Hailing from High Wycombe, UK comes alternative pinup & fetish photography with an attitude for sure! His work is both erotic and terrifying! An accomplished photographer with a keen eye for vivid colors, composition, and breath taking details that make each one of his photographs truly artistic. He is also has been accepted into the Guild Of Erotic Artists.
Be it rope work, leather, lace, chains, blood and gore, or some other facet of macabre fantasy, he certainly has something to fill the need for your carnal eyecandy pleasures. Each piece is exquisitely and tastefully done with the skill of a seasoned craftsman. There are many who you might find claiming to do this kind of work as "professionals" that turn out nothing in the level of quality and class that is displayed in this work.
His rates that are listed are amazingly reasonable and any model who may have the opportunity to work with him should fancy herself(or himself) lucky! To see more of his work:
View his DeviantART account here.
View his MySpace account here.
I first became acquainted with Adam DeVille through MySpace around 2005 I believe. I was fascinated by his work from the start. Most of what I originally saw were his water color portraits, usually of celebrities or commissioned work by other MySpace users and friends of his.
DeVille's water color's were always very very simple, yet, they had an eerie truth to them. These depictions were very sleek, contemporary, and ghostly. Very few had color. Most were strictly monochromatic black and white, with one that stands out as being pink and white. Occasionally he would add just a hint of color.
Next I recall his canvas works. These, I must confess, have been my absolute favorite work of his. There is so much energy lurking just underneath the oils and other media he uses on the canvas, so much anger. Yet these images he has done on canvas are the principle of simplicity. Very abstract utilizing more than just oils to cover the canvas, he has used roses, feathers, and other materials to adhere to the canvas and build into his work. It's this use of objects within the painting itself that I found to be the most moving aspect of his work to me.
One image I found to be the most exciting of his, however, was a very interpretive creation I've only seen in a photo and do not know if a print exists or not. DeVille took a news paper, the stock section if I recall, and did a water color painting of some abstract lines in the middle of it. In the middle of this leaf shaped line abstraction he placed a scorpion (fake I believe but I'm not sure). The way he positioned the scorpion over the abstract water color, it's true form came to light, and only after a moment or two of studying the image making sure I saw what I thought I saw did I completely understand it. He depicted a woman's genitalia over the new paper with this abstract water color and scorpion as if to say that news such as this bites, stings, and can get you fucked! I laughed for some time in a devious amusement to this! I cannot find this image now, as he no longer (for all I can find), resides on myspace and his personal website at DevilleArt.com doesn't have a display. I would love to be able to show it here, so if anyone has a link to it, please let me know (Adam perhaps?).
**UPDATE** - I received an email this morning with links to the work I described above. Since an image is so much better than words in this case, as something is surely always lost in translation, I am including it here for your viewing pleasure. The work is titled: "We're Not So Different You And I" and it was sold to a collector in Canada back in 2004. The page is actually from a Bible circa 1930.
The image at the top right is a moving piece of one of his sculptures while the images below depict his canvas and water color works. To view more of his work you may find it at DevilleArt.com.
So, over time, long before I even considered this blog, I started bookmarking some of my favorite artists (mainly photographers). People who's work I found to be exquisite, talented, passionate, well thought out and executed, and exotic. What can I say? I love to find the beauty in some of the darker things, and there certainly are a lot of people out there who seem to agree with me.
So where is one to begin? Thinking about it there really was no good place, so I decided to take a look at someone who I've recently become acquainted with on the popular social networking site MySpace. On MySpace he is known as Deeds of Flesh Photography.
He is not the most extreme, out of the work of his I have been exposed to - but at times he does lean that way. I have been very impressed by what I have seen. His lighting technique is spot on, and he is very creative in his composition. This photo of his, featuring model Mae-Alice, is absolutely beautiful:
There is a sense of peaceful eeriness about the photo, very calm and serene, yet paralyzing as you can sense the fear the subject has. You become part of the photo, one of the ghostly figures in the background watching as the nearest figure grabs the poor girl on her shoulder not quite knowing what is about to happen as she prays and pleads.
The strong contrast between her coal black hair and dress with her pale skin make it feel as if she has been scared white, or even, perhaps, passed part way over already. The silvery buttons just scream out cutting her in two. All the while the blank stare and dark eyes from the faint figure behind reveal nothing to the intent of this collision of worlds.
A wonderful job in the lighting accentuates the lines as her clasped hands form what turns into an arrow with the line from the dress's buttons, and that arrow like form is repeated a number of times through-out the image.
Here we have Mae-Alice again, this time a quagmire of a photo. Your eye is drawn in from the bottom left corner as you follow her legs and you see a slight play with the flesh of her legs in a seemingly innocent way that beckons you to look. Hands tied and head covered you're drawn to what is supposed to be the insides of her head thrown across the wall.
Very graphic indeed.
I would not say this promotes violence, however, as it makes one feel for the victims plight, as opposed to sympathizing or creating the desire to be in the place of the offender.
