Life's Little Adventures

Our Studio, Part XVII

Click here for the previous entry on this thread

THE CAMERAS WE USED

When Jim Houghton and I began our photo studio in New York back in 1965, we had to do it on not much more than a shoestring. So we made use of whatever cameras we owned between us — not necessarily the best ones for whatever assignments we could get. Jim contributed his Leica M2 and a Mamiyaflex TLR. I threw in my well-used Canon 35mm SLR, a Mamiya 6x9 press camera, an ancient 4x5 Linhof and an utterly useless Nikonos underwater job. Right away, we traded the Mamiya 6x9 press for another Mamiyaflex TLR as these were good for both general commercial, fashion, beauty, and portrait work. The Canon soon acquired an identical twin, and the Linhof proved marginally useful for product shots.

None of these were really ideal.

What we really needed most was an 8x10 view camera. At that moment I was offered a brand-new 300mm f/5.6 Schneider Symmar lens in a Compound shutter at a fantastically good price. What was wrong with it? Not much, only that it had the wrong name engraved on its barrel and was thus not saleable through normal channels. I snapped this up, and bought an el-cheapo Calumet 8x10 body. This was no Deardorff or Sinar, but it served the purpose and lasted through our entire career. In truth, it was a clumsy beast, but practically indestructible. I swear it was made of cast iron. The Symmar lens fit it perfectly, and soon thereafter we added a Schneider Angulon lens for wide-angle shots.

Salvaging a 150mm Schneider Symmar lens from the old Linhof 4x5 camera, we purchased a Calumet 4x5 monorail view that seemed to be an exact copy of the old Kodak monorail of the 1940s. This was good for product shots, and for catalog work where the client wanted a larger image but was unwilling to pay for 8x10.

The real workhorses were the Mamiyaflexes. These TLRs had interchangeable lenses, were easy to load, and used 120 roll film. Unfortunately, they were also extremely fragile and broke down frequently. Most often, the film advance lever broke off when shooting too fast. At one point, on location on Paradise Island in the Bahamas, all three of our Mamiyaflexes ceased working. With a small screwdriver I was able to get enough undamaged parts to put together ONE working Mamiyaflex.

After that, we decided on a Hasselblad. The 500 EL model, with electric drive, a pentaprism viewfinder, a bellows-type lenshade, and a fast-focus lever to be exact. Wow! What a camera that was! Fast, comfortable to use, and extremely rugged. It was so good that we soon acquired another identical one. And a few more Zeiss lenses. Photo on left shows this model, without the fancy viewfinder or lenshade. One particular feature of Hasselblads was the snap-on film magazine. With a few of these loaded, it only took about one second to reload, so there were no interruptions for changing film.

The Canons soon gave way to Nikon Fs, each equipped with a motor drive. We used these Nikkor lenses: 28mm, 28-50 zoom, 50mm, 105mm, and 200mm. While on a trip to Tokyo we bought two more bodies, motor drives, and lenses at bargain prices. All of the model Fs (photo, left) were later replaced with model F2s. One nice thing about Nikons was the rugged bayonet mount, which enabled lenses from any Nikon SLR model to fit any Nikon F-series SLR body, regardless of model. This way, we could keep our old lenses (which never wear out) and just replace bodies. The newer F2 bodies were also much easier to load, with their swing-open backs.

Another very useful camera was the Polaroid folding pack-film camera, which had regular shutter speeds and lens openings, plus a combo viewfinder-rangefinder. This enabled us to check lighting effects and verify exposures before shooting with a regular film camera. It was deadly accurate — if the Polaroid test photo looked good so would the photos taken with the above cameras. This was especially true with complex strobe lighting setups. It was also handy for checking out possible locations before the actual shooting began.

In addition to that Polaroid, we also had a 4"x5" Polaroid sheet film holder/processor, which was used with our 4x5 Calumet camera. And best of all, the custom back for Nikon SLRs, which produced big, enlarged Polaroids shot through the Nikon body and lens.

For personal non-commercial use, I had an Olympus OM-1 35mm camera with zoom lens, chosen because it was so compact, a Polaroid SX-70 (again, very compact), and a Nikon Super 8 movie camera. Jim had his beloved Leica, which he used heavily.

The photo below shows Jim and assistant Bob Manilla at work in the studio, circa 1979, photo courtesy of Hardy Baeumler.

Later, I'll discuss the various films we used, plus the developers, papers, and other darkroom supplies.

OF COURSE, if we were doing this today it would be all digital cameras. Instead of a darkroom there would be an Apple computer loaded with Adobe Photoshop, and a good printer.

RETURN to Our Studio Index.

