Dave mentions Stevie's "forthcoming album" in new Billboard article

[TrueFaith77]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

Stewart isn't on Ferry's new album Olympia..it was Ferry's 2002 album Frantic that Stewart cowrote on which is also very good..I particularly like one they cowrote on there "Goddess of Love" about Marilyn Monroe.

Stewart collaborated with Ferry during the Alphaville sessions, which yielded tracks on Frantic AND Olympia. "You Can Dance," "Alphaville," and "Tender Is the Night" are all Stewart collabs that appear on Olympia. However, it should be noted that for BOTH albums, Ferry worked with different producers and re-recorded the songs--Ferry referred to the process of dealing with the Alphaville tracks as similar to how he does covers of other artsists' songs, so radical were the changes--(though I think there are some Dave instrumental presence on some of the tracks, but don't have the cd booklet with me @ the moment). I contend Dave must help people get their juices flowing, but I still feel/fear he's not the man to bring them to fruition.


IN OTHER NEWS: What do y'all think of Dave's Annabel Lee tweet?

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by wheart

I respect his musical abilities - not sure about his skills as a photographer. I really feel that Stevie should have placed the task of creating her first cover in 10 years in more capable hands, as in a photographer who only does photography. There are a lot of very talented photographers out there. I'm not sure Dave Stewart aka Jack of All Trades, is one of them. Sorry if this sounds harsh. I may be eating my words.

I know many, many people disagree with me (as if that's anything new), but I don't consider photography to be this rare artistic talent. Yes, there are good photographers and bad photographers. And yes, one can become technically skilled at it. Yes, photography can be aesthetically pleasing, even beautiful at times. But is it art? Not any more or less than any decor object like a piece of furniture or a pillow. If any idiot with a decent point-and-shoot digital camera can take really good pictures, it pretty much confirms that good photography is more about the quality of the hardware than the people using it. Really the only difference between the pro and the amateur is that the pro has learned a thing or two about lighting, the technical operation of a camera, the manual settings and some basic composition. Being as photographed as much as he has been photographed as half of the Eurythmics, I think it stands to reason that he has acquired the technical skills of the pros along the way. I think the only thing that approaches "art" is the post-production, art direction and packaging. The photography is the easy part.

[TrueFaith77]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

I know many, many people disagree with me (as if that's anything new), but I don't consider photography to be this rare artistic talent. Yes, there are good photographers and bad photographers. And yes, one can become technically skilled at it. Yes, photography can be aesthetically pleasing, even beautiful at times. But is it art? Not any more or less than any decor object like a piece of furniture or a pillow. If any idiot with a decent point-and-shoot digital camera can take really good pictures, it pretty much confirms that good photography is more about the quality of the hardware than the people using it. Really the only difference between the pro and the amateur is that the pro has learned a thing or two about lighting, the technical operation of a camera, the manual settings and some basic composition. Being as photographed as much as he has been photographed as half of the Eurythmics, I think it stands to reason that he has acquired the technical skills of the pros along the way. I think the only thing that approaches "art" is the post-production, art direction and packaging. The photography is the easy part.

I disagree. A photographer must be both an artist and a technician. Camera, stock, lens, aperture, subject, "art direction," composition, lighting, depth, development, "post-production" are all selections that lead to the communication of an idea, feeling, experience, insight, truth, beauty that not just anyone can achieve.

What you are talking about is the amateur achievement of communicating a fact--Stevie Nicks was here--and some sense of that fact being communicated in a way that's basically appealing (in focus, recognizable, not framed funny or up her nostril/s). So you are right. Art is not required of an album cover. It might be asking too much for it to be art.

[Christopher]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

IN OTHER NEWS: What do y'all think of Dave's Annabel Lee tweet?

Has me wondering could they be shooting a video for this song as part of the filming that he said would be taking place all week...or perhap's the theme of the photo shoot is inspired by Annabel Lee, or heck it's probably just playing in the background as they shoot some footage. It's anyones guess! Let the speculation continue to drive us crazy.

On another note he just responded to someone who asked if we'll be will seeing any sneak peeks. and Dave responded @goldddustwoman probably a trailer

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

I disagree. A photographer must be both an artist and a technician. Camera, stock, lens, aperture, subject, "art direction," composition, lighting, depth, development, "post-production" are all selections that lead to the communication of an idea, feeling, experience, insight, truth, beauty that not just anyone can achieve.

Horse****.

I kid, I kid.

But you have to admit that all of those "skills" are technical in nature. As for those other fuzzy terms like "insight" and "truth," I think you read way too much into photographs. With enough hardware, shots and luck, a monkey pressing a button will eventually get "the shot" that will convey all kinds of experience, insight and truth. Again, I don't deny there is a skill involved. I just would not place photography on the same level as a real artist like a painter or sculptor or even an architect- people who create things out of nothing with their own hands and imaginations.

