Burgers and snap shots

click photo to enlarge
When we were in Seville recently we came upon TGB, also known as The Good Burger, and in Spanish, La Buena Hamburguesa. What drew my attention wasn't the idea that I could have a burger from a place that positioned itself above McDonald's, Burger King and all the other fast food burger outlets, but the bold, illuminated window sign. In the dark of the evening it caught my eye because nearby it took a little effort to decipher but from across the street it was very easily read.

I'm not a patron of the mainstream burger bars. In fact, I don't frequent the upmarket competitors either, though I have had, over the years, a couple of what in London are often called "gourmet burgers"! However, I do enjoy, now and then, a burger of my wife's making. It's what I consider to be a good burger because it comprises good quality beef and tasty, nutritious bread buns that my wife has made. The meat and the bread are the essence of any good burger, and if the former is well cooked and any garnish is sufficient to complement the essentials without overpowering them, then I am usually going to be happy with the offering. I see that this particular Spanish chain prides itself on quality ingredients and their preparation. And I can see how that would appeal to some Spanish people and some visitors. But not this one: for me being in Seville involves sampling Spanish food, particularly the tapas of that city, not a food that is now an international offering. Though we didn't have a burger I did get from the shop a photograph that pleased me. It was a  snap shot (not a snapshot) taking quickly as a person passed by, their silhouette breaking up the words and catching outlining illumination from the shop sign lights.

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Photo Title: The Good Burger, Seville
Camera: Sony RX100
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 10.4mm (28mm - 35mm equiv.)
F No: f1.8
Shutter Speed: 1/200 sec
ISO:125
Exposure Compensation: -0.3EV

Back street shop front

click photo to enlarge
The British character is traditionally supposed to be low key, reserved, eschewing ostentation and brashness. There is an element of truth in this view. However, there have always been plenty of exceptions to this rule, and the internationalisation of many aspects of life have introduced more "showy" elements into British culture.

When I first crossed the waters that separate our island from the rest of the world one of the first things I noticed was how much more intrusive advertising could be in some European countries. Large cut out letters forming names on top of buildings were commonplace in Greece and France but very rare in Britain. Store fronts often had names on that stretched right across the facade where in Britain they were usually more modest. Roadside adverts were more noticeable even given the lower population density. But, things change, ideas are imported, and Britain now exhibits more of these kinds of features despite having planning regulations that seek to control them. I came across this example in Hull recently. The shop's location off a main thoroughfare clearly prompted the owner to come up with this large, eye-catching advertisement that could be seen by anyone glancing down the side-street. And, despite the colours having begun to fade, it worked, hence my photograph!

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Camera: Olympus E-M10
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 14mm (28mm - 35mm equiv.)
F No: f5.6
Shutter Speed: 1/1000 sec
ISO:200
Exposure Compensation: -0.33 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

Advertising and happiness

click photo to enlarge
Modern advertising has always intrigued me. One of my early blog posts, in 2006, was called "Gullibility and advertising". I returned to the subject via product names in 2010 in the post, "Silly brand names and pier views". In 2012 "Underpants, celebrities and gibberish" found me reflecting on no less than David Beckham's boxer briefs, and in April of this year the sight of people volunteering to stand under artificially created rain while fake thunder and lightning crashed and flashed about them prompted "Advertising puzzles me". Advertising is so ubiquitous and, it must be said, often so clever, that we often fail to register it at a conscious level. However, at a subconscious level it feeds on us like a tapeworm, gnawing away at our very being, influencing what we buy, why we buy it and changing our perception of just what a product can do for us.

