Showing posts with label Annie Leibovitz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Annie Leibovitz. Show all posts

Thursday, August 6, 2009

Annie Leibovitz...Bankrupt?

Annie Leibovitz at the International Center of Photography's Infinity Awards in
May, where she was honored with a lifetime achievement award

© Patrick McMullan Photography

Things are turning quite ugly between  successful and talented photographer Annie Leibovitz and Art Capital Group.

Please read article written by Katia Kasakina for Bloomberg News.


I think, better hold off for a while getting her work owed by me  appraised. Not a good sign!

Monday, July 27, 2009

Merce Cunningham 1919-2009 RIP

Photo- Annie Leibovitz
Merce Cunningham
1994

12 7/8 x 13 in. (32.7 x 33 cm)
Gelatin silver print, printed 1997
Signed and numbered lower edge.
I am lucky enough to own this photograph! Love it!



Merce Cunningham was a choreographer who, for all the clarity of his vision, frequently left his audiences perplexed.

People streamed out of his performances uplifted by the beauty of the dancing and energized by its formal rigor. Yet his famous use of chance as a tool of choreography planted a seed of doubt. One always emerged carrying something in the heart: the quiet awe that comes from wanting to explain the unexplainable, and from contemplating the imponderables of life.

Cunningham, who died Sunday at age 90 at his Manhattan home, notoriously employed chance in creating his works; he would throw dice, toss coins or consult the I Ching to determine the order of steps in his dances. Discussing this tactic in a 1998 interview, Cunningham said, "For me, it is about acceptance." He added, "It's a very easy way to make decisions -- very simple. If you can't make up your mind about something, toss a coin and then accept it. Accept it."

Bowing to an act of fate and living with the results of a gamble -- that was the hard part. But Cunningham's philosophical attitude, which derived from Zen Buddhism, lent a peacefulness to all of his works regardless of their dynamic energy and despite the attention-grabbing antics of some of his many collaborators from the worlds of rock music, modern art and fashion.

Born in 1919 in Centralia, Wash. -- where he studied tap dance as a child, -- Cunningham kept alive the independent spirit of American modern dance by rebelling against the psycho-dramatic aesthetics of the previous generation, notably Martha Graham, from whose company he emerged as a brilliantly original voice, founding his own troupe in 1953. He was greatly influenced by the ideas of his artistic partner and lifetime companion, the late musician and composer John Cage, who died in 1992.

Cunningham remained firm in his devotion to avant-garde experimentation. He never compromised his ideals, or succumbed to commercial temptations. Perhaps more than anything, this integrity explains the durability of his example, which not only influenced the rebel choreographers of the Judson Dance Theater in the early 1960s and the Minimalists of the 1970s, but also can be seen today in the evolving work of theatrical artists like Angelin Preljocaj and Garth Fagan. Cunningham became the patriarch of American modern dance, revered internationally as a symbol of American artistic freedom and ingenuity.

Cunningham was quick to embrace new technologies, creating dances for video and film, learning in his 70s to work with the choreographic software program now called Danceforms, and helping to pioneer the use of MotionCapture. In Cunningham's 2006 premiere "EyeSpace," audience members received iPod loaners to listen to the score.

Cunningham also allowed his famous collaborators (Robert Rauschenberg, Jasper Johns and Andy Warhol, among them) to challenge him by introducing sculptural elements on stage, and even by deforming the dancers' line -- as fashion designer Rei Kawakubo, for example, did by adding humps and goiters to the dancers' costumes in the 1997 "Scenario."


Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Artwork... As Collateral?



ARTmostfierce found this article and could not believe what he was reading.This article titled That Old Master? Its at the Pawnshop by Allen Salkin of the NY Times is quite telling.Please read.

Last fall, Annie Leibovitz, the photographer, borrowed $5 million from a company called Art Capital Group. In December, she borrowed $10.5 million more from the same firm. As collateral, among other items, she used town houses she owns in Greenwich Village, a country house, and something else: the rights to all of her photographs.


