Spring Break
On This Earth
Photo Essay by Nick Brandt
Interview by Stephen Pasqualina
Issue date: 6/1/08 Section: Spring 2008
Why shoot only in black and white?
A couple of reasons. One, I just simply prefer the aesthetic-the way that in black and white, you are forced to focus much more on the graphic shapes and forms. Two, black and white has more of a timeless sensibility, and part of the aesthetic reasoning for it, and the sepia toning of the photos, is that it makes the viewer feel more like they are viewing images from another time, from a bygone era. Color has too modern a sensibility. Having said that, the colors out there are often so amazing that it seems vaguely ridiculous that I'm shooting black and white only. But I bet those photos, taken in color, would just be too much like eye candy.
How much of a role does Photoshop play in producing your images?
The fundamental integrity and content of the image is there on the negative-the animals, the landscape, the sky. I don't add animals or clone them or whatever. But I do do a lot of grading-darkening the skies, lightening the ground, doing localized contrast adjustments. The panoramic-shaped photos are two shots, taken consecutively, that are stitched together. I love doing these as they give the viewer more sense of the epic expanse of the environment.
Have you ever had any close calls with the animals? How close do you get?
No close calls in terms of danger. Well, I pissed off the alpha male in a chimpanzee troop once by getting too close and he hurled a boulder at me, and swung a liana in my direction (I was a bit slow off the mark and it thunked me on the head). I do get pretty close to the animals as I don't use a telephoto lens, but with the exception of the primates, these are done from the safety of a car, so I'm fairly safe.
In a July 2006 interview with Professional Photographer, you said that you want your images to be "an elegy to a world that is tragically vanishing." Talk a little bit about how you see your body of work as such.
Well, time is running out fast. Every year I go back, there is less. Most of it is due to population pressure, some of it is due to poaching (which, of course, is often a natural extension of population pressure in poor communities). I see what I'm doing as a last testament. A lot of people have compared my work to Edward Curtis', whose photos were a last testament to the American Indians' way of life. I wish I could be wrong. I wish I could say that it's not a last testament, but I don't feel hopeful.
A couple of reasons. One, I just simply prefer the aesthetic-the way that in black and white, you are forced to focus much more on the graphic shapes and forms. Two, black and white has more of a timeless sensibility, and part of the aesthetic reasoning for it, and the sepia toning of the photos, is that it makes the viewer feel more like they are viewing images from another time, from a bygone era. Color has too modern a sensibility. Having said that, the colors out there are often so amazing that it seems vaguely ridiculous that I'm shooting black and white only. But I bet those photos, taken in color, would just be too much like eye candy.
How much of a role does Photoshop play in producing your images?
The fundamental integrity and content of the image is there on the negative-the animals, the landscape, the sky. I don't add animals or clone them or whatever. But I do do a lot of grading-darkening the skies, lightening the ground, doing localized contrast adjustments. The panoramic-shaped photos are two shots, taken consecutively, that are stitched together. I love doing these as they give the viewer more sense of the epic expanse of the environment.
Have you ever had any close calls with the animals? How close do you get?
No close calls in terms of danger. Well, I pissed off the alpha male in a chimpanzee troop once by getting too close and he hurled a boulder at me, and swung a liana in my direction (I was a bit slow off the mark and it thunked me on the head). I do get pretty close to the animals as I don't use a telephoto lens, but with the exception of the primates, these are done from the safety of a car, so I'm fairly safe.
In a July 2006 interview with Professional Photographer, you said that you want your images to be "an elegy to a world that is tragically vanishing." Talk a little bit about how you see your body of work as such.
Well, time is running out fast. Every year I go back, there is less. Most of it is due to population pressure, some of it is due to poaching (which, of course, is often a natural extension of population pressure in poor communities). I see what I'm doing as a last testament. A lot of people have compared my work to Edward Curtis', whose photos were a last testament to the American Indians' way of life. I wish I could be wrong. I wish I could say that it's not a last testament, but I don't feel hopeful.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Photoshop Fan
posted 8/26/08 @ 7:46 PM EST
It\'s great to see the interviewee\'s artistic skills put towards a positive cause!
Post a Comment