RETURN to Photography Index.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the most challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

Photographer's Assistants

Here's what I wrote for Photographic Product News back in 1965 about hiring photographer's assistants. This was not long before I left the Richard Avedon Studio in New York to join with a partner to form our own.

Sooner or later, as your business grows, you may well have to hire an assistant to help with the more routine chores and free yourself for the important ones. And when this happens you will very likely find yourself faced with a problem of conflicting goals if you have not chosen well. Hiring an assistant photographer is not like hiring a laborer. Commercial photography is a vastly complex field, covering as it does everything from art to merchandising, from electronics to chemistry, and the person you hire must be able to straddle all these aspects with equal ease. So you find yourself looking for someone who knows a little bit of everything and is at least temporarily more interested in your success than his own. Such a man is indeed a very rare bird.

Let's look at the qualifications. Prior experience or formal education are not necessarily good things. The last person you want is a know-it-all. While the man must have a working knowledge of photographic processes and an ability to perform technical jobs to your satisfaction, you certainly do not want someone else's working methods imposed on you. He must not be set in his ways or your efforts to teach and mold will be in vain. This would normally call for a younger man although a more mature person with experience and a fresh, open mind might prove a wiser choice, if such a man can be found.

Your man must also be fairly free of conflicting duties, which may prevent him from working overtime just when you need him the most. Generally, a single young man will be the most free in his schedule, but not necessarily. Try to ferret this information, by whatever cunning questions you can devise, during the initial interview.

How much does he know about photography? Practical experience, even as an advanced amateur, may count more here than trade school learning. An amateur is at least truly interested in the craft whereas the trade school graduate may possibly only be looking for an easy future in a soft job. Try to find out his motive for wanting to be a photographer. The truth will show up very quickly in his sample work. If his own pictures look like school assignments, beware. Less perfect but more original works indicate greater interest.

Besides photographic ability, your man must be a general jack of all trades.Can he change a plug? Make minor repairs to a strobe? Paint a background wall? Do some crude carpentry on the darkroom shelves? Can he drive a car well? You are certainly aware of the fantastic variety of professions that you as a photographer seem to be in.

Having found this genius, the chances are that he is a Prima Donna. Look out! No fiery temperments here, unless you enjoy daily conflict. Of all the qualifications, none is more important than a personality that works in harmony with yourself, your clients, and the rest of your staff. Not a dull soul, but a lively, likeable person, eager to please and equally eager to get ahead. That he should be full of energy, willing to do any task and be resonably neat about goes without question. Wit and charm are almost too much to ask for, but lucky you if you find it.

Most important, perhaps, is a strong desire to forge ahead. The ambitious ones work the hardest, even if they eventually leave to go into their own businesses.

A word of caution. Beware the photographer who didn't make it on his own and now is looking for a job. He may not be satisfied with anything you can offer him for long. Also beware the bank clerk looking for a more exciting career. This man may soon retreat to the teller's cage when he discovers just how much plain hard work there is in photography.

We have made a practice of sometimes hiring underprivileged young men and foreign apprentices as we have found that in their strong desire to learn a respectable trade they are more willing to work conscientiously than mere clock watchers. This accomplishes two aims, first we get better workers, secondly the individual gains invaluable training in a skilled job whereas otherwise he may spend the rest of his life being a drain on society. Some of our best help have been high school drop-outs who appreciated the fact that this was perhaps their only chance at a future career. Foreign apprentices are a bit difficult to find and there is always the nuisance of language and sponsorship, however they are usually well schooled in photographic techniques and require little training. They can be contacted through societies for international understanding or through foreign contacts you may have. Underprivileged young men may be found through schools and public-spirited organizations (Lions, Kiwanis, etc.). This is not to be considered a source of cheap labor and in all fairness should be paid the same wages as others of the same skill level. 

How about a girl assistant? No reason not to if heavy labor is not part of the job. And it may well make the studio a more pleasant place to work in.

What sort of a salary should you pay? This is always a delicate problem, balanced somewhere between the work demanded and the opportunity offered. Perhaps about $70 per week is right for a semi-skilled trainee. You can of course get an apprentice for much less but he will eventually feel that he is being exploited (which he is unless nothing is demanded of him), and an unhappy employee is worse than no employee. A skilled assistant can demand his own salary and get it — usually $125 to over $200 a week. You yourself are the only judge as to how high a skill level you require — do you want an errand boy or someone who knows as much as you do?

Overtime is a big factor in the studio business. You will probably be required to pay it (depending on job title and salary or perhaps give compensitory time off. If your man is really happy in his job he may be blissfully unaware of the hour and not ask for time and a half, but if he does request it, it is better to pay and keep a contended worker.

