Posts Tagged 'celebrity photographer'

“Top Secret” Photo Assignment

Photo: what’

In his blog, photographer Andrew Hetherington recounts the story of getting a photo of notorious paparazzo Ron Galella–paparazzi-style–for a “top secret” assignment for the AARP Bulletin feature called “Where Are They Now?” After staking out his house, Hetherington tails him in his car and pounces at a photo lab. Galella, 78, said he was impressed by the ambush, but was aware he was around the whole time (if not knowing why). Surprisingly though, Galella tells AARP, he likes being photographed.

Smash His Camera, a documentary on Galella’s distinction as the godfather of paparazzo, stalking the likes of Jackie Kennedy Onassis and Marlon Brando, debuted at Sundance this year. His photos of Jackie O. in the 70s are among the most iconic, right up there with the White House years.

Galella calls the current paparazzi “gangbangers.” (But don’t we always think our way of doing things as more refined, when in all actuality Jackie O. felt just as terrorized as modern-day celebrities with him around.) Still, he says the most photos he took of her in a single year was 20. It seems quaint, doesn’t it?

Read the AARP article on Ron Galella here.

Article from What’s the Jackanory? via The Click

Dude Carries a Camera

Photo by lg_fotografia

So Jeff Bridges won the Academy Award for Best Actor Sunday night. I was kinda unimpressed by his performance in Crazy Heart, but I understand the Oscar is often for your cumulative career or extreme likeability. (Sandy Bullock, I’m looking at you too.)

In any event, Bridges is apparently quite the shutterbug. As PopPhoto found out a few years back, Bridges favors panoramic style, uses a Widelux and shoots mostly on his movie sets. His work was compiled in the 2003 book Pictures.

See more of Bridges’ work on his personal site here.

Article via PopPhoto Flash

Famed Photographer Facing Financial Ruin

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images Europe

Annie Leibovitz is one of, if not the, preeminent celebrity photographer in the world. She also owes $24 million – due September 8th – and she’s on the verge of financial ruin, not to mention losing the rights to her archives.

So the New York Times in a recent article asks rather incredulously: “If Annie Leibovitz can’t make it in New York, who can?” Er, anyone can make it in New York – especially at the salary she’s been commanding for around 30 years; she just must be, to be really frank, a colossal flake.

While the article seems sympathetic to Leibovitz, any thinking person would come away shaking their head. It describes Leibovitz as beholden to a “pawn shop”-like lending company (but their shaky reputation was apparently well-documented) and having  family burdens (like work overload and children – yes, very unique) and real estate expenses (multiple million-dollar homes). They also say she’s  terrible with her money and extremely irresponsible and always has been.

“The mind that can take these extraordinary pictures is not necessarily the same mind that is a perfect money manager,” said Graydon Carter, the editor of Vanity Fair.

OK, but does that mind know well enough to pay someone else to manage their money? How does anyone making the money she does, or even just anyone anywhere,  get into a situation where they owe $24 million? The article notes that she’s always been extremely protective about reproduction of her work, and sadly, she stands to lose the rights to all of her images since she pledged them as collateral for the loan (along with her homes). Too bad she wasn’t protective of her financial portfolio.

Like MC Hammer and Ed McMahon before her, it’s just really hard to feel sorry for multi-millionaires who can’t manage their money.

Article from The New York Times

%d bloggers like this: