Tuesday, 28 December 2010

Slow Shutter Speeds

Altering the shutter speed of your camera can create some amazing effects if you've got a tripod and something that makes some decent light!

I bought some sparklers for bonfire night and me and my friend Will took some pictures;


These two were the best out of the first attempt, we took them at Otterspool Promenade where it was very windy and cold so we gave up after about 10 minutes! They were taken at f/14, 3.2 seconds, ISO 100.



f/14, 3.2 seconds, ISO 100

The rest were taken in my garden the next day when it wasn't as cold or windy so we got some better shots. The ones of me were taken by Will, you can see some of his pictures on his Flikr.


f/6.3, 6 Seconds, ISO 400


f/4, 10 Seconds, ISO 400

These two are the results of my first attempts at drawing with light, I had to use my phone because I didn't have anything else at the time so it was quite difficult to get right!



I took this of my boyfriend in Wales on Valentines Day, 2010. It was taken using my Canon 450D with a 50mm lens. I could go on forever about how much I love this photograph, but I am not going to be that guy!

I don't often say it, but he is definitely my favourite.

Delamere Forest

Finally got round to scanning all of my medium format negs from Delamere Forest and had a mess around with them on photoshop. I used some different filters and changed the levels slightly






These are some of my favourite photographs which I took for an assignment on non urban landscapes. They were all shot on my Bronica and as you can see from the results it's an amazing camera! I think i'm finally coming round to Photoshop, I used to absolutely hate using it but since I've found tutorials like THIS ONE it's been a lot easier to use and a lot more fun!

Monday, 27 December 2010

Blink 182

I got bored tonight, so I decided to scan in the album sleeve from Blink 182's Enema of the State in bits and then I messed around with brushes in Photoshop sticking it back together



I used sticky tape brushes from THIS great blog, and brushes i've used previously for putting marks on the image to make it look old and worn. I think it turned out alright!

If you use it please credit me and don't steal it! Thanks!

Sunday, 12 December 2010

35mm; Types of Camera and How to Use Them

35mm is a great place to start if you want to get involved in film photography, as it is much easier than medium or large format in many ways.

So How Does it Work?

If you've used a DSLR with manual settings before, you shouldn't find it too difficult to use a 35mm film camera, as the principles are pretty much the same. If the aperture and shutter speed settings aren't correct, your image will come out either under or overexposed, resulting in something like this;

With these of images, I had set the ISO wrong on my light meter (set it to 400 when the film speed was 100) which resulted in the images being extremely underexposed (which is where the bright areas of the image are effectively all white - or 'blown out'). You can tell they have been developed properly because the edges of the film are black, and the writing is perfectly visible. Unfortunatly with overexposed film, there isn't much you can do about it.

So one of the most important things to remember (which I often forget!) is what speed the film is. It may be useful to make a note of the film speed when you put it in to the camera, so that if you want to finish off the roll at a later date, you'll know which settings the camera needs to be at. Another thing which you'll need to remember when loading a film in to a 35mm camera is that the camera has an ISO setting which is usually next to the sutter release. If you pull it upwards, you will be able to turn it to apply the ISO setting. IT IS IMPORTANT that the correct ISO is set before you begin taking pictures. THIS WIKIPEDIA PAGE is quite useful in explaining exposure settings.

Setting up the Camera.
   To load the film, pull A up and the back will pop open.

     The film fits upside down in to the B section, and you can then push A back down to hold it in place. Pull the film along the back of the camera towards C. There is a spool with a slit down the middle, which the film will fit in to. The sprockets running along each side of the film will hook on to those running along the sides of the camera, which will drag the film along when D is pulled to the right (this winds on the film). Once the film is hooked on to the spool, press the shutter and then pull D to check whether the film is moving. If so, the film back can then be closed, and you can continue to press the shutter and wind on the film until a number 1 appears in the window on the top of the camera, which indicates that the film is ready for the first shot. As with the medium format camera, there are a lot of youtube tutorials which show you how to do this. Here is one that may help.

Finding a decent camera.