Many years ago I came to the conclusion that one of the main aims of advertising was to obscure the distinction between pleasure and happiness. We see this in the cliche of a new car being sold through a film of a young couple driving down an empty road in beautiful, sunny countryside, smiling beatitudinously, as though blessed with all the happiness that it is possible for life to confer upon them. Buy this car, the subtext says, and you will be like them. Or buy the wrist-watch that George Clooney advertises and you'll be like him. Or happiness is yours if only you wear this or that brand of clothing, eat at our restaurant, or live in our exclusive residential development. The fact is, that advertisements rarely give you straightforward, factual information about the product they are trying to sell. Instead they tell a fictional story about achieving happiness, pleasure, status or a life-changing experience, in which you are encouraged to see yourself as the main character, the person who is transformed by something as simple and easy as a purchase. At the heart of much advertising, it must be said, is dishonesty.

That thought was sparked the other day when we were in London. We were heading for Waterloo tube station one evening and passed the British Film Institute's IMAX cinema, a large circular building with illuminated, wrap-around advertising. The word "Honestly" was part of an advert for I know not what. And, as I raised my camera to photograph the building with a cluster of London Transport double-deckers below it, I wondered whether honesty figured anywhere in the pitch being made to we passers-by.

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Camera: Sony RX100
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 24.1mm (65mm - 35mm equiv.)
F No: f4
Shutter Speed: 1/125 sec
ISO: 800
Exposure Compensation: 0 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

Advertising puzzles me

click photo to enlarge
Ever since the invention of the TV remote control our household has muted the adverts. Consequently I am unable to take part in conversations about such things since, while I may have seen the advert in question I won't have heard it. Choosing to avoid advertisements seems to me a perfectly reasonable thing to do, though I know not everyone will agree. The fact is I can't understand why we should willingly co-operate with companies trying to sell us things we neither want or need.

The particular pitches that advertisers choose puzzles me too. Take celebrity endorsement. We all know that such people are paid to either wear, use or promote the product in question. That being the case, why would we be influenced by the blandishments of David Beckham, George Clooney, Sienna Miller (whoever she is) or anyone else? Or what about the way so-called "up-market", that is to say expensive, products are sold. Muted, often monochrome colours, plenty of white space in print advertisements, few words but in classic fonts, "under-stated" design, models that don't smile and other "less is more" tricks are used to suggest that a product sits at the top of its market. But if all this is obvious - and surely it is - why do advertisers persist with it and why are buyers influenced by it? Perhaps the pitches are not as unsubtle as I think, or maybe people want to believe it all and suspend their critical faculties in such situations.

I pondered advertising methods recently after coming upon a whisky company publicising its wares outside The Design Museum in London. They'd set up a framework from which models of dark clouds were suspended, a sound system was simulating thunder, flashing lights represented lightning, and heavy rain periodically fell on members of the public who volunteered to stand in the centre of all this wearing brand name-emblazoned waterproofs  and similarly badged umbrellas. Apparently the word "storm" featured in the whisky's name and the "weather" was intended to give the public a taste of what is regularly experienced on the Isle of Skye whence the drink comes. Oh, and the lucky punters who subjected themselves to this ordeal had the chance to win a bottle of the beverage. I suppose my reaction could be best described as bemused, so i took a couple of photographs and walked on.

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Camera: Sony RX100
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 37.1mm (100mm - 35mm equiv.)
F No: f4.9
Shutter Speed: 1/80
ISO: 800
Exposure Compensation:  0 EV
Image Stabilisation: On 

Underpants, celebrities and gibberish

click photo to enlarge

I had intended to write a piece on an aspect of castle architecture today, a subject that I was going to illustrate with this photograph of a spiral staircase at Castle Rising, Norfolk. However, as I read "The Guardian" newspaper over my breakfast of a bowl of porridge and a cup of tea I saw a full-page photograph that made me laugh out loud. Now, "The Guardian" is a serious newspaper, and though it often has articles of a deliberately humorous nature that do provoke such a reaction, and whilst it sometimes publishes pictures with the same intention, it doesn't often raise a titter elsewhere in its pages.

