FASHION:THEORY

STRAWBERRYFIELDS FOREVER

2006-07-10T22:46:00.000+01:00

Every picture should be built on a standalone idea. No matter where the picture takes you the idea wil stay put to give the thing some substance.

Strawberryfields Forever the Beatles song is just like that. It has its weird complicated side but underneath theres a song with John playing along on guitar. The song itself sounds good without all the other stuff and maybe its made more interesting later with Pauls mellotron part and Georges Indian zither and the fact that George Martin has spliced together two different versions into one.

So someone complains my idea was this but now its turned into that. But if the idea is strong enough you should be able tobuild on it and still sense it under all of the 'that'. Good photographs are built on a strong concept and or design so that no matter what is added the origins are evident.

The problem comes from simply copying a page, so what was the idea behind this page. If you knew that how do you not know that you would do something different. Of course photographers look at magazines to 'see whats going on' but better photography comes from photographing the idea of whats going on. That way youre whats going wont be like everyone elses.

Wether its John singing and playing along on acoustic or the Beatles playing on record
Its Strawberryfields Forever

IN A FIX?.....CALL HARRY HOUDINI

2006-07-06T21:45:00.000+01:00

It happens in photography,( David Bailey and Donovan once discussed over lunch how there were literally hundreds of things that could go wrong in photographing fashion) so now youre in a fix, cornered, the location didnt work out, its raining and doesnt look as though its going to stop, youve forgotten a piece of equipment etc etc.

So what do you do? you do what you planned to do if any of these things happen just like Harry Houdini the famous escapologist

Houdini once boasted he could get out of a jail cell that was securely locked. But he had to inspect it first. When he went he took a selection of picklocks with him, (Harry had already tested nearly every lock on the market and made picks for them) as he seemed to be testing the strength of the bars and pretending to see if he could sqeeze through he was really deciding on which pick would pick which lock. He stretched out on the bed to see how hard it was for his 'stay' and at the same time hid a selection of picks as he checked the mattress etc. When he returned he was meticulously shaken down to see if he was bringing anything in but there was nothing, because it was already there. The guard had hardly sat down to read the paper when the phone rang. "Houdini calling". He was out!!!! and there it was the empty cell.

It just illustrates the point by planning ahead and preparing for location changes etc etc You can get out of most fixes just like Harry. Bert Stern had the attitude,'if it cant be done here where can it be done'
Because he'd thought of that beforehand he probably knew the answer.

LETS GO BIG GAME HUNTING

2006-04-06T09:01:00.000+01:00

Some 'amateur' photographers dream of shooting big accounts, big fashion,big elebrities etc etc.
What do you need to do such things. Its a bit like big game hunting. First point where is the big game. What would you do????

Would you buy a rifle first or a flight ticket.

Yes where is the big big game. Where i live I could buy the rifle, the bullets, the tent the provisions, the 4x4 everything, but it would do no good, because there are no big game targets here. I would end up chasing little game with big game equipment. Sure it massages my ego to have all this stuff but I have no trophies well no big big trophies.

On the other hand I could get a ticket to where the game is. What about the stuff, well we'll hire or rent that for the moment, build up a trophy list and then maybe buy some of the stuff and really give it its intended use.

Would it be best to spend £$1000s on gear or spend the same amounts spending time in a big game location sayLONDON,PARIS, MILAN, NYC or LA

When the tickets not an option the camera makers rub their hands with glee. First get a 1Emark7 20mp and a full set of low dispersion x lenses and next, well who cares what comes next, they say thats your problem. Heck shoot the girls in the office and join an online forum.

Give us all your cash and thatll be your ticket

KISS THE FROG

2006-03-04T12:54:00.000Z

"I remember I wanted to get in and out as soon as possible. Larry Carlton and Chuck Rainey were there, pretty much business as usual. Then they counted off this tune...the first thing I heard was the lyrics 'agents of the law/luckless pedestrian,' and I almost stopped playing. I thought, 'I'm listening in my phones to this guy who can really sing, and the tune sounds amazing, and the band is amazing,' it was just...different. You have to kiss a lot of frogs when you're a studio player. After that I had to stop and collect myself.

This reminds that in commercial photography as well as session musicianship you have to have an attitude toward the job. That was Rick Marotta a drummer who did some Steely Dan sessions in the seventies. His first look was 'business as usual' but he got a suprise, a good suprise.

When you take on a fashion session, even if as a test, you sometimes have less control as you'd like but the idea is to work to make whatever is in front of you as good as possible. Even if the m.u. and the clothes are not to your personal taste.

It may look like a frog but kiss it anyway and the suprise may come

Back to the Steely Dan players

Heres one person who wouldnt kiss the frog because he thought the music was 'schlocky'

So he didnt get hired and get the good suprise

"There was a situation during the time that Steely Dan was really hot. Larry Carlton recommended me to those cats to play on a track. There had been a date that I had done three years prior to that recommendation, where it was some schlocky. music and I said, "Ya know, I don't really want to play this," and I just played very mediocre. The "one thing" Fagen and Becker happened to have heard me play on was a tape of that one track. They told Carlton, "We've heard this cat; he's not happening." Carlton told me the story afterwards. So it doesn't pay in the long run to do that. "

Kiss the frog. It pays in the long run.

THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN

2006-02-14T16:27:00.000Z

Simply stated

1. LINE
2. SIZE
3. SHAPE
4. DIRECTION
5. TEXTURE
6. VALUE
7. COLOUR

Do you see any of these when you look through the lens or is it all frocks, legs and hairstyles. Can you make one or two stand out. Wheres the design in this fashion picture???

In the film the Magnificent Seven Brynner was the standout. He wore all black. His horse was bigger than the others. He had better lines. Good. The other actors were SUPPORTING actors
they had interesting attributes but that was it.

However the problem was with another actor named Steve McQueen, He was up and coming. He wanted more.Watch the film and watch McQueen try to upstage Brynner. While Brynner talks McQeen in the background fiddles with his hat fanning his face, checking his gun etc. Doing anything and everything to draw attention away from Brynner and onto himself.

It reminds me when I look through the lens, something has to stand out,

you can see fashion pictures where the hair upstages the frocks, hair pictures where the mu steals the show, pictures where the photography upstages everything.

whats the star of your show, dont let the supporting ideas steal the moment

You can have Brynner or McQueen but not both

AIM HIGH SHOOT LOW

2006-02-07T22:09:00.000Z

Questions, Critiques, there are thousands of them. Often unhelpful,contradictory, sometimes misleading.

Aim high, shoot low

Its from a Bob Hope film I think. Hes useless with a gun and has to have a shootout with the baddie. On his way to meet him everyone gives their 2 cents worth of advice, aim high shoot low, lean left shoot right etc. It reminds me of the queries: which developer should I use? Whats a good lens for fashion? Which is the best film for portraits? Answer!! Try it and see. Are people afraid to test these things? Its what fashion testing used to be all about. Trying things out. Find what works for you. Then use it/them. Test Test Test, Testing has validity moreso if your trying to prove a point to yourself. (Most tests arent really test at all just excuses to photograph)

If not youll get as many ideas as Bob got in his film, so many he couldnt remember any, and yes he won the fight but it was sheer luck.

