The final pictures are so heavily over-produced that they look incredibly fake-- which is a shame and leaves me totally baffled. It looks like someone literally painted the figure on the picture.
The only time anxiety kicked in was the picture of the whole team posing for a shot at the corner.
If I were you, I'd take another crack at a few with the opposite approach--hide the safety gear but otherwise show the amateur costumes honestly, bad lighting, flaws and all. It would deliver a much deeper version of the empowerment message you're going for in the text of your post.
Seeing a super-hero in a dangerous position is not really impactful--that's what superheros do.
Seeing a regular person who is trying to look like a superhero (but subtly failing) in a dangerous situation tells all sorts of stories about the roles we each imagine and hope for ourselves--and the fronts we put up for other people.
I'd actually love another go to create these images all over again. If I can find another rooftop, I would definitely give it a second shot. Thanks for the feedback!
Oh my. Yes, the raw untouched photos - with all safety equipment showing - activate a completely different part of my brain. Now I know these are real people, really leaning over the edge of a skyscraper.
It was a bit like seeing the Mission Impossible movie and admiring the great CGI that made it look like Tom Cruise was swinging from a rope off the side of the Burj Khalifa, and then seeing the "making of" video and realizing he was swinging from that rope.
I figure, if you are going to process the image so heavily, why bother even using a real rooftop. These images don't look real. They are, so why shouldn't they?
You know what? And I say this with all respect: screw how s/he feels.
This is art. And it's not art of the kind where I decide to strip down to my underwear, decide to throw spaghetti and sauce at a large white canvas and say, "hey look at what I created".
What you've done is impressive and I'm willing to bet unlike anything anyone else commenting on this post has ever done.
It's cool. It's edgy. It's different.
Sure he's got an opinion, and that's fine. He likes RAW better than your final shots but so what? He might also like my spaghetti splattered canvas.
Your shit is cool--cool enough that you think it's worth showing and therefore, cool enough for you to be proud of it the way it is.
I'm glad someone else had the same reaction. I also thought they looked like composited photos, so what's the point? I really liked the post and the thought behind the project though, so I felt like an A-hole.
This was exactly my thought too. Why bother with all this hustle when the final images are so blurred that they might as well have been painted from the start. :-O
There was a trend in photography that began at the end of the 19th century called Pictorialism, which emphasized soft focus and significant retouching[1]. It began to fall out of fashion in the nineteen-teens when its most prominent voice, Alfred Stieglitz, embraced modernism[2]. Interestingly, even Ansel Adams started as a pictorialist before embracing "straight" photography. Adams became an incredibly outspoken critic of pictorialism, going so far as to call the last well-known pictorialist, William Mortensen, "the antichrist" years after Mortensen's death[3].
Of course, these things have a way of going full-circle, and—today—digital pictorialism is the big thing. It'll pass in a few years.
> The only time anxiety kicked in was the picture of the whole team posing for a shot at the corner.
Especially the one guy giving a thumbs up toward the middle left. There's no way he's tied in and he's standing on the ledge. One misstep by anyone there and he goes over. At least that's the way it looks.
Totally agree; I think the project is absolutely brilliant and a perfect idea, wonderfully executed, but the final images have a "fake" look that just kills them.
It shouldn't be hard to produce another rendering from the same sources though.
From the GIF, it looks like the people were tied in, and the tie-in gear was then photoshopped out. Which means that in terms of the truth of the situation, it's not much more impactful than simply photoshopping the people onto the ledge in the first place.
If people want to see the real thing, take a look at:
there are enough videos out of Asia and Russia if you want to feel real anxiety. The daring do of so many young people never ceases to amaze me.
While I appreciate the attempt to artfully present this type of thrill seeking little beats a go pro on a stick or one handed hanging from building framework. Dressing up makes it too hollywood and who needs that when real life is all more impressive
this tends to be the style for the professional/marketing photo business. Realism is not actually the goal. Glossy eye-popping photos (think HDR) are what the customers actually want. If you want natural-light and documentary-style photos, that is better suited for an "art" photographer, not a "commercial" one.
That rigging looked outrageous. All I saw was one guy holding onto the models. If a model slipped and fell, that guy won't have stood a chance in holding them back.
Hopefully the person was themselves hooked into the roof, and the rigging was hooked into the roof, with him acting on belay. But I certainly didn't see that.
I'm so glad nothing bad happened, but this seemed irresponsible from a safety and technical standpoint.
Everything was doubly tied down, don't worry :) The person holding was there simply to maintain tension the entire way as the models walked from the side to the edge. As for the camera, the flex comes from the metal itself but it was also extra secured with straps in the event that anything fell loose.
