We've got a really cool competition which is open to anybody, with no age or country restrictions.
The Competition:
Later this year we are launching an online marketing campaign for www.carlbeebee.com
In order to be a winner of this competition you must make a photograph or video - or anything else interesting and unique promoting the website.
The top place winner will win an A3, framed, fine art print of 'Lovers & Liars' complete with an official certificate of authentication. The winner will also receive a signed Exhibition guide from Carl's New York show earlier in the month.
The 2nd place winner will win a 10x8 framed, fine art print of 'Lovers & Liars' complete with an official certificate of authentication and a signed exhibition guide from Carl's New York show earlier this month.
All other entries that are used as part of the marketing campaign will win a signed exhibition guide.
We're looking for entries that are cool and unique, so get your thinking caps on!
If it's any help we're also using the tagline "Cooler than the Fonz"
Please send all entries to info@carlbeebee.com with the subject title 'Viral Competition'.
3 different members of staff will decide the winners and they will be chosen by by the 1st April 2012.
Good luck!
Dean.
Thursday, 2 February 2012
Monday, 16 January 2012
PROFESSIONAL PHOTOS ARE NOT BLURRY!?
I found this article recently in a book called ‘FotoLog’ - I’d be interested to hear your thoughts.
‘PROFESSIONAL PHOTOS ARE NOT BLURRY!’ the purist shouts, screwing his SLR onto a tripod as he lines the family up for a portrait. ‘Red-eye is ugly!’ he recites, swivelling the flashgun so it bounces off the ceiling. ‘Wide-angle lenses make your nose look big!’ But there a are a few gaps in the purist’s impressive photographic knowledge. He doesn’t know that Terry Richardson shoots magazine covers with a cheap compact camera, that Ryan McGinley makes red-eye sexy, or that Wolfgang Tilmans won the Turner Prize with images containing flaring, blurring and camera shake.
Instead of making the medium as neutral and transparent as possible, both amateur and art photographers play around with the inherent qualities of film, lenses and light, transforming flaws and failures into pleasures, coaxing innovations of error.
You could try telling the purist what happened when Picasso met a sceptic on the train. The man asked why the artist couldn’t make his paintings more realistic. Picasso looked puzzled. ‘But what would a realistic portrait look like?’ he asked. The man produced a photograph of his wife. Picasso peered at it intently, then said, ‘Is your wife really so small and flat?’
- I loved the article and this has essentially always been my argument with photographic purists. I’ve never felt that a photograph has to be technically brilliant, to be a brilliant photograph.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)