Special Effects Photography
Livingston
1985
The pictures in this book are really cool! These images had to take a really, really long time to create in 1985. In one example, a TV set and a vase are attached to a wall at crazy angles and flowers are hung with wire. An assistant is hidden behind a wall with a turkey baster/mop contraption to provide a spray of water. That’s a pretty elaborate set-up for one photo! Special effects photographers of today would just cut and paste some images wherever they want them and use cool software tools to add the water and flying effects.
Matt Fellows, the ALB logo designer, did not position Death and a troll in a library to create that picture…right, Matt? No, Mary and I were not the models for that shot.
Submitted by Holly
15 responses so far ↓
Justin // June 30, 2009 at 9:54 am |
Is this really “awful” ? Would you weed this book out on the basis that it creates art using less conventional methods than might be used by the majority of photographer / designers? It seems plausible that art students might be given an assignment that challenges them to create surreal images without the use of digital image manipulation.
I mean, it isn’t a 1980’s book about everything you should know about HIV, it’s an art book… those techniques are perfectly valid, if a bit archaic.
Gina // June 30, 2009 at 5:56 pm |
Gotta love the Atari-looking images reflected in the sunglasses on the front cover.
skr // June 30, 2009 at 9:56 pm |
Actually, sometimes those conventional special effects are cheaper and far more effective/realistic than the computer route. You should see some of the setups for high end commercial photography. Even the stuff that uses a lot of computer effects/compositing are quite elaborate.
Daemon // July 1, 2009 at 12:29 am |
Actually, a lot of pro photographers still do go for the elaborate staged photo rather than faking it in photoshop. Depends on the photographer, the desired effect and how easy it is to do in real life vs how long it would take to do it in photoshop.
Erin Bosenberg // July 1, 2009 at 9:20 am |
I remember creating special effects in darkrooms and being 27 now I only started photography in the late 90s
Gina // July 3, 2009 at 4:58 pm |
Well, the title does call it say “modern” masters. Nothing about the book appears to be modern. I’m sure that there are better, newer titles that show how to make special effects- with and without all of the computer techniques.
Kelly // July 4, 2009 at 11:20 am |
Gina, why would you need a newer title to show you the same techniques. This is the problem with our microwave society. Just because the title is old doesn’t mean that there is anything outdated about the special effects. Just because digital photography has turned everyone into an amateur photographer, doesn’t mean that professionals don’t still take time to do photography properly. Instead of complaining about the book, realize that perhaps this is just a book that is above your level of technical expertise rather than an outdated book.
incurable hippie // July 6, 2009 at 5:48 am |
I own this book! It’s great !!
Fragano Ledgister // July 8, 2009 at 2:03 pm |
If I recall correctly, Photoshop (or one of its immediate ancestors) was invented just about then. This is a historical document of some value, marking a time when you had to stage your trickery rather than do it in the computer.
Bryan C // July 13, 2009 at 4:35 pm |
I have this very book and was thrilled to find it. It’s got lots of useful techniques and ideas, and the studio execution is pretty much the same regardless of whether you’re using film or digital to record the images. Many photography students are required to work with film and are prohibited from using trite Photoshop shortcuts.
NicoNicoNico // July 13, 2009 at 9:16 pm |
I’ve done a bit of photography in the past, so I’m actually curious to see how those effects are done without a computer. I’ve modified photos in Photoshop as well as in the darkroom, but I’ve never staged anything. Sounds like a load of fun, and a good weekend project with friends. Just because it doesn’t mention anything about computers (which, honestly, there are a *ton* of books out there on the subject), this is still a useful guide in some respects.
Hey, if your library wants to get rid of it, send it to me. I’ll gladly take it off their hands.
Judi // July 15, 2009 at 2:39 pm |
I agree it is dated in its look but as several people already mentioned most photography students are required to learn traditional techniques before they move on to the digital stuff. So it would be useful in a school or college library. However, I do question the relevance for a public library, especially if it isn’t being checked out. Public libraries aren’t archives. If it isn’t useful to the constituents of a library then it can be considered for removal even if it would still be useful to someone.
Hoebie // July 26, 2009 at 1:44 pm |
This is not book which should be weeded. In fact, doing so would insure the loss of valuable information for younger generations. You may be a librarian, but that does not mean you understand all of the information in all books. As a professional artist and photographer I can tell you that computer technology is incredibly limited and there are things which can NEVER be recreated by the computer, which MUST be done with real set ups.
How do you think people get the elements to combine for a digitally composited photo? Do you think they just borrow them from from an image library? Someone has to know how to shoot the different elements that will be put together. And you need some real technical expertise to make these photographic elements.
You are very stupid if you think removing this book from the library is a good idea. You only think the information in the book is outdated because you know little or nothing about the subject matter and rely on received ideas that you hear other dimwits sputter about on television. It is a crime that a librarian should be such a know-nothing.
arnold // September 10, 2009 at 4:45 pm |
thanks for sharing…
minnaloushe // September 22, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
Hoebie, chill… I’m a photographer, too… No need to call names…
Yes, there are special effects that should be done in the studio, and some that can be done with software – don’t you think maybe a library book should be able to help a person decide which is which? Or at the very least, include a section on photo software? I’m sure there are updated versions of this book.