Obviously you were using a small lightweight camera, but a single c-stand and a few sandbags is not really adequate for this sort of work. Yeah, it'll work fine 99 times out of 100. It's the 100th time that you overengineer for. Those rotary clamps sometimes fail, eg because sufficient strain and a history of overtightening causes one of the screw threads to shear, and then your arm slides right out despite the sandbag on the end. In windy environments the momentary strains are much higher than the steady one of the weight.
Had that happened in this case, the arm and the camera would have been traveling at >100mph when it hit the ground, on the busiest streets in the city. When you rig something that could put someone else at risk, rather than just what's attached to the rig, you build with the assumption that each individual component may catastrophically fail.
At the very least, you should have had a second stand farther back with an arm clamped to the near end of your working arm, plus you should have one person on each stand whose only job is to watch the stand. What you have here is OK for the height of a garden shed or the deck of a low-rise apartment building. It's absolutely not OK for the roof of a skyscraper, man.
And that's with the thing just bearing the camera load. You had the models using your load-bearing stand, which you are holding with only one hand, to steady themselves as they step up on the edge wall. They're gripping it well above your point of contact. If one of them lost it, s/he would have pulled the whole rig down, exponentially increasing the chances of the arm coming free. Or the camera coming off its mount. Or the ballast bag on the arm vaulting over the side.
Fort that matter, at the start of the video you're leaning out videotaping yourself with a camcorder that isn't visibly secured to anything and that doesn't have any gaffer's tape securing the battery to the camera. At this height anything that falls presents a deadly danger to the people in the street below. A camcorder battery is certainly heavy enough to kill someone. Sure, you're a careful guy, you've probably never dropped your camera. But even though nobody means to drop a heavy light or an expensive lens or a c-stand or a camera or a sandbag, I've seen it happen many many times in the middle of film production. Shooting without permits is one thing, disregarding well-established safety practices is quite another.
As someone who has spent a fair bit of time working on swingstages, towers and other structures, there's a few things that immediately caught my attention. Yes, I'm going to be that guy.
- As this appears to be a photoshoot for SmugMug, of SmugMug employees, does Smugmug carry the proper class of insurance on their employees to allow this sort of work? In most cases, unless additional coverage was purchased from the insurer, your general "office worker" insurance will not cover this type of work.
- Was the building owner aware of the photoshoot, and did they have the insurance to cover this sort of work?
- Does Von Wong's liability insurance cover this sort of work (especially since he's not tied off when jumping around on the ledges)?
- I don't see a shock absorber attached to the harness, whcih is necessary to limit the forces on the person to 900lbs (body belt) or 1800lbs (harness) in the even of a fall. I also note that the harness looks like it's a climbing harness NOT a proepr fall-arrest harness (the exception I saw was Hell-girl). Generally you must wear a full body harness rated for fall-arrest and be attached using the back D-ring when doing this type of work.
- The tie-off point, while not visible in the video/photos, (generally) must be a certified tie-off anchor or rated to 5000lbs arresting strength. Using a travel limiting device _may_ have been acceptable, but there doesn't appear to be one.
- The webbing making a sharp angle across the roof flashing is also not ideal, as you should be anchored from above in almost all cases.
- Was there a rescue plan in place? Had someone fallen, what would have happened?
If all of these things were taken into consideration and properly addressed, then thank you for doing your due diligence, otherwise I feel like this has OSHA violation written all over it.
I imagine the city of San Francisco also has regulations when suspending equipment beyond a buildings footprint over an active street.
People die regularly from improper fall arrest systems. You were not just doing a fun photo-shoot, YOU were responsible for these people's lives, as well as the lives of anyone walking below.
I will acknowledge that my knowledge relates to the Canadian labour code, but the US regulations appear to be similar.
If this was insured (which I doubt) and a claim was made, the insurer would turn right around and sue Von Wong (as the organizer of the project) for gross negligence. On the preponderance of the evidence stand (ie >50% probability) that obtains in civil litigation, they would almost certainly win.
I don't like making all these negative comments. But I've seen people get seriously injured in entirely avoidable accidents, and could give you numerous examples of fatal accidents on film sets off the top of my head - whenever I read of one I study it carefully to ensure I never make a similar mistake. Film and photo shoots are fun, exciting environments, precisely because they often involve unusual locations, activities, or situations. But because everyone is participating in the pursuit of some larger goal (producing art of some sort) the people in the roles of director/producer have an outsize responsibility, because they are temporarily invested with significant authority to the point that people will put their common sense and personal judgement on hold, akin to Stanley Milgram's famous electric shock experiments, due to the blend of unfamiliarity and micromanagement that the endeavor necessarily involves.
