MC Photo wrote:
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.

Specifics? What does he do?

Mike Stewart 247 Foto wrote:
All the predatory allegations about him are exactly that... allegations. Me, I don't hear one side of a story and let my jury out.

So...you think he would come out and tell people, when asked, that he sexually harassed models, some of which were underage?
That's the problem with illegal activities; people won't admit to doing them if it means they'll get in trouble/look like an asshole. Therefore, it always remains "one-sided".

Lauren A Farrington wrote:

So...you think he would come out and tell people, when asked, that he sexually harassed models, some of which were underage?
That's the problem with illegal activities; people won't admit to doing them if it means they'll get in trouble/look like an asshole. Therefore, it always remains "one-sided".

My point is, if you weren't there, then you don't know what happened.

Why didn't these models go to the police and file a report? Why tell a reporter? Why hasn't Terry been questioned or arrested even once? Why do so many mainstream celebrities - politicians, actors, musicians, et al - love to work with him if he's such a horrible human being?

Sex sells and he knows it. Everyone knows it. His images push the envelope. He's a world famous photographer. Sex has been "a kind of obsession" for him before... same as most other people.

99% of model's around the world would very enthusiastically agree to a shoot with Terry Richardson. Some models would presume that if they f*** his brains out, they'll get somewhere. What % of them would be looking for revenge if Terry didn't get them another gig or take their calls?

If TR is actually doing the things a few model's have famously reported, then yes, he's a gigantic piece of shit who deserves to lose his career & worse. But no one imo should let their jury out based on allegations from people they don't know.

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?

Not just stories, but photographs of models giving him a blow job on set. http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l2wtx … o1_500.jpg At least he seems to be up front about it. The one model I know who worked with him wasn't harassed, but she said he was creepy. She's a big girl, if he'd tried something he would have qualified for the Vienna Boys choir soon after.

New Art Photo wrote:
Not just stories, but photographs of models giving him a blow job on set. http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l2wtx … o1_500.jpg


Pure Class............

linky no worky.

Mark Laubenheimer wrote:

linky no worky.

The correct link is 2 posts above that post.

JAE Photography PA wrote:

The correct link is 2 posts above that post.

wow. it sure is.

paul best  wrote:
girls will blow him if it would get their photo in a magazine .. not everybody is exploited . just regretful !! 

casting couches
movie producers
most men in a powerful preceived position will use it to get what they want:money , sex , and if they are perverts then they will pevert .

how do girls get into music video ? its a creepy bussiness , i dont see how high fashion is any different . people are people . maybe this is the norm  and if he was screwing boys would the models even care ?

What if you couldn't get it up. You'de miss out on a blowjob.

AMCphotography wrote:
There are far more talented photographers out there and yet he seems to get to work with everyone who's anyone.

A good part of it is that he was born into he industry. His dad was a famous fashion photographer.

Google this:

lope navo meat market uncle terry richardson

look at the 1st result. (can't link because it could be considered porn)  make sure to scroll all the way down.

Paul Brecht wrote:

A good part of it is that he was born into he industry. His dad was a famous fashion photographer.

Google this:

lope navo meat market uncle terry richardson

look at the 1st result. (can't link because it could be considered porn)  make sure to scroll all the way down.

I think he's talented but its this crap that makes me not like him.

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

Ah, forget where i thought i read that, could have sworn it's what it said, but i could be wrong.

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:

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.

You're as naive as it gets if you're citing a website, a marketing tool, for facts.

It's a shame my friend Wendy isn't here to give her speech on PR. In short, she says that there is not a single thing in any modern media that is their unless someone has paid a PR person to put it there.

You know that most of the leaked celebrity sex tapes are not accidental leaks, right? Some are, but there are a lot that are calculated moves.

I'm not making a statement on what Terry has or hasn't done. I'm saying that all of the people here are basing their opinions on non-verifiable facts.

They're also saying that he's a master of "the game" in an industry that sells youth and sex. It's very believable that he's in the position to do the things that he's accused of, but if he's really a master marketer, than he's controlling everything. You have no way to know which accusations are real and which accusations are solely for PR, either for him or the person making them.

