Andrew Attah wrote:
Okay so I don't post here much, but I'm interested to see how opinions fluctuate over time...  Last time I started this thread, about 3 years ago (at a guess), most people loathed him, however, I wonder if there's been a change in the popular opinion here.

Me, personally, I think he's easily one of the best fashion photographers working today, but anyway:

http://www.terrysdiary.com/

A lot of his work is there, but here're some direct links in case you don't have time to flick through looking for the print stuff:

http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/2219437 … ar-out-now
http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/2144242 … bazaar-out
http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/2102390 … ers-bazaar
http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/1995495 … -by-nicola
http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/1895159 … ar-out-now
http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/1895156 … bazaar-out
http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/1807444 … -me-for-gq
http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/1771201 … gazine-out

Lots of Harpers work there, for sure.  But you get the...  Picture.

As an extra.  Kate Upton's Cat Daddy (Poss NSFW):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCUnWIs88CQ

religion and politics.

Andrew Attah wrote:
Me, personally, I think he's easily one of the best fashion photographers working today, but anyway:

In my opinion successful yes, Best NO.

Andrew Iverson Media wrote:
His usual white wall ring light shots don't do anything for me (me being someone who loves his own ring light even), and honestly i'm more than a little envious of his success. He can also be a bit creepy from things i've read, and that turns me off.

That said, when he goes beyond the usual style of his, like the image below, i'm finding i like his work. Oh well.

I'm fairly sure he doesn't use a ring flash.  Bracketed Speedlite is what I believe is his weapon.

Moon Pix Photography wrote:
My thoughts?  He sucks.

Any insight into your opinion?

Robert Jewett wrote:
Brilliant at marketing and "playing the game". 

Total perv/creeper.

Low talent photographically.

Can't stand him, myself.

What exactly makes him a pervert?  I've heard some stories but I've only ever heard one side of the argument/they seem to be from aspiring models that never made it.

What is it about his photographic process that makes him "low talent"?  Correct me if I'm wrong but his images are exposed perfectly, well composed, have a great energy about them, do exactly what they're supposed to do and work great in their context.  What is it I am missing?

Andrew Attah wrote:
What exactly makes him a pervert?  I've heard some stories but I've only ever heard one side of the argument/they seem to be from aspiring models that never made it.

What is it about his photographic process that makes him "low talent"?  Correct me if I'm wrong but his images are exposed perfectly, well composed, have a great energy about them, do exactly what they're supposed to do and work great in their context.  What is it I am missing?

i find them incorrectly exposed, poorly composed, and have awful energy about them, and they don't do exactly what they're supposed to do, and they work poorly  in their context.

to each their own.

honestly though, i just don't dig the vibe he seems to project.

Andrew Attah wrote:
What exactly makes him a pervert?  I've heard some stories but I've only ever heard one side of the argument/they seem to be from aspiring models that never made it.

Have you seen his sex book ?
http://jezebel.com/5495699/exclusive-mo … otographer
http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2010/03/ … _form.html
Some Coco person says she wont work with him again
http://www.styleite.com/media/coco-roch … ver-again/

Andrew Attah wrote:
What exactly makes him a pervert?  I've heard some stories but I've only ever heard one side of the argument/they seem to be from aspiring models that never made it.

clearly you missed a few years. there was stuff all over the net, including right on his website (since taken down). Since there are are a huge handful of links in the OP I find it hard to believe anyone could miss out on the fact that everything was way beyond 'one side'.  I more than begin to suspect a here.

Mark Laubenheimer wrote:

i find them incorrectly exposed, poorly composed, and have awful energy about them, and they don't do exactly what they're supposed to do, and they work poorly  in their context.

to each their own.

honestly though, i just don't dig the vibe he seems to project.

I can see why you'd have those opinions on everything but his exposures. They are so consistently dead on it's really amazing.

MC Photo wrote:
I can see why you'd have those opinions on everything but his exposures. They are so consistently dead on it's really amazing.

