London Southbank

[Deleted member 67219]

So I went up to Southbank for a lecture yesterday on Modernist Architecture and couldn't resist taking my camera (of course). I got up there early and went for a wander round the area first and this was the result.

I tried to capture some of the intent of the buildings. The Brutalist architecture vs the earlier and more idyllic Modernist and so forth as well as the spirit of some of the other areas.

I also restricted myself, as I often do, to just my 100mm lens.

Quite a lot of images, but I'd love to hear any thoughts. Could only add 6 to the post (wanted to add 7), so there are more here!

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

 

[Solo man]

A very good set, I like number 2 and 5....very geometric in design some of them....I especially liked 6, 10, 18, 20 and 21 from the other set.

 

[GWR100]

Terrific architectural set Charlotte, You really picked some great aspects of the Festival Hall, It takes me back to the Festival of Britain in 1951.

Geoff

 

[Deleted member 67219]

A very good set, I like number 2 and 5....very geometric in design some of them....I especially liked 6, 10, 18, 20 and 21 from the other set.

Thank you. I am wondering if my style of architectural photography is too niche to actually be able to work as a practicing architectural photographer. I think I may have to expand my repertoire! However I'm loving studying it as part of my degree, just sad that my next module in architecture is not until Feburary 2015!

Terrific architectural set Charlotte, You really picked some great aspects of the Festival Hall, It takes me back to the Festival of Britain in 1951.

Thank you. We were up there to study the original social context of the Festival Hall and it was utterly fascinating. It seems a shame that they reclad the exterior in the early 60's, but the interior is still rather lovely and captures something of a Jetsonesque ambiance, especially the carpet! Really must go back and take some shots of the interior sometime.

 

[Brian G]

No.1 is a good shot of the river Thames.
If it were in a club competition the judge would probably say there is no defined subject, and too much water in the foreground.

I would also be more careful with your cropping of some of the buildings shots.
No.5 could benefit by including a little more at the top and bottom. As it is, the edges of the building are frustratingly just out of shot.
Personally, I would either include more of the London Eye in No.6, to show it's context with the RFH, or alternatively, include more of the RFH and the Christmas lights, and eliminate the London Eye completely.

Just my personal opinions, as the judge said.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

No.1 is a good shot of the river Thames.
If it were in a club competition the judge would probably say there is no defined subject, and too much water in the foreground.

I would also be more careful with your cropping of some of the buildings shots.
No.5 could benefit by including a little more at the top and bottom. As it is, the edges of the building are frustratingly just out of shot.
Personally, I would either include more of the London Eye in No.6, to show it's context with the RFH, or alternatively, include more of the RFH and the Christmas lights, and eliminate the London Eye completely.

Just my personal opinions, as the judge said.

I am almost certain that your average camera club judge would absolutely hate everything about almost every photograph I take. :-D

Thank you for your comments.

 

[Marc]

A good set Charlotte, particularly like the minimalism of #4 with this contrast of the light over the hanging pictures.

I take/prepare 2 different styles of photos, one for me and one for camera club competitions.

 

[Solo man]

Thank you. I am wondering if my style of architectural photography is too niche to actually be able to work as a practicing architectural photographer. I think I may have to expand my repertoire! However I'm loving studying it as part of my degree, just sad that my next module in architecture is not until Feburary 2015!.

No idea whether your style is too niche or not.... but, having viewed them again, I'm quite taken with 13, and prefer that over 12

 

[Deleted member 67219]

No idea whether your style is too niche or not.... but, having viewed them again, I'm quite taken with 13, and prefer that over 12

Mm, I couldn't get it to work vertically. I think I am just not a photographer who likes to shoot portrait format - I have grown up with landscape format computer screens!

 

[huffy]

I like No3, the contrast between the uniform and straight edges in grey and colourful graffiti is very interesting.

 

[Brazo]

I like them, not the first one. But in the rest you have really isolated the important elements of the scene, they are uncluttered and work well as simple images. I would say you also made the best of the bad light but would love to se some more contrast through stark shadows, obviously on a better day.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

I like them, not the first one. But in the rest you have really isolated the important elements of the scene, they are uncluttered and work well as simple images. I would say you also made the best of the bad light but would love to se some more contrast through stark shadows, obviously on a better day.

Thanks. To be honest this is perfect light for me. My camera doesn't come out on sunny days.

 

[Brazo]

Thanks. To be honest this is perfect light for me. My camera doesn't come out on sunny days.

