Toronto Photography Meetup Group

That would be an interesting situation. She would loose the fortune but keep the fame.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/09/08/leibov ... pstoryview

I'd rather be milli vanilli, they lost their fame and keep their money!

lose, not loose!

Sorry, I see that spelling failure enough times I just had to go postal .

loose doesn't sound like choose
lose doesn't sound like chose

English is a weird language!

I'm confoosed

So if the best paid photographer can't make a living shooting, what does that say for the industry?

I don't think that's what this means at all. I agree it can be pretty tough (it also depends on your preferred life style) but I think in her case it has a lot to do with financial irresponsibility.

Girl's had a rough couple years...

I think alot of the mess started when her partner died and beacuse they weren't "married" she had to pay taxes on the money she left her. Sucks to be American.

Me Engerish No Good.

exactly.. for her to earn as much as she does and not have wisely invested some as a decent cushion means she probably has been living pretty lavishly

[quote]One key to the puzzle of how such a high earner got into such deep debt undoubtedly lies in the brownstones. She bought two of the houses in 2003 and began extensive and lengthy renovations to combine the two properties. That got her into trouble with the local historic preservation society and ignited a $15 million lawsuit from her next-door neighbour

Now, this is interesting/pathetic:

http://www.pdnpulse.com/2009/09/a-closer-look-at-the-annie-leibovitz-lavazza-case.html

Ouch.

On top of all that, according to another PDN article linked from the page above, "Pizzetti

It's not been proven that she was at fault at all. It could very well have been a staffer that made the mistake and sent the wrong photo to the photoshop group.

But in the end Karma you get is the Karma you put in. So if karma's a bitch then....

Here is another article (long) which I found enlightening. Basically - she over spends...

http://nymag.com/fashion/09/fall/58346/

It's true that someone else may have physically made the mistake... but ultimately Leibovitz is responsible for what her studio produces. Sure, the underlings might be reprimanded or fired, but it's the boss who ultimately takes the heat.

It's hard to imagine Leibovitz looking through the shots sent back by Pizzetti, and then later approving the final photographs to be sent for print, and not wonder where the photos came from? Perhaps a staffer said "yes, we took care of all licensing issues for the images" and Leibovitz trusted that person's word. Maybe she could not have known... but again, shit always rolls downhill, and the person at the top is the first to get hit. That's why CEO's, etc. get paid the big bucks.

...but didn't one commit suicide regardless?

Blame it on the rain...

[quote="dant"]It's not been proven that she was at fault at all. It could very well have been a staffer that made the mistake and sent the wrong photo to the photoshop group.

But in the end Karma you get is the Karma you put in. So if karma's a bitch then....[/quote]

Are you kidding me?

this poster puts it best:



if she didn't shoot those locations herself, how did they end up in the final shots? like she wouldn't approve the post work done to produce the final images that are under her (brand) name and wasn't aware that she didn't shoot these locations?

I've always defended her (see other thread Tanner linked to) but it's too obvious that she's just going downhill @ full speed.

I still respect and admire her body of work (The VF covers book is just mind blowing) and still consider her one of the most influential photogs of recent history, but this is just a sad ending to a legendary career.

She can get more milli vanili in the future if she has fame No fame no vanili!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090911/ap_ ... _leibovitz

safe for now

not really

http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_display/photo-news/legal-news/e3id4e011604f3ec58269f4350a88a3e60b