DSLRUsers.com

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:27 am**

Jeans company hires US photographer for $200,000 I am not really sure WHY? Shock value perhaps but they could have a great Australian photographer and graphic company for the same cost.

Why is it that people from overseas are still considered better?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/fashion/badb ... 72131.html

If you subscribe to the theory that sex sells in advertising, Terry Richardson is definitely your man. Best known for louche imagery that blurs the lines between photography and pornography, the 41-year-old American coaxes models into his studio to strike poses that no doubt shock their parents. It's all in the name of art and commerce, with a long list of international fashion magazines and brands from Gucci to Levi's keen to trade on his risque rep.

Australia's Lee Jeans is the latest to join that list, investing what local sources estimate at $US150,000 ($200,000) to get Richardson to photograph its spring/summer advertising campaign in New York on Thursday. That's roughly 10 times what an Australian photographer would earn for the same campaign.

http://www.terryrichardson.com/

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:45 am**

Those people are nutz :shock:

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:58 am**

Yep a $20,000 commission to shoot some jeans would be nice

If they wanted some shocking photos I'm sure I could supply them

Looking at his work I am not even impressed but his photos they are a bit controversial but not what I would call good photography.

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:02 pm**

Dug wrote:.....Looking at his work I am not even impressed but his photos they are a bit controversial but not what I would call good photography.

Ditto, well said.

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:08 pm**

Never seen so much crap in one spot. Maybe he could invest the money in a photography class or two.

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:15 pm**

well shit.. if he can take pics like that and make thousands.. imagine what i can do with my crap shots!!

Ok.. maybe i went a bit far.. but i just looked at his pictures.. and they dont inspire me at all.. almost borderline insulting to some photographers who spend a lifetime perfecting there art to take beautiful quality inspiring images... and for a company to pay someone that much... is the world just showing how mad and stupid it is... or maybe its just me

Tim

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:27 pm**

I had been a little disillusioned of late with the quality of my photos, however after seeing his this morning.

$200,000 - just shows it's not what you know it's who you know, check out his Biography page it's a who's who of showbusiness. If you ask me he's a well connnected supurb salesman and that's about it. :wink:

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:47 pm**

I could take images that were almost porn for 1/4 that price. Heck, even 1/8.

His images do nothing for me, anyone on this site could take images of that quality. His images are like the 'modern art' of the photo world. Crap.

IMHO of course.

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:54 pm**

Not my personal taste in photos, but I also admit that I am not in the demographics that Lee Jeans is targeting.

In the SMH article, they got someone to think it was a good idea.

SMH wrote: one photographic agent said the industry was abuzz at rumours Richardson may have been hired.

"You can't really fight with the master. He's at the top of his field," said Jo Sinclair, the general manager of The Artist Group.

"As much as I would like it to swing round and that they would use an Australian next time, which I'm sure they will because they probably can't afford to do that for a second season, competition is a good thing, and I think that by using him it's raised the bar."

Let's hope he is right and this "helps" Australian photogs.

cheers,

André

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 1:37 pm**

some of those shots are just.... hrmm diplomatically, they just dont do anything for me. what a shame the job was awarded on merit of his pricetag rather than talent and taste.

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 1:52 pm**

This is the way the world turns now . Pop culture .Give Paris Hilton a camera and i bet she could charge $200000 a shoot . The publicity that comes with these peeps is what gets the bucks .

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 1:59 pm**

Ok now I know what I need to be succesfull

photo of

1. Naked old people

2. Camel toe

3. C grade celebritys

4. Naked young people

3. Jake Gyllenhaal

4. and a strangled cat

All shot with bad film and in a provokative nature.

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 2:13 pm**

They should hire an Aussie to take similar stuff and spend the remaining $190,000 on making their jeans better.

My Lee jeans developed holes in the left pocket before anywhere else made new holes... which is so unusual for me.

I've since duct-taped them up.

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 6:23 pm**

I think I must be a real old fart - they are some of the crappiest photos I've ever seen !!!!

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 6:44 pm**

I would have done it for a quarter of the price ......

PLUS.......

pp the images
12 assisants
2 spare camera bodys
a new computer
First class travel
all expences
a driver
all meals
my personal chef

and anything else I might think of.........

just to let you know I am not cheap.....

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 6:45 pm**

but he'll do anything for a drop of good red

just to let you know I am not cheap.....

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 7:38 pm**

Nnnnsic wrote:They should hire an Aussie to take similar stuff and spend the remaining $190,000 on making their jeans better.