A common fringe benefit granted is freedom to use studio facilities for personal work. As long as the person can be trusted to take good care of your equipment, to use his own materials, and his work in no way interfers with your business, this may seem a good way to keep everybody happy. There is a danger here, though, that he may become more interested in his own photography to the detriment of work performed for you. If this gets out of hand he may regard the studio almost as his own and your work a nuisance that has to be put up with. I would suggest giving this privilege only after you have known the person for a long time and he is well aware of the limitations.

Lastly, how do you go about finding the person? A number of applicants will very likely contact you directly — most of these are sincerely interested in you and your work or they wouldn't have bothered. Some must be sought after — from schools, service organizations, placement agencies or even other studios. However you try, just avoid Help Wanted ads. I tried this once, giving only a phone number and a not very encouraging job description, and was literally beseiged for weeks with endless phone calls from totally unqualified applicants.

Here's hoping you find the magic man — the one who is completely satisfactory to you and happy with himself. Good hunting!

Here are some questions to ask during the interview — you may think of many more, but as a start:

1. Educational level attained, diploma and courses attended.
2. Birth date and place.
3. Languages spoken.
4. Marital status and dependents.
5. History of military service if any; dates, branch, rank, job.
6. Credit references, bank account.
7. Personal references, letters of recommendation.
8. An explanation of his motivation in seeking a job with you. Let him do all the talking on this one.
9. Brief history of amateur and/or professional background.
10. Employment history, job duties, salaries, dates, places, reason for leaving.
11. Ability to perform tasks required — practical test may be in order here.
12. Income requirements. A realistic figure now will save later misunderstanding.

 

TIMES HAVE CHANGED! Back when this was written, over 40 years ago, it was assumed that all photographic assistants were male, hence my use of "he," "him," and "man." Ladies, I apologize. Today's assistants, of whatever gender, should also be familiar with computers and especially with Photoshop. And they will have to be paid more. Lots more.

CLICK HERE for the Assisting Avedon entry.

CLICK HERE for the Our Studio index.

CLICK HERE for the Photography index.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

 

Our Photo Studio, Part XVI

Click here for the previous entry on this thread.

OUR FIRST PHOTO ASSIGNMENT IN EUROPE

Summer, 1967. It's been 19 months since we started our very own studio in New York City, and both my business partner, Jim Houghton, and I really needed a little vacation after all the trials and tribulations of beginning a new venture. Luck was with us. Our sales rep, Art Aaron, brought in a nice little job to do in Germany, Italy, and Austria. It wouldn't pay much more than the cost of doing it, but business was — as always — slow at this time of year, and we needed the break. So we said yes.

The job was for Opera News Magazine, published by the Metropolitan Opera Guild of New York. They wanted us to capture in photos the very essence of three operas that were soon to be performed at the Met. These were: Hänsel und Gretel by Humperdinck, Roméo et Juliette by Gounod, and Luisa Miller by Verdi. What was wanted were atmospheric renderings of the appropriate settings, namely the Black Forest of Germany, Verona in Italy, and the Tyrol in Austria.

We began by flying Lufthansa to Stuttgart, where we rented a smallish Mercedes from Hertz and headed south into the heart of the Black Forest, Germany's renowned Schwarzwald. As soon as we encountered really dense woods we pulled over and took photos while daylight was still with us. After that we found an inn for the night, had dinner, and braved the forest spirits by taking scary pictures by flash in the dark. No evil witch appeared, and not a gingerbread house was in sight, but all-in-all it was full of the primeval realm of nature that so permeates this fantasy tale of little Hänsel and his sister Gretel lost in the woods.

The small text insert on the left is from the first page of the photo essay as it appeared in the December 23, 1967 issue, just in time for Christmas.

Above is another page of the four-page essay. After getting enough pictures we headed south to Baden-Baden for lunch, then a long drive to Interlaken in Switzerland, where we stayed the night. What do you do in Switzerland besides climb mountains? Why, look for watches. I bought a huge diving watch, which looked cool even though I don't dive.

The next day we drove to Luzern, where we again stayed the night before taking off for Italy. That route took us south to a point near Göschenen, where the car had to be put on a train to pass through the St. Gotthard Tunnel under the Alps. Emerging at Airola, we rejoined the E-9 highway past Lugano, Como, and into Milan. By this time it was quite late at night, so we took the first hotel we saw.

From Milan we took the Autostrada to Verona to capture scenes from Roméo et Juliette, which the town is full of even though the story is pure fiction. The photo above was a grab shot — we were seated at this café having a pizza as the lovers strolled by. Moral: Always keep your camera at the ready. Jim shot this one with his Leica M2 — small, silent, unobtrusive. Tri-X B&W film.

