Last week Brayden and I dodged puddles on our way to visit photographer Michael Hauptman in his Nolita apartment. There we discussed his OC online editorial, his recent trip to India, and his book, Notes on, Something LIke Life Should Be.
Gillian Tozer: So, how did you come about shooting the latest OC editorial?
Michael Hauptman: It was a long time coming actually. OC Online's Rory Satran and I had been going back and forth for maybe a year, discussing what I could do for Opening Ceremony. And then they started the editorial section, which suited me perfectly.
GT: Cool. Obviously we’ve all seen the result and it’s beautiful, but how did the shoot go?
MH: Thank you. It was a lot of fun. I’ve only just recently gone out on my own—like a year and a couple months ago—and since then I’ve been doing a lot of portraits for Dazed and Confused and T Style, and shooting bands for Beat. So doing the OC editorial was only the second proper fashion story that I’ve ever shot. It made me want to do a lot more fashion because it was so much fun. Annabelle was so sweet and there was such a nice vibe. It could’ve been a total disaster; we shot it on Halloween and only two days before there was that freak blizzard. It was around the mid-50s when we shot it.
GT: Yikes! So the editorial aside, what’s it like being a photographer in New York at the moment, fresh out from underneath Richard Burbridge’s wing?
MH: It definitely has its ups and downs. I was happy to stay with Richard as long as I did because my style is the antithesis of his—he’s so extremely technical, which is great. I admire Richard’s work ethic and his ability as a photographer, but I always felt confident that when I went out on my own I would never be a baby Burbridge.
These days, there are so many people doing the exact same thing—not just in photography but in every field. And it just feels like there is a complete over-stimulation because of the web. I just try to focus on who I am, what I want to get across, and what I feel. I believe that’s the only thing you can really do to separate yourself.
GT: Did you have your own aesthetic going into the assisting role, or did it develop over time?
MH: No, it developed over time. I never wanted to rush things and it took me a long time to figure out my aesthetic and myself. The most important [aspect] of my photography is that it is a total reflection of who I am as a person, whether it's a drawing or a photograph. So I took my time developing my style. I think over the four years I worked for Richard that really came to fruition.
GT: Do you shoot on film as a way to differentiate yourself from other photographers?
MH: I just feel most comfortable with film. Digital is so expensive: I don’t have $30,000 at my disposal to get the same results as Richard, for example. A big thing for me is the ISO—the speed of the film—and that’s something that digital still lacks. You still can’t shoot that fast on digital without it really compromising the image quality. So it’s not even so much a conscious choice, more of a "you gotta do what you gotta do" kind of thing.
GT: And the painting over the images and ab
Gillian Tozer: So, how did you come about shooting the latest OC editorial?
Michael Hauptman: It was a long time coming actually. OC Online's Rory Satran and I had been going back and forth for maybe a year, discussing what I could do for Opening Ceremony. And then they started the editorial section, which suited me perfectly.
GT: Cool. Obviously we’ve all seen the result and it’s beautiful, but how did the shoot go?
MH: Thank you. It was a lot of fun. I’ve only just recently gone out on my own—like a year and a couple months ago—and since then I’ve been doing a lot of portraits for Dazed and Confused and T Style, and shooting bands for Beat. So doing the OC editorial was only the second proper fashion story that I’ve ever shot. It made me want to do a lot more fashion because it was so much fun. Annabelle was so sweet and there was such a nice vibe. It could’ve been a total disaster; we shot it on Halloween and only two days before there was that freak blizzard. It was around the mid-50s when we shot it.
GT: Yikes! So the editorial aside, what’s it like being a photographer in New York at the moment, fresh out from underneath Richard Burbridge’s wing?
MH: It definitely has its ups and downs. I was happy to stay with Richard as long as I did because my style is the antithesis of his—he’s so extremely technical, which is great. I admire Richard’s work ethic and his ability as a photographer, but I always felt confident that when I went out on my own I would never be a baby Burbridge.
These days, there are so many people doing the exact same thing—not just in photography but in every field. And it just feels like there is a complete over-stimulation because of the web. I just try to focus on who I am, what I want to get across, and what I feel. I believe that’s the only thing you can really do to separate yourself.
GT: Did you have your own aesthetic going into the assisting role, or did it develop over time?
MH: No, it developed over time. I never wanted to rush things and it took me a long time to figure out my aesthetic and myself. The most important [aspect] of my photography is that it is a total reflection of who I am as a person, whether it's a drawing or a photograph. So I took my time developing my style. I think over the four years I worked for Richard that really came to fruition.
GT: Do you shoot on film as a way to differentiate yourself from other photographers?
MH: I just feel most comfortable with film. Digital is so expensive: I don’t have $30,000 at my disposal to get the same results as Richard, for example. A big thing for me is the ISO—the speed of the film—and that’s something that digital still lacks. You still can’t shoot that fast on digital without it really compromising the image quality. So it’s not even so much a conscious choice, more of a "you gotta do what you gotta do" kind of thing.
GT: And the painting over the images and ab