You have no idea if the model wanted to sleep with him and he refused and she made up te story out of spite.

Having a fully formed opinion based on facts that you can't verify yourself in an industry and media that are not based in truth is naive.

If you were citing 60 Minutes, or the NY Times, a brand that is based in accuracy of fact and risks their reputation with every story, or the legal system, with a trial, which still doesn't guarantee fact, but is intended to do everything it can to get at it, then you may have something.

I can tell you that my first hand and second hand experiences with him don't match my third hand experiences with him at all.

So what do you think of Lady Gaga? Not artistically or as a person, but she clearly has a friendship with him and has worked with him more than once and has had him shoot several of her shows. Do you think she's getting his "monster cock" jammed in her face and getting raped by him while an assistant shoots it and gives her a wet nap to clean up with after? Did she have him fly to Korea to shoot her show there because she'd always wanted to get raped in Korea?

Anything is possible, including things worse than anyone has imagined, but your judgments are not based on fact, they are based on hearsay, and you don't seem to be aware of the difference. That's naive.

Benjamin Kanarek wrote:
A Marketing genius, whom when push comes to shove can blow most of us out of the water technically. But he choses what he has chosen for the reasons that keep his name in the market place.

technically, anybody can play the piano....but it takes an artist with feeling to make it something more than a typewriter.

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.

He has a very long history of getting naked on the set, playing with himself on the set, etc., etc., etc.

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?

Actually, many of the photos I've seen of his were composed poorly, exposed poorly, and looked like high-school level vacation snapshots, not professional work. My bet is, if you took his name off of his photos and posted many of his average shots in the Critique section, most decent photographers would rip his images to shreds. I, personally, do not find him a talented photographer even on a good day.

That said, anyone who is of average competence in their craft and is able to get away with the lewd stunts he can and still receive such public praise means he's a great marketer and, in that respect, I believe he deserves some respect. No doubt about that.

Paul Brecht wrote:

A good part of it is that he was born into he industry. His dad was a famous fashion photographer.

Google this:

lope navo meat market uncle terry richardson

look at the 1st result. (can't link because it could be considered porn)  make sure to scroll all the way down.

Thanks for that link. Yikes!

Benjamin Kanarek wrote:
A Marketing genius, whom when push comes to shove can blow most of us out of the water technically.

Is that right? I've always wondered if he knows the rules he's breaking. I've never seen anything of his that was technical in any way.

Black Technicolor Art wrote:
I think a lot of people are envious of his access.
I don't know how he did it, but fairplay.

In terms of photography (the study of light) he's masterfully consistent so unless your port can match that level of consistency I'd STFU.

are you saying he's good at photography or just consistent?

Jim McLintock wrote:
If you want great then check out Lucien Clergue.

A good example of how subjective opinions are. Lucien is a legend, but I never liked his modeling photography style; it has no soul imo. It's the perfect human body shot almost exclusively as landscape. Every Lucien model shot is carefully and methodically planned, posed, and lit. Completely opposite of what Terry Richardson is doing with his modeling work - spontaneous, in the moment, in your face, all attitude & emotion.

To me, Richardson's style is a direct reflection of the blurred line between mainstream entertainment and porn in the last 20+ years. The porn industry generates more revenue than TV and movies combined. Terry's personal style is provocative to the point where opinions are either love it or hate it... very little gray area.

I like Mark Laubenheimer's model photography better than Lucien's. Technically they are even imo... both are masters of using light, and both have a distinct style. Mark's work speaks to me more because we see the soul in his subjects... we see their face in almost every shot.

Tony Yang is the best model photographer out there imo. His portfolio is like a Hendrix solo.

Mark Laubenheimer wrote:

are you saying he's good at photography or just consistent?

GOOD Photography on a purely technical basis is about mastering and controlling light. If you can do that consistently - it shows skill and knowledge of a high standard. I don't much like his photography content, but but his photography skill isn't good, its GREAT, he's one of the most consistent people out here.