[wheart]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

I know many, many people disagree with me (as if that's anything new), but I don't consider photography to be this rare artistic talent. Yes, there are good photographers and bad photographers. And yes, one can become technically skilled at it. Yes, photography can be aesthetically pleasing, even beautiful at times. But is it art? Not any more or less than any decor object like a piece of furniture or a pillow. If any idiot with a decent point-and-shoot digital camera can take really good pictures, it pretty much confirms that good photography is more about the quality of the hardware than the people using it. Really the only difference between the pro and the amateur is that the pro has learned a thing or two about lighting, the technical operation of a camera, the manual settings and some basic composition. Being as photographed as much as he has been photographed as half of the Eurythmics, I think it stands to reason that he has acquired the technical skills of the pros along the way. I think the only thing that approaches "art" is the post-production, art direction and packaging. The photography is the easy part.

I don't quite see how he could acquire any skills of a photographer while simply being photographed, unless he was paying really close attention...which is entirely possible, I suppose. Dave does seem like an inquisitive sort. I also think that the result of a good photo depends, at least in part, on the relationship between the subject (Stevie) and the photographer (Dave). We already know that Stevie feels very comfortable with Dave and their musical partnership (fingers crossed) has been a successful one. So let's hope she feels equally comfortable and energized behind his camera lens.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by wheart

I don't quite see how he could acquire any skills of a photographer while simply being photographed, unless he was paying really close attention...which is entirely possible, I suppose. Dave does seem like an inquisitive sort. I also think that the result of a good photo depends, at least in part, on the relationship between the subject (Stevie) and the photographer (Dave). We already know that Stevie feels very comfortable with Dave and their musical partnership (fingers crossed) has been a successful one. So let's hope she feels equally comfortable and energized behind his camera lens.

Anecdotally, a good number of models now fancy themselves as "photographers," Tyra Banks being the most egregious example of this. The fact that she can do it, and do it pretty well at that, kind of confirms in my mind once and for all that photography is something that anyone can pick up.

[TrueFaith77]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Anecdotally, a good number of models now fancy themselves as "photographers," Tyra Banks being the most egregious example of this. The fact that she can do it, and do it pretty well at that, kind of confirms in my mind once and for all that photography is something that anyone can pick up.

But that's like saying anyone with a camcorder is Gregg Toland. Just not true. I can put paint on a canvas and call it "art."

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

I know many, many people disagree with me (as if that's anything new), but I don't consider photography to be this rare artistic talent. Yes, there are good photographers and bad photographers. And yes, one can become technically skilled at it. Yes, photography can be aesthetically pleasing, even beautiful at times. But is it art? Not any more or less than any decor object like a piece of furniture or a pillow. If any idiot with a decent point-and-shoot digital camera can take really good pictures, it pretty much confirms that good photography is more about the quality of the hardware than the people using it. Really the only difference between the pro and the amateur is that the pro has learned a thing or two about lighting, the technical operation of a camera, the manual settings and some basic composition.

Kristen is a photographer.

Michele

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by michelej1

Kristen is a photographer.

Michele

You mean "photographer"...

[MacMan]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Anecdotally, a good number of models now fancy themselves as "photographers," Tyra Banks being the most egregious example of this. The fact that she can do it, and do it pretty well at that, kind of confirms in my mind once and for all that photography is something that anyone can pick up.

I pretty much agree with you regarding anyone can do it... The subject is half the battle, the other half is lighting and post production... Doesn't hurt to keep at it and learn from your mistakes.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by MacMan

I pretty much agree with you regarding anyone can do it... The subject is half the battle, the other half is lighting and post production... Doesn't hurt to keep at it and learn from your mistakes.

It's true. We have people here who, after doing it so many times and with trial and error, take better concert pictures than the newspaper photographers do.

Now, photographing for an album cover requires a different kind of skill. But I find that a lot of people in show business, be it music, acting, writing, etc. are also artists. Our John did a pretty nice album cover himself. So, I don't doubt that Dave could do it.

Michele

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by michelej1

It's true. We have people here who, after doing it so many times and with trial and error, take better concert pictures than the newspaper photographers do.

Now, photographing for an album cover requires a different kind of skill. But I find that a lot of people in show business, be it music, acting, writing, etc. are also artists. Our John did a pretty nice album cover himself. So, I don't doubt that Dave could do it.

Michele

Too, Dave was airbrushing a photo in the link he shared with his other work. I would think that would take a least a little bit more skill than someone with a point and shoot.

Never knew that about John. Interesting.

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by wheart

I respect his musical abilities - not sure about his skills as a photographer. I really feel that Stevie should have placed the task of creating her first cover in 10 years in more capable hands, as in a photographer who only does photography. There are a lot of very talented photographers out there. I'm not sure Dave Stewart aka Jack of All Trades, is one of them. Sorry if this sounds harsh. I may be eating my words.

Don't worry - Stevie's probably got Neal there shooting over Dave's shoulder!

[APerfectLie]

I think before the days of photoshop, being a photographer required some kind of artistic talent. Now, anything can be done with a click of a few buttons. The only really art behind photography now is knowing what will and will not look good in a shot.