Julius Shulman – Photographer


Julius Shulman
“Richard Neutra and Me”
1950 printed later
Gelatin Silver Print
S K Josefsberg Studio


TITLE: My Mother
ARTIST:
Julius Shulman
WORK DATE: 1935


Julius Shulman – Photographer


Eames House
203 Chataqua
Pacific Palisades, CA
Architect: Eames
Photography: Julius Shulman


Case Study House 22
1635 Woods Drive – Above Sunset/Laurel Canyon
Los Angeles, CA
Architect: Pierre Koenig
Photography: Julius Shulman

Eye for architecture ”
Renowned photographer to speak in Pasadena
By
Janette Williams Staff Writer
PASADENA – “My Dear Shulman, When I let you in on Tallesin West I did not realize you were a professional photographer. I thought you were some artistic youth wanting to try your luck. … I admit that no better photos have been made of the camp than those you send. What technique did you employ in making these admirable prints?”

Frank Lloyd Wright, writing to Julius Shulman in 1950, knew good work
when he saw it. Now, at 96, Shulman is recognized as the preeminent architectural photographer of the age. Shulman will be at Art Center College of Design in Pasadena Saturday to launch the Sidney D. Gamble lecture series. Even people who don’t know Shulman’s name know his work, most famously of the 1960 Case Study House No. 22. The iconic 1932 image of the two young women sitting in a glass box hanging Sunset Boulevard has become the most widely seen architectural photograph in the world, Shulman said.

He and his Kodak Vest Pocket camera – which he still has – were just “in the right place at the right time” in 1936 when his sister introduced him to architect Richard Neutra’s assistant, Shulman said. Neutra liked and bought the pictures Shulman took of his Kun house in the Hollywood Hills and he was on his way.”

Nice story – I’m interested in the “myth”. Being in the right place and the right time that is. i believe you have to make the conditions ripe with opportunity in order to produce (like farming – you must put a fish in the bottom of your hole before you plant the corn) – because it’s easy to produce nothing. I wonder what the back story really is….?

On this architectural photography style – I wonder about the artistic viewpoint? Is this architectural photography really a certain genera of work that belongs simply to “product” photography?

UPDATE:  a little vid of Julius Shulman here…  interesting note in the vid by Shulman about “Iowa Architects” – how true that work such as the work by Shulman is quite the reason for many such “discoveries” –  it’s another example of the eye of the photographer to portray a sense of character of a space (whether you like the style or not) and this is key to convey a sense of mystique… A story here on NPR as well….

A note on "the Dynamics of Architectural Form"

In The Dynamics of Architectural Form, the art historian Rudolf Arnheim noted, “As the viewer moves around an object…he receives an orderly sequence of gradually changing projections…A work of architecture, therefore, is an object that never has and never will be seen in its entirety by anybody.” Arnheim understood that the “space between things turns out not to look simply empty”; that buildings are perceived—or experienced—obliquely; and that sites are topographic. Maltzan’s projects are typically constructed to similarly guide and shelter cognition, complex unity, and what Arnheim termed “sensory perception.”

Above from Alternate Ground, by Raymund Ryan, first published in the Alternate Ground Heinz Architectural Press, 2005

Composite / Averages


, posted by Matt Niebuhr.

I’ve noticed a couple of recent discussions on other blogs and posts about accomplished photographers that consider the element of time multiples and overlaying images in their work. All for different purposes and to different results… So anyway, without getting into details on the who and the why (if you take the authors word – or a critics word for it that is) I’ve been thinking about how I might explore the application of the technique and where it could lead and how that may apply to the notion of “originality”.

So here is an early attempt of my own from some images I’m culling through on for a completely different purpose – what’s interesting is that the overlay technique can really start to allude to another story – it blurs / blends and might just enrich an otherwise serial type visual experience… So – where does “originality” come into play? It’s not in the technique for sure, for me it’s about the decisions all along the way on subject matter and blended results… We’ll see if it goes anywhere.