Then again, after you shoot several thousand similar images of people standing in front of a white wall, you tend to get the hang of it. 

MC Photo wrote:
I'm curious how many people here who have opinions about him have met him or worked with him.

It's naive to believe that you can know the things about him that people are claiming through the media. I guarantee that everyone here has heard a story retold that they were involved in or witnessed first hand and were able to see how far from reality the storytelling was. The stories could all be true, but judging from the sources I think it's immature to be as judgemental as some people are.

There is at least one photographer here who works as a creative director and hired him for shoots. He said that Terry has the best rapport with his subjects compared to any photographer he's ever seen shoot.

I met him once briefly and he was a quiet, gentle and humble person.

I haven't experienced any first hand accounts of bad behavior, only second and third hand.

I bet the stories are as accurate as the rumored specs for the 5Dmk IV.

go on the wayback machine and look what used to be on his own website ffs.  this is not being judgemental lol. inability to find stuff that is so readily available really looks like trolling.  go ahead and bet. not wasting any more time on this.

Tansy Blue wrote:
Let me put it this way...

If the images in his book were in the portfolio of a photographer wanting to work with me, I would turn down that photographer.

I think his work is pretty good, but I prefer Meisel and Mert & Marcus (clearly I have a thing for photographers whose names begin with M). I sometimes feel like Terry Richardson wants to be Bob Carlos Clarke, and is failing miserably.

My name begins with "M"!! Maybe someday we will be discussing an article something like this:

"Though Giacomo shoots for everyone from Vogue to Harper's Bazaar to V, there is one gaping hole in his current body of work: W, which he hasn't shot for in ages. W's editors haven't commented on why, but according to one rumor, he was banned because art director Dennis Freedman found a photo he took of a model posed naked in a prison cell offensive"

Dream on Mark..... lol.
Again my point.... there is a lot of jealous drama here. The guy has been a huge success. Some people do not like that.

Tansy Blue wrote:
I sometimes feel like Terry Richardson wants to be Bob Carlos Clarke, and is failing miserably.

I'm not sure why you say that. When I look at Terry Richardson's work, I really don't see any significant resemblance to the work of Bob Carlos Clarke (who happens to a big favorite of mine.)

More likely, I'd say he's trying to be the William Eggleston of the fashion world.

Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:
I can't understand why more MM shooters wouldn't love him as well. He takes "crappy" pictures, sleeps with models, and makes shit tons of money... He is living a gwc's/mm'rs dream!



Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

Hmmm. Ostensibly he appears to be getting paid very well  doing something that WE ALL LOVE. Perhaps we all share the dream and some of us are jealous.

Giacomo Studios wrote:
Perhaps we all share the dream and some of us are jealous.

Or very few on MM get fashion, art, marketing, persistence, and sales...




Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:

Or very few on MM get fashion, art, marketing, persistence, and sales...

Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

Or more to the point "get WELL PAID (and thus recognized by the market) for fashion, art, persistence, and sales..."

Again... people get jealous of this kind of success. I would not pay attention to the BS. This guy is making it in a market that is highly competitive. Rock on!

Glen Berry wrote:

Then again, after you shoot several thousand similar images of people standing in front of a white wall, you tend to get the hang of it. 

Yes, but have you seen the other stuff he shoots?

Mark Laubenheimer wrote:
i find them incorrectly exposed, poorly composed, and have awful energy about them, and they don't do exactly what they're supposed to do, and they work poorly  in their context.

to each their own.

honestly though, i just don't dig the vibe he seems to project.

Photography is subjective & if he's breaking a few old fashioned rules, that gets him a thumbs up from me, great talent that's unappreciated amongst his peers.

Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:
I can't understand why more MM shooters wouldn't love him as well. He takes "crappy" pictures, sleeps with models, and makes shit tons of money... He is living a gwc's/mm'rs dream!



Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

win