Even though Romeo and Juliette never actually existed, you can see the famous balcony, his house, and even her tomb. These shots are part of a four-page spread that appeared in the April 13, 1968 issue.

Next stop was Austria's Tyrol, the setting of Verdi's seldom-performed opera Luisa Miller. On the way we made a lunch stop in Venice, right on the Grand Canal, and then headed north to Cortina d'Ampezzo, high in the Italian Alps. After a good night's sleep at this ski resort, we continued into Austria around Lienz.

Rural scenes abounded as we headed towards the Grossglockner Pass, which climbs some 8,370 feet on its 29-mile sky-high crossing of the Alps. So we got our photos of alpine bliss, complete with cows. Unhappily, I can't find any of these and so can't post any here. Lunch was taken outdoors at the impossibly picturesque village of Heiligenblut, where we finished the assignment before continuing north for a little vacation.

Pressing on past Salzburg, we turned west on the Autobahn to Munich, where we got a room for the night and visited the Hofbräuhaus for some tasty beer. The next morning it was off to Stuttgart to return the car and get a flight to Paris. After a few days we met up with friends who were going to London, so we joined them and spent nearly a week in South Kensington and Chelsea. After that it was back to New York to develop the film and get back to work.

Ah, that was a nice assignment, if not a very profitable one.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

 

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the most challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

 

CLICK HERE TO RETURN TO THE "OUR STUDIO" INDEX.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

Our Photo Studio, Part XV

WHY WE HAD TO BE IN NEW YORK

CLICK HERE for the previous entry on this thread

For our photo studio there was no other choice, at least not in America. Even though the city was rapidly sinking into bankruptcy at the time (mid-1970s), we had to hang on until conditions improved. There was a reason why the top publishing and broadcasting businesses were headquartered in New York and not in, say, Los Angeles.

Talent was that reason. Concentrated talent. Lots of it, in all related fields, and all within minutes of each other. Where else could we find such a selection of top models, artists, designers, stylists, and other skills practically next door? If you operated outside the city — or even outside of midtown Manhattan — you would have to pay traveling time, if you could get them to come at all. And then there was the vast number of available locations, to say nothing of professional photographic services such as overnight Kodachrome film processing or the easy rental of highly specialized equipment. Another plus was the number of qualified freelance assistants on call, ready to help when you needed them. And if your studio was not quite large enough for a particular job, there were several rental studios that were more than adequate.

The photo above was taken from the entrance to our studio on Fifth Avenue.

I learned about this early on, in the late 1960s, when we had a huge catalog job to do in Los Angeles, one that would take over a week of shooting. There was no way we could afford to bring New York models along with us, so we counted on the leading local model agency, and held "casting sessions" at the Beverly Hills Hotel. Now, the models there were certainly pretty and may have been very good at acting, but they were more "girl next door" than "high fashion." The resulting pictures, shot on location anywhere from Palm Springs to Topanga Canyon, were perfectly okay for the purpose, but nothing we would want in our portfolio.

Actually, at the peak of the mid-1970's fiscal crisis we momentarily entertained the thought of moving to nearby New Jersey, probably Jersey City or Hoboken. That idea quickly vanished, but I did briefly investigate the possibility of Long Island City, a part of Queens that is just across the East River from midtown Manhattan. It was only one stop from Grand Central on the number 7 subway, was relatively quiet and free of crime, and had plenty of old industrial buildings available for cheap rent. But then we realized that no one really wanted to travel beyond the area bordered by the East River, East 60th Street, Sixth Avenue, and East 14th Street. Unless, of course, it was to an exotic location for a few days.

Yes, there were plenty of reasons why our studio HAD to be in New York City's Manhattan. PLUS…there was also the sheer joy of living in such an exciting place, always filled with an almost electric energy.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

 

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the most challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

 

CLICK HERE for the next entry on this thread.

CLICK HERE to return to the Our Studio index.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

Our Photo Studio, Part XIV

Click Here For The Previous Entry On This Thread

 

WORKING ON A MOVIE SET FOR TWA

That logo on the right was the reason why my business partner and I traveled to Los Angeles for an unusual photographic assignment way back in the mid-1970s. TWA, at that time a really major airline, was just changing their graphics and the way their planes were decorated. They had already shot the new TV commercials on a soundstage at the historic Culver Studios using plywood-and-plastic mockups of the new plane interiors, and now it was our turn to do the still photography. We had never worked on a soundstage before, and very rarely in a union shop — so this was to be a whole new Little Adventure.

