Interview with Ivan Piacentini

Copyright (c) Ivan Piacentini

Bio

Ivan connected with us on Instagram a few months ago and we’ve followed his work since then.

He’s based in Trento, Italy and shoots across a variety of genres and subject matter, which is reflected in the diverse photographers whose work he admires - he shares our love for Bill Brandt’s work.

He splits his work across writing and photography, and this produces an interesting tension in his photography.

You can follow Ivan on Instagram @hexeban. 

Interview

theblowup 

How did you first get into photography?

Ivan

Accidentally. About 7 years ago I had some rough days: my love story ended and I left the house in which I used to live. A friend of mine (Giuliano Cappello, who happens to be a photographer) decided I needed some quality time, so he took me to the nearby lake, lending me his DSLR camera. During the travel, he briefly explained me the basics and when we arrived he insisted I should go “manual mode”. It was (as I understood later) a clever way to compel me to think about what I was doing, rather than on my problems. I spent the next three hours shooting photos, completely focused on what I was doing, with my friend helping me, step-by-step. Despite my photos being awful, it was extremely liberating.

theblowup 

Which photographers did and do you draw inspiration from? Who are your photographic heroes?

Ivan

David LaChapelle (he is a feast for the eyes). Paul Nicklen (I envy everything about his works). Joe McNally (I love how he masters the light). Fulvio Roiter (the “Venice’s photographer). Bill Brandt (because).

theblowup

Beyond photography, where do you draw your inspiration from?

Ivan

My main job involves a lot of reading and creative writing; also, I write for a local magazine, so I often find interesting ideas during a normal working day.

theblowup

Which genres of photography do you shoot?

Ivan

• Documentary
  
• Portrait
  
• Street
  

theblowup

Street photography is a controversial genre, not in the least because of its increasing ubiquity, which has led to a perceived decrease in quality. What’s your view about its continued validity as genre?

Ivan

“That’s the tech progress, baby. The tech progress. And there’s nothing you can do about it!” Joking aside… I can understand if somebody finds very annoying that “normal people” can shoot street photos (and frequently good ones) without effort and specific equipment. Similarly, it’s upsetting witness how “more doesn’t mean better” and how easily people (and potential clients) became used to “bad pics” to the point of not recognising a good job from a mediocre one. For sure, this can be perceived as an unfair competition: what’s the point of being a good photographer and demand to be paid if literally everybody else is willing to give away for free is pics? It can be discomforting, but this job evolved impressively over the last years, becoming harder and harder; so nowadays, if somebody wants to be a pro, good photos aren’t enough anymore. But let’s face a bitter truth: contemporary photographers (most of them) work with equipments that some years ago would have been considered pure science fiction. Shooting became enormously easier, saving photographers a lot of energy so they can spend it on other aspects: creative process, longterm learning, storytelling and, most of all, marketing. The difference between occasional and pro photographers relies on these necessary skills. If you want to be a pro, you have to invest in them. In return, your chances to meet clients interested in quality and reliability will raise hugely.

theblowup

Given how ubiquitous the capture of images - whether from amateurs with smartphones, passivley by security cameras or by photographers using dedicated cameras - what role do you think documentary photography plays today? How do you set your work apart?

Ivan

I think documentary photography benefitted a lot from the tech progress. The general reasoning remains the same but, unlike in street photography, I don’t perceive quality as an essential (even if appreciated) feature of this genre. I’d rather focus on pervasiveness granted by the new technology, that can prove quite useful: it’s not unusual for me to sell documentary photos taken with a smartphone. Plus: everybody has a smartphone. If you’re carrying a camera, even the simplest one, people tend to notice you. Often, as soon as they figure you out as a photographer, they stop doing whatever they’re doing.

theblowup

Which was your first camera?

Ivan

A Canon 550D (EOS Rebel T2i). I bought it with my father.

theblowup

How do you think about photography equipment? For some photographers it’s merely a set of tools, a means to an end. For others, the capabilities of the equipment help define what’s possible. 

Ivan

The second one. As I said, pro skills (and even good amateur skills) aren’t linked with the equipment. That be told, most of the job I get paid for (and luckily, most of the genre I prefer) consist in low light / crazy light / despairing light conditions photography: mostly theatre and indoor sport, but also wedding photograpy with tele lenses (when I can work in pairs with another photographer).

theblowup

What’s the main equipment you use today?

Ivan

A Sony Alpha 7R3, with a Sony FE 24-70 2.8 and a Sony FE 70-200 2.8.

theblowup

Lastly, what guidance would you give to people starting out with photography today? 

Ivan

Get a hold on some basic skills manual (I loved the Scott Kelby’s ones), or a good teacher. Study, but stop when it get’s boring. Then go outside (or stay indoor, it’s up to you) and take every picture you want to take. The key point is to become curious: “Why I like this picture so much? How do you make the background blurry? Why my arms are sore after holding a camera for three hours?” and so on. Answers are quite easy to find.

Ivan’s Work

To see more of Ivan’s work, follow him on Instagram @hexeban.