Photgrapher Annie Leibovitz

Julian Schnabel turned to an art lender when building Palazzo Chupi in Greenwich Village, later borrowing against his artwork with a bank.




By ALLEN SALKIN
Published: February 23, 2009

In other words, according to loan documents filed with the city, one of the world’s most successful photographers essentially pawned every snap of the shutter she had made or will make until the loans are paid off.

Those who know Ms. Leibovitz said she used the money to pay off mortgages and deal with other financial stresses. But whatever her reasons, she is not alone in doing business with Art Capital and similar lenders. At a time when stock portfolios are plunging and many homes, even grand ones, have no equity left to borrow against, an increasing number of art owners are realizing that an Old Master or a prime photograph, when used as collateral, can bring in much-needed cash.

“It’s very discreet,” said Ian Peck, a co-owner of Art Capital.

This little-known corner of the art business is lightly regulated and highly litigious. But this has not dissuaded clients who have included rich collectors like Veronica Hearst, art galleries and prominent artists themselves, including Ms. Leibovitz and Julian Schnabel.

Art Capital’s headquarters in the former Sotheby’s building on Madison Avenue looks at first glance like an art gallery. Two Warhols, a pair of Rubens portraits of Roman emperors and a pink nude by the contemporary Mexican painter Victor Rodriguez hang on the cool white walls. A sculpture of a faun by Rembrandt Bugatti sits on a windowsill in a conference room where transactions are discussed.

But it would be more accurate to describe the airy space as something far less genteel: a pawnshop.

Art Capital issues loans of $500,000 or more at interest rates from 6 percent to 16 percent. Fail to pay and you lose your Rubens; several of the works on display in Art Capital’s office on Madison became subject to sale after their owners defaulted.

The company expects to make about $120 million in art-related loans in 2009, up from $80 million in 2008. At a Manhattan-based competitor, Art Finance Partners, “we are up 40 percent in originations in the last six months,” said Meghan Carleton, a partner.

ArtLoan, a similar company in San Francisco, is actually regulated by California’s pawn laws. It opened in 2004 and has seen “exponential” growth in the last year even though it charges interest rates of 18 percent to 24 percent, said Ray Parker Gaylord, an owner.

“It’s a very rough-and-tumble corner of the business,” said Marc Porter, who heads the American operations of Christie’s auction house. Christie’s and Sotheby’s also offer loans against fine art but focus on bridge loans to customers who have pledged their art for planned auctions.

“For years, one of the reasons this wasn’t an especially big business is that everyone was getting money for something else,” Mr. Porter said. “It was easy money everywhere. But now people are looking to every asset they have to unlock cash.”

ArtLoan prefers to make loans on items that are physically small and thus easy to store or to ship to auction houses and dealers in case of a default. A recent loan was for $115,000 against a collection that included an early 20th-century bronze sculpture, a 19th-century Persian carpet and a Swiss music box.

Art lenders typically lend up to 40 percent of what they appraise the artworks to be worth, and usually take possession of the works.

A former investment banker in New York, who spoke anonymously because he did not want friends to know his financial situation, is sending six modern paintings to ArtLoan, hoping to borrow $50,000 against them to finance a business venture. His former company’s stock, which he was given as part of his annual bonuses, has gone from the high $70s a share to $22, he said.

“At this point, I’ve been not working for a year and a half,” he said. “I have a choice, which is sell part of my art collection, which when I first left my job in 2007 was an option because the art market was strong, but like all markets it has gone south. Now I can take a loan without having to sell at a discount.”

For her $5 million loan, Ms. Leibovitz put up as collateral a country house in Rhinebeck, N.Y., three town houses in Greenwich Village and all “copyrights ... photographic negatives ... contract rights” existing or to be created in the future, according to a loan document filed with the City Register’s Office in December. That month, Art Capital granted her an additional $10.5 million loan, which was to consolidate the existing mortgages on her homes, according to loan documents.

Please read more:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/arts/design/24artloans.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&th&emc=th




http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2009/02/25/photographer-annie-leibovitz-overexposed-is-forced-to-sell-her/

Saturday, May 31, 2008

Pixel Perfect...