If you want to know if your equipment and materials and ideas will work, dont ask ,TEST

DO YOU REALLY WANT THAT CRITIQUE...its probably worth less than 2 cents

2006-02-01T10:09:00.000Z

Do you need it? 2 cents worth!!!!
I once asked an experienced photographer how I could make progress, the reply was "stop asking other photographers (my peers) what they think about your pictures."
Strange, but surely you have to ask someone to get some feedback??
'Sure. but look' he said' what are you trying to do with these pictures, something commercial? If so show them to an ad agency, people in the business, insiders, youll soon find out where you are and where you need to go, and they wont be saying great shot, how did you light that, or do you use the new Gazebo Mark3f camera with the Tinkertoy 1.3 zoom lens. These guys know what was, is, and will be and theyre not the self indulgent peer gratification junkies you hang out with.
Ouch, but it was going to get worse.
OK so you tell me what you think.
Well how long have you been photographing seriousley
About 5 years
It looks like one year five times over to me. You got your peer approval the first year and spent the next 4 years trying to keep it.
But there must be something good?
Sure but you're not selling the goods just your own ego.
"Look," he repeated." think about selling the goods, not yourself,(then came the thing I remembered most) If your going down the commercial route suppress the creative ego, we'll find out that youre a genius later."
Ouch (that hurt) bigger ouch (he was right).
Formerly there were only a handful of people to ask about your pictures unless you joined a camera club but now with the web you can interact with literally thousands and play critique tennis all day long if you wish.

I asked an internet acquaintance about this recently. NYC fashion photographer Richard Warren.
This is what he said
I question the value of critiques in a public forum . Aside from the self-indulgent need for peer approval, what is the point ? If you took the photo and liked it enough to place it on a server then obviously the image meant something to you. I understand that when you are starting out it is good to ask others about basic composition, lighting, lens choice etc.If you have a good grasp of lighting, composition, technique and style. and are trying to develop a personal style then you should not listen to others as to how "take the photo" or even their opinion of the composition .
The editing process is just as important as the image making process. You wouldn't let others take photos for you right ? So why ask others to edit for you ?
When I was still an assistant, I was helping my boss edit some film from a Lineia Italia shoot done in Rome. It was rare that I was helping with the edit, but I guess he had his reasons for wanting to turn-around the film quickly. He pulled a slide out and asked me what I thought of it. I was duly impressed with the shot and innocently mentioned "Great shot , sort of looks like a Helmet Newton shot". He took the chrome and through it on the floor and stomped on it " I can't make photos that look like Newton; I have to take photos that look like me !"
As "decoration" to one of my posts I placed an image on a public forum. I was not even asking for a critique; but received a mouthful.
"Never cut a girls head in half !" , " Instead of over head light, why not try a big soft box from the side" I even had folks telling me what type of background to use.
I took the photo (good or bad) and liked it enough to print it and put my name on it. Why in the world would I want another photographers opinion on my personal work ? Don't get me wrong; I like strokes as much as anyone else. Just be honest with yourself and realize that "strokes" is the only tangible reason to post a photo on a forum (other than to solicit models to hire you for portfolio shots)
Yes, the varied cast of characters. Some are making photos as their art while others are following the editorial fashion route. Really the only comment I could make about someone's "art" is that it works or does not work for me. Otherwise I start telling them how to take a picture; and no one needs that.
Narrow the criteria. Putting an image up on an forum and saying "What Do you think ?" puts all the work on the person willing to comment. If someone is putting this little effort in a post , then why should I put more effort in my reply ? Its too much work.
I would be able to comment better if someone limited the critique.
"I was trying to do a Maxim type photo; What do you think ?"
OK. Now the criteria is set and I have something to judge by. I have seen Maxim photos and can use that as a reference to judge the photo in front of me. I have always done this with my own fashion work simply by looking at the magazine and then looking at my photo. If my photo is as good as the one in the magazine then it is a "keeper". In this case you really do not need a lot of folks commenting on your photo.
Finally , variety in the posts. I did a "no-holds-barred" critique on another forum once. The following 20 posts were "What Do you Think ?"
Too many "What do you think?" is just as bad as "Model booking January-December" posts. Its nice to see a mix

And that doesnt include 'any and all comments welcome'. So is there any real value to photographers via forum critiques. Personally I view them as market research. I ignore all the ones that suggest I should have gone for more detail in the whites, and the How did you do that etc' but look for something else.
Suppose someone said 'your photographs are scary', or 'depressing,'' or (heaven forbid) they make me want to go out and buy that dress or tie. Well you could react to that kind of comment. Why do they think that way? Should I take another look? If youre a poster when was the last time some one critiqued that way. When was the last time you wanted that type of response.

Any and all comments welcome

Richard Warren kindly agreed to let me post his comments. His work can be found here
Fashion photographer Richard Warren http://www.richardwarrenphotos.com/

WAIT A MINUTE SOMETHINGS WRONG HERE

2006-01-31T13:59:00.000Z

Is there a difference between shooting fashion for fun and minor gain and the kind that that is oriented toward ads and magazine pages. I place myself in the former category.
First irritation is that most information is outsider information, passed on by journalists and ,consumer magazines, and fashion mags themselves.
Two points are overplayed 1.
The best way to improve photography is to try to copy magazine pages. And the greatest myth of all, you should always and only shoot for yourself and follow your own vision. Most successful photographers have a style, true, but most play the market place and end up doing whats required photographing whatever is going on in their “style”. However their vision is greatly restricted by those whom they work for. Theres much politicing going on in the fashion photo world. Editors and creative directors are whimsical creatures, they also know however great they are they can and do get dumped by company CEOs, people who have minimal interest in fashion and great interest in their shareholders.
Wether working pros like it or not some of this frisson filters down and influences their work. They become good at doing two things, retaining a style and doing what their hirers want of them. Of course when its time to be interviewed they wouldn’t dream of mentioning this, and, their interviewers want something more spicy. They like phrases like They gave me a trunk of clothes and told me to do what I wanted. Or how about big fights with the art director. And theres always’ I have no interest in fashion whatsoever.”
None of this is probably true but it makes good copy for outsiders to be influenced by it.
The result for shooters mentioned at the outset can be what someone said were facsimiles of fashion, what one could imagine a photo would look like, and of course if a MU artist and Hairstylist had been available it would look really good, just like the real thing, but we just had to use those glam platform shoes that don’t match the outfit because thats all we have, in fact they appear in all the pics. Wait a minute somethings wrong here, why accept this?This key wont unlock this door. Why . Well the shooter is following his personal visionand woe betide any insider who says that these pictures suck.
How about at least imagining other sets of eyes looking over the pictures, people who arent just interested in photography, but also styling, Make up, selling clothes, selling magazines, saving their jobs, where mistakes, bad styling clothing mismatches just wont do. etc etc.
If youre good, really that good, the frisson associated with commercial fashion photography will make you that much better.