What I'd come upon to cause  my merriment was an advertisement featuring a black and white photograph of David Beckham in his underpants (sorry "boxer briefs") and nothing else. When I say nothing else, parts of his hands, arms and torso were obscured by tattoos drawn in a style that could charitably be called naïve. And his head, of course, currently hides behind a bouffant quiff and a Three Musketeers-style beard and moustache, the latest in a long line of hairdos that seem designed to periodically refresh his image. But, apart from the underpants (sorry "boxer briefs"), tattoos and facial hair, he was revealed as nature intended. Actually, that's not quite true either. His face wore what I can only describe as a scowl-cum-frown. That was one of the causes of my laughter and it surprised me because he usually flashes a happy-chappie smile. Perhaps, I thought, he's been taking lessons in scowling from his wife, Victoria, a woman whose default public face, it has been widely observed, looks decidedly unhappy. On reflection I thought that it was probably a requirement of the company whose underpants (sorry "boxer briefs") he was advertising. I think, for reasons best known to themselves, they wanted him to look "hard". That would also account for the simian arm positions - slightly away from the body - making him look like he's ready for a scrap.

Now, I can't claim any deep knowledge of fashion, men's undergarments, celebrity culture or advertising. But I can recognise gibberish when I see it in print (I should, I write enough). However, the advertising slogan "David Beckham, Bodywear" struck me as ludicrous. Bodywear? What sort of word is that? Where else does one put underpants (sorry "boxer briefs) except on your body. And, assuming that this is the exposed tip of a merchandising iceberg, does "bodywear" differ in the slightest scintilla from "clothes"? But then perhaps I'm being too critical. Maybe I'm ill-informed or simply not part of the target demographic. Surely it was enough that an advertiser and their hired celebrity had given me a moment of levity first thing in the morning. I should be thankful for that and forget the rest. But the fact is, I can't. More specifically I worry about anyone who, on looking at this advertisement, thinks, "Mmmm, if those underpants (sorry "boxer briefs") are good enough for David Beckham they're good enough for me" and rushes out to buy some. Such people surely don't exist. Do they?

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Camera: Canon
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 17mm
F No: f6.3
Shutter Speed: 1/8
ISO: 3200
Exposure Compensation:  -0.33 EV
Image Stabilisation: N/A 

hub becomes nccd

click photo to enlarge

It seems that the hub (lower case) has become nccd (also lower case). An improvement, certainly, but wouldn't it have been so much better to have gone the whole hog and made it N.C.C.D.?

Ever since I moved to Lincolnshire I've visited the National Centre for Craft & Design in Sleaford. I've been delighted, bemused, exasperated and despairing as I've viewed their regular exhibitions. And that's exactly how it should be. There's absolutely no reason why I should like everything that is shown. I much prefer to see a wide range of exhibitions that bring me experiences that are new, different and challenging, and that necessarily means, as far as I personally am concerned, there'll be hits and misses. The next blog post will feature the current main exhibition which I think is a definite hit. However, for today let's stick with the "re-branding" exercise.

It makes much more sense to use the initials of the centre's official name rather than the generic title of "the hub". There are too many other places with that name which leads to confusion, and anyway it's become a touch passe. But why keep the lower case? Surely that's a fashion that's had its day too. Moreover, lower case becomes either confusing ot unreadable when written in a block of text. I would rather that capitalized initials had featured in the new advertising and that subsequent updates to the style and signage simply modified them. I do, however, quite like the overlapping angular shapes that accompany the revised name, and the painting of them on one side of the building works well too. So well in fact that I had to photograph them with the window reflecting a nearby tree.

photograph and text (c) T. Boughen

Camera: Canon
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 40mm
F No: f7.1
Shutter Speed: 1/125
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation:  -0.33 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

Climbing the north face of the high street

click photo to enlarge

"Our Himalayan suit will keep you alive in minus 40, minus 50 degrees. Not so many people are going to go to Everest but you can trust we are going to keep you dry even if it's only while you walk the dog."
Timo Schmidt-Eisenhart, head of European division of North Face outdoor clothing company (quoted in The Guardian, 11th December 2010)

