Justin James Reed

18.03.09 by Jeff

Justin James Reed

Justin James Reed photography. I’m not sure what lens he uses but I like how flat and abstract everything becomes.

justin james reed photography photographer

« PREV POST / NEXT POST »

Comments

http://www.jolinras.com Jolin

its just the angle he is shooting with, easily achieved.
http://www.jeffhamada.com/ jeffhamada

well yes and no – i have only basic photography knowledge but i would think the lens affects the depth of field and how much you can stop-down.
Cody

I agree with Jeff the photographer would have had to shoot at some sort of telephoto lens length with a high aperture. Awesome find and awesome work!
http://www.jeffhamada.com/ jeffhamada

ya ^ i just meant to be able to shoot and have that super long depth of field, you couldn’t shoot wide open – so you couldn’t achieve those photos with any lens.
http://waxyphotography.com Waxy

It is likely a telephoto but, even more important, I suggest that he’s using a perspective correction, either with a tilt-shift lens or via Photoshop. Not even a ladder would allow JJR to achieve these straight lines, particularly in numbers 2, 5 and 8.
http://flickr.com/photos/dutchct/ dutch

It also helps that a lot of the photos are taken on gray cloudy days.
Pingback: Doobybrain.com | Justin James Reed photography
Cody

all of these things put together even! its a cool but subtle effect. i’m diggin it.
http://andrewhefter.com Andrew

He is more likely using a large format camera or a tilt-shift/perspective control lens. I lean towards the former though, given the format of the images is all 4:5 and the tones are rather naturalistic (i.e. done with film).
http://blog.twenty2wo.com AdamBeneke

I would have to agree and say its a large format camera. Great work though. I love that first image.
http://www.streetlevel-photography.com Liam

A telephoto lens flattens perspectives and perceived subject distance. A wide angle lens tends to exaggerate them.

It also looks to me like he is using a view camera (4×5 or 8×10). Probably with a moderately long lens – maybe 210mm or 300mm or so (on 4×5). The exception being the shots under the electrical wires, those look to be a wider lens… 135mm ish.

Wonderful stuff. Glad you posted it.
http://redblank.com non-building

oh, come on people… who cares about equipment!? what a yawn-fest!

instead, let’s talk about the ideas that are fostering this work: the ex-urban condition / the relationship between built and non-built environments / or how about his use of orthographic composition and the fact that many of these images are more like drawing than photography.

equipment is always subservient to concept – never the other way around.
http://www.jeffhamada.com/ jeffhamada

yea i really wish i hadn’t put in that bit regarding the lens it was more of a passing comment–

I really enjoy the geometric shapes and negative space. similar to Kim Holtermand in that sense
http://www.streetlevel-photography.com Liam

Fair enough.

In many ways the work is reminiscent of Murakami’s paintings – at least in the superficial uber flattening of the field.

And the emphasis on texture and pattern carries these well beyond the par for this type of image, which usually tend more towards a Steven Shore beautiful banality.

Wish I had more contemporaries to draw comparisons to… but then I’d just be pulling shit out of my ass. If you’ll pardon the expression.
http://justinjamesreed.com Justin

Andrew nailed it, I shoot 4×5 using rises and falls to achieve my perspective. The lens is a straight up 150mm, which is equivalent to 50mm on a 35mm. Thanks for the post!
http://www.jeffhamada.com/ jeffhamada

really great work Justin!
Pingback: Other Little Magazines #12 – On Photography | shrapnel contemporary