How many of your photographs in your collection are the REAL DEAL ?

By this I mean if they are the original conception and instant image conceived by the artist or a backstage calculated and pumped up on technology steroids image reminiscent  of  all the major editorial magazines and publications.

Are you a fan and collector of REAL photography or you are simply falling for that perfect looking image that simulate a poster because there is no flaws in it?

How much value do these rather trendy and off the moment techniques add to the photographs?

Is  Photography as an art media evolving to accept this new technology and the days of instant imaging (Polaroid) are doomed?

How will these new technology fare with old good Classic Photography without all these tricks out of a hat?


ARTmostfierce had all these questions and many more on his head after reading this article in the New Yorker Magazine written by Lauren Collins . It is a very good article and I recommend that you read it (it is seven pages long) and find out what really happens behind the scenes.


ARTmostfierce was so extremely disappointed to find out that photographers like Phillip-Lorca DiCorcia, Patrick Demarchelier and Annie Leibovitz are among the many artists that do some serious professional backstage image manipulation changing anything you can imagine to achieve that perfect image.I was well aware of the fashion editorial photography but, not so much for book publishing and  specially REAL art collection photographs!
Another questionable example of the merging of ART and Fashion!

The guy responsible for most of it is Pascal Dangin and he is quite brilliant at it!
Not only he has an incredible eye to identify flaws but,  also how to correct them and even fool people with good trained eyes! This is the kind of guy that you want right next to you when you are about to buy a photograph. He will dissect it and put it back together for you in a matter of seconds! He is a genius!
 
Enjoy the article !
Let me know your thoughts!

For a charity auction a few years back, the photographer Patrick Demarchelier donated a private portrait session. The lot sold, for a hundred and fifty thousand dollars, to the wife of a very rich man. It was her wish to pose on the couple’s yacht. “I call her, I say, ‘I come to your yacht at sunset, I take your picture,’ ” Demarchelier recalled not long ago. He took a dinghy to the larger boat, where he was greeted by the woman, who, to his surprise, was not wearing any clothes.
“I want a picture that will excite my husband,” she said.
Capturing such an image, by Demarchelier’s reckoning, proved to be difficult. “I cannot take good picture,” he said. “Short legs, so much done to her face it was flat.” Demarchelier finished the sitting and wondered what to do. Eventually, he picked up the phone: “I call Pascal. ‘Make her legs long!’ ”
Pascal Dangin is the premier retoucher of fashion photographs. Art directors and admen call him when they want someone who looks less than great to look great, someone who looks great to look amazing, or someone who looks amazing already—whether by dint of DNA or M·A·C—to look, as is the mode, superhuman. (Christy Turlington, for the record, needs the least help.) In the March issue of Vogue Dangin tweaked a hundred and forty-four images: a hundred and seven advertisements (Estée Lauder, Gucci, Dior, etc.), thirty-six fashion pictures, and the cover, featuring Drew Barrymore. To keep track of his clients, he assigns three-letter rubrics, like airport codes. Click on the current-jobs menu on his computer: AFR (Air France), AMX (American Express), BAL (Balenciaga), DSN (Disney), LUV (Louis Vuitton), TFY (Tiffany & Co.), VIC (Victoria’s Secret).
Vanity Fair, W, Harper’s Bazaar, Allure, French Vogue, Italian Vogue, V, and the Times Magazine, among others, also use Dangin. Many photographers, including Annie Leibovitz, Steven Meisel, Craig McDean, Mario Sorrenti, Inez van Lamsweerde and Vinoodh Matadin, and Philip-Lorca diCorcia, rarely work with anyone else. Around thirty celebrities keep him on retainer, in order to insure that any portrait of them that appears in any outlet passes through his shop, to be scrubbed of crow’s-feet and stray hairs. Dangin’s company, Box Studios, has eighty employees and occupies a four-story warehouse in the meatpacking district. “I have Patrick!” an assistant to Miranda Priestly, the editor of Runway, exclaims in “The Devil Wears Prada,” but her real-life counterparts probably log as much time speed-dialling Pascal.

Please read more about this interesting article !