Sunday, October 31, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Friday, October 29, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Monday, October 25, 2010
The Industrial Revolution is often seen as a black hole in the history of typography. In that era the role of the punchcutter changed to that of a largely uncredited factory worker. Records of who worked on individual typefaces are sparse. Today it can seem as if there is practically no information left about the designers of the nineteenth century.
William E. Loy was a type vendor, printer, and writer. Loy was unhappy to see so little credit given to the designers of the types that he had spent decades using and selling. In 1896 he began work on a series of articles profiling type designers that appeared in The Inland Printer, the leading journal of the trade. Drawing on a lifetime of connections he obtained biographical information, photographs, and lists of designs to use in what he termed “sketches” about twenty-seven type designers. It was also his wish to include images of their work, but he was unable to do so for technical reasons.
Years in the business and use of firsthand sources make Loy a very credible source about the period, which spans the heyday of wood type and artistic printing. This credibility is so important because his articles identify the origins of important electrographic and pantographic techniques as well as the artistic printing movement (credited to use of John M. Wehrle’s Ornamented No. 1552, A.K.A. Ray Shaded). Loy’s biographies are brief but enlightening, examining the origins of nineteenth century American designers in England, Scotland and Germany and their subsequent immigration to the United States. The writing avoids speculation in favor of fact glazed with praise for the quality and importance of the type. Each sketch is brief, but packs a good deal of information by not dwelling on trivia.
Nineteenth Century Designers and Engravers of Type republishes Loy’s entire series of articles about America’s type designers. Editors Alastair M. Johnston and Stephen O. Saxe have furthered Loy’s work by using patent records to track down more typefaces not in Loy’s lists. Paired with the articles are images of over 800 typefaces by the designers reproduced from period specimen books. it's about 50$
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Friday, October 08, 2010
By William Oliver
Over a 20-year career, David LaChapelle has carved a name for himself as an enfant terrible of pop culture photography. The cutting, acerbic wit and layered symbolism in his celebrity portraiture, fashion and advertising images is seen as a bolt of honesty—albeit a glamourised and high-gloss one—in an industry known for its false vision of reality.
During the last few years, LaChapelle has moved away from commercial work to focus on fine art. While retaining his unique visual style, this new direction highlights his interest and understanding of both contemporary practice and art history.
While in London working on his current exhibition, “The Rape of Africa” at gallery Robilant + Voena (until 25 May), The Art Newspaper met up with the infamous photographer to discuss the show, falling out of love with fashion and the new path his work is taking.
The Art Newspaper: What is your interest in fine art photography?
David LaChapelle: The fact that so much contemporary work is conceptual. When you are looking at it you know that it can only be art because it couldn’t be anything else, but it can be difficult to unravel. That is something that activates me; I want to make work that that has a language people can read.
TAN: Although you have had a successful career shooting for advertising and magazines, you actually began in galleries. Why did you move into commercial work?
DLC: I started showing in galleries in the early 1980s in New York City. I felt successful because my friends liked the work, and some of my shows were well attended, but my last gallery show of that period, in 1991, really wasn’t. At that point, when you’re not reaching an audience, you have to look for other ways of getting your work seen.
TAN: Why do you think the show was not well received at that time?
DLC: To be honest I was naïve about the whole process back then, I didn’t even know that there was a hierarchy of galleries. I was showing in SoHo but the gallery itself was completely off the map. I became a little disillusioned, had met Warhol and was shooting for Interview. I began to treat the magazine as my gallery; if people ripped out the pictures to keep, that to me was like a collector or a museum taking the works.
TAN: After a long-standing career shooting celebrity portraits you have now moved back into fine art. Your latest exhibition centres on one image, The Rape of Africa. What was your idea behind that photograph?
DLC: I visited the National Gallery and began looking at Botticelli’s Venus and Mars. I wasn’t in love with Botticelli in the way I was in love with Michelangelo, but I saw this painting and was so excited by its personification of the gods in a figurative way. Having people represent war, greed, love and beauty, and the fact that they were post-coitus, seemed incredible. It occurred to me that the painting could be contemporary; the ideas in it still seemed so relevant today; as fast moving as our world is, we haven’t progressed with our morality or spirituality.
The use of Africa in my photograph is about it being the cradle of civilisation, the idea of Mother Earth and Mother Africa. The production of gold in Africa is destroying both the society and the country itself but continues because of our obsession in the West. The human suffering and the cost to the environment are incalculable. We are degrading our mother and we are raping Mother Earth in our quest for financial security, but while doing so we are ensuring our own insecurity.
TAN: Why did you choose Naomi Campbell as the model for Venus?
DLC: Botticelli used Simonetta Vespucci as his model for Venus. She was famous in Italy at that time for being a great beauty, and Naomi Campbell is a great beauty of our time. I wanted to twist the idea slightly and talk about greed and wealth etc. It was not just about Africa; Naomi in a way was the representation of Africa even though she is not actually from Africa. I looked at her and thought it didn’t matter, I didn’t need to have a woman from Africa to represent what I was trying to say.
