Some of my readers might only vaguely know who the former are:
There. A nice photo of them, which probably netted the photographer a minor sum. Or it could be a publicity picture given away free. See, it's too NICE of a photo. And that's what THIS story is about.
It's about how a paparazzo popped a few nasty remarks at Teigen JUST to try and get her to change expression.
Oh, if you don't know who they are: "Johnny Legend" is a rather unfortunately-named pop star I don't find legendary, and his wife is a swimsuit model. They got my attention because Teigen began to Tweet about how a typical "ambushed at the airport" session turned very ugly.
It's a reminder that racism and antisemitism still exist (just in case anyone thinks they don't!)
For me, it's a reminder of why I retired from taking assignments from photo agencies. For a while, I made some good and fairly easy money freelancing for a few of the major operations out there. It was a sideline with me, and I found snapping photos for a few seconds a lot easier than writing for hours at a time.
An agency might call and say, "Go HERE and HERE and HERE..." and it was almost literally like shooting fish in a barrel. In the morning I'd cover a celeb shilling her line of perfume at Macy's. SNAP. In the afternoon, maybe some politician giving a speech. SNAP. And in the evening, a biggie, a bunch of stars standing around at a movie premiere, more than happy to hear "over here, over here," and pose this way and that, before disappearing inside.
There was NO guarantee that a photo of mine would be chosen over my competition, but the odds were decent enough, and it was a novelty. Sometimes, you'd get a free meal if you were covering a particularly ritzy event (like a star choosing the restaurant 21 to announce a big movie deal, or a comedian choosing the Carnegie Deli to brag about putting out a new comedy album).
I found the transit and the waiting boring, but sometimes I'd be photographing somebody I cared about, and it was an adrenaline rush to have only a few seconds to get THE shot. Back then, with no digital cameras, you actually had to have a steady hand, know a little about f-stops and film speeds, and even FOCUS before you snapped the picture.
What bothered me was that my colleagues sometimes switched from "over here" to "this way, Fats!" or "Come on Miss Big Shot." Nothing too rude, but rude enough. They did it in order to get a different expression. If you antagonize a star, and the star looks at you with hatred, or shock...you've got something you can REALLY sell. Everybody else just has the same "smiling" portrait YOU have something the tabloids might buy at a very high price.
One agency lady actually told me to always include shots where a star's eyes are closed, or mouth is open, etc. "The tabloids pay a lot for those!" A wardrobe malfunction could get big bucks at High Society or Hustler. I always pulled any unflattering picture before submitting them.
I detested anything that was actually "paparazzo," and in any way involved aggression. I preferred one-on-one assignments where I accompanied an interviewer and did some shots in the hotel room or nearby street locations, or planned outings were I was on the guest list and I and my colleagues had an agreed on time and place to get what was beneficial for all.
I remember attending a banquet to get a "photo op" with Dustin Hoffman. We photographers were going to be allowed five minutes, as whoever wanted the publicity (the venue, Hoffman, whatever charity or company he was doing something for) didn't care THAT much about us. And why should they? Get in and GET OUT.
Hoffman was seated at a banquet table in the middle of the huge room. Once everyone was seated, and just before the event was about to start, we got the signal. Five or ten of us surged in, with some of the more aggressive ones pushing and shoving to get as close to Hoffman's table as possible. If they needed to sit in somebody's lap to get a better angle, they did.
Hoffman stood up politely, and gave the same smile as he looked left, then center, then right, then back again.
I heard the guests mutter their insults and express their outrage at us "animals," for backing into them in their seats, or bumping them with camera bags. Or just being there, causing a delay.
Some time later, one of my photos got used in a book. It was because I was apparently the only one who bothered taking a photo when Dustin happened to be talking to some guy nobody recognized. It was Steve Ross.
I was annoyed by the intolerance of these rich people begrudging us the chance (and it was only a chance) of making getting paid for our day's work. (The paycheck would also depend on the circulation of the newspaper, the budget of the book company, and the size of the picture on the page.)
But I was more disgusted with my colleagues, for being so aggressive and rude when it wasn't necessary. It's only gotten worse.
I'm glad I got out when I did. Yes, the business is no longer lucrative because EVERYBODY whips out a cellphone and takes celebrity pictures, and these are instantly tossed around the Net regardless of copyright. Yes, I don't really know or care about Teigen, Legend and other people Millennials find fascinating. But most of all, I don't want to be part of a business dominated by idiots and amateurs and driven by unflattering images and invasion of privacy.
Anyone with a camera and an Internet connection knows where the stars are. They know the airport arrivals, the hotels, and all the rest of it. The few outlets that actually pay for photos don't want the posed smiling shots of the star standing in front of a canvas sheet with GOLDEN GLOBE stamped onto it a dozen times. They want that airport shot. That sidewalk picture. The more gruesome the facial expression the better.
The paps are more than ever prone to shout out anything to get a reaction, and since the payment goes to shots where a star's expression is RADICALLY DISTORTED, the best way to get that reaction is to say something obnoxious and outrageous.
Fair? No. "Free speech?" Sure. It's very rare when a celebrity can get a court order to prevent a specific photographer from indulging in "harassment," and being forced to use a telephoto lens at least, and stay 30 or 50 feet away.
How sad that anyone would want a picture of this pleasant looking Christine Teigen (there, I had to correct "Tiger" obsessed spell check again) looking angry, aghast or grieved. Who wants to see an attractive woman looking deathly or distorted? TMZ...Too Many Zombies.
No comments:
Post a Comment