Von Wong, you know what would have really been impressive. If you had taken a moment to show the rigging in the making-of video. Just a walk through of the precautions that you used to showcase what an excellent shoot coordinator you and your team were. Jumping up and taking the crazy selfie was fun and crazy Russian style, leading to a fair degree of narrative power and sweaty palms, but it wasn't good safety promotion on your part. For the dudes that do this, it doesn't always work out for the best - those crazy youtube/liveleak videos sometime come with terrible falls. I've been in shot situations where I'm so glad nothing went wrong, and thankfully we didn't have behind the scenes footage to show how poorly rigged our set up was, but showing your dedication and diligence for the safety of those people that you were shooting would really be a testament to your work. It's my opinion that this bordered on unsafe and irresponsible. It's clear from your other videos that you care deeply about your creative work, you can do better with your technical and safety work as well. I'm glad nothing bad happened.
Being a part of these sorts of shoots is one of my favorite perks of working at SmugMug, hands down. Reminds me of art school when my friends would try to convince me to be a part of their crazy photo shoots, except this time the photographers are quite a bit better.
To date, Ben has...
- Lit my head on fire
- Taught me to breathe fire[1]
- Stuck me under a rain machine[2] while I lifted a giant tire infested with spiders
- Popped a balloon full of curdled green milk over my head
Never a dull moment, and there's always an amazing photo afterwards to immortalize the moment (for better or worse).
What it is about our minds that make it so easy to imagine being up there, on the ledge, looking down, maybe with one foot over... and my palms are sweating heavily already.
It's a bit like having a child; I now spend nights worrying about the most ridiculous events that could happen to my daughter.
Because 99.9% of the time those inbuilt reflexes are what keep you and others alive; people who don't have them get Darwin awards.
I was glad to see they used safety equipment, especially since they were working with non-professionals, but I was annoyed that they didn't mention it in the article and played it down in preference of the breathless self-affirming schtick. Safety protocols matter, because they're what makes the difference between everyone going home after having done something difficult and had a life affirming experience, and going home with PTSD or not going home at all.
The photographer standing on the corner of the building with no safety so he can take a selfie? Fuck him. Doing that on your own or with similarly risk-tolerant friends? OK, enjoy your dangerous hobby, I can appreciate your enjoyment of it as a spectator and relate indirectly to high-risk situations I am comfortable with. Involving an audience of people (on the rooftop) while demonstrating such a disregard for safety? Horrible passive-aggressive behavior that burdens everyone else with significant mental and legal risk, not to mention his employer.
If this took place in a professional context (eg of a commercial film/photo shoot) that would be an instant firing offense of the never-hire-this-person-again variety. If you're going to do dangerous stuff in a group of mixed ability, you have an ethical and professional obligation to adhere to and demonstrate the highest safety standards. If you want an entourage to witness how badass you are (as opposed to leveraging that through your creative work) then you're a walking liability.
Edit: I see Von Wong arrived here at the discussion. I'm going to leave the above up unedited, not to be personally insulting but because it expresses my sincere annoyance about this issue.
> The photographer standing on the corner of the building with no safety so he can take a selfie? Fuck him. Doing that on your own or with similarly risk-tolerant friends? OK, enjoy your dangerous hobby
If he falls or drops any equipment, he puts the people below him at risk of fatal injury. This isn't just a question of showing off for an audience, it's a question of the safety of bystanders.
As others have said, the level of safety demonstrated here appears negligently insufficient to match the risk to the photographic subjects and to bystanders below, machismo aside.
I was struck by his genuine self-confidence and lack of fear. It didn't come off as daredevil machismo at all. I thought it was inspiring.
Von, I'd be curious to know how you reached that level of comfort? Is it just the way you are, do you have training or experience in stunt work, something else?
No doubt, but self confidence != immunity from mistakes. On the side of a mountain, that's one thing, on the side of a skyscraper it imposes risks on other people which they never signed up for. See my comment elsewhere in the thread about the camera rig, for example - sorry, but it's inadequate.
He took his picture while standing on a flat platform next to something scary. You cursing him out and imagining how "passive-aggressive" his behavior is seems utterly bizarre to me and I could not disagree more with how you're portraying the situation.
Ah but standing there on that ledge and looking down knowing that the slightest mis-step could mean the end, where none of your worries past or future matter except the present... That feeling is so magical <3 !
I'm not sure why you got downvoted for this, but I wanted to say that the point you're trying to make is not in vain. Different people have different risk tolerances, and even enjoy different levels of risk: and, of course, we combat fear of risk by having knowledge of what the real consequences are and what our limits are. Some of the pieces that highlight Alex Honnold's work [1] as a free solo climber bring to fore a very similar experience: the emptiness and clarity inside you of knowing that you must focus 100% on what you're doing is said to be quite liberating.
