Photos of the Q-West Gallery Artists

I’m finally home from my dog-sitting assignment in Queenstown and I have a lot to go through. I have interviews with the five key artists at Q-West Gallery, photos of some of these artists at work and 80% of the portraits of those key artists. And that’s what I thought I would talk about today – the “80%” and the “portraits”.

As I have mentioned in the past, I am more about nature photography than anything else. Wildlife, landscapes and macro photography of the natural world are the kinds of things that pique my interest. So you can probably guess how much experience I have with portraiture. That’s right, none! That meant I had to approach the portrait phase of my photo story project with a certain level of preparation.

The first thing I did was search for everything I could find online about lighting, posing, selecting the moment, choosing the background, etc, etc, etc... And that was also the last thing I did. The more I read, the more I found myself thinking how artificial the final image would be. I’m not saying there is anything wrong with portraiture or portrait photography, but I am saying that the practice of portrait photography doesn’t fit with my natural aesthetic (pompous but true!). When I thought about the portraits I wanted of my subjects I realised that I wanted my subjects to be themselves, more than anything. So I changed my approach.

I decided that I wouldn’t sit my subjects, pose them, light them and photograph them. Admittedly, part of my decision came about because I couldn’t do any of that. I have no flashes and no experience with them, so custom lighting was out; I have no studio and no access to a studio so I had no control over the background I would be using; and I have no idea how the hell you are supposed to get your subjects to pose! I mean, how does that work?!

But mostly my decision came about because I wanted photos of my subjects as they really are. I wanted their expressions, their gestures, their ‘poses’ to be 100% natural because, to my mind, you see far more of the subject of a photo when he or she is allowed to be themselves. To get that clearer view of who my subjects really were, I decided to try and capture the perfect image of each artist during the interviews.

Initially I had intended just sitting down with my subjects and interviewing them where I found them. I would cause minimal disruption for the subject and they would be able to meet me in a place of their choosing, thus making them more comfortable with the interview process. The decision to capture the portraits during the interviews required a bit of a rethink.

Fortunately, my super-secret contact had rooms right beside the gallery that had nice big windows which would let in a decent amount of natural light. By setting up an interview space (two comfy seats) right beside the large windows and draping a white sheet in such a way that it curved around behind the subject, I could use the natural light to illuminate my subjects. The sheet worked nicely as a soft reflector, bouncing light in to the unlit side of the subject. As you can see from the examples here, it seems to have worked quite well.

James Dunn

Dave Fitzpatrick

My first two interview-cum-photo shoots, Dave Fitzpatrick and James Dunn, worked out rather well. Both subjects are well lit, clear, and in focus. To contextualise to subjects a bit more I had them select pieces of their art to display around them, thus giving you not only a feel for the artist, but also for their art. With James this was easy – I could hang his quilt behind him and have him simply hold his marionette. That way I could use my best piece of glass (Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G – 75mm equivalent on my D3200 DX body). In order to fit both Dave and his art into the one image in the relatively confined space I had to work with, I had to go to my widest piece of glass (Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G – 27-82.5mm equivalent). Not great glass, but it got me my shot, so...

Denise Mitchell

For subject number three, Denise Mitchell, it was easier to meet her in her home. The lighting situation was more challenging but, by the simple expedient completely rearranging her lounge room and surrounding her with boards of white corflute, I was able to use her skylight to get enough light into her face to get a good shot. As every part of her home spoke to Denise’s personality, and I could decimate her lounge to my satisfaction, I could get the space I needed to use my nifty fifty again and still bring in some of the environment.

Mal Gotjes

Mal Gotjes, my fourth subject, is a very private individual, not really given to placing himself in the forefront, as it were. Put another way, he’s kinda shy. In order to help him feel as comfortable as possible I decided we could do the interview-cum-photo shoot in the workshop part of the gallery. That was Mal’s base, the place he was most comfortable, and just happened to be filled with his works and the tools of his art. The only issue I had was that, once again, I was forced to set up in a tight space and use my kit lens again. I think it came out alright, though.

My final subject, Bob Cartledge (AKA my super-secret contact, AKA Daddy dearest) proved to be the simplest. We got into the interview space, I set up my camera with the nifty fifty and started the interview. And my father danced around in his seat more than a break dancer with a cramp. Movement was a problem for all my subjects, really, but I brought this one up because I was unable to get a good, in-focus shot. Well, that’s not technically true. I did manage to get sharp focus... on Dad’s ear! Fortunately I have repeat access to this subject (I better have if he wants his Christmas present!) so I can redo the shoot.

Bob Cartledge - I made this a bit bigger so you could see the crisp, sharp earlobe!

