Lou Reed - Photography and gear

Austerby · 11-10-2009

Article in todays Independent Newspaper about his new book, Romanticism:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-en...r-1817676.html

"He denies it, but Reed is a camera geek. He can quote camera names and models with an intimate knowledge: "I have a Leica medium format – just the body cost $24,000. I have been waiting around for the M9. I love this camera. I love it that they are digital. I love the Alpa, they're quite the little company, you should check out their website. I use it with a Schneider lens. And the medium format Hasselblad, and they went into Fuji lenses. Why are some lenses so much better than others? What is it about the way they polish glass?" It's difficult to get him off the subject. "I'm not an obsessive," he says. "It's just like guitars."

buzzardkid · 11-10-2009

Started up the Velvet Underground from iTunes, commence reading the article now

MichaelW · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Austerby

"I have a Leica medium format – just the body cost $24,000.

Answers the question of who's the market for the S2, I guess. Thanks for the link, interesting to see the photos shown in that article mostly have a strong IR effect.

buzzardkid · 11-10-2009

Lou,

if you can spare an M9, I'm waiting for it, Man

Will buy that book for sure!

Nate Butler · 11-10-2009

I'm waiting for my M
Seven thousand dollars in my hand...

Damaso · 11-10-2009

After seeing the (few) images in the slide show I don't think we'd be talking about his work if he wasn't Lou Reed....

LChanyungco · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damaso

After seeing the (few) images in the slide show I don't think we'd be talking about his work if he wasn't Lou Reed....

the first one with the flares looks cool

Jamie123 · 11-10-2009

The first one's ok but the rest are really bad. Don't quit your dayjob, Lou

photo_fred · 11-10-2009

with Damaso completely.

gns · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damaso

After seeing the (few) images in the slide show I don't think we'd be talking about his work if he wasn't Lou Reed....

We aren't talking about his work. We are talking about his cameras.

Cheers,
Gary

semordnilap · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

Maybe, maybe not, but he is Lou Reed, and the rest of you most decidedly aren't.

Exactly! It's not everyone who gets famous thanks to the talents of John Cale and Andy Warhol!!!

Naw... no disrespect meant to Mr. Reed. I don't think there's any way his photographs could ever come close to Metal Machine Music.

Damaso · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by gns

We aren't talking about his work. We are talking about his cameras.

Cheers,
Gary

We wouldn't be talking about his cameras if he hadn't published a book of photographs. Personally I have a pet peeve about people who collect cameras and don't really know how to use them. I am not 100% sure this is the case there but the evidence I have seen so far indicates that it is.

Of course if you have the money you can buy whatever your want. I just don't want to be subjected to what you produce!

kshapero · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damaso

After seeing the (few) images in the slide show I don't think we'd be talking about his work if he wasn't Lou Reed....

totally agree. IMHO this is another example of folks going after their daily fix of celebrity BS. I saw Velvet Underground twice in the late 60's. They were nothing to write home about. Actually they were mostly terribly off key and not very accomplished as musicians. But then again I digress, they got in the Rock Hall of Fame because they were so brave to sing about shooting Heroin. Now that's talent.

And the sunglasses.

Alex Krasotkin · 11-10-2009

Last Great American Whale...

Jamie123 · 11-10-2009

He's also one of the curators for NYPH'10 which makes me wonder a little. It's not that all of his photographs are horrible but they're pretty unimpressive. The fact that he found those worthy to be published worries me a little.
I don't really have a problem with people who spend lots of money on cameras and aren't great photographers. Most Ferrari owners are not racecar drivers either.

So who's the best photgrapher amongst the celebritiesr? Lou Reed? Richard Gere? Brad Pitt?
My money's on Brad Pitt.

Austerby · 11-10-2009

For me Lou Reed has always been an artist worth keeping an eye on - I like a lot of his work though by no means all of it but he has produced some very interesting material over a very long period of creativity. I don't think he's setting himself up to be a great photographer but he is clearly interested in the visual image and is an effective communicator in getting people interested in what he's doing.

I'd much rather people such as him put out books on photographs that we see and have a good debate about rather than keeping them private - and I do think it's quite something to place one's work in the public domain and allow the rest of us to view and comment.

There were only four photos shown on the Independent website, one of which seems to be regarded as pretty good, the others more routine. By my standards that's a decent hit rate and I'd like to see more before making a call on this collection, let alone a sweeping judgement on his entire abilities as a photographer as others have done.

