Discussion
  • Read More
    LaComtesseDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:07am

    At the risk of sounding like one of those assholes who looks at a Pollack and scoffs "I could do that!"*—can someone explain what makes Richardson's technique special/appealing/etc? Serious question to photographers and photography lovers/students. He's got a definite style, but it seems pretty uncomplicated, unoriginal, and, frankly, uninteresting, but is there something I'm missing here?

    *Well… you didn't, and that's kind of the point…

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      JosephFinnLaComtesse
      3/14/14 11:10am

      Shiny sleaze. That's about as good as I can get.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      LLLaComtesse
      3/14/14 11:13am

      I think it's like how Paris Hilton is famous for being famous. He takes pictures of famous people, because he takes pictures of famous people.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    SuffersfoolsgladlyDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:12am

    Let's not forget, Gaga had him on tour with her for months to shoot her coffee table book. It caused me to doubt her, even though the book was awesome ( I got it for fifteen bucks on amazon). Who could hang out with that weirdo for all that time? He's such a creeper and every time I see those dumb glasses, I want to throw myself off a building. Also the sideburns. He is like a police composite drawing of a sexual predator.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      IHateGoatsSuffersfoolsgladly
      3/14/14 11:21am

      I honestly wonder if he drives a white panel van. He's like the stock character for a creeper on any show.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Dodai StewartSuffersfoolsgladly
      3/14/14 11:21am

      I think they were also working on a documentary film together.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    whassaDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:11am

    They signed releases?

    I certainly don't have a PR person or whatever but I thiiiiink if I was accused of heinous stuff, my exclusive letter would be like, "I definitely didn't ejaculate into the eye of a teen model while working with her. Nor did I lick her ass. Let's be very very very very clear about this." And then the letter would continue from there.

    Mentioning signed releases just sort of makes it sound like everything happened but they signed on the dotted line first.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Dodai Stewartwhassa
      3/14/14 11:21am

      I agree. He didn't deny anything, really, he just claimed there were consenting parties.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      wasabi75whassa
      3/14/14 11:24am

      In some cases there is photographic evidence (he took photos while it was going down) so I don't think he really could deny it. At that point what can you really go with other than claiming that everyone freely consented and signed releases?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    AnnieOakleyAgainDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:13am

    Shooting a model and then whipping out your dick and suggesting she touch it may nottechnically be a threat or coercion, but it's also not very professional

    It's more than "not professional." It's sexual assault in a workplace. In a "for hire" situation where two people are being paid and employed, that is not okay. If he did it in a public space, he'd be arrested. If he did it any any work environment, he'd lose his job. Just because they're not in an office doesn't mean that there are no boundaries, policies, etc. The models are being paid (or at least compensated someway that classifies the work as 'for hire') and so is he.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Dodai StewartAnnieOakleyAgain
      3/14/14 11:20am

      Yes, you're absolutely right. I just meant to point out that he was careful which words he used. He denied threatening or coercing. He didn't deny exposing himself.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Sara PadillaAnnieOakleyAgain
      3/14/14 11:56am

      I for one would like to see those consent forms, and see precisely what was consented to.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    benjaminalloverDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:23am

    "I collaborated with consenting adult women who were fully aware of the nature of the work, and as is typical with any project, everyone signed releases . . . I give everyone that I work with enough respect to view them as having ownership of their free will and making their decisions accordingly."

    Translation: you all knew I was a creep before you agreed to work with me, or should have. I "respect" women's "free will" so much that I cannot fathom the basic concept of coercion, plus you signed a release form so stop complaining.

    What about Terry Richardson's "ownership of his free will and decision making"? I guess he regards the release form as something that absolves him of his need to be professional.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      mollymlf05benjaminallover
      3/14/14 11:38am

      Yeah, that is definitely not a "I didn't do anything wrong" statement; it's a "well, you should've known what you signed up for" statement.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      benjaminallovermollymlf05
      3/14/14 11:58am

      His sense of impunity is astounding, and his faith in the protection offered by a release form seems unrealistic and naive.

      We don't know what those contracts actually said, but I seriously doubt it was anything like "expect to have sex with the photographer, which you hereby consent to". I'm not sure what other wording would allow you to whip out your dick and ejaculate in a colleague's open eye under a work contract for a major publication.

      Good luck with that going forward Terry.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    cateyeDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:08am

    What I find absolutely hilarious is that looking at those covers side by side, they're just so boring. Everything is shot the same way, with too much flash. A lot of the poses are quite similar, as are the various states of undress for the women.