THIS KEY WONT UNLOCK THIS DOOR

2006-01-31T13:48:00.000Z

So you can photograph as many 'models' as you like, In your own world anything goes.But when you enter the world of others get ready . Even the literature tells us to watch out. Helmut Newton looks on as the assembled editors go through his pictures, at the end there's stunned silence. These pictures are great but,but, the model has underarm hair so even though Helmut thinks this is beautiful his pictures wont be running.
Vreeland to Bailey” You’ve excelled yourself but we cant use these pictures, theres no languor(whatever that is) in their lips.
Frank Horvat says to his Bazaar editor, 'how about no make up? ah but at the time Revlon are buying so many ads all the faces need to be well made up. The democratic photographic principle bites back.
The late Terence Donovan used to call in at the Tottenham Court Road camera club and show some of his pictures. He would tell the audience don’t try to match these pictures youll never do it. For the week end or minor market shooter its true, but why.
Its not only the expertise of the team photographer, make up, hair, stylist etc it’s the unseen people, magazine editor, ad agency, designer,and a whole host of others that bring tension and frisson to the job. It has to work, it has to be good, money,jobs, reputation depend on it.
This often is what makes good better. For most of us this isn’t the case, at best it prints for all who were there and thatll do, and if its good enough for the way the personal vision goes that’s the key to success and feeling good about yourself.
Heres some drummers from the Steely Dan sessions Bernard Purdie, Rick Marotta and Jeff Porcaro and bassist Anthony Jackson
They were very strict to the point of super precision," Purdie recalls. "Really picky. They wouldn't take no for an answer and they wouldn't accept mistakes-period. It was truly frustrating in the beginning. I come from the school that when you feel good about what you've done, it's hard to do better. It only goes downhill from there. I learned to curtail my own feelings and just wait. They wanted it their way, so you had to do many takes.

They were the most demanding of anybody I've ever worked with," Marotta says. "Donald was like the Prince of Doom. For instance, I'd walk in the control room and it would sound unbelievably great, and he'd just sit there, looking at the floor, saying, 'Yeah, I guess it's okay'.
"0n 'Dont Take Me Alive', there's one backbeat in th 16th or 17th bar that was a little softer than the others. I'd say, 'Donald, show me where.' He'd wait for the tape to come around and he'd point it out. 'Right..... there .' He'd pick the same spot out each time. He wasn't crazy, he was just so microscopic.

From noon till six we'd play the tune over and over and over again," says Porcaro, "nailing each part. We'd go to dinner and come back and start recording. They made everybody play like their life depended on it. But they weren't gonna keep anything anyone else played that night, no matter how tight it was. All they were going for was the drum track." (The final product on Gaucho was a combination of 46 edits.)

Fagen, in particular, is a stickler for detail, so the only important issue is whether my detailing as interpreter coincides with his as composer. Once a stylistic approach to a song has been decided-such approach, of course, having been determined almost entirely by Fagen-the actual recording of the performance begins, and this is where the legend of cruelty to musicians originates. It's true that Becker, Fagen, and split more hairs than most and never hype players: no high-fives, no reverential cursing. You've played well? Good; next song. Or more likely: Not good; do it again. Still not good; again. Still not good; go home. Many did. This kind of ferocious performance-disciplining, far from intimidating me, sends adrenaline pouring into my bloodstream. Anthony Jackson.

Wether more or less this is the world of working for someone who is hiring you to do work for them, they have a personal vision too, and paying for it to be interpreted

Its sa this poster somewhere wisely stated " It’s pretty easy to sit outside the big markets and complain about how incestuous they are. Then you step into those big markets and you realize they contain whole universes. The competition is fierce. No, talent does not always rise to the top. But professionalism often does. A temperament and a capacity for managing the business environment, the clients and their often wacked out notions, peers, reps and agents, editors, the egos of all concerned, so on and so forth — and then on top of it to get shots: that’s what will get honed in those contexts. You don’t have to like it; hell, many of the people who go through it don’t *like* it. But most of those who manage to negotiate it one way or another will acknowledge they got something out of it, and that it made them “better” in some sense of the word.
Art, or voice, or vision, or whatever you want to call it, happens as an accident in this world. Everybody in the business is interested in it to some degree, but it’s rare that any of them get the chance to foreground it. Someone else’s expectations are always driving the car, and someone else’s credit card is always putting gas in the tank. Getting the job done — whatever the job is perceived to be by the ones who are paying for it — becomes priority one. Time matters; familiarity with the game matters; proximity matters; track record matters. You can’t blame people for minimizing risk when that’s part of what they’ve been explicitly charged with doing by the guys who put bread on their tables"

Maybe we just have to imagine not so much what will other photographers think but what would a stylist think. a booker, a magazine editor, which magazine would this place in, would it shift the designers garments

Its the key that unlocks the door

FASHION NEW IS NOT THE NEW NEW

2006-01-31T13:41:00.000Z

Is 'new' in the photo fashion world different from 'new' in the ,well, real world?
Fashionistas say stupid things like 'brown is the new black' Their magazines are the 'Biggest fashion issue EVER' They speak in largely tri-partite sentences 'Big.Beautiful, Blonde and describe some clothes as impossibly pretty.
We have to understand NEW in fashion photography as fashion-new not new -new.
Some photogs are getting near to fashion speak already. I cant understand why theyve missed the point of fashion-new. Going well beyond the well worn 'awesome' as as a suitable description we sometimes get 'killer'or the best yet'achingly beautiful' which Im sure youll agree is getting near to impossibly pretty.
New in fashion is ringlite-new, polaroid-new, or anything new as long as you do (or re-do it) first.
Some of the newness is not image but sensibilities attached to it.
Remember the point on Frank Horvats page
Marvin wanted me to do for BAZAAR the same kind of "natural" fashion photos I had done for ELLE. But Nancy White, the editor, wanted the models to wear extravagant hats and plenty of lipstick ("otherwise Revlon may cancel their ads" ). She eventually agreed to publish the sequence, but some of the best photographs had to be dropped.
Bailey,Donovan and Duffy were new not so much because their pictures were different but because they represented then then societies sensibilities toward fashion-new, rejecting the conventions of the time for a more rough, heterosexual viewpoint. This was new to the fashion world.
Photographers such as Norman Parkinson took umbrage at this ill-mannered uncouth approach. What he didn’t realise was that the (young) world was about to become a more ill-mannered,uncouth place. Sensibilities were changing.
When Arthur Elgort said to his model 'just hold this newspaper and walk towards me' this was new, although Munkacsi and Toni Frissel had done things like this, it wasnt with Arthurs sense of professional-amateurism which was just right for the time.Liberman described his pictures as full of happiness and light. New.
So whats new. Terry Richardson-new is that its the same old sexy pictures but they always look as though the photographer is a particiant(or he will be shortly) in whats going on. Not new to photography (Larry Clark) but new to fashion. Newton and Bourdins pictures dont take on this sensibility.
What else is new: Designers want photographs that look like them. Galliano talking about Dior pictures taken by someone famous hired by the advertising agency as being not like me, not making the product his. He fired them and now travels to London to oversee and get involved in Dior advertising with Nick Knight that presumably mirrors his sensibilities. Its fashion auterism. Its new. Well fashion-new.
New? Exerpt from Washington Post Chic click review
‘There is today a School of High Abjection, as you could call it, that gives an artist's snaps of drug-addicted friends and other sexy down-and-outers the kind of status that a School of Paris painting had in 1920. (Nan Goldin, whom Washingtonians got a chance to come to grips with in the last Corcoran Biennial, is the new school's master.) And that well-established status may be why fashion editors are willing, even eager, to have this look within their pages. It may not illustrate the clothes -- it may not even show them -- but it sends the crucial message that even a line as dull as Sisley can claim some kind of kinship with the art world's cutting edge. And that's because the most prestigious fashion photography no longer has a special job to do that speaks, even obliquely, about designer clothes; it just has to assert its fine-art status, so some of that glory can rub off on the fashion house that's paid for it.’
U.K. TV is running a series as to how the business world applied Freuds psychological principals to consumer manipulation. As the mood of society changes and its sensibilities, the old will no longer do.All those magazine questionaires that get filled are for a purpose. Its not a circle, its a spiral, things go round come back but are not (quite) the same. This is the new.
Believe me, New is the(not quite the same) old of fashion photography.

