Terry Richardson and Miley Cyrus, at it Again (NSFW)

This article contains images and/or video that the editors have flagged as NSFW (Not Safe for Work).
To view this content you must be logged in to your Fstoppers account.
Terry Richardson and Miley Cyrus, at it Again (NSFW)

Terry Richardson and Miley Cyrus are completely, as you'd say in middle school terms, MFEO. Or made for each other if you can't remember that far back. They both have taken the spotlight and thrust it upon themselves by stepping out of the box and making people want to see whatever they're going to do next. Apparently in their world it just means a whole lot of nudity which may or may not entail Miley thrusting herself into an Arizona Grapeade.

If there is one thing you have to give credit to Terry for, it's the fact that he is consistent and can turn out a editorial like nobody's business. And since the photography community loves to talk about him and like it or not, everyone loves a good Miley Cyrus story, I figured I'd leave you with the gems that have come out of their most recent shoot.

If you would like to view more, head over to the archives at Terry's Diary.

[Via: Terry's Diary]

 

 
Log in or register to post comments

155 Comments

You have a point. But these images aren't about gear, technique, numbers, heart, mind or emotion. They are about a half/nearly all naked celebrity. It is less about photo skill and more about reputation/networks/business sense.

Savi You's picture

I see what he's doing. I understand it as well. There was a TED speaker that spoke about this very same thing. Make images that get people talking...good or bad. These "style" of photos that TR makes are the ones that gets everyone talking. I'm sure he can shoot technically amazing photos with artful composition but no one is going to talk about that. Here he has Miley, who is the most talked about persons on the planet right now, doing things on camera that's practically Hustler material. It's genius.

I have to say that I don't like his work for three reasons, two of which are personal based on my own tastes.

Personally, I don't like the aesthetic. It is intended to look amateurish, but I don't think it is pulled off with any finesse, so they simply aren't to my taste.

Also personally, I think they are a juvenile depiction of human sexuality. I have no problem with nudity or depictions of sexuality, but Richardson's body of work never seems to go beyond the most basic and, to me, the most lewd, aspects of sexuality. He seems to be shocking for the sake of the shock, and I find that very tiring.

Outside of my taste, I don't think he says anything with his photos. I am not even talking about anything deep. An image that is nothing but beauty (or lack of beauty, even) has something to say with the style, but Richardson's style just seems.... well, pointless. I am not saying there isn't something there, but so far, I can't see it and no one has ever been able to explain it to me. Usually pro-Richardson arguments are like this: He makes lots of money. That isn't good enough for me.

The pro-Richardson arguments who base it on the money he make are ill thought-out, i agree.

Instead, have a quick think of the people in his portfolio. Richardson has shot a lot of the most high profile people... and i think its for this reason.

Celebrities, actors, singers and so on are having their picture taken weekly... photographer after photographer, story after story, concept after concept.

99% of the shoots these people attend there is an art director, and a group of producers, theres lighting everywhere, people running around because everything has to be perfect.... the subject then walks into the room and is placed into someones art.

its set up, its contrived, its safe

Then someone like Richardson comes along with his point and shoot and pop up flash and makes it all about the subject.

His skill is walking into the room and getting the subject at their most relaxed, at their most exciting, and at their most natural states.

He makes his subjects feel beautiful, and feel they can express who they really are.

By no means is he the first to do this... just watch David Bailey on set. Who doesn't even stand behind his camera. He is in the set, up close and personal, interacts and gets his subject at their best... and fires remotely when he sees those micro expressions.

That is our job as photographers, and sadly there aren't as many doing that as there should be...

Why are Richardsons pictures so popular?

Because the viewer looks on and feels they are experiencing the real version of Miley, or GaGa, (or insert your favourite celeb here)... not the version the publicists and the art directors are trying to sell.

Thank you. For the first time I have heard something that makes sense as an appreciation for Richardson.

It still doesn't change my personal opinion about him or his work (my taste and everything), but at least now I can understand what others see in it.

Great reply!

If the real version of Miley Cyrus is a girl licking her reflection in the mirror then she really is fucked.

I couldn't agree more. I don't believe this is the "real" Miley. This is the Miley that is for sale. I don't believe he captured anything more than what Miley is trying to sell.

Exactly! I couldn´t explain it better! Cudos

Sorry, but no!