First, a lttle background about the Culver Studios. Located in the Culver City section of Los Angeles, just south of the Santa Monica Freeway, the historic studio complex first opened in 1918. In 1924 it became the De Mille Studios, home of those movie extravaganzas of Cecil B. De Mille, and in 1928 a merger changed the name to RKO. By 1935 the studios were known as Selznick International, producing such all-time favorite flicks as King Kong, A Star Is Born, Citizen Kane, and Gone With The Wind. Its Colonial-style administration building of 1919 (photo, left) is still a striking sight, easily visible from Washington Boulevard. The giant Sony Studios (formerly M-G-M), just south of Culver Studios, were once part of the same complex and now offer studio tours. Culver Studios themselves are rented out to film makers for independent productions. Some 14 sound stages are available, ranging in size from about 3,000 to 17,000 square feet.

At that time, one of the larger stages was filled with airliner interior mockups, used for both feature films and commercials. The newest of these was a plywood-and-plastic Boeing 747, painted in TWA's brand-new color scheme and with the new logo. What was really strange about it was when you climbed the forward spiral staircase that was supposed to lead to the upstairs lounge, you walked out onto a pile of wood. There was also a Lockheed L-1011 done up the same way. The interiors were actually quite convincing, as they had to be for still photography.

We flew to Los Angeles on a TWA L-1011 (photo above, with the new livery) along with the client and an art director, and checked into a Culver City hotel. Along with our cameras and lenses we also brought our own Balcar studio strobe lights as this is what was needed for the slow Kodachrome film we used — movies and TV employ tungsten lighting that would have been be useless to us. On a union set — which this most definitely was — we could not touch our own lights, let alone plug them in. This all had to be done through a hierarchy of union grips; we had to tell the foreman what we wanted done, then he had a grip do it. I could have done this myself with one hand in about two seconds. Oh well, it keeps people employed. How thankful I was that the still photography industry in New York was not unionized. At least we could handle our own cameras!

We had a dressing room set up for the models, who were local TWA employees recruited for their fleeting moment of fame. Once dressed, they were positioned inside the cabin mockup, and we had some wall segments removed to make way for the lights and cameras. This is the way they do it in Hollywood. The proceedings took all day, and then began the night work.

It seems that as of that day, only one actual TWA plane had been repainted with the new color scheme. And that one aircraft — a 747 — was landing that very night at Los Angeles LAX, but had to leave early the next morning. We could get pictures inside it that just could not be done in the sound stage mockup. But it was already dark, and they wanted sunlight streaming in the windows. How to work this?

Liberating a pile of white bedsheets from our hotel rooms, we headed down to the airport. I then climbed up on the wing of this 747 and, using gaffer tape, spread the bedsheets over the outside of the windows in the section over the wing. This would diffuse the bright strobe lights that I positioned outside on the wing. Then photography on the inside could begin. The first Polaroids (used to check the lighting and exposure) showed that everything was working just fine, and the finished photos actually looked like they were taken on a sunny day high above the clouds.

One last job, around 6 a.m., was a photo of people checking in at the terminal. After that, we went back to the hotel (with the purloined bedsheets) for a well-deserved snooze. And then back to New York.

A few days later this same plane made a visit to New York's JFK airport during daylight hours, so we rushed out there to do exterior photography on the tarmac. Within a week or so another plane, an L-1011, had been redecorated and was briefly available at Newark's EWR airport, so we finished the whole assignment there.

CLICK HERE to return to the Our Studio index.

CLICK HERE for the next entry on this thread.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

 

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the most challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

 

RETURN to Current Main Page.

Our Own Photo Studio, Part XII

HIGHWAY TO HELL

It was late Spring 1979 at our photo studio in New York City. I had already decided to leave the business and start a new Little Adventure producing travel guides, but I still came in when needed. By now, my partner Jim Houghton and his assistant were doing all of the photography and I mostly took care of business matters. One of our best clients was Atlantic Records, for whom we've done dozens of album covers over the years. This time their head art director, Bob Defrin, had a hot new assignment for us.

The Australian hard rock group AC/DC was about to break big in America, and they needed a rear cover for their new album "Highway to Hell." The band's name, by the way, refers to the different types of electricity and to the "High Voltage" of their stage performances — not to what nasty minds might think. The front cover was also done by our studio, but over a year earlier for the group's "Powerage" album. In the end, a different choice was used for that record and the December 1977 photo with the devil's horns put on the front cover of "Highway To Hell."

My contribution to this was strictly in the lighting, in which I created just enough of a highlight on the grey background to separate them from it and yet retain a "dark" feeling. The horns on guitarist Angus Young's head, by the way, were later airbrushed on, as was his devil's tail. Now, these guys looked pretty scary, but they were actually a delight to work with! Jim took the photo on Ektachrome film with a Hasselblad 500EL camera equipped with an 80mm Planar lens, using a  single Balcar studio strobe, umbrella reflector and a Calumet generator.

The 1979 rear cover involved advance planning and arrangements. This was to be shot at night on a dark highway with the smoky fires of Hell behind them. Where to find an abandoned highway close to Manhattan? Why, Staten Island, of course. The Mayor's Office for Film Production helped on this by arranging for us to use a closed section of road that was under construction.

That night we all boarded a rental location van and headed for Brooklyn, then across the Verrazano Narrows Bridge to the unfinished West Shore Expressway. The band members were all excited about seeing the famous sights along the way.

Our Balcar strobe lights and the rented smoke machines were powered by our Honda location generator. Jim used various cameras; the final shot was probably from a Nikon F2 loaded with Tri-X B&W film, although the picture could be a bit deceptive and may actually be a color conversion made to look like a full-frame B&W print. Looking back, I think that we should have used more lights behind the smoke.

"Highway to Hell" is the album that firmly established AC/DC's place in the rock world, at least in America, where it reached #17 on the charts. The group was formed in 1973 in Sydney, Australia, by Malcolm and Angus Young, two brothers who had immigrated there from Glasgow, Scotland at an early age. They are still going strong, and Angus still sports his trademark schoolboy uniform.

THIS ENTRY HAS BEEN REWRITTEN IN AUGUST 2009 TO CORRECT A SERIOUS ERROR IN THE ORIGINAL POST, AS NOTED IN THE COMMENTS SECTION BELOW. THANKS FOR THE CORRECTION, GUYS.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

 

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the mosy challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

 

CLICK HERE to continue on this thread.

And CLICK HERE to read the whole thing and more in French on a spectacular AC/DC fan website in France.

RETURN to Our Studio Index.

RETURN to Music Index.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

CHECK OUT the records by clicking on their titles in the boxes below, or on the Buy button to purchase.

Our Own Photo Studio, Part XI

TO SPECIALIZE OR NOT TO SPECIALIZE — THAT WAS THE QUESTION

In the fall of 1965, when my business partner Jim Houghton and I first formed our own photo studio in New York, we had a major decision to make. Should we go the route of most commercial photographers and establish an identifiable "style," or be generalists that could handle a wide range of assignments? Between the two of us we had the necessary experience to be able to take on just about anything from still life to industrial ads to high fashion. But we drew the line at weddings! Or the creepy stuff that low-life paparazzi do.

Our mentor, Richard Avedon, was known primarily for his fashion and portrait photography, and had a strong look that immediately let you know whose work it was. We could have just imitated him, and to some extent in the beginning we did just that. Especially in his sometimes use of dramatic lighting. But the work offered to us in those early days often called for something different, and to pay the rent you have to do what the client wants.

We decided right off to have no particular style, but to offer another quality instead — one all too lacking in many "hot" photographers. That was dependability. Always being on time, ready to work, and with the right equipment and resources to do the job. In the long run this resulted in loyal clients and repeat business.

Quality was another important factor. We had both worked for Avedon, and so knew how to produce those stunning black-and-white prints. We also chose the very best lab in town to do our color processing, and to supply us with the pick of emulsions.

Styles in photography, as in many endeavors, come and go. What is in high demand one year may be utterly passé the next. Photographers who are too identified with a particular "look" often have to re-invent (and re-sell!) themselves every few years, or go hungry.

Another early decision that we made was to always be in absolute control of every shooting, the way a good movie director is. There are basically two types of photographers in this regard — those who record events over which they have no control and those who take charge of every little detail, leaving nothing to chance. Both are equally valid, both require talent and training.

Having no particular style also smoothes out the inevitable ups and downs in business. When the demand for fashion photography is slow you can always fill in doing promotional shots for airlines.

Not being stuck with one specialty also keeps you on your toes, meeting new challenges and solving new problems every day instead of doing the same old thing over and over again.

But the best advantage is simply that a variety of experiences just makes life more interesting.

I left the business after 15 years not because I was bored but because I wanted to open a new chapter in my life.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

 

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the most challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

 

CLICK HERE to explore the full story of our studio.

CLICK HERE for the next post on this thread, Highway to Hell.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

Our Own Photo Studio, Part X

ROCKIN' IN THE BAHAMAS

A large part of our New York photo studio's business was in record album covers. You know, those huge 12" square cardboard sleeves for LPs that just cried out for striking graphics, unlike the small CDs of today or the even smaller cassettes of the 80s. This is where creative art really shines. Or not. Here it did not.