Are you photographing something..or anything!!!

2006-01-31T11:55:00.000Z

When I play a jazz cd my wife says it sounds as though they playing anything. When I play a few jazz guitar passages she says that just sounds like anything too. So then I just play anything and she says...youre still just playing ...anything. If some of my jazz friends come to call and when I play the anything passages over to them they say:Thats not jazz youre just playing anything. So it goes with styling, you have to know or want to know fashion to really see it. Just as a jazz musician knows his way round the fret/keyboard ( they know the mode, what notes are available and what to leave out)so stylists know their way around clothes and accessories and to the same degree But to some people it just looks like anything ,a load of clothes and colours thrown together, with some fake blood and few dolls with the heads and arms pulled off.
And when they try to reproduce edgy thats just what it looks like because thats what they see
Imagine youre a first time artist being asked to copy a great work of art. How many might decide to copy a Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, because they look 'easy' after all its just paint thrown onto the canvas isnt it?Or another angle re 'easy' pictures:From time to time you may see the fashion illustration of Mats Gustafson either in blocks of colour or 'simple'line drawings or those of Rene Grau. They look pretty simple but trying to re create them shows an underlying expertise hidden by the outward 'simplicity' of the work.
Its the underlying structure to edgy thats hard to catch
All commercial fashion photography 'edgy' or 'catalogue' is difficult. You have other eyes to please and you enter into the area of peer judgment.One emphasises creativity the other restraint
So when photographers are just out of the egg what do you hear. Well I want to do something different, High end fashion, something edgy.

Different from what?? Edgier than what??? All that (not so) easy catalogue stuff.

Most new starters have this attitude because it gives them more long grass in which to hide their lack of fashion knowledge.

DONT COPY WALK THE CHANGES

2006-01-31T11:20:00.000Z

Don’t just copy, Walk the changes
Its easy to think its all too easy. In fact maybe thats why most avoid it, they think "copying" is too simple.
Nothing could be further from the truth. On a visit to the Louvre I watched an artist brilliantly copying an Ingres painting, well it looked good to me but the grunts and sighs told me he wasnt happy with how it was coming up.
Lesson learned: copying heightens the visual senses.
A musical example. When Jaco Pastorius exploded onto the Bass playing world in the 70s he was so far ahead of the pack that no-one could understand him . Its alleged when record producers first heard Pastorius they could not believe their ears. He said he was going to play Donna Lee ( a really fast jazz bop tune for trumpet) on bass. Really well this is laughable.” When he had finished I nearly fell of my chair” said one producer,” Id never heard anything like it.”
eg Heres Marcus Miller a great bassist in his own right:
"I was around 15 years old and a drummer friend of mine told me I had to check this record out. It was Jaco's first album. The first thing I heard was "Donna Lee". I have to admit, I didn't quite get it. It just sounded like some cat playing whatever notes he felt like. I was just learning about jazz and hadn't progressed in my own development to where I could even begin to comprehend what Jaco was doing. But this guy was obviously good so I got the record for myself and began to really listen to it.
It stayed on my turntable for around two years.
I slowly began to appreciate what Jaco was doing. I was studying music pretty intensely then and it seemed like each step I took in my development allowed me to appreciate that Jaco album more. I'll never forget when, just for kicks, I decided to walk the changes to "Donna Lee" on my bass while Jaco's version was playing. This was probably a year into listening to Jaco's album and I had finally learned "Donna Lee" at school. I was still assuming that, once Jaco stated Charlie Parker's melody, he pretty much was playing any ole' thing that he wanted and that it had nothing to do with the changes. Well I'm walking the changes under Jaco's melody and continue the changes under Jaco's 'crazy solo' and of course realize that it's not crazy at all! I realize that he's playing the changes -- and not just playing them. He was creating harmonies and lines that were so amazing it was sick!"
It was only when Miller referenced that he realised what was going on and that most of his assumptions were wrong.
Assumptions about fashion pictures can be just as wrong to until you walk the changes with them.
But how did Jaco get so good and out in front of his contemporaries. Rather than locking himself away and concentrating on just one thing in his pursuit of genius, this is what he did:
"I was never in a school band but lots of high school bands with friends, just R&B bands and dance bands. We'd play at parties and night clubs. I started playing at night clubs on bass just before I turned 16. I kept doing that until almost joining Weather Report.”
"I did all my learning in the clubs. Playing eight sets a night. It was real killer stuff; going in at 9pm and leaving at 6:30 in the morning without days off. I've done lots of gigs. , I played with: Temptations, Nancy Wilson, Johnny Carson, Bob Hope, anybody, comedians, show gigs. That's where I learned all my reading, in show gigs. I just went out on all gigs."
Maybe this lead to Jaco thinking differently than the others: He was asked wether Bird was his main influence
"I wouldn't say he's my main influence but he's definitely a big influence on me; he definitely can play some great lines. I really like the way Charlie Parker plays. Herbie (Hancock) is a big influence on me, James Brown, people like that. The people I said before; the Beatles, Sinatra.
Sinatra is a killer. He was a real big influence on me, because that tone of his voice is in the same range I play in.
So Jaco simply played everything when he was starting out so his musical sample was big,the influences were wide ranging and when the sample got big enough and the time was right he distilled it down to his style.
He had walked the changes with so many different things that he knew what he did and didnt want to do
Its a great lesson when starting out.
Walk the changes with shooters that catch your eye fashion non-fashion anything anybody and go for a big sample before going for one style
It helps find the style you want by virtue of circumstance and real practice.
I think its called paying your dues.

COPYING or is it REFERENCING AND REVISITING????