My Lee jeans developed holes in the left pocket before anywhere else made new holes... which is so unusual for me.

I've since duct-taped them up.

Totally agree, Leigh.

I bought 3 pairs of genuine jeans in Thailand in 2003. Lee, Levi and AIIZ. All are still alive but Lee.

Alex

Posted: **Sun Jul 16, 2006 7:41 pm**

blacknstormy wrote:but he'll do anything for a drop of good red

just to let you know I am not cheap.....

a good Tyrrells Pino please.........

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:39 pm**

I tend to agree that these are overall Very ordinary images on his site. One or two are interesting because of perceived messages, but frankly I was thinking when I saw the 'milkmaid' "Doesn't that girl know that this is non-pasteurised!! :shock:

I guess one reason I have that view is because of the extremely high quality of work that DSLR User members post here. I think that DSLR Users.net could easily start a Stock Image site here with the POTW entries as starting Inventory.

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:52 pm**

I can see why you all don't respect this guys work.

While I don't think he is worth this much I do know how he does it.

His photos have a very distinct style - 'cheap' looking/direct flash... while doing something a little extra - or shocking. I really like some of the pics - the girl squirting herself in the face is damned funny and a bit of a simile too.

This guy has a definate style which is cool at the moment. Paying him $200K has no doubt already been worth it due to the free advertising from conversations like this and media coverage...

Marketing - constantly outsmarting the masses.

EDIT - on further inspection some of the photos are making me sick!

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:24 pm**

I can't believe how... searching for a word... um .. poor some of the photos are, they are just ... yuck!

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:39 pm**

Its the shock factor which made him famous. 200K for his talents is a large price to pay.

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:08 pm**

$200k is cheap for the publicity it has generated!

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:10 pm**

If some one is happy to pay AUD200,000 than good luck to him. If the photographer can ask for that much and people are happy to pay him I don't think that anyone has the right to stand up and oppose what he's earning.

Anyway here is a link that Glen sent to me awhile ago that is far more impressive than earning AUD200,000 even if you think he may not deserve it

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:32 pm**

OK so it's not just me thinking this guy is taking people for a ride

I thought maybe I was missing something :roll:

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:35 pm**

huynhie wrote:If some one is happy to pay AUD200,000 than good luck to him. If the photographer can ask for that much and people are happy to pay him I don't think that anyone has the right to stand up and oppose what he's earning.

I have no problem with the $200,000 I have a problem with an Australian company promoting US photographers when we have so many great Australian photographers looking for work.

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 8:43 pm**

Oh man, good luck I say. What a great gig to get whether it be for his skill, marketing, or whatever. I would dream of such a gig

Imagine the pressure though, really, if you were being offered that much dosh to shoot for a big multinational?!

I'd be shaking in my pants.

Rob

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:14 pm**

robster wrote:Oh man, good luck I say. What a great gig to get whether it be for his skill, marketing, or whatever. I would dream of such a gig

Imagine the pressure though, really, if you were being offered that much dosh to shoot for a big multinational?!

I'd be shaking in my pants.

Rob

No pressure look at his work if he screws up he can call it art!

If the campaign does not sell the audience just was not up to his standard :wink:

Posted: **Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:31 am**

robster wrote:Imagine the pressure though, really, if you were being offered that much dosh to shoot for a big multinational?!

I'd be shaking in my pants.

Bah, pressure!

For that money I'd engage three or four people from this forum to do the shooting and keep half of the loot

Cheers
Steffen.

Posted: **Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:27 am**

Dug wrote:
huynhie wrote:If some one is happy to pay AUD200,000 than good luck to him. If the photographer can ask for that much and people are happy to pay him I don't think that anyone has the right to stand up and oppose what he's earning.

I have no problem with the $200,000 I have a problem with an Australian company promoting US photographers when we have so many great Australian photographers looking for work.

Lee jeans is as much an Australian company as Holden, Citibank and Crispy Cream. :lol:

What happens when an Australian professional lands a top paying job from overseas? Should they get treated any differently?

Posted: **Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:31 pm**

Zeeke wrote:Ok.. maybe i went a bit far.. but i just looked at his pictures.. and they dont inspire me at all.. almost borderline insulting to some photographers who spend a lifetime perfecting there art to take beautiful quality inspiring images... and for a company to pay someone that much... is the world just showing how mad and stupid it is... or maybe its just me Tim

Try visiting the Museum of contemporary art at the Rocks in Sydney, strike me pink, and Tesltra sponsors that stuff...

DSLRUsers.com

$200,000 for a photo shoot!

$200,000 for a photo shoot!