It sucks but its the same aspect of our mind that thinks up the amazing things like skyscrapers and cameras that we're then able to build. Imagination. :)
For contrast look up stories of the woman with a damaged amygdala who literally has no fear whatsoever. She has to have people around her to keep her from doing dumb things like pick up poisonous snakes.
I get the chills just looking at those photos, no way you could get me within 20ft of that ledge. Really cool pictures though, congrats on pulling it off.
Quote: "I wanted to capture the fearlessness of superheroes – without a green screen or cheap special effects."
But they were all tethered with safety harness and then evidence was removed in photoshop. How is that "magical, one mis-step would mean end"?
Sorry, but I thought the premise of this was daredevil stunts from ordinary people, but this is no different than greenscreen or cheap special effect which u seem to deride.
According to the comments in this thread, the safety harness and other equipment was inadequate enough that they actually were one step from death - so it was more daredevil than he intended?
It's like riding a roller coaster or doing a bungee jump -- you know intellectually that you're strapped in tight and therefore safe; but your lizard brain, the part that operates at a deep subconscious level, doesn't get that message, so it's still scary and/or thrilling.
Professional Rigger here (SPRAT & IRATA Certified) & logged thousands of hours as a safety supervisor around the world mostly on wind turbines, but also on bridges & buildings (Guggenheim, MetLife Stadium, etc.).
I have a bone to pick with the safety setup for this photoshoot. SmugMug staff should be concerned...
There are 2 types of fall protection rigging setups for this corner of the building scenario - Fall Arrest & Fall Restraint. Both have to do with the ability of the person to go "over the edge" in the case of a fall.
Fall Arrest is when the person has fallen over the edge of the building and they are arrested with the rigging equipment from falling and hitting the pavement 1,000 feet below.
Fall Restraint is a rigging system that restrains the person from falling over the edge in the first place.
From the video and photos it looks like Von Wong is a bit of a wahoo adrenalin nut[0] and though he and the team had good safety intentions, there are some serious safety issues I would like to point out. And next time please contact me so we can do this safely.
I am going to use this photo[1] and this photo[2] to point out safety flaws.
In these photos I see an Anchor on the I-beam (photo[1] left image red friction protection), a rock climbing harness for Body Ware, I see the connector with webbing, but I don't see a deceleration device. A fall arrest system consists of 4 items ABCD: Anchor, Body Ware, Connector & Deceleration Device. From this setup i'll assume the rigging plan was to build a fall restraint system to prevent their subjects from falling over the edge because there is no deceleration device.
There are just a few problems with this logic that lead to serious safety concerns. As we can see in photo[2] there is:
a) a hand holding the webbing "preventing" a fall, this is not a fall restraint system, it adds slack to the system that increases forces in the case of a fall (this is more apparent in the .gif: http://www.vonwong.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/1-VbF...
You can see the black rope coiled up and moving, not cool. EDIT: It looks like the subject is attached via lanyard to the "safety" guy. In the case of a fall he is in the system preventing himself from performing a rescue.
b) the subject could fall off either side of the "point" of the building as the anchor is not around the I-beam in the frame, but out of frame to the right (making the length of the lanyard longer and increasing the force of the fall especially if she fell to the right)
c) that granite edge acts as a knife and webbing doesn't stand a chance being dragged across it if they fall over the edge,
d) because this is a fall arrest scenario there are serious forces on the system if the subject falls over the edge, especially if they are standing up! (the higher they are above the anchor the more potential energy they have).
These are really interesting photos, just when you do them be smart and rig it correctly.
Thank you so much for doing a more detailed examination of the shoot, and offering your services in support to the photographer and to SmugMug. The safety on this shoot was terrible, and I'm so glad, considering how trusting and nervous the employees were, that nothing bad happened. But this type of reckless shooting, either for film, photo or video, needs to be addressed. Thank you for bringing this up as well. People don't understand how easy, and unforgiving a slip can be in conditions like this.
I was at Pinnacles National Monument when a lead climber swung around and pivoted out of his harness, resulting in a fatal fall. The whole process took about a second. It literally happened in the blink of an eye, and there was nothing anyone could do to stop it.
Reminds me of Li Wei's famous skyscraper photo sessions [1] in which the artist is seen being kicked off the top and suspended outside a window, amongst other similarly daring photographs. Only a minimal use of post-processing to simply remove the fine wires attached.
Seeing these pictures reminds me of this video of workers climbing a 1700ft TV tower [0]. Its pretty intense even to just watch, that is some real-world superhero courage right there!
something about this makes me incredibly nervous and provokes a lot of anxiety, I can't even look at these photos. that said, I'm sure that is the sort of emotion they are looking to elicit, well done!
The only time anxiety kicked in was the picture of the whole team posing for a shot at the corner.