When I first started at Plymouth College of Art it was fascinating to be introduced to all these new sources of inspiration and photographers, out there making a living doing what they and I love.
Although I myself do not shoot many landscapes one of my first real inspirations both through his imagery and his passion for work was Joe Cornish who I discovered in a lecture and in his book 'First Light'. When I found out he was going to be in the local area running workshops I contacted his gallery, crossing my fingers someone would get my message. Joe himself replied and was kind enough to meet me one morning, giving up his spare time before starting his workshop to chat to me about his journey in photography.
Thank you for setting aside the time to meet with me, it's much appreciated.
I'd like to start with how it is that you got into photography? In terms of the route you took professionally and also what sparked your passion.
Well I first started using a camera, 35mm at University when I was studying Fine Art. Nearly almost straight away, the moment when I picked up the camera I knew I love it. I started off using it in my first year and then started to get more creative throughout the second, third and fourth years, so by the time i graduated I was quite experienced and was taking pictures all the time.
When I graduated I really only had one thing on my mind: how could I get into professional photography? I had no idea and was very much on my own. I knew one photographer who was in America, Mike Mitchell in Washington DC who I had met before on a trip to the states. I knew his sister in law who was an old University friend of mine and after I graduated I got in contact with him. Luckily he wrote back and said that I could come over and if I was in Washington we might be able to find you a job. And that is how I started in photography; as an assistant to an American photographer. I twas a lucky break but of course it wasn't easy but nothing is and it was worth it.
That leads me nicely on to my next question. When you were starting out, how did you go about generating work for yourself?
It's very different to having a structured job, employment where a lot of the decisions are made for you; most photographic work is freelance which is still true and probably even more so today. I think the most important thing is you must exploit any contacts you have but you also have to be very imaginative within your work and where you look for opportunities.
In my case I was chronically shy and I still am quite shy strangely enough, but you've got to do it, got to push yourself. You put on your best smile and go out and talk to people.
In my head I had this vision of being a landscape photographer but I didn't know how to do it, I mean there's relatively little work in nature photography, well that's paid anyway.
So in my case I started out taking pictures of people, portraits for actors for the actors book. My brother was a young musician so that lead me into the area of photographing musicians. Any opportunities that arise you really have to take and for a long time it wasn't really making me any money and you have to be prepared for that.
I'm interested in your focus on landscapes in particular; what is it about these open spaces that keep you motivated to continue to photograph them?
That's a really good question, quite a human question when you thin about it, I mean why do some people prefer to be outdoors with nature and others happy milling around in the city? It's simply because I love being outdoors, I love the fresh air and I'm an active individual. Also that I'm very inspired by light, colour and texture. I have an art background and I think the things I just mentioned are the greatest source of inspiration for artists.
To be outside is a natural thing to do for me and especially being shy when I was younger it was the natural thing for me to do to avoid much contact with people [laughing].
Recently after working for many years with film you've made the switch to digital. What made this decision for you?
I should state I haven't given up shooting film. I'd like to regard myself as a photographer, not a digital photographer or a film photographer. I'm shooting digital at the moment having made the investment into a digital medium format back. The beauty of making such an investment is after the initial cost of the equipment the costs are relatively low and all you are paying with is your time. Whereas with large format film it can be £5 per exposure with 5x4 and even more with 10x8.
The digital is a nice change after all those years of expense, although I don't resent or regret them. I have a wide range of shooting methods all of which I fell are still relevant and therefore use particular ones for what I feel is appropriate for the style of shoot.
I feel that I am working towards using digital and film so you can't see the difference, you shouldn't be able to see the difference. To me capturing light and composition, yes the process of arriving there is different but the intention is exactly the same. It is how you capture it and how you print it and whether it's film or digital it really is very important to get the best results you can in camera.
Then you have the element of interpretation, if you choose to make very subtle changes within post production and how you choose to print. All these elements and stages should combine to ensure you get your artistic interpretation across as best you can and to the highest standard.
What are your views on contemporary landscape photography and how the critics tend to favour the dead pan aesthetic over the picturesque?
Having come from a Fine Art background I'm always slightly uncomfortable being characterised as a picturesque photographer but I completely understand why people would say that.
The art world sneers at the picturesque which has a lot to do with intellectual snobbery. Why there is this distain for the beauty and inspiration of nature I'm not sure, I really don't understand. Of course we must challenge creativity but like I said the distain seems incredibly short sighted.
I don't see dead pan as being a directly negative towards nature, I just see it as another style which is how some people approach nature with. Like Gursky and Burtynsky, but I love that work, absolutely fantastic.
It's a more cool and clinic way of exploring something whereas with light I feel it's more of an emotive language.
I enjoy many different styles of photography, dead pan is just another preference. Essentially what I think is, that it is important to be true to yourself and indeed your own style.
What advice would you give to students such as myself starting to find their way in the photography industry?
It's about working hard and I expect you've heard a lot of that. It's difficult to make a living as a photographer but then it';s never been easy to make a living as a photographer but people still do it.
There is work out there but like I said you have to be prepared to work hard and always develop your photography, don't get good at something and become complacent. This also means developing the business side of it as I'd say 90% of it is based on human relationships, your client, customers, models and so on.
You have to been incredibly adaptable, very diplomatic, sometimes tough but fair and sensitive to the people you wrk with. This is part of your role as an artist; to exercise emotional intelligence.
Be prepared to go out, be pro-active, smile a lot and do the things you need to to do get work.
Thank you very much for your time, it's been a pleasure speaking with you.
All images ©Joe Cornish and sourced from the Joe Cornish online gallery
No comments:
Post a Comment