Well that's sad as it appears your limiting yourself before you've even finished your learning. The less restraints we put on ourselves the more free we become

 

[Deleted member 67219]

Well that's sad as it appears your limiting yourself before you've even finished your learning. The less restraints we put on ourselves the more free we become

I know enough to know that I don't like the pictures I take on bright sunny days. Why would I take pictures that I don't like? Sunny days I just enjoy other things instead.

I *love* shooting on overcast days. I *love* shooting first thing in the morning light. I *love* clouded skies that are dark and brooding.

 

[Marc]

No idea whether your style is too niche or not.... but, having viewed them again, I'm quite taken with 13, and prefer that over 12

I believe 13 is the same as 4 in here and I agree although I believe 12 would work better in colour for the reasons I said in my post above.

I know enough to know that I don't like the pictures I take on bright sunny days. Why would I take pictures that I don't like? Sunny days I just enjoy other things instead.

I *love* shooting on overcast days. I *love* shooting first thing in the morning light. I *love* clouded skies that are dark and brooding.

Agree. I don't think it's limiting yourself at all, simply a choice.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

A good set Charlotte, particularly like the minimalism of #4 with this contrast of the light over the hanging pictures.

Yes, I thought that little insight into a gallery was quite sweet really. I wonder if next time I'm up I might shoot during the day and try and get someone moving inside and looking at the works. OR probably I won't bother.

 

[Solo man]

I believe 13 is the same as 4 in here and I agree although I believe 12 would work better in colour for the reasons I said in my post above..

Yes, you're right 13 and 4 are the same.... I had looked at the other set before I looked at these ones posted..... and, I agree that it is 13(or 4) being in colour, that makes the image for me.... it's an image that the more I look at, the more I like.

 

[Marc]

Yes, you're right 13 and 4 are the same.... I had looked at the other set before I looked at these ones posted..... and, I agree that it is 13(or 4) being in colour, that makes the image for me.... it's an image that the more I look at, the more I like.

Indeed. I'm very much a monochrome lover but every now and again I see an image which needs some colour.

 

[Crusader]

I like No3, the contrast between the uniform and straight edges in grey and colourful graffiti is very interesting.

This. I also love the shadows. 

 

[Deleted member 67219]

This. I also love the shadows. 

Thanks. I knew I wanted to shoot such an iconic area, but just wasn't sure how it was going to happen. Photographers *love* graffiti and seem to just love shooting boring pictures of it. As I was moving around the space I noticed an area where there was light pooling through a hole in the ceiling and it just sort of seemed to work. I tried to get rid of the horizontal edge but actually I think it's what makes the shot.

I hope it's a slightly different take on the Southbank skate park.

This is someone else's shot of what it actually looks like.

 

[kev2010]

I don't mean to offend, not my intent, but I personally do not think think these images work for me.

I find them to be very flat. I think the first image in the series sets the scene for me. I find the image uncomfortable to look at. There is no balance to the composition? I think the shot is underexposed and lacks life. This then follows into many of the other images displayed here. The set feels like the camera has been randomly pointed in any direction with shots being fired off at any instance.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

I don't mean to offend, not my intent, but I personally do not think think these images work for me.

I find them to be very flat. I think the first image in the series sets the scene for me. I find the image uncomfortable to look at. There is no balance to the composition? I think the shot is underexposed and lacks life. This then follows into many of the other images displayed here. The set feels like the camera has been randomly pointed in any direction with shots being fired off at any instance.

We do not always have to like everyones work! There's no offence taken at all.

They were meant to feel slightly uncomfortable to the viewer. As I said, I was trying to reflect the Modernist and Brutallist architectural surroundings in the images. This was a time of great change and unsettling design.

However I disagree with your premiss of there being no balance in the composition. One of the things that people routinely compliment me for is my awareness of composition without having to think about it. And if I dissect the compositions they all (more or less) follow classical rules. I just try to compose in an unexpected way in my photographs, to surprise the viewer and to challenge them. Which by the sounds of your comment I believe I managed to succeed!

 

[Ruffmeister]

I have looked at these a couple of times now and I really like what you've done.
2 and 5 are standouts for me although 3 has been well put together too. Good work!

 

[Deleted member 67219]

I think the shot is underexposed and lacks life.

(Also, there's no such thing as underexposed - just a different exposure to the one that you would have chosen!)

 

[kev2010]

If you like them then that's fine with me. I guess for me they just don't work. If you are happy with the compositions and exposures then who am I? I do seem to be the odd one out as the series is gaining a lot of praise. Indeed, I guess you have surprised me with these.

 

[Musicman]

I find them to be very flat

Ah, that's what I like about #4/#13 - heading into Ben Nicholson territory

I also like #6 in the second gallery. There's something reminiscent of some mid 20th century photography about it (can't quite place exactly what I'm thinking of at the moment).

