The last post on urban decay reminded me of a trend in fashion
photography for using old, dilapidated buildings for a location. I've
even done it myself:
Why? For me, it means a fantastic contrast of texture. The gritty wall makes the nice clean, smooth fabric (and skin) really pop. Because that's what "pop" is--contrast. And as I've mentioned before--and will again many times--contrast is everything.
I don't claim my image is much more than that. But in other circumstances, it can or could be. Despite its recent trendiness, using urban decay for a fashion location surprisingly goes back to the 1940s. This one by Clifford Coffin of Wenda Parkinson is one of the earliest I know of:
And at the time it was taken, that photo had to represent a lot more than some texture contrast. It was taken in a bombed out building in London in 1947, after Britain had won the war, but lost it's empire and financial solvency. The building surely represented all that Britain lost, but Wenda and her beautiful dress just as surely represented a hope and desire for the future. To me, it's one of the most poignant photos ever--fashion or otherwise.
Maybe people at the time didn't see Coffin's photos that way, I don't know and have no idea how to find out. But I do know that thinking about it made me realize that there exists a contrast not talked about in design theory: namely, Mental Contrast (let's call it). The idea that a photo causes two different thoughts, which combine to make the photo what it is. In the Coffin photo, the emotions of the past contrast with hopes for the future, and together maybe spur action to carry on.
Other photos I'm sure have different mixes of Mental Contrast. I haven't thought about it much, but plan to.
Why? For me, it means a fantastic contrast of texture. The gritty wall makes the nice clean, smooth fabric (and skin) really pop. Because that's what "pop" is--contrast. And as I've mentioned before--and will again many times--contrast is everything.
I don't claim my image is much more than that. But in other circumstances, it can or could be. Despite its recent trendiness, using urban decay for a fashion location surprisingly goes back to the 1940s. This one by Clifford Coffin of Wenda Parkinson is one of the earliest I know of:
And at the time it was taken, that photo had to represent a lot more than some texture contrast. It was taken in a bombed out building in London in 1947, after Britain had won the war, but lost it's empire and financial solvency. The building surely represented all that Britain lost, but Wenda and her beautiful dress just as surely represented a hope and desire for the future. To me, it's one of the most poignant photos ever--fashion or otherwise.
Maybe people at the time didn't see Coffin's photos that way, I don't know and have no idea how to find out. But I do know that thinking about it made me realize that there exists a contrast not talked about in design theory: namely, Mental Contrast (let's call it). The idea that a photo causes two different thoughts, which combine to make the photo what it is. In the Coffin photo, the emotions of the past contrast with hopes for the future, and together maybe spur action to carry on.
Other photos I'm sure have different mixes of Mental Contrast. I haven't thought about it much, but plan to.