TAN: Will The Rape of Africa form part of a series?
DLC: No, this picture is a stand-alone work. I am producing a lot of other pieces that are a series, but they are taking longer and longer to complete. Not because I am getting lazier with my production, but as I move forwards I am applying further layers to the narrative and symbolism in the imagery, and that process adds time.
TAN: Have you now fully made the move from fashion into fine art?
DLC: When I first left [fashion] there were a lot of reasons. I felt I had said all I could say within the format of the images I was making at that time and I had started to come up against a few problems from clients surrounding my ideas. I shot the series Jesus is my Homeboy for i-D, a hip contemporary style magazine, but they had issues with it because of the depiction of religion. I shot something for Italian Vogue that they had problems with because of the destruction in the pictures, and the fact that it was on newsstands around the time of hurricane Katrina. Also I wasn’t interested in the same things I was 25 years ago; I didn’t want to meet any new pop stars. It occurred to me I didn’t have the creative freedom I wanted. Fashion and magazines as a vehicle to reach a broader audience had reached an end for me, so I looked for other outlets.
When I first started the art pieces I said I would never go back to commercial but the studio became really quiet and I started to lose touch with my people. What I do is really collaborative, there is a huge amount of work that goes into the set building and designing. People think it is all done digitally but that is a fallacy. Really, because of this, I have done some commercial work recently but my real focus is now on my art.
Blog Archive
- Apr 2019 (1)
- Mar 2019 (2)
- Feb 2019 (7)
- Jan 2019 (2)
- Jan 2018 (3)
- Dec 2017 (2)
- Nov 2017 (1)
- Apr 2017 (4)
- Mar 2017 (7)
- Feb 2017 (6)
- Jan 2017 (2)
- Dec 2016 (1)
- Nov 2016 (1)
- Oct 2016 (1)
- Sep 2016 (3)
- Aug 2016 (2)
- Jul 2016 (1)
- May 2016 (3)
- Apr 2016 (5)
- Mar 2016 (7)
- Feb 2016 (2)
- Jan 2016 (5)
- Dec 2015 (6)
- Nov 2015 (3)
- Oct 2015 (4)
- Sep 2015 (6)
- Aug 2015 (6)
- Jul 2015 (4)
- Jun 2015 (7)
- May 2015 (5)
- Apr 2015 (2)
- Mar 2015 (8)
- Feb 2015 (2)
- Jan 2015 (6)
- Oct 2014 (3)
- Sep 2014 (1)
- Aug 2014 (2)
- Feb 2014 (6)
- Jan 2014 (5)
- Dec 2013 (2)
- Jun 2013 (2)
- May 2013 (10)
- Apr 2013 (7)
- Mar 2013 (8)
- Feb 2013 (12)
- Jan 2013 (5)
- Oct 2012 (2)
- Sep 2012 (6)
- Aug 2012 (4)
- May 2012 (7)
- Apr 2012 (10)
- Mar 2012 (9)
- Feb 2012 (8)
- Jan 2012 (10)
- Dec 2011 (2)
- Nov 2011 (15)
- Oct 2011 (15)
- Sep 2011 (10)
- Aug 2011 (3)
- Jun 2011 (3)
- May 2011 (11)
- Apr 2011 (12)
- Mar 2011 (20)
- Feb 2011 (7)
- Jan 2011 (8)
- Dec 2010 (5)
- Nov 2010 (4)
- Oct 2010 (13)
- Sep 2010 (12)
- Aug 2010 (5)
- Jul 2010 (1)
- Jun 2010 (6)
- May 2010 (11)
- Apr 2010 (7)
- Mar 2010 (12)
- Feb 2010 (5)
- Jan 2010 (5)
- Dec 2009 (1)
- Nov 2009 (11)
- Oct 2009 (2)
- Sep 2009 (7)
- Aug 2009 (1)
- Jun 2009 (1)
- May 2009 (5)
- Apr 2009 (4)
- Mar 2009 (17)
- Feb 2009 (10)
- Jan 2009 (4)
- Dec 2008 (3)
- Nov 2008 (21)
- Oct 2008 (20)
- Sep 2008 (8)
- Aug 2008 (3)
- Jul 2008 (10)
- Jun 2008 (12)
- May 2008 (6)
- Apr 2008 (10)
- Mar 2008 (6)
- Feb 2008 (6)
- Jan 2008 (5)
- Dec 2007 (4)
- Nov 2007 (6)
- Oct 2007 (11)
- Sep 2007 (11)
- Aug 2007 (16)
- Jul 2007 (5)
- Jun 2007 (15)
- May 2007 (15)
- Apr 2007 (36)
- Mar 2007 (15)
- Feb 2007 (10)
- Jan 2007 (11)
- Dec 2006 (8)
- Nov 2006 (25)
- Oct 2006 (30)
- Sep 2006 (8)
- Aug 2006 (2)