And this brings me to my point for this post; you never know what is going to happen on a shoot, so you need to make sure you have a back-up plan. In my case, I knew I could get repeat access to my subjects, so I knew I could go back if something went wrong. If I hadn’t had that option, I would have made other plans for the shoot. Most likely I would have dragooned a family member to help me out and spent a bit of cash getting myself set up so I could shoot tethered to a laptop. That way I could check my shots then and there and decide whether I had got what I needed or if I needed to keep going.

So, my Dad is the 20% of the portraits I didn’t get, and I’m italicising ‘portrait’ because they’re not your traditional portraits. As far as I know, anyway. What do I know about portraits?!

Right! So what’s next? Well, I’ll be heading back down to Queenstown for Christmas but I won’t be working on the project then cos’, you know, Christmas! Which means it will probably be into the New Year before I can get back down there for my project. On that visit I’ll get the rest of the shots I need, I’ll do another walk-through on the gallery floor to see if there is anything that grabs me and then I get to start on the hard part – laying out the story. Hopefully I’ll be done by March... 3001!

What are you thinking, folks? How did my images come out? Do you have any tips or tricks for me for my next portrait shoot? What experiences have you had on shoots recently?

Let me know!

 I hope you enjoyed the read!

Please check out my portfolio at:

https://bobcartledgephotography.myportfolio.com/

You can also find me at:

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+BobCartledge

https://www.facebook.com/bob.cartledge.758

https://www.flickr.com/photos/152458661@N05/

https://www.instagram.com/bobcartledgephoto/

And I am @BobCartPhoto on Twitter

Dunn Quite a Lot

Guess what? Turns out I can do a blog post this week. And next week. Yay for me!

As I think I’ve mentioned at least once in the last week, I am back in Queenstown to continue work on my photo story about Q-West Gallery. While I’m down here I am interviewing artists who work and exhibit at Q-West Gallery. I’ve done two interviews so far and I have found that there is a great amount of depth behind the artists here. So much so that I felt I had to write about it. But I don’t want to rabbit on too much because, well, photo story. So what to do, what to do?

I think I’ll talk a little bit about James Dunn (He prefers Jim, and I know he’s going to be reading this, so there’s this evil little voice in the back of my mind saying ‘call him James!’. But I’ll defer to the fact that he’s bigger than me and call him ‘Jim’).

Now there is a hell of a lot about Jim that I can talk about. I can talk about the fact that he is a blind sculptor and quilter and wood carver. I can talk about the fact that he has worked in television and radio and healthcare. I can talk about… man! There’s a lot to talk about! But I’ve decided to talk about the impression I got of the man during the interview.

Jim is a 53 year old man with Autism. Don’t get the significance of that? Then let me explain. Jim was an autistic child during a time when there was no distinction between autism and ‘mental retardation’, to coin the term of the day. And not only was he an autistic boy, he was a blind autistic boy. Imagine the nice little cubby hole that would have made for him in the welfare system of the day!

Jim made it plain that, for much of his formative years and into his adult life, the things people were most interested in telling him were what he couldn’t do. The focus of family, social services, educators, everyone was on Jim’s limitations, not his capabilities. And I honestly believe that was the best thing that could have happened to him. Because it motivated Jim to prove them wrong.

This blind autistic boy, at the age of eight, completed his first ever artistic work; a quilt sewn on his great grandmother’s Singer sewing machine. Crafted by a child supposedly ‘mentally retarded’ and incapable of just about anything, as decided by a fresh-faced young psychologist straight out of school with a book of definitions.

So what else has Jim done to prove the system wrong? Well there’s the 30 years of community radio, including production and hosting late night talk back. There’s the television where he was a technician, a cameraman (no joke! According to Jim he just worked the focus until it was at its least blurry. And it worked!) And he was producer/director of his own show.

Now, in Queenstown, Jim is the secretary of the local Men’s Shed, and key in the recent acquisition of funding for that shed, he is an active member of the Friday afternoon Quilting Group and of the Q-West Gallery (funnily enough). And at home he carves wood.

And this is all very interesting and makes for a compelling story and had absolutely nothing to do with why I chose to tell you about Jim. You see, when organising this interview I asked Jim to bring in some of his pieces so that I could capture images of Jim with his work. During the interview, I asked Jim to talk to me about the quilt he brought with him. It was during this description that I saw the complex and subtle mind that lay behind all the history and all the labels. I saw someone with a deeper understanding of himself and his autism than any supposedly ‘normal’ and apparently ‘healthy’ person could hope to achieve. His description of the quilt, the meaning of the colours, the nuanced design and construction, the intentional disparities all served to paint a picture for me, not of the autistic blind man, but of the highly intelligent man, the highly skilled artist, it had been my pleasure to talk with.

And that is the point I want anyone reading this to take away; look beyond the surface. Ignore what you can see, what you are told is there and what you expect to be there. Do that and you will see what is there. Jim the Autistic Blind Man is far, far more than those labels convey, but many people have allowed those labels to define him. And man, have they missed out!