Kiyoshi Fujino wrote:
a lot of people think her newer stuff is too posed and overworked.

Have to agree with those people... maybe alittle underworked too.  From what I can see in this published shot, her set preparation is sloppy and has much to be desired (dirty floor foreground / tacky cracks and scars in background / canvas background runs out on the right side of the frame / subject spacing could be tighter, facilitating canvas covering everything and everyone to the right)... I'm just sayin...



Girl in the gold dress (in middle) looks somewhat alienated (too much space around her) from the rest of the group.  And what is that table doing sticking into the guy's arm on the extreme left of the image?  Yeah that shoulda got 86'd also...

Kiyoshi Fujino wrote:
That's it. The image is highly controlled. There's not a single detail that isn't there for a reason.... But what she's really good at is striking the balance between order and chaos.... What's good about that image is every individual is conveying something personal that's not being crowded out or lost in the details. And it looks like a Vogue centerfold, but also looks effortless.

I seeeeee... so essentually what you're saying is... all this abundance of imperfection is actually some form of twisted perfection in her world.  Now it makes sense.  Guess I should try that... run around and shoot loads of fucked up shit... fuck that shit up even more in post... and label myself as an image inovator...

And as the mind reader that I am... someone here is gonna come along and say... 'Dude... you're already doin that... keep up the great work'...    If that's the case... then I'm well on my way to being a AL protege...  

I should bring a 'fuckup the photo' preset to the market with loads of 'insert imperfection here' tools (telephone wires/dumpsters/cracks/smuges/dog poop/photo-bombers/train tracks/wrong white-balance/outta focus/pimples&scars/hair roots/zipper down/wardrobe mal-functions/bloated tummies/soiled clothing)... and watch millions of GWCs clammer to purchase it...    

This will be a fantastic tool for photographers who 'get it right' outta the camera... but didn't honestly want to... seeking an abundance of imperfection as the final result...

Select Models wrote:
I seeeeee... so essentually what you're saying is... all this abundance of imperfection is actually some form of twisted perfection in her world.  Now it makes sense.  Guess I should try that... run around and shoot loads of fucked up shit... fuck that shit up even more in post... and label myself as an image inovator...

And in the world of $500k commissions. But of course. As Yohji Yamamoto said “Perfection is ugly. Somewhere in the things humans make, I want to see scars, failure, disorder, distortion.”

Any $20 retoucher can make an image perfect. But perfect isn't real and doesn't connect with people. Which is why they're stuck doing catalog shots, while Terry Richardson's shooting Obama and Miley Cyrus.

Select Models wrote:
I seeeeee... so essentually what you're saying is... all this abundance of imperfection is actually some form of twisted perfection in her world.  Now it makes sense.  Guess I should try that... run around and shoot loads of fucked up shit... fuck that shit up even more in post... and label myself as an image inovator...

I think you'll find that the market has already spoken on that point.  She's the one that got the gig. And the paycheck to match. And she continues to get those level of gigs, such as the Royal Family for Vanity Fair, etc.

But yes, you're certainly allowed to laugh at her, if you like...


P.S.  I also liked her use of having everyone (men and woman) wearing the same black tux outfit on the left half of the screen, and then (after using the central standing woman in gold as a soft transition) changing to a range of colors and outfits on the right side of the screen, with one black tux to tie it back together.  Plus the black background on the right hand side also helps to balance it with all the black on the left hand side.  And yes, the deliberate black table "casually" placed horizontally in the bottom left hand corner to balance the black background that runs vertically in the top right hand corner.

As has already been pointed out, there are no "accidents" here.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out that the center background break (which very conveniently happens to separate the two different image styles in the photo), the right hand background "cut off" and the black table had all been added in post...

Kiyoshi Fujino wrote:
Terry Richardson's shooting Obama and Miley Cyrus.

Yeah she's got a HUGE advantage over him.  Photographers of his gender are now under constant pursuit by the 'sexual abuse' gold-diggers...

LightDreams wrote:
it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out that the center background break, the right hand background "cut off" and the black table had all been added in post...

Are you SERIOUS?.... well it would certainly surprise the hell outta me... AND HEY... maybe there IS a future for my 'fuckup the photo' app...

Select Models wrote:
HEY... maybe there IS a future for my 'fuckup the photo' app...

Hah!  While I know you weren't serious, consider an imaginary app that randomly generates different foreground and background effects or overlays, where you could rapidly flip through 100 randomly generated results.  It might just have somewhere in it, some visual aspect that you might want to keep as an improvement and/or use as an inspiration for something somewhat similar.

Just another variation of the old random idea generators.  Although some random Photoshop curve and/or image effect generators already exist out there though, for "random idea" generating scenarios.  How successful or popular those apps or plug-ins are, is another matter entirely..