If I have criticism of the set as a whole, it's that they have a very loose relationship with upright verticals and keeping things square - which, back to the Ben Nicholson note, rather reduces their impact for me.

Thanks. To be honest this is perfect light for me. My camera doesn't come out on sunny days.

FWIW, I'm rather of the opinion that the masses and textures of the concrete on the QEH and Hayward Gallery are best enjoyed in full sunlight.

While at university I had the pleasure of a couple of lectures by Sir Leslie Martin, who was the LCC architect behind the Festival Hall. I'm curious what they were saying about the building in the event you attended.

 

[Jayst84]

Some nice shots, and some where I think the composition could be tidied up - such as 3, 10 and 14, I'm not a fan of little things/bits of sky just peaking in at corners or frame edges where they don't feel like they're a real part of the composition.

The processing I feel works better on some than others - where at times it looks a bit heavy handed.

Thank you. I am wondering if my style of architectural photography is too niche to actually be able to work as a practicing architectural photographer

I don't think your shooting style is niche at all. You have some fairly straightforward record shots of buildings, and then some nice details and a couple of 'juxtaposition' images that everyone likes to take from time to time. The low contrast, high blacks processing has of course been all the rage for the last few years as well.

This is someone else's shot of what it actually looks like.

It actually looks like it does in your shot as well.

 

[Musicman]

FWIW, I'm rather of the opinion that the masses and textures of the concrete on the QEH and Hayward Gallery are best enjoyed in full sunlight.

BTW, by way of a partial explanation of this opinion, there is fairly well-known aphorism coined by Le Corbusier:

"Architecture is the masterful, correct and magnificient play of volumes brought together in light."

Corb's later work had an undeniable influence on the buildings of the later phases of the South Bank and, I should hazard, that particular quote played some part in the development of architectural photography in the 20th century.

 

[Musicman]

Oh, and the black and white reproduction of architectural photography available for magazines and books in the first half of the 20th century had its own impact on the practise of Modernist architecture.

Many of the early modernist buildings of the 1920s and 30s were highly coloured - strong planes of red, blue, yellow ochre (Gerrit Rietveldt's 1923 Schroder House being a prime example).

When they were disseminated in print, especially in the US, where architects had no opportunity to visit the original buildings in Europe, the pictures were interpreted literally as white and black - which led to the development of the white-painted 'International Modern' style and its descendants with which we are familiar even today.

 

[Jayst84]

Oh, and the black and white reproduction of architectural photography available for magazines and books in the first half of the 20th century had its own impact on the practise of Modernist architecture.

Many of the early modernist buildings of the 1920s and 30s were highly coloured - strong planes of red, blue, yellow ochre (Gerrit Rietveldt's 1923 Schroder House being a prime example).

When they were disseminated in print, especially in the US, where architects had no opportunity to visit the original buildings in Europe, the pictures were interpreted literally as white and black - which led to the development of the white-painted 'International Modern' style and its descendants with which we are familiar even today.

I thought architects were generally smart people. Surely they knew what the deal was with black and white reproductions?

 

[Musicman]

It became a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy - they were seduced by the images they saw and wanted to recreate that. Besides, it is difficult to convey in any accompanying text a visual aspect that you cannot see in an image on the same page - think of watching snooker on a monochrome TV set.

Same thing with neoclassical architecture being dominated by white marble, etc., despite the fact that it was always well known that classical building in antiquity (especially temples) were often painted with bright colours. If we were to paint the front of the British Museum in red, blue and gold today, there would be an outcry.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

Some nice shots, and some where I think the composition could be tidied up - such as 3, 10 and 14, I'm not a fan of little things/bits of sky just peaking in at corners or frame edges where they don't feel like they're a real part of the composition.

I don't think your shooting style is niche at all. You have some fairly straightforward record shots of buildings, and then some nice details and a couple of 'juxtaposition' images that everyone likes to take from time to time.

The sky peeking in? It's a deliberate part of the composition in those three shots! I thought you meant where I had missed a few pixels or something!

By niche I meant for commercial architectural work. One of the reasons I am taking a History of Art degree that has several modules of architectural studies is that I am interested in the concept of being an architectural photographer (I got fed up with commercial and fashion and gave it up). However I think that my tendency to enjoy the abstract rather than shooting the classic vistas of buildings reflected in water at night leaves me in a bit of a niche position. That is what I meant by niche, niche as an architectural photographer, not as a general photographer.

 

[Jayst84]

The sky peeking in? It's a deliberate part of the composition in those three shots! I thought you meant where I had missed a few pixels or something!

