It's been 3 months since I left RMSP and two months since I left the USA. Time I put fingers to keyboard again for sure. And the inspiration for this resumption? Well that's down to a visit this week to the National Portrait Gallery in London.
The last time I visited the gallery was for the exact same reason; to see the prints selected for the Taylor Wessing Photographic Portrait Prize. That time I was in London to get a visa so I could attend photography school. This time I noticed the effects of the five months I spent at school.
The Taylor Wessing prize is a prestigious, international photography competition that attracts over 6,000 entries from around the world. With a first prize of £12,000 it is easy to see why so many photographers enter.
Although I studied the 2010 winning entries in some detail I'm sure I wasn't as thorough as I was this time for the 2011 results. After a quick walk round to take it all in I went over each entry one by one. I looked at the depth of field, the sharpness of the image, the composition. I guessed at what post processing had been used. I got up close to examine the catch lights in each subject's eyes. I tried to work out if it was natural light or studio light or even fill in flash. I guessed at where some sort of light shaper had restricted the light to part of the scene. I tried to work out the angles. I tried to work out what type of lens may have been used on some of them. Often I think I was near enough right. One or two had me thinking harder and one had me giving up. Studying photography gives you a whole new perspective on photographs if you let it. Today I did just that.
What puzzled me most was the composition; so many of the photographs 'broke the rules'. A leg that was missing a foot: it didnt matter. The lightest part of the scene was at the edges: it worked. The subject faced one side of the frame and the other half frame was there apparently doing nothing at all: that worked too. No sign of 'rules of thirds': Dolly Parton, for she was the subject, just didn't seem to mind. She sat there on her hotel bed, her diminutive form swamped by palatial surroundings and didn't appear one bit interested in composition. Doubtless she was thinking of the 14 other interviewers who would be want to get the most out of their allotted time that day, if they hadn't done so already. Sometimes the rules are irrelevant, photographs are inspiring because they are inspiring, not because they tick a bunch of boxes.
Note that I am not saying photographs are inspiring because they were shot with the latest digital camera equipment and processed on an expensive computer. The winning entry was shot in natural light, on film, and was not post processed. One of the most impressive exhibitions of photography I've seen since leaving Missoula comprised photographs taken on mobile phones of one sort or another. The often heard comment by people unfamiliar with photography beyond a basic point-and-shoot camera is, "That's a nice camera, I bet it takes great pictures". I wonder how many times the great masters of oil painting heard comments about their art work being so good because they used such high quality brushes!
Regardless of how the image was recorded each photographer first had to see the subject in their own unique way using a set of standard issue eyeballs. The photographers exhibiting in this exhibition had mastered those instruments very well indeed, showed considerable skill in recording what they saw with their cameras, and then translating that to a large print for the competition. I shall return to see the 2012 finalists later this year, and I have already registered to be informed when I can enter a portrait of my own.
To see some of the photographs on display click on this link: http://www.npg.org.uk:8080/photoprize/site11/index.php
To see the winning entries click on this link:
http://www.taylorwessing.com/about-us/corporate-social-responsibility/national-portrait-gallery.html