The other day I was laughing at and lamenting Toyota's advertising pitch for its 4X4 vehicles. Their suggestion that because they are the only manufacturer to make an off-road vehicle that has journeyed to the North Pole then you should buy one for whizzing about the roads and lanes of Britain seemed to me risible. And then, a couple of days later I read an article about North Face and how their clothing, which includes some that is designed for climbing etc, is a fashion hit on the high street because of, to quote one of the authors, "the discreet badge of masculinity the logo confers." Ridiculous, but probably right. People are daft enough to swallow the line spun by such companies. In fact it appears to be a basic marketing approach across a range of consumer products. You want to sell cameras? Get a high-end model into use by professionals then sell the consumer models on the back of it. How about a family saloon? Take the body shell of your mass-production model, gut it, re-engine it, change everything except the basic shape, compete in rallying or some other form of motorsport, then use the resulting images and associations (and trophies if you happen to be successful) to sell your mainstream cars to the man in the street. There are plenty of men (and increasingly women) who will buy cars on this basis. Ludicrous or what?

I was wearing no discreet badge of masculinity from North Face or any other "top brand" when I took today's photograph. In fact, the temperature was a couple of degrees above zero, and felt positively balmy compared with previous days. My subject is the Italianate pool and the classical loggia of the war memorial in the grounds of Ayscoughfee Hall, Spalding. The ice shows signs of melting, but it was several inches thick and so needed a good few days of higher temperatures before it became home once more to the mallard that were huddled on the bank nearby. The memorial building is by Edwin Lutyens who was also responsible for the Cenotaph in Whitehall, London. It is a fine piece of work that I must make the subject of a future blog post. Incidentally, the grounds of Ayscoughfee Hall are now public gardens with a cafe etc, and the unusual and wonderful name has prompted me to suggest, on more than one occasion, that we should have an "Ayscoughfee cafe coffee", a remark that usually provokes groans and pitying looks in my companions.

I seem to have taken a lot of contre jour shots lately, and have probably done enough to fulfill the pledge I made a few months ago to do more of this kind of shot.

photograph and text (c) T. Boughen

Camera: Canon
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 24mm
F No: f8
Shutter Speed: 1/400
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation: -1.0 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

A composition and bad manners

click photo to enlarge

This morning I went to answer the phone, and as I did I looked at the LCD display to see the caller's number. There wasn't one. Instead it showed the word WITHELD. I don't know about you, but I am seriously tempted to ignore any phone call where the caller does not allow their number to be shown. Why? Well, I consider it to be downright rude. With any phone call we take it on trust that the person who speaks is who they say they are, and that they are being honest. I am MUCH more likely to believe this to be so if they are not hiding their number from me. The fact is, I don't conceal my number when I phone someone, so I don't expect others to conceal their number from me. That sort of openness, give and take, call it what you will, is just good manners. There will be reasons why companies do this sort of thing, all of them in the interests of themselves rather than the customer. But there will also be those who do it because they want a dialogue only on their terms, with no opportunity for the customer, once they have collected their thoughts, to get back to them. As I say, witholding your phone number is bad manners.

In my experience this has spread from telephone advertising into more reputable companies, and is being extended into departments of government. This is unfortunate because, were I to follow my inclination and refuse to speak to anyone phoning me from a "withheld" number, I'd be cutting off my nose to spite my face. Yet, how else am I to get the message across that this practice is unacceptable.

I mention this in the accompanying text to a photograph of a vase of flowers in a sunlit room with deep shadows because I was processing this image around the time I took the call. It's one of my wife's quick and effective arrangements in our living room. As we were talking on the sofa we both saw the possibility of a photograph in the composition. I had thought to convert it to black and white, but then I tended to lose the yellow of the flowers, and it is this, alongside the very sepia-like colours elsewhere in the shot, that make it for me.

photograph and text (c) T. Boughen

Camera: Olympus E510
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 55mm (110mm/35mm equiv.)
F No: f5.6
Shutter Speed: 1/320
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation: 0 EV
Image Stabilisation: On