Top right (and to be suuuuper picky, bottom right as well) of #5 in the OP and I'm not too keen on the way objects meet the top of the frame in #1. If it's deliberate, that's fine, I wasn't questioning that. I was saying I would prefer them framed slightly differently.

That is what I meant by niche, niche as an architectural photographer, not as a general photographer.

I know.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

If I have criticism of the set as a whole, it's that they have a very loose relationship with upright verticals and keeping things square - which, back to the Ben Nicholson note, rather reduces their impact for me.

I have a very loose relationship with life in general, so it doesn't surprise me that you'd say that. :-D (Life is too short for straight lines!)

I'm curious what they were saying about the building in the event you attended.

We were discussing the social context of the building and how this was new design that broke away from old traditions mostly. It wasn't an event as such, just a lecture for my degree on location rather than in a classroom.

 

[ah5168]

There is a difference between the photography of Architecture in a social documentary or fine art context as in the work of Düsseldorf school Becher, Gursky, Höfer, Struth et al. and the photography of Architecture for commercial purposes. While there is obviously a market for former I think Gursky’s photo of the Rhine is still the most expensive to date, commercial architectural photography is about displaying “the product” in the best possible way.

Generally the best way of doing this is to use light with reasonable contrast, at the right angle to show of the features of the building. If your intention is to become a commercial architectural photographer then mastery of higher contrast light is a must and much more difficult than photographing buildings in flat light.

 

[Deleted member 67219]

There is a difference between the photography of Architecture in a social documentary or fine art context as in the work of Düsseldorf school Becher, Gursky, Höfer, Struth et al. and the photography of Architecture for commercial purposes. While there is obviously a market for former I think Gursky’s photo of the Rhine is still the most expensive to date, commercial architectural photography is about displaying “the product” in the best possible way.

Generally the best way of doing this is to use light with reasonable contrast, at the right angle to show of the features of the building. If your intention is to become a commercial architectural photographer then mastery of higher contrast light is a must and much more difficult than photographing buildings in flat light.

That is what I meant. I think my style is not relevant to the demands of commercial architecture photography. Or rather, my kind of style is not in demand by enough people to make it viable as a business.

I could shoot the more typical stuff as you describe (I am capable of shooting in higher contrast light!) but the whole reason I gave up working in commercial/fashion photography was because I became tired of photographing in a way that everyone else wanted me to. I refuse to compromise on that point again, ultimately leading me down the same path.

Hopefully over the next few years the market will open out and there will be more experimental and offbeat work being commissioned and hopefully it will be around the time I have completed my degree and PhD and I'll be in a prime position to take advantage.

 

[theurbanclown]

Some nice compositions there but I'm not keen on the editing. It feels over processed to me - I can see the look you're going for and it's a style I normally appreciate but here it's a little too much (heavy vignette, strong yellow hue in highlights).

 

[Deleted member 67219]

Oh, and the black and white reproduction of architectural photography available for magazines and books in the first half of the 20th century had its own impact on the practise of Modernist architecture.

Many of the early modernist buildings of the 1920s and 30s were highly coloured - strong planes of red, blue, yellow ochre (Gerrit Rietveldt's 1923 Schroder House being a prime example).

When they were disseminated in print, especially in the US, where architects had no opportunity to visit the original buildings in Europe, the pictures were interpreted literally as white and black - which led to the development of the white-painted 'International Modern' style and its descendants with which we are familiar even today.

Now this is *very* interesting stuff. Didn't comment before because I wanted to investigate.

I just dropped by to see my tutor who is a specialist in modernist architecture and she said that there is some truth in the tale. However it is unclear if it is the architects who took the reading of the black and white photographs as truth or the critics. She doesn't believe anyone has written on the subject.

I think I may have just found my research dissertation subject for the RPS.

 

[Musicman]

Looking at how things work from the perspective of an architect, I'm tempted to suggest it was more the critics, but the critical discourse in its turn influenced the architects.

The 1932 MoMA Exhibition in New York, curated by Hitchcock and Johnson, which coined the term 'International Style' is probably a key event.

I did turf up this short discussion of the topic in a book published by the University of St Etienne.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...chcock and Johnson" "black and white"&f=false

 

[Mag1cp2x]

These images create a 'torn' feeling in me - while I admire the photos I dislike the concrete awfulness of the architecture. I had the misfortune of seeing some of these grey and soulless monstrocities being created and even though I was very young I felt there was something very unpleasantly sinister about them. No 5 is to me both the best image and the horriblest building, it being straight out of the Nazi slave labour built 'Atlantic Wall' school of architecture.
I like it that you are trying and doing something different.