Studio Harcourt - photography

[Deleted]

Studio Harcourt is undoubtedly the most famous photographic studio in France, all the more famous because since it was founded in 1934, it has always used the same photographic techniques. Even photographs taken in 2009 look like they were taken in the 1930's. Apparently what made the difference is that when the studio was started, the owners hired cinema lighting technicians to light all of the portraits, and this is what made the photos both timeless and old fashioned as the world moved on, plus the fact that they are always retouched to remove all blemishes.

Every French celebrity and quite a few international ones have had their Harcourt portrait taken. Anybody who wants a portrait can get one made if they have enough money. Harcourt will even photograph your pets. The studio will take color photographs if requested to do so, but the main attraction will always be the ones in black and white.

It is actually quite difficult to find many Harcourt portraits on the internet, because they are so expensive and heavily copyrighted, but here are a few that I located.

Edith Piaf


Josephine Baker


Brigitte Bardot


Carole Bouquet


Yves Montand


Jean Gabin


Jacques Brel


Chet Baker


Here is an example of how the modern photos look. This is Julien Doré, the winner of the 'Idol' show in France two years ago. He is a heavily tattooed rocker (as well as being a direct descendant of the artist Gustave Doré).


And here is what a completely anonymous person can look like if he wants a Harcourt portrait.

[bixaorellana]

[Kerouac2 wrote:] "timeless and old-fashioned"

That's it! Even though that silvery, mood-shadow style is associated with an earlier era, it continues to work perfectly. In most of the photos, beyond knowing who the celebrity is, it's really the clothing and hairstyles that give away the era.

I wonder if the last photo was a reject, or if it was cropped for the internet. It has no signature, and it's doubtful the studio would have cut off the top of the head in that way.

[lola]

Love the smiling Piaf, and Baker.

I want that treatment, too. Not that I could, but any idea what a sitting costs?

[Deleted]

Here is their website.

[Deleted]

Anyway, a basic portrait is 1900€. That includes makeup.

[lola]

Seems like a better way to immortalize yourself than a fancy headstone in Pere Lachaise, and doubtless cheaper.

Thanks, kerouac.

[lola]

Nude with body paint and a white dove perched on your hand no doubt costs extra.

[Deleted]

There is now a book tracing the entire history of Studio Harcourt.

[lola]

It would be nice to know how they do it. I guess most important first step would be wanting to make photos like that. But how do they achieve that intensity?

I'll be taking senior photos of my younger girl soon with natural light and B&W film, our ancient Minolta with the old primo lens. She's a good subject, and i want to do her justice short of flying her over to Paris with the 1900€ check in her pocket payable to Studio Harcourt .

[bixaorellana]

Okay, what I'm about to say either marks me as a complete philistine, or as a discerning judge of the visual arts: those portraits aren't all that great. Looking at the website, what I note is that sometimes the lighting makes no sense, that all of the portraits look excessively posed, and that many of them are devoid of personality. Some of the older ones produce a positive response because of our feelings for the celebrity pictured. The rich effect achieved by the developing and touch-up process is also compelling. Of course, ome of them are quite good and interesting, such as Josephine Baker in classical mode, or Edith Piaf's face rendered as an art deco study in forms.

But both of those modern pictures look like rejects. Perhaps Julien Doré is simply a boring person with a boring face. Certainly his portrait does not suggest otherwise. Likewise, the portrait of the unknown is empty and even a bad job of cropping.

Agree? Disagree?

Incidentally, this is an interesting article about a premier retoucher.

[lola]

Well, I disagree but can't articulate a defense, make a lousy art critic.

The Jean Gabin, not even that one?
It would have been hard to take a bad photo of Bardot those days, granted. I don't have a problem with posed appearance, and actually like the two modern ones above.

[bixaorellana]

Oh, I love the Jean Gabin one. And as I said above, some products of that studio are superb. It's just that there is a whiff of the emperor's new clothes about the veneration of anything with the Harcourt name on it.

Or, I'm wrong.

[Deleted]

The Studio Harcourt style is more or less to turn people into immortal statues, not to breathe life into them. They are creating icons. The extremely old fashioned studio lighting is part of it.

[lola]

I had never heard of Harcourt, so come to it untainted with veneration. There are many things I had never heard of before this fine dear site, and appreciate very much being able to sample from my cultural backwater.

I like the quirkiness of the completely anon. one.

[Deleted]

They were talking about Harcourt on TV the other day, and it was mentioned that the main element that gives the unmistakable look to the photos is that flash photography is never used, only standard lights.

[bjd]

I can't imagine any studio photography using a flash! Those celebrities would look like rabbits caught in headlights.

Speaking of lighting, on Sunday later afternoon in Rome, we saw a fashion shoot. Even though the sun was shining really brightly (it was about 5 pm), a guy was holding up a big reflector to shine even more light on the model.

And speaking of Harcourt, I found the portrait of Schwartznegger made him look like a humanoid, not a real person. I found some of the portraits good -- others less so. In general, I really like black and white pictures of people, Harcourt or not.

[bixaorellana]

Bjd, even skimming the article in #9 will give the impression that advertising and fashion shots are slated for heavy editing. Maybe the fashion shoot guy was avoiding any distinct light and dark areas, knowing they'd be put in later.

I have been experimenting with editing programs on the computer, and it is astounding how a person's expression, looks, and age seem to change with different lighting.

[Deleted]

Coming back to this almost 3 years later, I can tell you that old fashioned Studio Harcourt has returned to the summit of its glory.

For one thing, even when it was not fashionable with the general public, it never ceased to be considered a "must" for all French (and many other European) film stars. It is sort of the French version of getting a star on Hollywood Boulevard. Established stars seem to return about every 5 years for a new portrait.

But now there is a new element. There are Studio Harcourt photo booths!

   

The locations are temporary, but they are quite popular. They are placed in multiplexes, malls or prestigious stores. There were two of them for a promotional operation in a shopping mall in Paris recently, in conjunction with Séphora, who provided makeup artists for the occasion. These booths cost 10€ so they are a real bargain compared to the hundreds of euros required for a real Studio Harcourt portrait. Then again the results are pretty haphazard, according to what I have seen doing a few inspections on Google Images.

The mall in question -- the Forum des Halles in the center of Paris -- happens to be the location of the most popular multiplex in Europe, and since the Cannes Festival is also taking place at the moment, it was the perfect time for a Harcourt expo.

the odds on winner of 'Best Actress' at Cannes for "Rust and Bone"

[lola]

It appears that what you get for your 20 euro is a photo booth type photo.

It's fun to look at their gallery. Roger Federer from 1998, for instance.