He likes his gear, as we all do. We also know he could produce similar imagery from other equipment but that's not really the point here.

I look forward to continue to be entertained, intrigued and stimulated by Lou Reed's creativity in whatever field he selects to work in. (and Laurie Anderson's too - another deeply interesting and creative person).

Paddy C · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamie123

So who's the best photgrapher amongst the celebritiesr? Lou Reed? Richard Gere? Brad Pitt?
My money's on Brad Pitt.

Don't forget...
Seal
Karl Lagerfeld
Bryan Adams
Viggo Mortensen
Matthew Fox
Wim Wenders
etc. etc. etc.

snausages · 11-10-2009

Dear Lou Reed,

Your music stinks and so do 3 out of 4 of your stupid pictures. Possibly even 4 out of 4, but we're still working that out.

Way More Creative And Artistic And Good At Photos Than You,
RFF

ps - can we have your autograph?

lemalk · 11-10-2009

Amen. Amen. Amen. Love Lou Reed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Austerby

For me Lou Reed has always been an artist worth keeping an eye on - I like a lot of his work though by no means all of it but he has produced some very interesting material over a very long period of creativity. I don't think he's setting himself up to be a great photographer but he is clearly interested in the visual image and is an effective communicator in getting people interested in what he's doing.

I'd much rather people such as him put out books on photographs that we see and have a good debate about rather than keeping them private - and I do think it's quite something to place one's work in the public domain and allow the rest of us to view and comment.

There were only four photos shown on the Independent website, one of which seems to be regarded as pretty good, the others more routine. By my standards that's a decent hit rate and I'd like to see more before making a call on this collection, let alone a sweeping judgement on his entire abilities as a photographer as others have done.

He likes his gear, as we all do. We also know he could produce similar imagery from other equipment but that's not really the point here.

I look forward to continue to be entertained, intrigued and stimulated by Lou Reed's creativity in whatever field he selects to work in. (and Laurie Anderson's too - another deeply interesting and creative person).

jpfisher · 11-10-2009

Quote:

So who's the best photgrapher amongst the celebritiesr? Lou Reed? Richard Gere? Brad Pitt?

Not having really delved into the work of a lot of them, I do have to say that Matthew Modine's stuff in his diary from Full Metal Jacket is pretty good.

Jamie123 · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paddy C

Don't forget...
Seal
Karl Lagerfeld
Bryan Adams
Viggo Mortensen
Matthew Fox
Wim Wenders
etc. etc. etc.

I'd strike Lagerfeld from that list as he's not a celebrity with a camera but a working commercial photographer. Ok, ok, he mostly shoots for Chanel, i.e. hires himself but it's still professional. As an "art photographer" I find him terrible.
Also I'd strike Wim Wenders as he's a director and as such photography is part of his trade (to some extent).

We could add John Mayer to the list aswell. Also, I once saw Audrey Tatou use an M8 at an interview. She couldn't get it to work, though, so I don't know if I'd put her on the list

Paul T. · 11-10-2009

Jeff Bridges has a pretty good portfolio.

Jamie123 · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpfisher

Not having really delved into the work of a lot of them, I do have to say that Matthew Modine's stuff in his diary from Full Metal Jacket is pretty good.

Yeah his FMJ stuff was pretty decent. Some very good stuff in there. I like how he said in the interview how Kubrick called his Rolleiflex an "old piece of junk" and advised him to get the latest and greatest Minolta. Priceless

Jodorowsky · 11-10-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSU

I guess for him cameras are like heroin or a white heat, white lightning.

I don't know about cheap scotch, but round my way, White Lightning is a very cheap cider. White Light, man.

buzzardkid · 11-10-2009

And still I'm going to buy the book. I might not like all that I see, but I've had that with Steve McCurry and Richard Avedon books as well.

He's produced a consistent body of work, with a conceptual vision embedded in it. Something to get me interested, to say the least.

I might even disagree on any image that's in there, but then that is what I get from it: how would I have taken that shot?

All in all, I like the sense of emptiness that's in all the shots, with only the one with a human in there. My thing is shooting portraits, but even in those I like a sense of emptiness and loneliness, so having a book with landscapes in B&W should appealing to me.

And, only seventy dollars in my hand