  Getting your hands on a 35mm camera is very easy (depending on the type you want and how much you are willing to spend!). Ebay is great for second hand cameras, i've bought a few from there myself. This is a 35mm lomo camera priced between £7.99-£9.99, and if you scroll down the page, it shows you some of the results of shooting with this particular camera. This would be a great for a first time user, it is a lomography camera and the images produced may not be to everyones taste. Lomo cameras are mostly made out of flimsy plastic (which is why they are so cheap) and tend to lack in focus, resulting in a dream-like image. If you require more information about lomography, here is a detailed section from my blog.

 Most standard 35mm film cameras look like this:




 There are many many different types of 35mm camera. I have an Olympus OM10 (pictured above) which is a great camera, but there are some other excellent cameras made by a variety of different companies such as Pentax, Canon, Nikon, and of course, Leica. Most of them are very similar in design, so once you've got the hang of one you'll probably be able to use them all. However, Leicas are slightly different.

One big difference is that the viewfinder is on the left of the camera rather than in the middle. Reportage photographers used these cameras a lot because it allowed them to look at what they were photographing with the left eye while they had their right eye to the viewfinder. I have never had the pleasure of using a Leica as they can be very expensive, but they are definitely something which I will be looking in to in the future. If you'd like to see some of the results of shooting with a Leica, this Flikr group is for Leica users and has thousands of photographs taken with various Leica cameras. You can also go to Magnum Photos and search for specific cameras to see the results.

   I would highly recommend an Olympus to anyone who was interested in buying a 35mm camera. It is very easy to load the film in to and is easy to use. The only thing you need to be aware of when using a 35mm camera is that if it doesn't have a built in light meter, you will need to know the correct camera settings for shutter speed and aperture. I have a Sekonic light meter which does this for me, and you can get that HERE for about £100, although you can get some cheaper versions. Light meters are also great for studio photography, as well as any type of film photography. Whenever I take my cameras out, my light meter comes with me.
 
 35mm Photographs. 

  Below is a selection of photographs that I have taken with my Olympus OM10


For more of my photographs taken with a 35mm camera, see my Flikr set 


Wednesday, 8 December 2010

Linda McCartney

This is the second part of my report in which I compared the work of Annie Leibovitz and Linda McCartney. Most of the information came from her book Linda McCartney's Sixties: Portrait of an Era, which again, is a fascinating read and contains absolutely beautiful photographs.

    Unknown to most as a photographer, Linda McCartney produced exceptionally beautiful beautiful images of some of the most influential people in the music and fashion industries in the 1960s. Never before had so many people wanted to be a part of this culture, and with photographs like McCartney’s, it is easy to see why it was so idolised. Her images of some of the most important musicians in the world, which were candidly shot and taken from a fine art perspective rather than from a photographer's, gave the viewer an insight into their closely guarded private lives that other photographers did not have access to. Her friendship with them gave her the opportunity to photograph them in a way that was seen as a friend simply taking a few photographs, rather than a photographer taking pictures for a magazine or to sell for their own personal gain. It is extremely obvious to see that the people McCartney photographed were at total ease with her presence, particularly when looking at images of the Beatles.


    Linda McCartney, formerly Linda Eastman, was born in New York in 1941.[1] Her father was a lawyer who represented fine artists and musicians, and so she grew up around such people as Willem de Kooning and Hoagy Carmichael.[2] With these great influences in her life, it is easy to see why she became so interested in fine art and photography. She studied Art History at the University of Arizona[3], which was where she first became interested in the art of photography.

    After she had finished college, she moved back to New York and got a job working as a receptionist for Town and Country Magazine. It was here that she picked up an invitation to a press conference for the Rolling Stones on a boat called the SS Sea Panther. As she thought that no one at the magazine would be interested in this opportunity, she took the invitation and went herself. She was unaware as to why she was the only photographer ushered onto the boat along with the press, and she had no idea that this opportunity would lead to her being one of the most demanded photographers of the 1960s. When she returned to work, she found that she had every magazine present that day asking for copies of her photographs. The Rolling Stones’ manager had even asked her if he would purchase the negatives from her, to which she replied “I told him he could have as many copies as he wanted, but I was not selling the negatives”[4].
  