2006-01-31T10:56:00.000Z

The way to succeed in the copying field is to keep your business aspirations local .Keeping it local means that local clients can hire you and pay less than if they hired the 'real' photog. Like all those tribute bands we hear about but who never cut records.
Or get famous like Meisel and just rip everybody off and say its your style, check back for Meisels series on Jack Vettriano ( a much criticised populist artist here in the UK) in IV its a straight copy but then Nick Knight did a Tamara de Lempicka series in Brogue a while back. Strangley these ‘famous’ photogs didn’t copy they referenced or revisited.
Referencing is a lot more than copying.
Look at this way: Fashions all been done the themes are recycled and stay the same but the fabrics change and so does peoples view of the fashion.
Also according to Colin McDowell its easier to reference the past than the future ( Courreges space age fashion in the 60s/70s fell into the future trap.) Hr guessed as to what future fashion would/could look like and he was wrong
Most photogs reference or revisit the past and just as fashions styles can be old but the fabrics new successful photogs bring a new take to an old idea. The trick is not reference things that are too contemporary and close.
Meisel breaks this 'rule' too. At least Helmut thought so
http://www.indexmagazine.com/interviews/helmut_newton.shtml
LEETA: A lot of photographers in the ‘90s copied your style, using hard flash, hotel rooms, cars, even dogs. HELMUT: I’ll tell you something, I’m touched if I can influence young people. I was influenced by Brassai, by Erich Salomon — they’re the people that I admired when I was very young. In fact, I still think there’s some Brassai in my photography — which is a good thing. But what really pisses me off is when famous photographers do it. I’m not mentioning names, but I’m thinking of a Versace campaign. You know the photo of the woman with the garters? LEETA: You mean Steven Meisel? HELMUT: Mind you, he’s a very good photographer. But it’s a dumb way to work. But look, young people have got to start somewhere. I grew up in the Bauhaus period, I looked at Maholy-Nacy, Cartesh [fc], and Brassai.
So there you go.
Referencing heres an example:
Heres a picture by Herman Landshoff: Girls on bicycles taken for Junior Bazaar 1946 Theyre kids having fun 1940s style http://www.lookonline.com/land-4.jpg
Now Twiggy by Ronald Traeger. She shows all the attitudes of 60s kids http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/PM/pm_820002_b.jpg
And lastly Elaine Constantine all the uncoolness of 90s kids being stupid etc
http://www.galerie213.com/dossier/cons/imcons/gr05.jpg
Theyre all kids having fun on bikes but the attitudes are different, theyre of their time, In a way the Constantine picture is a good 'copy' of the Twiggy shot really more of a reference.
These pictures give a good idea of the difference between 'copying' and 'referencing' or 'revisiting'

GET REAL: Get on the inside(or as near as possible.)

2006-01-30T21:01:00.000Z

In his book Adventures in the Screentrade William Goldman writes about the value of being an insider. He use the film Porkies as an example. This film was a success. All the amateur and out of work screenwriters thought ' I could do that'. Goldman says they were wasting their time. Before public screening test projections and the grapevine had decreed that Porkies was going to be a success. Before release Porkies 2 was well into production and #3 was being worked out by insider screenwriters who had already made their submissions. Outsiders were only yet working on #2 light years behind the real process.
This is what is needed: More grapevine. More industry reality. More toward the inside
Because most interesting fashion pictures and ideas dont come from reading the fashion mags.
I have a book with a picture of the art dept in Vogue there are three maybe four issues laid out with the pictures on the wall. Its called lead in time. By the time shooters have avidly read and prepared their next test in three weeks time insiders are three months ahead.
EG: The MUA, fashion and photographers assistants meet their buddies after working with xyz magazine photographer.
Well what have you been up to? They relate their experiences. In a couple of days at least 25 people know that famous xyz wanted absolutely minimal make up and red,yellow and green gels its the next big thing.
And its not going to show in the mags for another 3 months thats the time when the outsiders get their first chance to copy, critique and test or whatever
Too late. The others guys MUAs and stylists are 3 months into their next jobs.Why should they care what we think about stuff they did 3 months ago
Get grapevine, more relevance, more toward the inside.
There is great value in working on the real workings of fashion photography business and not what the consumer photo publications would have us believe. Most of what they say doesnt ring true and is misleading. At best you may get the ring of truth here but usually theyre playing to an eager maybe over eager fashion shooting public and of course their advertisers and sponsors.
Suss things that deal with the way things really are and not how folks want them to be.
This way we avoid being grossly offended when someone on the inside tells us our ideas wont work, wont sell or wont do. (Didnt we ask for a 'critique' )
If the information passed on is real (by someone right on the inside)rather than mythical then view it as extremely relevant. Take a consumer publication article concerning Peter Linbergh reporting his use of Pentax 6x7 etc. The article says little of substance letting slip that the photographer uses Plus X @ 64 asa. The usual techno bias.
Goodness I could buy a 6x7 dev my own PlusX and be just like him.
Contrast this with an internet post by someone who actually watched Linbergh work. He used multiple 6x7s some with b+w some colour and some polaroid. + the HMIs and the usual assistants.
Like most consumer mags the articles have to give the reader hope and a reason to buy the equipment, usually done by heavily censoring the photographers real process to elevate the 'I could do that idea'.
If someone can give us more grapevine info then the more relevant everything will be
May as well get your fashion ideas where the great and good get them from: The street, life itself, current events that lend themselves or insiders who know what they talk about. The real world fashion industry thats what theyre talking about.
The sizzles as important as the sausage.
The danger of internet forum photography isnt the sausage (well executed pictures) its the sizzle or serious lack of it. Why none? Perhaps because the photographs are to please no-one but self and to post to get 'critiques'. Not near enough to the inside (but still awesome.)
But will these pictures work for the agency who want to make money from promoting their models and who now have reservations from the horrible pile of 'edginess' thats just dropped into their lap.
Fashion photography is all small 'a' art stuff with commercial in front of it.Thats relevant and real.
Theres lots of bottom line, make money,please the client, deal with the egos and personalities as well as the picture taking
Why is this so hard to accept for some
The reason may be the pursuit of the greatest consumer driven myth of all time. 'I only shoot for myself and follow my own vision.'
Goldman relates an amusing anecdote:
A screen writer knows that most submissions get tossed before the first page is over.He tries to avoid convention. He wants to write just the way he wants. So planning to do something interesting to capture that interest, his first page goes something like this:
'Its a great morning, a couple are jogging along talking to each other in Central park. As they jog along they see a strange shape moving towards them. It gets closer. They stop. Its unbelievable. A herd of twenty camels is bounding towards them at speed. The couple are fixed to the spot. The herd gets closer...
Well that should capture the interest.
Switch to agent reading.
He checks to see that its not Woody Allen whose sent this. . Its not Allen. The agent begins to think. If I were to make this movie Where would I get these camels from. Would I have to import them from the Middle East or get them from circuses. Would I need permits to use them in Central Park. What do they eat? And who would look after them. Whats the day rate for camel trainers these days. Would I need interpreters if they only spoke Arabic. How much would that cost.
He tosses the manuscript on the pile with all the others.
Great idea, but the writer didnt think about the industry he was writing for, after all he only writes for himself, and usually hes only one who reads his pieces past page 2. He thought his idea was so great that any producer would do anything to use it. But he was wrong!! He thought he was a genius!!! Hilarious!!....He's going to be out of work!!!
Fashion photography improves when the photographer starts thinking about photographing for an industry called the Fashion Industry with its quirky ways, ego clashes and multiplicity of illogicalities. In this industry despite what we are told Fashion photographers are bit players and certainly not top dogs.
True story:
Anna Wintour and Grace Coddington arent hitting it off at British Vogue. Coddington loves fashion, the clothes, the art and act of it. Wintour is more pragmatic, she wants to appeal to the woman in the street, increase circulation and subscriptions etc.
A shoot takes place. Wintour orders a re-shoot because its not what she wants. and whats more no final pictures are to be taken without her approval. Problem: Wintour stays in her office, the crew with Coddington is on the street.
Heres what happens: They take a series of polaroids of the the frocks and the scenarios. A motorcyle messenger takes them to Wintours office and waits. Wintour flicks through them, checks the ones she wants and gives orders to scrap the other ideas. The messenger takes these back to the crew. Then the real shooting begins.
'I only shoot for myself and follow my own vision' Really!!!.
OK true you may have a vision but expect to be told how much of the vision is required and where and when its going to useful
Alexander Liberman to Helmut Newton “Helmut we have reports that you’re shooting everything around the the pool at the hotel, its not what we want get your *** out of there and start shooting where we arranged”
Business professionalism is a strange animal and certainly not always logical.
Heres a Norman Parkinson anecdote:
Art director to Parkinson
“Listen Parkinson, We handle the Hunts catsup account and we want, for our summer campaign a colour picture of a summertime picnic with five little girls in flimsy white lace dresses eating hamburgers in buns with red catsup oozing out”
It was snowing heavily outside. Parkinson said there might be a problem
The art director continued:
“It has to be taken around NYC and we want the transparencies in a week. I have my problems , now you have yours”
The pictures were taken in a tropical hothouse in a botanical garden on artificial grass. Problem solved.Professionalism maintained.
Youre only as good as your last set of pictures

