|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
May 29, 1998 For many assignment these days, I go into the situation and shoot a short roll of film, hitting only one or two angles before I leave. I feel guilty sometimes because it feels like I blew off the assignment, but many of these stories are identical to hundreds of other stories I’ve shot over the years and I’ve learned what works and what doesn’t. If my schedule is tight that day, it is more efficient to make the photo I know works and then go on to other things. This is easy , but it is not interesting photography. And if this is all I ever do, it can lead to burnout. Once a week, though, I have a guaranteed challenge. A year ago, we launched a feature on the arts that I work on. It is a self-generated feature, meaning I find the stories, make the pictures and write the copy. If it’s boring or predictable - it’s my fault. When I decided to shoot a figure drawing class, I knew that I’d be up against some newspaper taboos. I’d have to find just the right angle to show what the class was about without showing a section of the body that might offend someone. We didn’t publish photos of thong bathing suits when it was a news story so I knew the editors would judge on the conservative side. For this feature, I shoot more film that I would on a reporter-assigned story. I work different angles, looking for something unusual, because the photo is the first part of this process. Later, after I’ve picked a photo, I write the copy to support the photo. It’s backwards from the typical newspaper approach which is what makes it interesting to me. On a chilly Sunday afternoon, I came to Studio Six Eleven where a small group of artists were drawing. The model was posing nude, standing under harsh track lights. The lighting helped the artists see the shadows better, but it presented bad lighting for photography. I worked as discretely as possible watched the situation for awhile before I started taking pictures. Tom Burton click images to see full size version
I liked the way the model was still in her robe and there are sketches in the foreground. I can show a drawing of a nude, but not the real thing. But the composition didn’t quite work and the artist on the right side had her hand to her nose, a distraction that took away from the photo.
I moved in closer to emphasis the artist’s sketching, including just a bit of the model in the upper right corner of the frame. This still didn’t work. The Etch a Sketch - which was part of another drawing exercise - didn’t fit in well. And the crop on the model showed too much of her pelvis.
This photo worked the best in terms of showing the environment and I had hoped that the lighting would work so that the model would be a silhouette. But there was enough light bounced into the shadow areas to define her back and darkening the figure in the printing looked too artificial. We won’t show a rear end in the paper - although one editor said "if we were a magazine" she’d run it without question - so this one was ditched without much discussion.
The model took a pose on the floor, in part to be closer to the space heaters. I took the prism off the top of my Nikon and rested the camera on the floor for a ground-level view. Like the first two photos, this one didn’t have a strong element in the photo and the model was so cropped that you couldn’t tell what was going on. On to something else.
This was one photo that almost made it. I liked the way the space heater worked into the photo and the legs were shadowed just enough that we could publish the photo. The photo itself is the most artful of the take, but it doesn’t show the artists. My journalism instinct made me look for another photo.
For this angle, I wanted to get the model and the artists connected in the photo better than the previous wide angle shots had been able to do. I used a 60mm lens, stopped down to f/16 for more depth of field. Even with 3200 ASA film, I had to use a slow shutter speed so I locked the camera to a tripod. The composition allowed me to put the model in the foreground and juxtapose the artists in the background. The lighting was harsh, but a flash would have put too much light on the model. I liked the balance between the information in the photo and the composition and lighting. This is the photo we published.
During a break, one of the artists showed the model her sketches. I often shoot a wide shot first, and this one had potential. The curve of the painted floor complimented the curve of the sketch pad. I liked the mood of the lighting, but worried that it would be a problem on newspaper presses, picking up too much ink.
It is not unusual for me to work closer to the subject as a situation continues. This is a closer crop than the previous photo, and it better emphasizes the drawing. I don’t mind the amputated figure at the right, although the legs do cut across that interesting curve on the floor. But once again, I took a chance on the lighting and felt that the final result was beyond our reproduction capabilities. If we were a magazine - with glossy paper - it might have worked.
I did try a few frames with flash to open up those harsh shadows, but the result was less than exciting. The lighting was too bland and I would have even preferred a harsh, direct flash look to this effect. But the model’s pose in this image might have been one we could have published. The picture itself, though, is pretty dull
All Images ©1998 Tom Burton /The Orlando Sentinel .
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tom
Burton
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Contributor
since 1998
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Behind
the Viewfinder - A Year in the Life of Photojournalism |