Instead I feel this calls you to take notice of the victim and want to save her from this gruesome end! After all, this kind of tragedy has played a key roll in art and literature for centuries.
The death of a beautiful woman, is unquestionably the most poetical topic in the world. - Edgar Allan Poe
Red, the color of love, life, passion, and, inevitably, death is a reoccurring color theme in this photo, the blood, the hood, the background, even her skin tone shows the red well.
His figure studies are very well executed with simple, elegant compositions, lighting in just the right way, and very classy. Such as with the two images below:
The one on the left reminds me of an old movie still from some obscure Noir film, while the one of the right has a sensual feel to it.
Other work of his includes some very crafty wide angle shots, as well as some other ghostly symbolic imagery. There was even a photo in his albums that made me think of old school music journalism with a model that could have been a trash glam punk rock queen from the gritty days of Sex Pistols tours! Everything from gore horror to landscapes, you can tell he puts a piece of himself into every shot.
I highly recommend viewing more of his work here, and keeping your eye out for more. He is definitely a talent to be seen.
I have decided to move this blog in a particular direction involving underground artistic movements. What I'm referring to as "The Art Underground" is basically anything that mainstream art & pop culture art are not. The elegantly taboo, the intrinsically grotesque, gothic, noir, absurd, erotic, and shocking.
I have no intention of making this a shock factor blog. I only wish to discuss things with true artistic merit. For that, I need to define such merit. Artistic Merit refers to the perceived quality and/or value as a work of art and, often times, is what will separate Erotic Art from Pornography, as well as define what is truly a work of art from what was done as a means to provoke. Keep in mind, for something to be pornographic it does not need to be nude, and something nude or violent is not necessarily pornographic.
Among other, slightly harder to name, qualities my main criteria will be the following:
- What is the purpose of the piece? What Kind of Symbolism is used? What Kind of mood does it convey?
- How technically sound is the piece in the use of what ever medium?
- Does it contain blatantly sexual imagery - if so, is it there for the sake of sex or is there a more symbolic?
- Does it contain excessive violence - if so, is it there for the sake of sex or is there a more symbolic?
I believe that should give a safe standard of judgement.
For those of you who might be concerned - I will make an effort to have more people than just myself pass judgement over any piece I display.
Also, while my main focus is photography, since I am, after all, a photographer, I will make an effort to display other forms of visual art as well, and I encourage recommendations and submissions!
To recommend an artist send the following:
- Artist's Name
- Link to the Artist's online Gallery (or samples of the artists work as JPG's no more than 800x800 pixels)
- Type of medium (i.e. Photography, Ink, Painting, Pencil, Sculpture, etc)
- Your Name & relation to the artist
- A brief description of the Artist's work/vision.
Send that in an email to: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: The Art Underground Submission
Without going into to much detail about the apparent attitude of many "models", since I already touched on that quite enough in my post about Time For Print/CD, I would like to discuss an issue that has been brought to my attention a number of times recently by other photographers - some of whom have been in this business far longer than I!
Many many photographers feel that they are starting to witness the destruction of the creative process altogether. With digital technology becoming more easily available and the general public having tools at their disposal to provide an easy means for image manipulation on the computer, many models have taken it upon themselves to "Fix", as one photographer put it, their photographs to their liking.
I have even heard of models submitting a photograph as her own work of art under this reasoning:
[The Model] owned half of the copyright since she was there when the photo was taken and was the subject of the photo so it HAD to be a 50/50 collaboration. Then [The Model] altered the background and did some "artwork" to the photo which had to make it 100% her own.
It's a very complacent disregard and disrespectful attitude that I've seen in other aspects of society in recent years, avoiding a sociopolitical rant, however, let me just state as fact that this is NOT how the system works.
When a model is given payment in the form of monies or trade product (such as prints, images, or such) - that makes the service they provided nothing more than a work for hire. In Title 17 Chapter 1 §101 of the Copyright Law a work made for hire is the ownership of the employer. That is, if a model could lay any claim to copyright at all. For all technical purposes, a model is nothing more than a tool for the photographer in composition, just as paint and canvas are tools for the painter, and the release the model signs simply gives permission to the photographer to use the model's likeness (and other details depending on the agreement).
When a photographer releases a final print of any image, that image is to his liking. Everything from the retouching, the artwork he's done (physically or digitally), the composition of the subject matter in the image, it is all part of the photographer's creative process and we need to remember that the presentation of the photo is just as important as the image itself!
To quote directly from a personal journal of BillyD Photography:
The model has the right to not like the pose, not like the photo or not use the photo. During the photo shoot the model always has the last word and no is no. Once the photograph is taken, I believe they do not have the right to change the photograph to their liking. Especially if my name is on it as photographer. Butting their name on it, well, that's just plain thievery.