    McCartney had a knack for always being there at the right moment. She claimed that they key was to always have her camera with her, as she never wanted to miss an opportunity. She shamelessly admitted that she had a severe lack of technical knowledge, and that most of her photographs were taken in black and white, as it was easier to compensate for an incorrect exposure. The photographs taken of The Rolling Stones helped her to move on from her job at Town and Country and become a freelance photographer. She developed fond friendships with many bands and artists at the time, such as Janis Joplin, Simon and Garfunkel, Jimi Hendrix, and most famously, The Beatles, and her photographs have featured in such infamous magazines as Rolling Stone.





    Her relationship with Paul McCartney helped her to gain a close friendship with John Lennon and Yoko Ono, enabling her to capture intimate photographs of their life in the way that no one else could. Her documentation of the music and fashion scene at the time is extremely unique, and it is very easy to gain a sense of what it must have been like at the time to be involved in such an aspired to group of people. She created photographs that could not be replicated, and images that could be considered as art and not simply a photograph. They show the freedom of spirit that was felt by many, despite extreme political disasters such as the assassination of JF Kennedy and Martin Luther King, and the threat of a nuclear war(after the US government discovered Cuban and Soviet governments placing nuclear missiles in Cuba[5] in 1962). This created a state of panic throughout the world, especially in the Britain, as the government had agreed to let the USA place nuclear missiles on the United Kingdom, so as to be closer to Russia if a war broke out.
 
    When looking at McCartney’s photographs, the troubles of the 1960’s seem like a completely different decade. She had an ability to capture some of the most idolised people in a way that makes them look like they were the most important people in the world.


[1] http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01185/arts-graphics-2008_1185494a.jpg
[2] McCartney, L, 1993, Linda McCartney’s Sixties: Portrait of an Era, First Edition, Bulfinch
[3] http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0565371/bio
[4]McCartney, L, 1993, Linda McCartney’s Sixties: Portrait of an Era, First Edition, Bulfinch
[5] http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/kennedy_cuban_missile_01.shtml

Sunday, 5 December 2010

Annie Leibovitz

This is an extract taken from a case study in which I compared the work of what I believe to be two of the greatest female photographers, Annie Leibovitz and Linda McCartney. Below is the section on Annie Leibovitz. The images were taken from the book Annie Leibovitz At Work which is a fantastic read.


    Described as one of the greatest American portrait photographers, Annie Leibovitz has produced some of the most controversial photographs of her time. Images such as a naked and heavily pregnant Demi Moore featured on the cover of Vanity Fair and the picture of Whoopi Goldberg in a bath of milk were rarely seen on the pages of magazines in the early 90s. Over the last 40 years she has become heavily involved in the fashion, music and advertising industries and has become one of the most critically acclaimed and well known photographers of all time.
    Leibovitz trained as a painter at the San Francisco Art Institute, but stated that “photography seemed like a faster medium than painting”[1]. She attended photography night classes and a workshop during her years at college, and it was those that led her to realise that photography was what she wanted to do. During the Vietnam War, she went to Israel with her camera to take some pictures, and also photographed anti-war rallies and protests against the War and the invasion of Cambodia. Her boyfriend at the time persuaded her to take these images to the art director of Rolling Stone and one of her images of a demonstration at City Hall was used on the cover of a special issue dedicated to campus riots and protests.
    Coming from an artist’s background, Leibovtiz was taught never to crop or edit her photographs, but now she was working for a magazine, she had to take more of an active role in her images, as they would only have been changed by an editor in a way which she did not approve of. Her early work consisted mainly of reportage images, and she considered herself more of a photojournalist than a portraitist in her early years. In regards to music, she stated, “id missed the most important moment. I had never photographed Jimi Hendrix or Janis Joplin, both of whom died in the fall of 1970”[2], to which it seems she was quite disappointed about. However, she did get the opportunity to photograph one of the most musically and visually entertaining rock and roll bands of all time when she toured with The Rolling Stones in the early 1970s.




    Her first opportunity to photograph them came when they toured in San Francisco in 1971. She went along with them while they played in a few different cities, and three years later was asked to be their tour photographer. “Mick asked me to be their Cartier-Bresson. I’m not sure what he meant by that[3]. As Cartier-Bresson is renowned for always capturing the exact moment when something wonderful happens, I believe that Jagger wished for Leibovitz to do the same for him and his band. During the tour, she became heavily involved in the life of a rock and roll band, feeling that she should participate in whatever they were doing because as their photographer, she was now part of it. This involved a lot of drugs and alcohol and concluded with her ending up in rehab when the tour had finished. “I didn’t know what I was getting myself into. It was unbelievably stupid of me to pick that group of men in that situation to decide to become part of something”[4], however, she claims that having her camera by her side saved her, by reminding her of who she was and what she was there to do, saying that it separated her from them. These images of the Rolling Stones, I find, are particularly beautiful. She has captured, in Mick Jagger’s words, their movement perfectly. Having to adapt to the lighting used on the stage must have been extremely difficult, but she produced exceptionally stunning images with what she had to work with.
    Annie Leibovtiz is particularly notorious for her controversial photographs and approach to taking them. There are well known stories of her upsetting the Queen by asking her to remove her tiara during a photo shoot, (which turned out to be a false accusation that the BBC made a formal apology for) and the image of a heavily pregnant Demi Moore shocked America in the early 90’s, with many supermarkets refusing to sell the issue even with a paper cover to disguise the photograph. These images are a bold statement and show Leibovitz’s creative and artistic side, as well as her no nonsense approach to producing a great photograph.  She has produced many eccentric and visually provocative images of painted artists and actors, such as the images of Steve Martin and Keith Haring below.



    Working for renowned fashion magazines such as Vanity Fair, Leibovitz has been given the opportunity to do what she loves with an extremely large budget, allowing her to produce some of the most beautiful photographs ever seen in the fashion and commercial advertising industries. Although she has stated that reportage photography means the most to her, she cannot deny her talent for creating awe inspiring high fashion images. Her keen eye for what would make a particularly interesting photograph and her artistic side has led to her becoming one of the most critically acclaimed and most demanded photographer of not only her generation but of American photographic history. Although I prefer her early images shot on film with very little editing, there is no denying that her most recent photographs are visually and technically astounding.





[1] Page 13, line 6, Leibovitz, A, 2008, Annie Leibovitz At Work, Second Edition, Great Britain, Jonathon Cape
[2] Page 22, line 4, Leibovitz, A, 2008, Annie Leibovitz At Work, Second Edition, Great Britain, Jonathon Cape
[3] Page 33, line 15, Leibovitz, A, 2008, Annie Leibovitz At Work, Second Edition, Great Britain, Jonathon Cape
[4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u34EcDiHVgY, from the documentary Life through a Lens, 2007

Saturday, 4 December 2010

Airbrushing and Liquifying Continued

I used some more images from the set of my friend Allie to practice with the liquifying tool. Here are some of the results;


I chose this image to work with because the angle was quite unflattering and made her look a lot bigger than she actually is. The tattoo on her arm is a little disfigured as a result of liquifying it so that is something I will need to work on.


This was taken at a much better angle than the previous shot and therefore didn't require much editing, although I slightly liquified the face, waist and legs.


This image is from a test shoot which I did with Steve Collinson who is an amazing fashion photographer from Liverpool. He taught me how to use lighting equipment properly to achieve high end fashion shots. With this image I made the hair and lips fuller and re-shaped the eyebrows, as well as airbrushing it using THIS tutorial. I altered the nose slightly so now the shadow doesn't quite fit, and although I tried to correct it I havn't been able to do so.

Wednesday, 1 December 2010

Nick Knight

Nick Knight is probably one of my favourite photographers. I first came across his work when I was doing my final major project. Knight photographed skinheads in east London in the late 1970s and early 80s. His photographs were a documentation of what was happening at the time. Hostility towards the government and police, violence, political involvement, tattoo culture and the influential music scene were all captured. The photographs were featured in his book "Skinhead", which is essentially a walk-through guide on "how to be a skinhead". I absolutely love these photographs. They are a no frills look at the subculture and they have nothing to hide.




These are just a few images from the book (Knight, N, 1982, Skinhead, Omnibus Press). It is an extremely interesting read as it gives you a history of the subculture as well as a guide to clothes, style and music, and of course the photographs are outstanding. 

Although Knight started out photographing skinheads, he is now much more well known for his work in the fashion industry, producing incredible photographs like these; 




His clientele includes Christian Dior, Swarovski, Calvin Klein, British and Paris Vogue, John Galliano and Alexander McQueen to name a few, and he launched his award winning fashion and photography website SHOWstudio in 2000. 

Knight is truly one of the greatest photographers of our time. He has been extremely influential in the world of fashion photography and continues to produce absolutely amazing photographs.

Thursday, 25 November 2010

Beginners Guide to a Bronica

As you've probably guessed by now, I love film photography, and medium format (or 120) is a particular favourite of mine. I've yet to use my twin lens Rolleicord, but i've had a lot of use out of my Zenza Bronica ETRS.



Unlike a lot of medium format cameras (such as Hasselblad, Minolta, and other Bronica's) the ETRS is not square format (6x6). The frame size of an ETRS is 4.5x6 which makes it rectangular. This is very useful when printing from the negatives, as the frame size is very similar to the 8x10 paper size and means that very little cropping of the actual image needs to be done. Bronicas are fairly easy to use once you've had some practice at loading the film, there's a few youtube tutorials which show you how to do it. This is one of them, although it suggests that you have to take the back off the camera in order to load the film which you don't necessarily need to do. This is a pdf of the instruction manual for a Bronica. The image at the top of the pdf looks slightly diffrerent from the previous image of the Bronica that I posted, this is because they have attatched a viewfinder which means that they don't have to look in the top of the camera to view what they are about to photograph which can make shooting a little easier (although I prefer the original method of viewing the frame), here is an example of what I mean:




and this is the viewfinder:
The instruction manual gives diagrams of what each part of the camera does. I have listed them below;





Medium format cameras have an excellent depth of field (or focal length), obviously depending on what type of lens is being used. My Bronica came with a standard 75mm fixed focus lens, which means that it does not have a zoom feature. I absolutely love the quality of the images it produces. I have used it for everything, from studio shoots to location. A roll of 120 film used in a Bronica allows you to take 16 shots, and this means that you have to carefully frame each image to make sure that you don't waste any. The image you see in the viewfinder will be back to front which can be confusing at first, but with some practice it becomes a lot less noticeable.

These are a few images taken with my Bronica ETRS: 



For more of my images taken with an ETRS see my flikr set.

The most common medium format cameras used in fashion photography are Hasselblads or Mamiyas which can be a little more expensive (particularly Hasselblads if in good condion) and if used today are mostly used with digital backs instead of film, which can be in excess of thousands of pounds. Some may argue that these are better quality cameras than those in the Bronica range, and although I am yet to have used any other types of medium format camera, the Bronica is something which I instantly fell in love with. I love the whole process, from loading the film to developing it in the dark room. It is an amazng process. Medium format photography is something which I think everyone who has an active interest in photography should try, and once they have, digital photography will never feel the same.

Sunday, 21 November 2010

Final Major Project Case Study on Skinheads

For my Final Major, I chose to concentrate on Skinheads. During one of my early assignments which I based on tattoos, I came across an American white supremacist named Curtis Allgier. His face and body are completely covered in tattoos depicting his controversial views. I became fascinated with how people with such radical views think and act and the reasoning behind why they choose tattoos as a method of getting their opinions across.

I studied photographers such as Nick Knight, who photographed skinheads in the 1970s and 80s. Knight is a former skinhead who is now a very well respected fashion photographer, and his photographs of skinheads are some of my favourite images of all time. They are raw and beautiful and honest. 

Below is the case study that I submitted for my Final Major project to co-incide with the practical part which was also concentrated on skinheads. You can view my photographs on my Flikr photostream. I would welcome any feedback on either my photographs or my report, but please do not steal it!



The Evolution of Skinheads from 1967 to the Present Day.
Final Major Project – Case Study
Student: Lucy Williams                                                 Tutor: Stuart Carter
Friday 14th May, 2010





Contents

3.    Introduction
4.    The Birth of the Skinhead
6.    Decline and Revival
7.    Politics and Racism
10.   Defining Characteristics from the sixties to the Present Day
12.   Tattoos and their Relationship with Skinheads
16.   Conclusion
17.   Other Images
18.   Bibliography

  Introduction

     Throughout this study, I will look at how the skinhead subculture has evolved from its emergence in the late sixties, to its continued popularity amongst the working classes in the present day. I aim to discover the true history of skinheads and identify their origins and beliefs, as well as their political and racial views. I am also going to look at the relevance of tattoos within the subculture, in particular, the relationship with tribalism. By studying work by such photographers as Nick Knight and Gavin Watson, I am going to discover why the resurgence of the subculture in the late seventies and early eighties caused the controversy that surrounds the subject today.


The Birth of the Skinhead

       The word “Skinhead” is often perceived as a negative one. To those who are naïve to their history, skinheads are seen as violent and racist. Although this may be true to some skinheads, the first wave of original (traditional or “trads”) skinheads were born out of a multi-racial bond between working class Mods, teddy boys, and Jamaican immigrants who came to London during the 1960s, who had a strong and united hatred for authority and the ruling classes.
     The Mod scene, which was popular in the early 1960s, had begun to divide. While the middle class mods could afford to keep up the trend of expensive clothes and fashionable haircuts, the working class mods were pushed aside, as they could not afford the same luxuries, and as a result, “hard mods” were born. This new subculture separated itself aesthetically from the middle class mods, by their shaven haircuts and a typical British working class men’s style of the time, which consisted of work boots, shirts, tight jeans and braces. Jamaican influences such as ska, reggae and soul music as well as their mannerisms were picked up by the hard mods as a result of living so close to one another, and with that, the skinhead was born

[1].
Fig 1
 

  Decline and Revival

    This culture was short-lived, and by the early 1970s it had somewhat deteriorated due to media hype over their violent and volatile nature. However, by the late 1970s skinheads had resurfaced in Britain as well as internationally[2]. Nick Knight, author of “Skinhead” (Knight, N, 1982), explains that although there was a decline in skinheads around 1972, they never really died out in the east end of London and in industrial areas of the Midlands. He mentions that with the rise of punks and their rivals, the teddy boys, a new breed of skinheads had appeared with very different views to the trads of 1969, and that each of the opposing groups had their own skinhead supporters. While the supporters of the teddy boys mostly remained traditionalists (although some were pro-British and slightly fascist), the followers of the punks were extremely anti-establishment, anti-royalist and anarchic. These were what are known as “anarcho-skins[3]”. Knight states that “the new skins achieved this by reviving the most extreme elements of the old skinhead style and exaggerating them[4]”. The new breed of skinheads are the most well known, and are the reason why skinheads are seen as figures of racial hatred. As they had adopted certain characteristics of traditional skinheads such as the jeans, boots and braces and occasionally the shaven hairstyles (although this was uncommon amongst the supporters of the punk movement who tended to wear mohawks), they were easily recognisable by the public and were an easy target for the media. The swastika was a common symbol displayed by these skins in the form of facial tattoos, and acted as a mark of intimidation as well as a sign of white power amongst some nationalist skinheads.

Politics and Racism

     In the early days, politics had no place within skinhead culture, and it wasn’t until the re-birth in the seventies that politics began to play its part. The National Front, something which today is depicted as going hand-in-hand with skins, emerged as the leading party for neo-Nazi and white power skins the eighties who were opposed to the Conservative Party in power at the time. Formed in 1967, the National Front was a collaboration between three existing parties; the Racial Preservation Society, the British National Party and the League of Empire Loyalists[5]. They essentially stood for the pride of the British, and were unhappy with the amount of immigrants who were being allowed to live in Britain. Racist skins were an ideal target as supporters, and they were easily persuaded by charismatic party members who promised to “put right” what Thatcher had done wrong. Below are some photographs taken by Ian Berry, who has photographed National Front demonstrations and rallies from 1980-2004 which mostly feature skinheads.

  
Fig 2 and 3
     The political side to the skinhead revival is also featured in “This is England”, a British cult film about a 12 year old boy who befriends a group of skins. Director Shane Meadows, who was once a skin himself, comments on the National Front as painting a picture of a “Chruchillian vision of Asian families rowing into the white cliffs of Dover on boats, and that the skinheads would be on the beaches fighting to stop them entering the country”[6]. He states that this is an appealing mindset to adopt as a young working class skinhead, witnessing people in your town in a dire state of poverty due to unemployment, when parties such as the National Front are pointing the finger of blame at immigrants.    
    As I previously stated, the most common misconception shared today about skinheads is that they are all racist. This statement is undeniably true for a small section of the subculture, but the majority of skinheads, particularly traditional skins and members of the Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice (or S.H.A.R.Ps) section of the subculture hold absolutely no racist views. This resonates through the music that they listen to, such as reggae and two-tone, aptly named because they put black and white musicians together to create ska[7]. Media hype and concentration on the small section of neo-Nazi skins, white supremacists such as Curtis Allgier (pictured on the next page), have led people to believe that being a skinhead is a precursor to being a racist. Allgier is currently being held at Salt Lake Penitentiary for charges including capital murder. He was arrested in Salt Lake City on June 25th 2007 after he shot and killed a corrections officer transporting him to a hospital[8].  In an interview for American television channel MSNBC, Allgier freely admits to being a skinhead. He says that “being a skinhead is a way of life, it’s preserving your race, it’s being proud of who you are[9]”.


Fig 4
    However, there is a distinct difference between a neo-Nazi skinhead, which Allgier is, and a traditional skinhead. It is acutely obvious, just from looking at him, that he is racist. His tattoos are mostly symbols with Nazi affiliations. He bears countless swastikas, as well as symbols such as the number “14”, which stands for the 14 word slogan of white supremacists; “we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children”, as shown in the image above. Allgier is what could be described as one of the “new breed” of skinheads, as described in Nick Knight’s book. This new generation of skins, particularly in America, became increasingly racist, and adopted the tough style and attitude of traditional skins and simply exaggerated it.
      As Allgier appeared on numerous news stories across America, it is easy to see why someone who knows nothing about the multi-cultural history of skins would assume that he is what could be described as “typical” of skinheads, when in fact he is in a very small minority. As with any subculture, the media have a tendency to pick the most negative aspects to broadcast, because they will cause the most controversy, and it is this which has brought about the negative image of skinheads that still resonates today.


Defining Characteristics from the Sixties to the Present Day
     With the majority of traditional skins coming from working class backgrounds, it was common that a lot of skinheads were uneducated. Included in Knight’s book, which is essentially a walk-through guide to skinheads and includes photographs he had take during the 1970s, is a letter written by “Harry the Duck”, a 16 year old skin from East London, in 1981. This boy is what could be described as a “typical” skinhead, and as Knight describes; “he is awkward and not especially bright. He is not articulate and he can hardly write. His opinions are none too savoury (still less kosher). He is not a pretty sight”. Knight asked him to write down what he liked about being a skinhead.


Fig 5
 According to Shane Meadows, skinheads were “amongst Britain's first anti-racists, mixing with newly arrived waves of West Indian immigrants with whom they indulged a mutual love of reggae and ska[10]”. This was during 1969 and 1972, and from their revival onward they have become increasingly associated with racism and neo-Nazi ideologies.
     This is England draws light upon the poverty that many working class skinheads faced during the 1980s as well as being poorly educated, indicated by their language and their use of colloquialisms. The film also illustrates their alcohol and drug use, something which photographer Peter Marlow discovered when he met with a group of skinheads from Essex, around the same time that the film was set. His images show young skins sniffing glue on the seafront.
 
Fig 6, 7 & 8
    

Tattoos and their Relationship with Skinheads

One of the most defining characteristics of skinheads is their tattoos. Used as a symbol of pride, intimidation, or racial hatred, tattoos have always been a part of skinhead culture. The word Tattoo originates from the Tahitian words “Tatu” or “Tatau”, “Ta” meaning to mark or strike (according to www.designboom.com’s brief history of tattoos), however, there is no real evidence to suggest that Tahiti was the birthplace of the tattoo. There are a few information sources which claim to know of the first example of a tattooed person. J. Tithonus Pednaud of Made Marvels (www.thehumanmarvels.com) claims that a slave from the Philippines named Prince Giolo, who was put on display by William Dampier in 1691, was the first example of a tattooed man.


Fig 9 – Prince Giolo

Dampier described him as "painted all down the breast, between his shoulders and behind; on his thighs (mostly) before; and in the form of several broad rings or bracelets, round his arms and legs.”[11]

    One of the most famous discoveries of “the first tattooed man” is that of Ötzi, found near Hauslabjoch in the Ötzal Alps on September 19, 1991 (and was subsequently named Ötzi after his place of discovery) by two German hikers. It is highly likely that he was the first example of a tattooed man, as it is estimated that he is around 5300 years old, carbon dated to about 3300BC[12]. The tattoos that covered his body consisted of lines and dots in certain areas, post mortems revealed that he had arthritis in these areas and it was therefore suggested that his tattoos were applied in relation to acupuncture (although there is no evidence for this)[13].

     According to Henk Schiffmacher, author of “1000 Tattoos” (Schiffmacher, H, 2001, TESCHEN), the original meanings of many tribal tattoos, such as those of the Berbers and the Samoans, are that they were applied for medicinal purposes (against rheumatism). This is also common in Egypt and South Africa. These tattoos consisted of a series of patterns, dots and lines in particular areas of the body such as along the back of the leg from the ankle to the knee, because they believed that this could protect against illness. Many tattoos held by tribe members can only be roughly translated, their true meanings may never be discovered as they date back thousands of years and are surrounded by a great deal of mystery as to how they came to be. However, they also serve as a guide to the history of tribes-people through non verbal communication in the deciphering and analysis of tattoos and markings on the body.
  
     The tattoos held by skinheads are very similar to tribal tattoos, in that they are a re-occurring aspect of the whole subculture. As well as some being in “code”, the tattoos displayed by neo-Nazi skinheads such as Curtis Allgier are a prime example for example. One of his tattoos, the numbers “88”, which represent the words “Heil Hitler” (the 8 stands for the eighth letter of the alphabet)[14], are something which other neo-Nazi skins would understand the meaning of.
Tattoos such as “Made in England” for example were commonly displayed on the heads and throats of some skins, such as the photograph taken from Knight’s “Skinhead” of a young man being led away by a police officer wearing the words “MADE IN BRITIAN” proudly on his forehead. The word “skinhead” or “skins” is an extremely common tattoo used amongst skinheads, and can be tattooed anywhere from the face to the fingers as a symbol of self pride.


    Football was also an important part of skinhead culture, and as a result, football related tattoos also became extremely popular. Emblems of the Union Jack are common amongst nationalist and traditional skinheads, as well as images of bulldogs and other symbols relating to British pride. These act as a badge of honour and something which displays loyalty to their country.


  
Fig 13 & 14




Conclusion


    Having researched many aspects of the subculture, it is clear that society’s views about skinheads are fairly misled. Largely perceived as racist, their origins of a multi-cultural alliance against the ruling classes and authority are forgotten by most. Admittedly, I assumed this presumption before my research was conducted, mainly because of the negative press that skinheads receive, their intimidating appearance, and the depiction of racial hatred in such films as “American History X” and “This is England”. This controversial subculture is often disregarded by those who can only scratch the surface of something which is much deeper than they could ever imagine it to be. From the films I have watched and the books and articles that I have read, I have gained an appreciation for those who come from nothing and stand up for what they believe in. 
      Although I do not condone the violent and volatile nature that the majority of skinheads demonstrate, I feel it necessary to draw light upon the reason that they exist today, and to make sure that their origins within West Indian culture are not forgotten.


[1] http://libcom.org/history/1960-today-skinhead-culture
[2] From the sections “Decline” and “Revival", Knight, N, 1982, Skinhead, Omnibus Press
[3] From the definition given by: www.skinheadrevolt.com
[4] Page 23, line 22, Knight, N, 1982, Skinhead, Omnibus Press
[5] http://www.national-front.org.uk/nfhistory.htm
[6] http://www.thisisenglandmovie.co.uk/#/skinhead/ from the section “Skinhead 80s”
[7] http://invereskstreet.blogspot.com/2009/09/skinheads-cult-of-trouble-by-ian-walker.html
[8] http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/08/23/face-of-hate-curtis-allgier-explained/
[9] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3u5yH3ryH4
[10] http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1617295,00.html, - Christopher Thompson, Time Magazine 2007.
[11] J. Tithonus Pednaud; http://princegiolo.blogspot.com/2007/11/who-is-prince-giolo.html
[12]History of Tattoos” – Designboom, http://www.designboom.com/history/tattoo_history.html
[13]History of Tattoos – Bronze Age” – Designboom, http://www.designboom.com/history/tattoo_history.html
[14] Curtis Allgier’s Tattoos and their Meanings; http://www.deseretnews.com/photos/4295133a.jpg