THE PRESENCE OF SIZZLE REVISITED

2006-01-30T20:31:00.000Z

A photog shoots for an agency. He follows his favourite photog Lets say Lindbergh. Just uses an overcoat down on the beach or in some desolate backstreet. He shows the pictures. Good but we cant use them, they look a bit well sort of old.
Imagine the great man PL comes in and hes shot the same as you. Reaction? Peter these pictures are marvellous well hang them straightaway. Why. Because his fame covers the lack of modernity, the same with Penn, Avedon, Newton and a whole host of others. They have what you dont have, fame and with it the kudos they can give to all they work with.
If you want to hold yourself back just keep copying the great and the good (but dated).
and slavishly reading and simply copying all those mags
Well that’s OK when youre just out of the egg following the first thing you see .
I learned the hard way photographing for a trendy London agency for their model book by doing the above instead of below What I did was GBD
Suppose our imaginary photographer goes off and comes up with a very modern digi-looking photoshop cooked set of pictures. The agency takes them. Why, because although hes not famous or published at least these pictures give the agency the kudos of modernity showing clients theyre right there on the front line of nowness, presence etc
Presence, sizzle its hard to come by, it takes hard work and professionalism. A programme about two comedians illustrates. A retrospective of their work live gigs where people were creased with laughter etc etc. But the interesting part was when the gag writers were interviewed. They would meet with the comedians and reel off maybe 20 gags or sketches. Honestly they never laughed at any of them they related. They would pick some for the show and just work them over and over until they were somehow funnier and everyone in the rehearsal room was creased. Thats giving a sausage sizzle,
Strangley its alleged that McCartney had the same problem with Get Back. Is that it? Lennon quipped, lets work on it to make it half decent.
This is professionalism. You dont have to be in love with your pictures to make them look better, or have a set of re touching ethics or morals.Or that every shot has to be a homage to some of the great and the good. Once youve got what you think you want work it over, get thereness and nowness into it. Seek the modern equivalent of that style that you love so much.
Reference and revisit the past just remember theres a present and a future
Thats where the presence of sizzle is

RULES: The ones we want to keep

2006-01-30T20:22:00.000Z

There still are some and theyre useful from time to time.
People starting out want to break the rules and usually come to grief.
A good one to keep in mind is Principality. One idea should stand out above all others.
A fashion picture usually has a heirachy of ideas
but despite the brilliance of the participants)hair,MUA, photog etc usually a competition of ideas is not percieved
Rather only when some or all are trying to be geniuses does the whole thing crash usually because the rule of principality is broken.( Is this a hair, beauty or fashion picture)?.
Poor lens choice and model posing can break the rule too. The hand on shoulder thats too close to camera becomes as large as the face and competes with it for attention esp if the fingers are spreadeagled out in a fan like shape. A normal lens shooting full figure at eyeline makes the legs look short and upperbody large. The picture takes on a principality thats unwanted.
With PS the big idea can be forced onto the picture. Most forum pictures suffer from a serious lack of post production, (which incidentally is the name of the game right now). Emotional principlaity, ideas that werent concieved at shooting time can be added later after some thinking .
A good example is found here:
http://www.showstudio.com/projects/comme/production.php
Nick Knights pictures for Comme des Garcons
Knight breaks the rules in the best way; He simply doesnt accept what he ended up with prepost production, and uses all the post production re touching expertise suppled by photoshop to get what hes sfter.
Strangley enough he ends up with the principality
he was looking for.
But the "rule breaking" if that’s what its called comes after the taking and in the post production.
To be succesful at this you need to be working from a big sample which is probably part of the difficulty.The shooter doesnt have it because he doesnt want it. He wants to be different
Its been said the only truly different people are eccentrics. Ive yet to meet anyone who called themselves an eccentric fashion photographer.
But if too many rules are broken when starting out
thatll be the result
The team supply it in the shooting stage and hoprfully the viewer will get it at the looking stage.
The photographer, MUA, hair and clothing stylist
all contribute to this but now added is PS.
Not just for retouching but for final picture editing also. PS stamps its look on the final result and can maximise the emotional investment of the 4 other players.
Its even more important when theres a model and photog but some of the others are missing.Which is likely
Its advisable to sit down and explore the emotional investment put into the work and how PS can maximise it.Maybe the problem is 'mindshop' the photog falls in love with his model his picture his idea and cant believe its not working.
But the shock comes when posting
The model looked skinny at the shooting stage but now all are saying shes overweight, too much depth of field, not enough contrast flyaway hair ,shes too short.Creases in the garment etc etc. Just sit down with the picture and work it over everything with a fine tooth comb
Stretching liquefying etc etc are among many tools
used in this way but at the end no one admits to it much, they just credit the editor photog etc.
While consumer mags generally elevate the photographers , fashion photography is teamwork
and if you dont have a full team things will be difficult. Most have or have access to PS and in one way or another its a team player thats not to be omitted.
Just dont be too quick to praise yourself. Its a wrap folks. Is it really???
It reminds me when I found a 1st edition copy of a Charles Dickens book in a junk shop. I knew they were worth a lot so I paid say $40.00 and began to think of what I would do with the profit I was going to make. I took it to a dealer and asked how much it was worth.
About $40.00 he said
He looked inside: Loads of foxing, and I see some pages have been snippedfor the picture plates. It has loose hinges and mildew on the chamois Maybe $20.00
But its old and 1st ed I said
He went to a shelf and brought a similar book
Even though it was the same age as mine it looked as though it was brand new.
If you want to maximise your investment he said this is what youve got to aim for.
Thats why photogs should keep looking at the high end. To have something to aim for and not to pass off poor quality (like my book)as something its not.
(I looked at the date and that was all, I was so in love with my find I never looked inside for page damage,or checked condition when some dealers check every page before puchasing) .
When the photography is over look long and hard at what youve got
The high end reminds us of whats required
The world is not reality
Its just paper
Really!! http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/03/1046540121180.html

THE PRESENCE OF SIZZLE

2006-01-30T20:04:00.000Z

I well remember the stir when looking at the new guitar amplifier. It had a control called 'presence'. How strange. We all knew volume, bass and treble but 'presence' what did that do. Well it makes everything seem more...'there' someone said.
How are photographs made to be more there. Just as sausages get cooked in something
most photographs nowadays get cooked in photoshop, But dont think its all the re-touching etc that the only ingredient. Along with a few other factors modernity being one, its an essential tool to give photographs 'presence'.
Eg You may hear photogs boast in what they didnt do to their pictures. If using PS they exclaim about minimal skin touching tiny curves adjustments and slight crops. And yes there was a time when this was cool, pure and all that stuff. But as time goes on it looks strangely old and dated. Unless one understands the difference between fame and modernity.
Not understanding certainly is a block to progress. As a result many photogs pursue and produce fashion picture that mirror the greats but the greats of the 80/90s maybe earlier.
Theres a problem here. Mostly their photography is old fashioned, great but dated. GBD
Of course there was a time when they were the latest thing but not now not the latest but greatest. Helmut Newton died recently So who is going to take his place? No-one,because the industry doesnt want another one Helmut was great but it was really his fame that kept him going. Now that hes not here all the clones who could 'do'a good Helmut picture will become tribute photographers like all those bands we hear about.
Avedons gone, Bob Richardson irreplaceable???
Is it necessary Who are the replacements for
Chris von Wangenheim, Bill King, David Seidner???
And anyway we already have the new HN, Terry Richardson. And before theres an outcry Richardson is the modern equvalent of HN for a whole load of kids who dont know or care what 30s German decadence is,will never get to see the riches of Monaco and for whom more smuttiness is the order of the day. And if you think carefully about it Richardson and HN have many similarities.
It shows that modernity is part of the presence of sizzle.
People like the idea or association of digital point and shoot Photoshop etc etc. kids in the colleges gloss over when their tutor talks about unsharp masking,dye transfers and all the other things that 'real' photographers love. After a long lecture a friend of mine said in class a student simple stated couldnt I do all that in photoshop and if so why bother with all the other stuff.
Its the modern approach Ask Mert and Marcus the modern day equivalents of Demarchelier and Lindbergh. But their pictures look sort of digi someone says, exactly
digi modern, worked over, cooked, tossed in PS.
Seasoned with modernity, cooked in the Modern style
Get sausage but dont forget sizzle

CAN I WIN MR OLYMPIA STEROID FREE????

2006-01-30T19:57:00.000Z

Can the lone photographer compete for the high end campaigns. Can any aspiring fashion shooter Do everything by himself. Just when you thought.
You were doing OK somebody says. Don’t think much of the styling(the model brought her own clothes) or the hairs a little messy ( you said just just leave it ,no-one will notice, they just did)
And now when you look the model looks not so slim as she did in the viewfinder and her skin is
Well….how come I didn’t notice that???
No, well he can compete but no chance of winning the prize
I very much doubt that the 'lone photographer' has any chance of winning anything in the high end category.
Unless you get a team together MUA,Hair, Stylist and the new essential helper PS
Retouching and image manipulation etc has always been important in end product esp high end product in commercial photography.
See the story behind a Max Mara campaign by Steven Meisel.
http://photosource.netsville.com/2001/s_and_s/re_trecrgb.html
Much of the photoshop work in fashion is extensive
but unnoticeable unless leaked to the press eg Kate Winslett
An analogy might better explain:
if you want to read the full text
http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/forum/showthread.php?t=83
Replace profit motivated bodybuilding organisations with major fashion magazines/shareholders/owners etc
Replace pro bodybuiding contests with high end magazine campaigns.
Replace steroids and supplements with Photoshop.
Replace bodybuilder with photographer.
Basic question:
CAN I WIN MR.OLYMPIA STEROID FREE?
Answer
Honestly? Slim to none. Zero, really, on a scale of 1 to 10.
CAN I WIN IN COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOSHOP FREE
Do whats expected in nearly every profit motivated,budget respecting
concern where an edge is needed, use whatever is available to you to get that edge....some call it cheating ,to others its called professionalism

McFASHION

2006-01-30T18:29:00.000Z

The word here is McFashion which unfortunately leads to McFashion photography sponsored by the magazines.I suppose it all comes from the McDonalds concept. Same bun same burger same fries wherever you go.
But surely theres got to be some art in those burgers, not much, but a great concept initially.
Concepts count.
Yes they (the magazines) have to make money, please their advertisers and shareholders, which means not too many, if any, risks which means pretty much the same thing month in out.
The trendies are no different Citizen K, Surface (the late)Dutch all McTrendyfashion.
Its the singularity of life.
People feel it and need to break with it and 'wierdness'is the answer and thats maybe why wierdness is a style in photography. McTrendyfashion photography.Its the way things are. The way the business is calling out to the young.
But if theres no nod to business and commerce it falls into eccentricity.
A model has asked to photograph with me tonight, shes travelled 100 miles to do some shows in the N.E.and is coming on another 40 to Newcastle to the studio
I told her what I do and asked what she wanted heres an excerpt
"am trying to explain what sort of poses am after so please bear with me .. am after sort of ."uncomfortable" shots none of this lifestyle .. or catalog crap ha ha.
I think she wants to be a contortionist with some wierdness thrown in.
Why do kids feel this way its because of whats in the air of their lives, its a constant need to break with the past,and to distance oneself from the present, without moving into the future. any editor worth their salt will know this, they want this for their pages, they want this from their photographers.It will please their readers.
Anyone who is willing:If you have a US Vogue , go to it, open it up and read the Ist Masthead then read the Publishers Masthead
How many of these people have a direct influence on the photography in this magazine.Lots and lots
The influence that such people have on fashion photography is seriousley overlooked.Especially by the 'I just do what I want to do people'.
Its been going on for years
Here I recommend a trip to Frank Horvat:http://www.horvatland.com/index.html
Horvats site is a real pleasure to visit.
Heres some excerpts:'My desire for a "more natural" look (or what seemed so at the time) created a lot of problems to the editors, the models, the printers, etc:'
'I hired the sexiest models I could find, certain that a couple of beautiful girls, photographed in front of the majestic cliffs of Etretat, would please the boss even more than the "décolletés" in the streets. But I was mistaken: what Dassault really wanted, was to improve his magazine with what he considered a high-class look. When I arrived with the new photographs, he just glanced at them and dismissed me without a word.'
'We persuaded Nancy to organize a party of celebrities in a penthouse garden. The fashion would be worn by good looking young women of the New York society, rather than by models, and I would photograph them casually, while they were talking, drinking or having fun with other guests. The pictures looked different from anything that had previously been published in the magazine, and even Nancy White was delighted, until she noticed that one of the guests was a black diplomat from the UN. "If we show the girls with this person, none of them will be eligible for marriage'
Once you get into the game there are forces outside direct photography that have great influence on what is published,then others not knowing whats being rejected because of these forces seek to copy the pages. The result is Life imitating photography imitating pages of McLife.
The drawback with photographing only for yourself with no regard to commercial fashion photography is that most of these individualists nick all their ideas from pages. Pages which are a result of the 'fashion system'
Anyone who wants their fashion pictures to improve has to give serious thought to building into their work, (even their personal work), the restaints and solidarities of commercial fashion picture taking, that is if you aspire to professional magazine quality.
Avoid dilettantism:'a person whose interest in a subject is superficial rather than professional'
Unless you want to stay on the fry station all your life

THE FASHION IDEA

2006-01-30T18:16:00.000Z

There are many ways to formulate a fashion idea. You can look inside your life check your preferences in all areas and then look for the common thread. This is the way you approach life, this is your style of life so you can develop a personal fashion style in the same way.
Then tweak it so its sellable to people on two levels 1.for industry peers 2. for the fashion public
Giorgio Armani looks like his clothes and so does John Galliano and they select different photographers to photograph them.
No one copies, rather they ‘revisit’ or ‘reference’ a style and give it their own personal tweak with the aim of making it appeal to the present public
Heres a clip from the Washington post
"These are the kind of people who have more appearance – more observable data points – than other people. A tremendous amount of their work and imagination is funneled into the portion of their existence that is immediately visible. Some of them may be smart, clever, funny and wise, though these attributes are ancillary to the primary mission of looking exquisite.
To say that they "dress well" would understate the important roles of such things as hair, makeup, nails, fragrance and overall morphology.
To be an appearance-based person you have to understand that there are no unimportant parts of your appearance. Your entire look may live or die on the choice of a belt.
A fashionable person is like a fancy wedding on two legs: Everything must be just right”.
Hence the need for photogs to keep up to date with trends and the thinking of the people who wear them.This is where part of the idea comes from.
In a fashion picture everything must be right to appeal to that thinking.
But back to the idea. Some photographers photograph their own life and environment
Helmut newtons pictures were reference to his past in Germany, the decadence etc of the thirties given the Monaco money tweak and his preference for big women.
Terry Richardson is the ‘new’ Newton but theres no moneyed decadence in Richardsons pictures but the modern equivalent of sexual freedom with large references to his upbringing which makes for harrowing reading if you ever look it up.
Then theres lifestyle with all its references (at least for high end fashion) to cinematic ambiguity etc.
And finally the romantic, painterly, style, of Sarah Moon, Deborah Turbeville, Dominique Isserman and Paolo Roversi.
And of course every permutation of the above that you can think of.
But every notable shooter has his own idea,angle,and signature.Which will never come from simply copying magazine pages and styles if you want to take your pictures to a higher and different level because often the photographer doesnt know the idea hes trying to copy even though he likes the picture Obviously lots to choose from , you have to make your own decisions
No matter how good you can become we go nowhere unless we can attract the right interest of the people that matter either in our own area or better markets. The better market the better the idea has to be.There are hundreds of photogs who can copy picture styles if needs be.
The idea may be well understood by the photographer but is it embraceable by the non sophisticated viewer.
Theres no need to explain what the idea is because when the viewer embraces it they supply their own meanings in accord with their present life and desires.Good fashion photograph ideas are in accord with the viewers present life ,ideas and aspirations
eg the Galliano story from the Washington Post
"Talley tells the Galliano story. It's a tale of the power of the fashion press, and of Vogue magazine in particular. John Galliano a few years ago was a Paris designer going nowhere fast. "He was sleeping on a floor in a sleeping bag," Talley said. But Talley loved Galliano's collection. He went to his boss, Wintour. "I said, 'Listen, darling, this is it. This is the collection. This will take fashion to a new level.' " And Wintour said, "Go do what you have to do."
So Talley paid for Galliano to fly from Paris to New York. He put Galliano up in the Royalton Hotel. He took Galliano to a birthday party, thrown in Talley's honor, at Mortimer's. At the party Galliano met the Park Avenue fashion set, including, for example, Catie Marron, a Vogue contributing editor (and friend of Talley's) whose husband, Don Marron, is a big shot at Paine Webber. Sufficiently impressed, in January Paine Webber agreed to bankroll Galliano's collection. That enabled Vogue to feature Galliano prominently in its pages.
He became an international phenomenon. Talley says he did not "discover" Galliano, however.
"Talent is something you don't discover. You embrace it."
Ideas are one thing Embraceable ideas are another

Idea#2
Sometimes its good to reference non fashion sources. Theres less prejudice that way.
Eg http://www.marktucker.com/
http://www.marktucker.com/index2.html
http://www.marktucker.com/r_saltonsea/intro.html
In the above Tucker writes
Im trying to communicate …through the colour palette and lack of contrast
That’s his idea added onto his style.
Tucker is from Nashville. His pictures remind me of Wabi Sabi
http://c2.com/w4/wikibase/?WabiSabi which is an idea in itself worth exploring
although to some extent it has been done via Holga and LOMO photography
William Eggleston is from Mississippi. The father of saturated colour pictures of the banal and ordinary big influence on Jurgen Teller and in this instance Meisel http://www.masters-of-photography.com/images/full/eggleston/eggleston_woman_on_curb.jpg.
From the idea here its easy to get to the idea here.
http://www.artnet.com/Magazine/features/holmes/Images/holmes8-30-2.jpg "They look challengingly at you, a stranger without a clue how to behave. They inhabit this world, they belong here. Who the hell are you?"
Perhaps it can be summed up in the work of Edouard Manet
Heres a long but very valuable essay http://witcombe.sbc.edu/modernism/roots.html
Manet was updating with ideas but still referenced older styles According to Antonin Proust, the idea of the picture suggested itself to Manet when they were watching bathers at Argenteuil. Manet was reminded of Giorgione's Concert Champêtre and determined to repeat the theme in clearer colour and with modern personnel.
So we have the idea watching the bathers added to an older painting with its formality but with the intent of modernising or bring it up to date. A closer likeness of composition has been found in an engraving by Marcantonio nb bottom right hand corner
The result was a new and modern way of looking at painting which pretty much shocked the public at the time. It was Idea+style+referencing
All this can be applied to the fashion idea principle
Just try to remember
Ideas are one thing, embraceable ideas are another