    So not only is the fashion industry going to great lengths to deny that this dude is just a disgusting piece of crap, their going to great lengths to deny that this dude is just a disgusting piece of crap who isn't very good at his job. There is nothing creative or innovative about what he does. His so-called provocative approach to photography is just rehashing old sexual tropes, and he clearly just dials in every shoot. Like, is this really what you want to risk a) your reputation and b), more importantly, young models on?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Surfboard2121cateye
      3/14/14 11:24am

      He has a famous Papa, that should tell you everything you need to know

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      grancy2cateye
      3/14/14 11:40am

      Yeah, it's really fucked up, but it's how most of the entertainment industry (some might say any industry) works. He's a Name talent. It doesn't matter that his work is shit, it's been accepted by the industry and now people want him. Fame breeds fame.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Turd-PolisherDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:09am

    Did he take his dong out while photographing the president?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ThePriceisWrongTurd-Polisher
      3/14/14 11:15am

      I wish I could star this more than once.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      weewqTurd-Polisher
      3/14/14 11:25am

      he shot him in 2007 when he wasn't president, so....

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    twizzler88Dodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:29am

    Richardson has always been sort of a pariah to the professional photographer industry cause he'll show up with two little 80's Minoltas, fire off a few hundred shots in his studio with very basic / over-exposed lighting, and continue to secure HUGELY profitable shoots with a ton of celebrities/magazines. The upside is the guy has a VERY catchy style of photography. It's edgy/sexy and it's also original. The downside is that yeah, the euro editions of Vogue/Harper's etc, they throw big money at this guy and pretentious no-talent/ass-clowns like Oliver Zahm continue to promote/plug the guy. The other (obvious) downside is that the man clearly has some pent up sexual-issues. Anyone that's shot with him has done it purely out of what magcover they're ending up on (or can end up on), not cause they want some dude who grabs his dick rubbing up against them. So yeah, Richardson deserves props for being good at what he does, but at some point the industry is going to have to recognize that he's another instrument in their sexual exploitation of young women. The fact that Elite Modeling is even in business with all the shit that went down with them over the years is compelling, but Vogue/Harper's Bazaar have been profiting off of sexual harrassment/exploitation/3rd world country labor-exploitation for years, so they all need to go out of fucking business, like, now.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      LolaChanningtwizzler88
      3/14/14 11:51am

      Well said. Nothing to add. Bravo.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      RunningOutOfBurnJokestwizzler88
      3/14/14 12:14pm

      He is exactly 'edgy.' That word terrible people use when something seems a little wrong but hey it's getting them attention, for once!

      While I agree with you that plenty of people are happy to profit off of him, he's not 'another instrument.' He is a person. Like the girls and women he assaults.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    kooklaDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 3:06pm

    I had no idea he directed the Beyoncé video. Didn't he also direct Miley Cyrus' Wrecking Ball video? It's all making sense now...

    Also, his response to the allegations reminds me of this guy. Yuckers.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      RocktheDebitkookla
      3/14/14 11:34pm

      I can't tell if Woody looks creeped out or aroused in this picture. Either way, <i>I'm</i> creeped out.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      kooklaRocktheDebit
      3/15/14 1:20am

      They should come out with a Halloween Costume for 2014 of either of these two. Your wingman will be Chris Hansen from To Catch a Predator.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    HollyLuyaDodai Stewart
    3/14/14 11:13am

    Shooting a model and then whipping out your dick and suggesting she touch it may nottechnically be a threat or coercion, but it's also not very professional, and creates a problematic dynamic, since a model is meant to be guided by and obey a photographer. And yet! Terry Richardson is getting lots of work.

    Not technically? Are you fucking kidding me? It's WRONG! Period. And I am quite sure that if I whipped my dick out at work regardless of whether it's at the beginning of the work period or end, I'd be disciplined. Having said that, if there have been complaints, has anyone actually gone to a lawyer about their experience? If not, then I don't see why any of these publications would stop using him until he is tried in court. If his claims of a witch hunt are true, it'll come out in court but until these women take it in front of a judge, there's nothing to be done other than a model refusing to work with him. That may be easy for those at the top of the game but not so much for any others in the modelling business.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Turd-PolisherHollyLuya
      3/14/14 11:21am

      Shooting a model and then whipping out your dick and shooting the model again. Ah hem.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Adebisi's hatHollyLuya
      3/14/14 11:37am

      He's got "releases". Cases would get thrown out faster than Woody Allen's molestation one

      Reply
      <