If the model hadn't been MC and thie photog not TR, nobody would have looked at those pictures twice. Most not even once, in fact..
The only reason for images like these to make headline news is celeb status and Two Indecent Texture Surfaces.(sorry if I use profanity for emphasis, but to describe rauncy images it is the adequate language).
->
Mah Cuzz: I'm not sure if the comparison HN TR would do justice to each artist; it would be like comparing van Gogh with Rodin. Or Piccasso with Andy Warholl.
Style be damned, HN was provocative and disturbing. And upsetting. But his lighting was superb, you got to leave him that.
As for money and making a liviing, I am not in the least jealous of any ohter artist; or Andreas Gursky. I still claim that these images do absolutely nothing for me.
Sorry, no.

I never compared them, but its obvious that Richardson studied Newton. By the way, if you look at HN Pics, you can see that he almost everytime used pop up flash or on camera flash. An HN didn´t care about gear either... I just mention the Olympus Stylus Epic he used, a p&s camera
So maybe you can compare them at the end. maybe more like master and padawan ;-)

Maybe...

Helmut Newton saying: "About the gear it is not... trust the force you must! The image you must see!"
TR replying: "Feel the anger! Popup flash is all you need! Join the dark side of on camera lighting!"
While I wouldn't go as far as calling TR the Darth Maul of On- Camera- Lighting, his images simply fail to touch me, provoque me or speak to me. Helmut Newtons images never seem sleazy. While there may be a flash in some mirror, the pose of his models are very deliberate, ther always is something going on in his pictures. Granted, I would never hang any of his pictures in my house (my wife can be very definite about that), his images speak to me.
Whereas with TR, I seem to have a bad connection.

You might want to take another look at Helmut's work. There's almost nothing there that made use of on camera flash.
While both use a theme of sexuality the comparison really ends there.

Sad and pathetic. Richardson has officially graduated to creeper level.

Normally, I like Richardson's work. The first photos not that bad. But the rest = terrible, for lots of reasons.

Jaron Schneider's picture

I also like the scarf shot. It has personality and is well composed. Really disappointed with the rest though. Not sure I'm down with the red eye being acceptable.

Being young and "not fat" does not make a person hot. Miley has succeeded in stealing Calvin's expression. http://www.decalguy.com/pd-calvin-sticking-out-his-tongue-vinyl-decal-st...

Haha!!!

Rodolfo Arechiga's picture

Trash! No matter how you photograph it, still looks like trash! Poor girl needs or tries to prove she is a rebel! Why?

WTF is this doing on FStoppers apart from trying to raise an search engine ranking?

Look at how many people are commenting. People are obviously interested in discussing it. Don't click. There are tons of places to argue over which gear is better.

Agreed OhBoy. He's part of the photography world.

If anyone, who wasnt considered a "famous" photographer produced these images, they would be slated and considered very poor. Over exposed, red eye, horrendous composition, amateur at best!

She needs to get some self respect, and stop try to make people forget that she was hannah montana, we all know it was just a tv program and she should be grateful and not exploit the money and life style it has given her. My opinion of her after todays antic though is one of disgust as she has been totally and utterly disrespectful to Sinead O'Connor and anyone else suffering with mental illness, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24395755) after a photo shoot like this i think Miley Cyrus need to look at her own mental health.

Bruno Inácio's picture

This guy is sooooo biiiiggggg! :D

I love the hater's arguing with the red eyes!
Yeaahh, he forgot to turn on the red eye reduction!
And the retoucher didn't noticed!
And the producer too...
Hey, your already heard the word conceptual?
:D

Research. research. research

Greg Tennyson's picture

I don't care for his style personally but the guy made more money than Justin Bieber last year so he must be doing something right.

That's a damning comparison. I like it.

Never thought Terry Richardson's work was good. Seeing this does nothing to change my opinion.

The debate over Cyrus's overt use of sexuality aside. The are horrible. You can see the photographer in the reflection in one, the lighting, IMO is horrible. It really looks creepy. So if that was what they were going for, then uhmmm..... kudos, mission accomplished.

Giancarlo Pawelec's picture

Terry Richardson is the least talented and skilled photographer in recent years. How on earth he books jobs I have no clue... sure his style is bold and this or that... but it is pure GARBAGE!

Pages