We produced cover photos for all kinds of music: opera, classical, mood, pop, jazz, country — but mostly it was rock. That's where the money and the big budgets were. Among the dozens of rock stars who found themselves in front of our lenses were AC/DC, Billy Joel, Chicago, Ted Nugent, and — the subject of this post — Emerson, Lake & Palmer, a.k.a.  ELP.

This tale takes place in 1978, beginning with an assignment from Bob Defrin, the head art director of Atlantic Records, then a division of Warner Communications. They needed a cover for ELP's latest album, which was being recorded (for tax reasons) in the Bahamas. Carl Palmer, the drummer, was in New York at that moment, so we had a meeting — and a lunch of dim sum in Chinatown — with him. During this he expressed his desire to eventually become a classical musician, and I told him of my love for Wagnerian opera.

Shortly after this we took off for Nassau in the Bahamas to do the cover of "Love Beach," as the album was to be called. Little did we know of the conflict that was going on between the group and Atlantic Records, or the problems this would lead to.

Bob Defrin, my business partner Jim Houghton, our assistant Sandy, and I installed ourselves in the record company's large beachfront apartment just west of Nassau town. And waited. Although they were super friendly, the band members had little interest in this cover, or even in doing the album. In fact, they just wanted to split up and pursue their own individual interests, having already made plenty of money. It was only contractual obligations to Atlantic Records that held them together.

The next day we thought that we might get some shots in. Keith Emerson, the keyboardist, picked us up in his Jeep for a short ride to the docks, where we boarded his boat. Soon we were out in deep water beyond the harbor, and Keith decided to go Scuba diving. Bob joined him, and Jim went swimming. For the next hour or so Sandy and I just sunned on the deck. Then everyone got back on the boat and we took off for Paradise Island, where we found a nice beachfront bar. Needless to say, no pictures got done that day.

On the following day we met at Greg Lake's house near the northwest corner of New Providence Island (the island on which Nassau is located), ready to begin photography. No luck. Greg just wanted to lay around and chat, so that day was lost although we did stay for an excellent dinner. He had heard about my love for Wagnerian opera from Carl Palmer, and so treated me to the Ride of the Valkyries on a really powerful audio system.

Finally, on the fourth day Bob had enough and practically dragged them to Love Beach (the photo on the left is a badly faded Polaroid of me scouting a suitable location there) for a group photo, which you see on the album cover above. Why anyone, record company included, wanted to make a hot rock group look like the Bee Gees is beyond comprehension. It was not one of our better efforts, but it was what they wanted, so it's what we did. For the technically minded, the final photo was taken on Ektachrome film using a Hasselblad 500EL camera with an 80mm Planar lens, and a Norman strobe for fill light.

The album was a critical disaster, and the band broke up later that year. They did reform in the 1990s for a while, but by this time their style of prog rock was long past its use-by date. I still enjoy some of their earlier works, however, especially their version of Mussorgsky's Pictures at a Exhibition.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

 

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the most challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

 

CLICK HERE to continue on this thread.

CLICK HERE for the Music thread index.

RETURN to Our Studio Index.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

Our Own Photo Studio, Part IX

Previously on this thread.

LOS ANGELES ON POCKET CHANGE

Here's a tale of how we survived an urgent unplanned trip to L.A. with hardly any money in our pockets. The year was 1969. Credit cards were not yet in common use, and ATMs were nonexistent. It was early evening in our New York photo studio and my business partner Jim Houghton and I were closing down for the day. The phone rang. On the other end was Bob Daniels, the Art Director of Esquire Magazine, one of our best clients. He had an emergency assignment that had to be done the next morning — in Los Angeles! The problem was that we had hardly any cash on hand, no cards, and the bank was closed. Bob said okay, he'll send cash and airline tickets with the limo driver who takes us to J.F.K. Airport. We have only minutes to pack as the plane leaves in about two hours.

What was the sudden emergency? It seems that they overlooked getting an appropriate photo for a story they were doing on L.A.'s controversial mayor, Sam Yorty. And the deadline was yesterday!

Minutes later the driver arrives and hands us an envelope. In it are the promised airline tickets, hotel vouchers, and a CHECK for a thousand dollars. Seems like signals got screwed up. A lot of good a check would do — we needed cash. By now Esquire's office is closed and we can't contact anyone. So we decide to try it anyway and not spend what precious little cash we had en route. Fortunately I did have a charge card for Hertz Rent-a-Car so transportation in L.A. was covered. We could always eat at the hotel and charge that to the magazine.

