(click images to make bigger)
Outside
Creative + Photo Director: Hannah McCaughey
Photo Editor: Amy Silverman
Art Director: John McCauley
Photographer: Inga Hendrickson
Note: Content for The Daily Edit is found on the newsstands. Submissions are not accepted.
Heidi: Typically you shoot products for the magazine, what inspired this new direction?
Inga: Hannah McCaughey, Outside Magazine’s creative director, and I worked together on this one. We wanted to do something that showed a character who the viewer followed on his journey through all of the fitness myths being written about. We wanted to do something that didn’t take itself too seriously so we used the a Ken doll as our protagonist and Outside has used Ken before as a character. Photographer Chris Buck and shot a great feature for Outside starring a Ken-like doll several years back. We wrote to Chris to warn him and get his blessings, which he was kind enough to give us. Thanks Chris!!
Tell me about this shoot, where are these locations?
Ken is such a funny character that we thought it would be good to bring him back for a cameo. Ken and I would tool around town together playing dress up and finding fun locations here in Santa Fe. In fact, the shoot was so fun that I still tote Ken around with me looking for fun scenarios to put him in! It doesn’t raise too many eyebrows as long as I remember to put his clothes back on between wardrobe changes.
Are these shot with the iphone/hipstamatic or some other photo app?
Yes, they were shot on my iPhone using the hipstamatic app. Being a fictional character, Ken seemed like a good choice to illustrate the myth idea, and this style of shooting kept it loose.
I know you are a staff photographer for Outside, do you have a studio space at the magazine?
I do a lot of freelance work for Outside but I’m usually in the studio. (Outside has a beautiful studio space where I do most of the shooting.) This feature was mostly shot on location so that was a nice change of pace for me.
{ 13 comments }
Wait a minute… The Daily Edit is featuring a spread shot with an iPhone?!
yes, very cost effective, as I’ve pointed out before.
Don’t really see how the type of camera used would make that much of a different to the total cost on shoots. Would the licensing be any less because it was shot with an iPhone?
really? lets see. no lights, no assistant, no rental fee, no processing fee, no delivery fee, no permit, no location fees, no talent fee… shal I go on?
I thought you objected to iPhone photography on aesthetic grounds, and felt that it devalued the medium… Not trying to be snarky… Honestly curious… Did Inga get paid less for this job than if she had shot with film or high-res digital?
personally, yes, I do not like them that much. professionally, I would not pay someone to go take an iPhone photo. that was my point in the earlier piece. the lack of value. Inga did not get paid, because she’s on staff. I hope you’re catching my drift. I don’t want to disrespect Hannah who is a very talented CD and Inga, based on her website, is a talented photographer.
This shows the value of smart phone photography is non existent. The only reason this ran is because of the staff position.
I think there is a huge point being missed here. Inga says the article is about myths. Using the iPhone camera & app is a very clever way to illustrate that.
On a side note, there seems to be some myths about the iPhone camera itself such as it takes no lighting, no assistant, no budget, no talent etc..to get a great photo with an iPhone. Sorry, I just think that none of that is true. We have all seen lots and lots of bad smartphone photos.
Great photos regardless of what was used to get them.
Funny, when I first saw this issue of Outside, I thought they looked like they were taken with some kind of cameraphone, but thought that they (Outside) would never
compromise their integrity by doing so.
The reason to use a specific camera is to attain a certain look or feel. I don’t understand how giving up control adds to the images…..and using an app to make them interesting points to a core lack of interest in the initial images.
I’m surprised that you picked this piece for the daily edit. Not because it’s not good, it’s very good, well thought out etc. It’s just completely overshadowed by the cover story. (as it should be)
To be honest, I’ve had the mag for about a week now, and I just keep going back to the Andrew Hetherington portraits over and over.
I just want to set the record straight- Inga is not a staff photographer for Outside. She freelances for Outside and was paid the same day rate she would get for any other shoot. We decided to use the iPhone because it was the look we wanted for the piece.
So, you commissioned Inga and her iPhone to knockoff the 20 something thousand dollar award winning shoot Chris Buck did, because you prefer the look, not because of any cost savings? I stand corrected.
Maybe if they shot with a Holga we would all approve? Choose your weapon! Make good pictures!
Comments on this entry are closed.