And he's right. No model has to use the final products they get from a photographer, I know many models who've hated the work they've gotten from a photographer and they've just pitched them and never worked with that photographer again. As for myself, I always make it a rule that I will not force a model to do something they don't want to do, and, if they do something they aren't sure about (say a nude pose) - if they aren't satisfied with the outcome of the final product, then I simply dispose of the image and neither of us will use those images ever. I would not want a model to feel shameful for taking part in creating something with me, and I have wasted hundreds of yards of film, and probably thousands of digital images that have never been seen because either the model, myself, or both of us did not like the final product.
That said, it still does not give the model, or anyone for that matter, the right to take the images of some photographer and alter them to their liking. Doing so is not flattery - it's thievery and it is illegal.
I have subscribed to a rights management service whereby allowing myself to syndicate and license out my contributions myself.
Please bear in mind that at the moment I currently have about half a dozen blogs, and while they currently all have the same content on them, I have no intention of them staying that way. While they will likely have cross content, in the future, for now, the identical content is just to introduce myself to those communities while I decide what directions I'm going to send these in, and, perhaps, what other authors I may include.
So, bear with me, and the slow posts in the beginning, while I get these things moving...
First for those that do not know TFP (time for prints)/TFCD (time for cd or images) is where a 'model' will pose in trade for some prints or images on a CD from the shoot. This is typically used with beginning models and beginning photographers to get experience and some images to help build a portfolio.
Well in general I no longer do TFP shoots. I'm here to make money, I do this for a living, and I have bills to pay. I spend a lot time editing images, and other tasks behind just taking photos. I've also invested a lot of money in equipment, props, and things. It can be rather aggravating when I am talking to a model, whether I approached her or she approached me, and the moment compensation comes up I get the "I don't pay photographers, photographers PAY me!" attitude. To be fair, I find it equally annoying when I get the same attitude from photographers in regards to some of the models I manage. In all honesty, I look at it like this: who's providing who with the service?
- If I am hired to do a shoot for a product and I bring a model in, I'll pay them.
- If I'm booking a model to take photos for their portfolio, I'm spending my time and money on supplies (prints, portfolio books, etc) - I expect to be paid.
- If I have an art project or choose an exceptional model to expand on my portfolio I will offer TFP or TFCD, and if I have it in the budget I may even offer to pay.
In the business real models get paid for the use of their photographic likeness to sell a service or a product, and the photographer gets paid to take photographs of a model or product. That means the model, if she's updating, expanding, or developing her portfolio usually pays a photographer to have it done with the most experienced photographers charging, and the emerging photographers willing to trade TFP or TFCD.
Now im not a total hard ass and do make exceptions. As I mentioned before mostly for artistic projects of mine or when the 'model' comes to me with a unique idea, unique look and/or shoot location. This usualy is in the areas of fetish, figure(nude), retro, pinup or other areas of intrest that I like to shoot for artistic purposes. This would be a colabortive effort between the 'model' and I to create some works of artistic merit.
I do not do TFP for general portrait or portfolio work, unless it meets requirements above. It never hurts to ask but be prepared for a no.
Also, I generally will not do TFP for a first shoot, only with those I have shot before. I hate seeing "I need to work on my portfoilo so I'm looking for some TFP." If you want a good portfolio it is in your best interest to look around and find some great photographers and pay fo their services and get the best photos you can. As I said before, the photographers most willing to do TFP or TFCD are usually the less experienced, college students, hobbiests, and such. You may get some really great work from some of them as I did some great pieces for people in the beginning, but you'll also get some general mistakes and average quality work - as I also did in the beginning.
When I do a TFP shoot, I will generally give the model a CD with 10 to 15 web quality images of the best shots after they've been enhanced and a discount on any prints. I do not give any digital artwork to the model, but after a piece has been completed, I will offer it to the model at a discount as well.
I never give out the high resolution originals, and a model release is always required. Also since this is not money making, all paid shoots will have priority so there can be a delay in image processing.
I don't say this to sound like a prick, I just feel it best to get this out of the way to avoid problems in the future. I feel, and have been told, my rates are very reasonable. I'm always happy to work with my clients because I enjoy what I do, and you can ask anyone I have worked with I typically will go beyond what I agree to in the first place.
Advice and words of wisdom taken from some models & others who are in "The Biz":
- It's not necessarily what you are interested in getting from a shoot. You have to understand others motivations for even showing up.
- If it's a TFP, it's not only that they want you in their book, they also have to want what someone else is bringing to the table. And, this will be collaborative. This means, it's not just about you. What does the photographer want/need? What does the makeup artist want/need? Fashion and hair too. You have to be willing to work with the team, not just shoot what you came there for.
- Getting what you need for your portfolio takes some thought on what you want to do, you want to be versitile, but you don't want to be all over the place. It also takes good communication with your photographer.
- If you are willing to pay each team member, we're talking a different ball game. You may very likely get stronger talent to work with you. And if you are paying, you would have much more control over the shoot, and you'd have a team much more motivated to care what they achieved for *you*.