New glamour shots…. and what is glamour ?

What is glamour
Some people will see glamour as mainly nude photography, also sometimes referred to as playboy style. Although I have to agree that for me playboy style can be fitted into the glamour category I don’t think that this is glamour perse. For me glamour is much broader. It contains everything from fully clothed to nudes, however with one thing in common, it has to be stylish. Glamour for me is better than reality. So one could say that everything I shoot is glamour because I do some work on the skin of my models, I do change the colors of the final image to a more pleasing one, I do use different light setups which are more pleasing for the models look etc.

However when I point out that a series is more glamour I always mean that these are images that contain a bit of “naughty” but in a good way. As many of you know we don’t do a lot of glamour in my work, mostly I love to focus on fashion, artists, beauty and shooting more crazy styling stuff. However I also love to go back to images that have something different and glamour for me is a sort of sidestep from my normal work that I love to do occasionally, playing with forms and expression is different in glamour from fashion and without a doubt a big challenge. In the past I hardly shot it because somehow it had no attraction to me because as a photographer you are somehow pushed into a corner with a big stamp on your head “wrong, ego etc.” and because I love my other work I also never had the need to explore glamour photography. When the workshops grew people more and more asked me to do glamour workshops and it took me some time to realize that maybe it would be fun to do the glamour workshops my way… meaning showing people that glamour does not mean top*less girls and flat light jumping around looking like they were ready to attack you and drag you down to the depths of you know what…..(sorry if I got carried away just now :D)

If you look at one of the replies by the way, that proves my point, just posting about glamour photography got my site banned from an UK schools network…. and I thought that I was always on the nice side :-), it has been corrected now by the way, thanks to the same reader.

For me glamour should have style, and yes of course there is a little bit of naughty in the images, you see a bit more than you normally do (however when I see certain fashion shots in vogue or shows on the catwalk I see more topless than I would ever shoot), the problem however is that if you try to aim for a broad audience you have to be careful, some people will not like to see anything less than a dress covering up everything, some people will have no problems with bathing suits but will freak when they see a lingerie shot, and some people will value photography for what it is. The artist interpretation of the subject he/she is visualizing (being it a painting or a photograph). When I teach workshops for example in a hotel setting a lot of people will ask me if the models will be wearing lingerie, and much to their surprise my answer is always (unless it’s a glamour workshop of course) “no of course not, it’s a fashion workshop”.

I think glamour has gotten a really bad reputation mainly due to the so called GWC (Guy With Camera) who only shoots to have girls in front of his camera that are nude, somehow I’m afraid that this overload of GWCs doing just that has given glamour a really negative vibe, to a point that when I teach I carefully select my images to include nothing that anyone could take offense to, in fact the image you see on top is probably the most glamour-ish shot I would use in a public slideshow of my work (and probably I would even not show this one). So is it a wrong image ? I don’t think so….

Over the years however somehow glamour has changed. I love photography and when I’m visiting a large bookstore I love to browse for nice photo books. I love for example David Lachapelle and own almost all of his books, without a doubt some of the most intriguing work I love…. but there is also a lot of nudity in his work, however somehow people don’t see that as “wrong”, although I have to add that some do. Another example is an add campaign that recently ran in the Netherlands (2010) for a company called suit supply  they have some amazing photography done, and in a recent campaign shameless (sorry text is in Dutch) they used a lot of references to more ero(tic a). For me the images were stunning, but I also felt that somehow they would get the company in trouble and indeed, they were forced to ban the images from Facebook and also the overseeing organization for advertising in the Netherlands were getting numerous complaints about the images. In the end however the campaign was allowed because it did not go over the “red line”. It has given the company even a LOT of attention. One could debate if these images are a wise decision, and I personally would not have take the risk, it is of course something that could backfire at you and in the end loose you your company. Some will say that I’m too careful but somehow I think one cannot be careful enough now a days.

Ok you read now a days and that’s for a reason.
When I look at some of the books I have in my library ranging from a lot of fashion books (still love the Vogue overviews and can highly recommend those), some photographers like David Lachapelle, Helmut Newton etc. I cannot find myself wondering if the expression that today we are more liberal than 20 years ago is really valid…. I wonder what would have happened when someone like Helmut Newton would start his career today… would he be accepted the way he was back in the days, I’ve seen a documentary where he was, to put it mildly, very rude to his models and the agency and without a doubt said things about the models appearance that now would have been regarded as harassment. For me I love some/most of his work, some images I also find to cross the border between good taste and ero*tica, but because it’s Helmut Newton people seem to accept this. I think/believe that when you shot fashion 20 years ago and also published a nude series people would accept this probably much easier than now a days, for me this means that I reject many assignments. Don’t get me wrong I don’t have any problem with good nudity and as you can see in this blog post I love to play with glamour settings, however these images are shot for my own portfolio, I have 100% control in what happens with the images and which images are used where. Somehow when I would do it in assignment for a magazine I’m afraid that people will get the wrong impression about my body of work which in my case is 98% non glamour. And this last sentence maybe says it all…. in todays atmosphere where you have to be careful when you are shooting a soccer game with kids playing, where you are forced away when shooting in a mall or even on the street in some cities and where some areas of photography are labeled wrong you have to be careful with what you do and publish….

However as always it’s the very small minority that ruins it for the well willing artists. Some “wrong people” are indeed shooting soccer games with little kids for reasons I don’t even want to think about, since 9/11 some security guards have a new calling in their boring life and that is prohibiting photographers doing what they love. All these limitations/problems are caused by a very small minority that already changed the world for us photographers on a daily basis, when we look however at nude or glamour photography it’s a lot worse…..

Real artists making boudoir photography and glamour photography NOT to shoot nude male or female models but because this fits their vision/their art are more and more hindered by the overflowing masses of GWCs doing the same work with other intentions. When we see what impact a minority can have what will happen with glamour photography in a few years time… I’m posting almost all of my glamour work on my blog, I think that my audience will appreciate it and to be honest never had any complaints about it, but when you are working 98% glamour and 2% fashion how will you be labeled in a few years time? this is something that scares me. When I see the impact for example 9/11 and for shooting children playing has had over the last few years for street photography as a whole, I’m afraid to see what the negative vibe for glamour photography will do for people claiming they are model photographers. For me if I have to drop glamour photography it’s no problem at all it’s a small part that never made me any money but I do it for the art, to experiment with light and to make sure that I’m more all-round as a shooter. I do think that there should always be room for any form of photography without getting a label of being wrong, even when it doesn’t fit your taste or preference. (I do have to add that I personally don’t believe porn etc. should ever get a label photography)

Actually the fact that I’m thinking about this blog post because I wanted to share some recent glamour images is actually already wrong 🙂 I also however strongly feel that in the case of photography it’s also a minority of people that really find offense in glamour/nude photography, however these people seem to have the strongest voice and can break down a company or a persons career. If you are working in boudoir photography or glamour I would love to hear your input on this blog post (also if you are one of the GWCs, let’s be honest….. :-))

But without wasting more of your time here are some of my favorite shots of the recent glamour experiment, some might not be 100% Safe for work, although I think it’s not that bad 🙂