, regulations, and ethics need to step in; to prevent this new tool from being used to cause the same old harm that we have been preventing in the past.

Implications of AI in Photography

The possibilities that come with AI are endless and almost impossible to bind, as with any other form of advancement in technology. It can definitely lead to unfortunate circumstances when used improperly, which is where the importance of human intervention, regulation, and government steps in. When it comes to how generative AI can be used for malicious things, it is up to us collectively to step in and prevent this.

On the other hand, AI tools in photography do offer a lot of possibilities. As with any other tool, AI can offer much better efficiency in our work as photographers. In-camera, AI has been helpful in minimizing the role of luck and increasing precision in our cameras. In post-production, AI tools can offer to do days’ worth of work in only a matter of minutes if properly used and prompted to achieve the correct results. Any photographer who shoots raw can be spared from hours of raw developing or using presets that still need refining, but this can only happen if the photographer has developed a consistent style and intentionality. Portrait photographers can now more efficiently retouch their subjects based on their style, preference, and the extent of processing they choose. Commercial photographers can now do everything they’ve been doing on Photoshop for the past couple of decades with much more precision while only taking a minuscule fraction of the time.

Authenticity Will Never Lose Value

As a landscape photographer, I can say that in some way of looking at it, landscape photography was as seemingly threatening as AI is now to landscape painters and visual artists before the dawn of photography. However, there seems to be barely any conflict between landscape painters and landscape photographers because the demand for either of them is just based on the preference of an entirely different audience. At the same time, as an architectural photographer, the most constant challenge is getting a client to spend more for photography of the actual structure instead of just using the already-available design perspective that was there way before the building was erected. In this case, it doesn’t seem like AI-generated images will be any more of a threat than other ways of illustrating an architectural project.

For portrait photographers, wedding photographers, event photographers, even more so, do I personally believe that authenticity, specifically the value of having genuine images of a person or event, probably won’t decline. AI, specifically generative AI, will definitely cause and actually has caused ethical dilemmas in terms of the crisis of disinformation and misinformation, but overall, photography is the art form that has the most potential to uphold truth and authenticity even in the age of advanced technology, for as long as the line between art and documentation is clearly maintained.

But for an individual photographer, with this not-so-new advancement in technology, and with human intervention factored in, AI tools offer two options. We can either spend less time editing so that we can take in more clients and shoot more, or we can spend less time editing so that we can spend more time for ourselves outside of work. If anything, this might be a reminder that most of us probably started learning photography for the sake of taking pictures — not editing them, so technology is now offering to take the bulk of that (still) necessary step of the process so that we could focus on the creative aspect.