First thing in the morning we realized that we needed a roll of grey background paper, which cost about $20, to isolate the subject from his office surroundings. We barely had that much cash between us, so we approached the hotel manager. He suggested that instead of charging it to the magazine, we pay the hotel bill with the check and he'll give us the change of nearly $700. Yay! Salvation.

The sitting in City Hall with Sam Yorty went smoothly and was over by noon. Our return flight was not until evening and we needed something to do in the meantime. Both of us had been to L.A. numerous times and had already seen the sights, so the mayor suggested we visit Disneyland in nearby Anaheim.

Now this was a place neither of us had ever been to, so we were excited at first. But the banality got to us, especially that annoying ever-present song about a "small world." Never again would I set foot in the Land of the Mouse.

We quickly exited, hit the San Diego Freeway up to LAX, and got on an earlier flight, upgrading to first class as a revenge. The next day back in New York I applied for an American Express Card. When that didn't come within a week I applied for a Diner's Club Card. When that didn't come I even applied for Carte Blanche. Then they all came. There must be a moral to this story.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

 

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the most challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.

 

CLICK HERE for the next story, Rockin' in the Bahamas.

RETURN to Our Studio Index.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

Our Own Photo Studio, Part VIII

Previously on this thread...

WHAT'S A GO-SEE?

Back in the days when my business partner and I had a commercial photography studio in New York (Steinbicker/Houghton Inc., 1965-1979), one of the rituals of the biz was the Go-See. This was when new fashion models who were just starting out with major model agencies such as Ford, Wilhelmina, Stewart, and Elite were sent out to visit photographers in the hopes of getting some free "test" photos of themselves to put in their portfolios. This was beneficial to both the model and the photographer, who always needed good-looking subjects to try their ideas on, and also to fill up their own portfolios. Naturally, big-name photographers such as Richard Avedon did not need to do this, but for us second-string guys it was both fun and and a way to show what we could do.

Click on photos to enlarge them.

On the photo above I was experimenting with a large sheet of heavy white Plexiglass, which I raised from the floor and illuminated from behind. The picture was taken from an overhead scaffold. The trick was in balancing the intensity of the rear light relative to the front lighting.

The usual arrangement was that the model provided the styling, clothes, and perhaps a location. The photographer covered the cost of film, processing, transportation, and general studio expenses. The resultant photos could not be used commercially without payment to the model, but could be used to promote the photographer. The model agency could put the photos on their "head sheets" and in the model's portfolios. This was a real win-win for all concerned.

The photo on the left was a winter scene in Central Park. The model provided the fur coat.

When we first started, in 1965, my business partner Jim Houghton did most of these, but later in the 60s and into the 70s I really got into it myself, doing test shots on dozens and dozens of lovely ladies (and a few guys, too) in order to sharpen my skills and develop new ideas. I've sprinkled a few of them around this blog entry just to decorate the page.

Another winter scene in Central Park. This was shot using a 500mm Russian Matsukov mirror lens on a Canon SLR camera, handheld, on the very grainy Anscochrome 500 film. Within a few years this film disappeared as new emulsions from Kodak and Fuji combined even higher ISO speeds with hardly any grain and excellent sharpness. But this stuff did lend a special atmosphere to the shots. FLASH! Less than an hour after posting this, I read in the March 07 issue of Shutterbug magazine about a new color negative film that duplicates the gritty "look" of the old Anscochrome 500 slide film. It is called Rollei ScanFilm, has an ISO speed of 400, and uses coventional C-41 chemistry. Designed specially for digital scanning, it is cut from aerial film made by Gevaert in Belgium, and is available online.

This was also shot in Central Park, my favorite outdoors location when there was no budget for anyplace that cost money. I also used the Hamptons and Westchester County fairly often, and when I find those 35+-year-old slides, I'll post them here. For out-of-town shots I always rented a car as keeping your own in Manhattan was extremely expensive, and both traffic and parking made it useless for local transport.

Here's another Central Park scene, this time in summer. There are lots more, but I won't bore you with them all. Actually, I would, if only I could find them among all the dusty boxes stored in the attic.

By 1971 or 1972 I was too busy with other assignments and could no longer indulge in these pursuits. And by 1975 I was playing around with ideas for a cable TV series on offbeat travel, which got nowhere but did start me out on travel writing.

Click here for that story.

And here to continue this thread.

RETURN to Our Studio Index.

RETURN to Photography Index.

RETURN to Current Main Page.

 

Interested in photography? Check out my "Assisting Avedon" blog.

 

SO, just what Little Adventure am I up to now in 2013? Why, just the most challenging one of them all! CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT.