Author Archives: admin

Work and the Economy

In the work and the economy session at NPS4 we heard from Esther Teichman, Sara T’Rula and John Wright…. A heady mix of pondering on academic learning in photography, the pros and cons of self-motivated learning, and both of these relative to a commercial practice.

Esther Teichmann is a practitioner in her own right, she also works commercially in fashion, she used to intern with Rankin; she now lectures and tutors at London College of Communication.

Sara T’Rula has tracked an altogether less conventional route into photography. Having previously worked in Westminster with a background in politics and economics, she used experiences gained here in technology and online tools and approached The Photographers Gallery to offer them assistance with their well known project Street Photography Now.

John Wright, by his own admission plays no part in any academic, ‘art’ or exhibition-based photography. John is on the advisory board of the Young Photographer Alliance – an organisation that states on it’s website to be ‘Inspiring, educating and empowering the next generation of photographers. Formerly a “third-world reportage photographer” John has worked through the famous people making funny faces stage and now works as a successful fashion photographer.

So there we have it, chalk, cheese and, well… something entirely different from those, and in no particular order. All present had been tasked with the prospect of discussing work and the economy in photography based upon their own experiences, and it opened up a multitude of questions and shall continue to be debated for some time yet…

I shan’t at this point pretend that I write from an entirely neutral standpoint. I have a BA and MA in photography and am currently starting my lecturing career in what could be the most academic of all photography topics: critical and contextual studies. I try every day to help students see their work in relation to many of the ways in which to practice photography and I (try to) help them to inform their work with knowledge. That knowledge comes through research and through consideration to the communication of their subject matter, via whichever conduit of photographic practice that they choose. In this sense, I like to consider myself open-minded, but I’m happy for that to be judged!

Teichmann considered how her practice and lecturing might adapt to accommodate changes in the market. When there are structural shifts in the nature of teaching currently, how do we begin to support young emerging artists? The nature of academia itself, even aside from teaching, is of course not distinct from economic changes. Universities function as corporate institutions; they are businesses themselves, with a need to make money and to stay afloat in order to provide an education to their students.

Teichmann believes that current graduates are shifting their expectations relative to those of previous generations of graduating artists.  Unlike the Hirsts; Emins and Hunters of the world who get picked up straight from their graduate shows, she believes that there is more humble nature to this generation of emerging practitioners. There is a need/an ability/an understanding, call it what you will, of the requirement to multitask. There is less preciousness around particular working practices, wherein graduates will practice in two, or three, different ways at the same time. It is no secret that the dissemination of work has been radically altered by changes in technology over the last decade or two. Work can now be seen more quickly, in many different places instantly, it can be altered, appropriated, ambushed! With this though also comes a need and an ability to control where and how work is seen; self-management, self-teaching and self-publishing are now on the rise. As a practitioner, taking your work into the world has changed.  This is another market shift that may change the way in which students need to be educated…so how can teaching change to meet these shifts?

I don’t have any answers to these, rhetorical, questions. Suffice to say that the discussion that they fuel is important and necessary for the future of photography; and it is ongoing…

Through self-teaching, Sara T’Rula quietly tiptoed into a photography practice and career. A love of jazz and her own working practices aroused strong ideas around collaboration and she approached the Photographers Gallery to become their community manager, looking after the public and user interface for Street Photography Now. The Street Photography Now community continues independently from The Photographer’s Gallery since the project finished; it is a self-initiated community, which is having a lasting and tangible affect on photography in its oeuvre. The group of practitioners itself is changing to suit the situation that it finds itself in. Again here we are reminded that this current generation of practitioners can be seen to self-govern, evolve, adapt and diversify. T’Rula is enthusiastic about participation and collaboration and is working towards an online presence for a participatory project at Format 2013. How exactly does an artist/photographer disseminate and contextualise work now – how can we focus on this as both practitioners and facilitators? T’Rula is also working with Ed Clarke using multimedia to try to make his work complicit with changing standards in viewing and accessibility – making work with the audience in mind is not a new thing in the art world, but assuming infinite audiences just may be.

Echoing most of what has been spoken of previously, John Wright is also focused on reinvention in a challenging economy, it seem to be how he survives his environment. Formerly a reportage photographer in developing countries, Wright was hoping to make difference but found it hard to reconcile what he was doing. He felt personally exploitative for his own commercial gain and photographic vanity, so become a celebrity photographer. With a clear end goal to the aesthetic and the placement of his work, John worked on his impact and visual style, starting with ‘cheap’ glamour and celebrity shots and working up from there. Through these experiences he learned more and more about his technique and followed his own motto:

“Always shoot for the people that you want to move on a shoot for.”

He hit the ceiling doing celebrity shots, stating that one subject matter (celebs) limits creativity and so you can’t photograph in any way that you want. John now makes fashion images and is wise to advise that you always know your future aims.

“You can reinvent yourself, but you need a plan… a clear target.”

John Wright’s advice in this sense was sound, but I felt that he lacked an appreciation of the more wide nature of photography outside of his own practice.

Photography is a vastly expanding oeuvre, it contains many ways of seeing and practicing, many messages and many styles; there are now many ways of being a photographer. Photography itself will continue to expand and contract, evolve and devolve, and as working practitioners in photography we will need to echo this shift in both the practice and concept of photography itself.

It was with the Q&A session at the end of this discussion that the issues raised around finance, education and exploitation really came to a head. We discussed the nature of the internship, about which Teichmann believes that there is an ethical split. The photographic industry is dependant on unpaid work placements, but they don’t happen in other industries to the same degree. Ultimately, she believes that internships need to be evaluated by the individual. Those who offer internships are actually showing a spirit of generosity by taking you under their wing in terms of mentorship and support, which can be invaluable for learning. In a sense John Wright agrees when he says that an internship can provide a free education, but if you take nothing from it, leave. He believes that you must take opportunities when they arise as they won’t always come to you, you must be specific and find the opportunities that expose you to the skills that you need to learn.

It was through the conversation around an academic education in photography that things became most argumentative. Are undergraduate course worthy of the £9000 fees? What do they offer? Is it a relevant education?

Esther Teichmann thinks UK offers exceptional photography education; John Wright does not.  She believes that the theoretical component of UK courses is strong, widely respected and supported. Most importantly, university can become a great place to create a network of academic experience – writers, curators, managers, etc and this nepotism is vital to forging your career.

John Wright believes that the art world is self-perpetuating and exists only to support itself; he stated that no professional commercial photographer went to university. This was a statistic that I haven’t felt the need to prove, as I can’t believe it true…

T’Rula regards art networks as imperative for the development of relationships and that in this sense, education and commercial are both valuable places to make contacts in the industry.

In its full descriptive nature I don’t feel the need to regale the entire argument, suffice to offer the ‘statistics’ and questions below:

In some countries in Europe, academic courses are run in a quantity that echoes the proportion of that business type in the economy.

To go to university is socially progressive. It is not necessarily for training as a vocational photographer, but for providing an education about photography.

Universities send out students who are ill equipped to be photographers.

In the UK, academic courses can be run simply if there are enough students on them.

Apparently there are more students studying photography in the UK than there are taxpaying photographers.

We need to re-think academic courses to accommodate self-promotion and technical skills. More practical inclusion may be required.

Where do galleries and photographic organizations stand through times of academic change?

Funded establishments will always be key to learning about photography.

University teaches student how to think and supports their skills. Thinking is a crucial part of learning how to operate as a person.

In a time of diversification, when you need to broaden your skills to narrow them in the future, how wide do you stay and for how long?

Esther Teichmann can be found at:

Sara T’Rula can be found at:

John Wright can be found at:

Keynote: Peter Kennard

Written by Sian Gouldstone,

I had expectations of the National Photography Symposium before I sat down to listen to Peter Kennard, clearly. They were mainly centered around the asking of original questions in photography. I was interested whether we would ask questions that haven’t been asked before, repeat or re-analyse those that have; answer questions for the first or last time; or whether we would not be able to answer questions at all. The more I learn and think about photography, the more of an enigma it becomes and this is what drives me… to teach, to learn, to discuss, and to ask and to try to find answers to the questions posed in relation to photography practices today.

Peter Kennard was interesting and driven, he offers and he asks questions of photography himself. It’s role and its procedures are scrutinized. Before all else though, I must point out that Peter Kennard is alive, still. He declared this to us himself, in person, in response to all the doubters… Ladies and Gentlemen; Mr Peter Kennard…

Kennard cites Heartfield, Rodchenko and Brecht as influencing and inspiring. I don’t know a thing about Brecht, I’ll admit; but I do know a thing or two about Heartfield and Rodchenko. Here we are, straight into montage and straight into politics with no introductions. Heartfield and Rodchenko made work that communicates and questions, it is of its time and more. It has a voice, one that speaks and asks, about the past, the present and the future. It is propaganda; it is inspiring. Peter Kennard, quite copiously, also makes work that communicates and asks questions. His work is propaganda, I guess, and it is inspirational.

Through this first session at the NPS, we were given information, factual and fictional, and asked to consider a range of issues through our relations with politics, plagiarism, Palestine, posters, poverty, printing & the photo-montage of Peter Kennard! The power of montage brings up all manner of issues, and despite the years that Kennard has been working, the issues raised by his work are still current – like Heartfield and Rodchenko, his work speaks and asks about the past, the present and the future. So far as I can see, it has always had a place, quite central, in a discussion around power and seeing in visual cultures.

Peter Kennard is of the old school of montage; paper, scissors, knives and glue. He himself explains that his work needs to be seen, and to be understood, quickly.  So it is simple.



Peter Kennard, Broken Missile, 1980, photomontage

The work Broken Missile is a photograph that Kennard took, of a child’s toy and a spray-painted piece of cardboard. It is unfussy and is subject to interpretation, quickly.

Kennard refers to this work on his website:

‘The point of my work is to use easily recognisable iconic images, but to render them unacceptable. To break down the image of the all-powerful missile, in order to represent the power of the millions of people who are actually trying to break them. After breaking them, to show new possibilities emerging in the cracks and splintered fragments of the old reality.’

It is the simplicity of Broken Missile and its subsequent re-presentations that makes it a fascinating piece. It provokes an interesting discussion and asks obvious questions about political issues. It was the questions related to plagiarism in photography that I was more interested in though – we have seen this image plastered across t-shirts and placards; used, used and re-used. At this current time, 30 years after Kennard made Broken Missile, we are within the motions of a great change in the way in which we view, make and use images. Plagiarism and pastiche are key ways in which we are changing our understanding of the past, present and future of photography. Where do we stand?


 A poster of Broken Missile taped to the fence of Greenham Common by a protester, 1982

Don’t think for a moment though that plagiarism offends Peter Kennard.  His use of iconic symbols extends to incorporate iconic paintings. Haywain with Cruise Missiles was a response to the siting of US missiles in Britain. In this, Kennard uses Constable’s Haywain to reinvigorate discussion on political issues, to symbolise the much-loved British landscape and possibly to metaphorically refer to the invasion of something that doesn’t necessarily belong to you.


Peter Kennard, Haywain with Cruise Missiles, 1980, photomontage

Right now, I am introducing ideas from Kennard’s talk, but large debate on plagiarism, pastiche, mimic and copyright can ensue… and it would be right up my street! It raises the very contemporary discussion around authorship and ownership, audience and meaning.  How are they changing in a very digital and accessibility savvy period? Kennard himself was quite clear that he doesn’t have the legal team to govern the dissemination of his images beyond the uses that he creates them for. He goes on to say, however, that people will make money from his work, but if in the process of this happening, the money goes to the correct cause intended by his work, then he has no problem.

The rights to use images, who can see and use images, and how images are shown are all relative to Kennard’s approach in one way or another. He tells us that his shows, and other work, can be censored and filtered politically. Restrictions are literally, or metaphorically placed around work shown in public. This leads to one of the aspects of Kennard’s approach to his work that speaks to me of questioning. He refuses to be bound by the exhibitory nature of his work. Kennard shows in as many different and engaging ways as possible. On every seat in the auditorium was a newspaper page, and advert for his new show. Kennard showed manual work, darkroom work, gallery work, public intervention, digital work & interactive work.

The Self Portrait of Tony Blair was shown in a shop window, ‘Santa’s Ghetto’, on Oxford St; a piece that allowed interaction from the public, that touched on a contemporary zeitgeist related to self-imagining and identity.


Peter Kennard, from Santa’s Ghetto, 2006



…in the ghetto’s window on oxford street, London (

Kennard also spoke of the café that he helped create in the City of London in Leadenhall market. The café offered soup for bankers, calculated at the same proportion of their average salary as an average African worker would pay – soup was charged at £111 per cup.

The issue of subversive work in public spaces raised questions about the traditional values of the art world. How accessible is art everyday? Do traditional artistic values and accessibility to controversial imagery limit photography as a genre?  Kennard used an example where Orange censored a Christmas message that he’d made. Orange subsequently withdrew the work, as they needed to bear in mind their corporate identity. The irony of this is that Orange lecture on censorship, and yet appear to censor work themselves.

The last thing that Kennard talked about was his book @Earth. @Earth is a sequence of pictures, which is intended to be read as a whole sequence. It is presented as a series of folders – each opening to reveal its series of images. Kennard says that a montage is a sentence. With this in mind, @Earth and can be read with a strong, intentional narrative. In some sense it is a retrospective thus far of Kennard’s career.

Kennard is keen to stress that the work he produces is primarily in montage.  Where collage stresses no similarity or reference between the images it uses, a montage does. The montage recognises skill on a surface, its images work together to communicate, to relate issues and to ask questions about the nature of what it presents. This is a metaphor it seems, for the careers work so far of Peter Kennard.

Peter Kennard can be found at and at




Every photographer wants to sell their work. Every gallerist wants to sell photographer’s work. But it is so much easier said than done. And yet, at the high end of the photography market, the Gursky’s and Sherman’s of this world sell for millions of dollars.

This talk was an informal discussion about the print sales market, between Chair Jeffrey Boloten, Managing Director of Artinsight, Zelda Cheatle, London based gallerist, and WM Hunt, US based collector, curator and photographic consultant. A match made in heaven; the speakers knew one another well and there was healthy, light hearted banter, but it proved invaluable to have a trans Atlantic perspective; one which, as the talk went on, was evidently a key issue in this topic of the print market.

Jeffrey Boloten started with a little run through of the art market at present, and photography’s place within it. It seems that, after a little lull at the end of last year, sales are on the up again and the photography market is more buoyant than that of the general art market. The photography market has evolved over the years to include prints not originally made to sell; fashion photography, reportage, photographs documenting performance artists and installations are now all equally sought after as art in their own right. This is an interesting development, given that prior to this the market was predominantly made up of fine art photography, made to sell. But here’s the thing, and was pointed out by Cheatle; dedicated photography galleries don’t sell photography. Photography only sells in art galleries.

And this is the crux of the matter for me. Working in a dedicated photography gallery, I have experienced this first hand; Photofusion struggles to sell prints. Someone in the audience made the point that dedicated photography galleries often show more reportage based work, and of course there is place for that kind of gallery and for photographers to get that kind of exposure (later on, Hunt did admit it was hard to sell reportage stuff; people don’t want to live with that kind of thing on their walls). But as Cheatle pointed out; look at the new Saatchi show, Out of Focus. All of the photographers in that exhibition are represented by art galleries; they (along with Cindy Sherman and Andreas Gursky who sell at the top end) consider themselves artists who use photography. They are not photographers.

In saying this, Cheatle confirmed something that I had been thinking about for a while. I remember bumping into James Hyman at the London Art Fair, where he was exhibiting paintings, and I asked him why he wasn’t exhibiting photography. He said he takes photography to Paris Photo, and takes it to fairs in New York, but it just doesn’t sell in London. His theory was based in the history of photography; in France photography had been picked up by the Surrealists as an art form in the 1920’s, and from then on was accepted as art. In the US, the beautifully crafted prints of Edward Steichen and Ansel Adams were quickly accepted as art; in contrast, the UK had documentary magazines such as Picture Post and the point of photography was very much as a documentary tool. This theory makes a lot of sense to me, and I put it to the panel. The response I got was that the people who buy prints in Paris Photo are German and Italian (not French!); and yet they did agree that the buzz surrounding the event in Paris is huge, and amongst everyone, collectors and non-collectors alike. That didn’t happen in the short run of Photo London, and I remain convinced that the reason for this is that photography is more ingrained in their psyche as an art form. It is still true that New York leads the world in the marketing of photography as art, although new art markets are springing up in Russia, India, China and the Middle East.

Talk then moved onto the subject of the quality of prints, and the fact that longevity of digital prints is suspect. Hunt is convinced they won’t last, and I thought it interesting that the Director of Harman Technologies, who was sat in the front row, didn’t make a sound to contradict him. So what happens when a digital print, bought at a high end auction, does fade? Hunt recounted the story of the fading Gursky hung in Tate Modern; apparently it is the dealer’s responsibility to re-print if such a thing happens. This then raises a lot of questions; Is it the same print? Does it have the same value? The feeling did seem to be that analogue prints were better quality (apart from when they’re not fixed properly, as in the case of Hunt’s Arbus which he sold to an unsuspecting dealer in Dubai!). And then of course the big editioning question. It was refreshing to hear Zelda Cheatle’s take on it; she sees editioning as a marketing tool, which actually doesn’t mean a thing. A print made now is going to be different to a print of the same image made in ten years time, or even tomorrow. Which makes editioning irrelevant; it’s only there because dealers like the idea of rarity.

The talk was incredibly insightful, with experienced speakers who were great storytellers and made this potentially dry subject a lot of fun. However, all of this chat was very much geared towards the high end photography market, and although Jen Bekman’s 20×200 online gallery initiative was given a brief nod, there was not a great deal of talk about the lower end of the market. Which I think is a shame, because let’s face it, most of the people in the audience won’t be selling their work at millions of dollars. After all, they consider themselves photographers, not artists.


Written by Carole Evans

Some references on the discussion of women in photojournalism

(1) Although this is a rather dated piece, I found it interesting how some iconic women photographers have said their gender has nothing to do with it: Women in Photojournalism and Combat” by Robert Stevens, January 2003

(2) A piece by Paul Melcher stirred some debate and a response by Washington DC based photographer Melissa Golden: On gender and photojournalism: a response to Paul Melcher by Melissa GoldenMay 13, 2011

(3) Here is Paul Melcher’s original piece: “Why Is a Photojournalist’s Gender Relevant to Their Work?”  May 9, 2011



Short films about photography archives

Some short films on the subject of photographic archives, as background to the Symposium session with Pete James, Jem Southam and Brigitte Lardinois.

First, a series of films made by Source Photographic Review as part of their three month season dedicated to photography archives. The second of these on John Blakemore features an interview with Pete James. There’s also link to the competition Source is running to find your favourite archive photo.

Second, a film Storage, from Process Arts, about the archive of Professor Val Williams, who is the director of PARC, the Photography and the Archive Research Centre.

National Photography Symposium 2012 Programme

Hashtag: #NPS4


Submit your questions to Photography Question TIme via Twitter with the hashtag #NPSQT.


All sessions happen at Somerset House unless stated.

Updated 19.4.12. This is the final programme but please bear in mind there might be small changes.


Tickets avaiable from Redeye or the World Photography Organisation



Friday 27 April 2012


13:00 onwards: registration in Portico Room / Photographer’s Lounge, Somerset House.


14:00: Archives. How can we decide which photographic work gets preserved in archives, and what should photographers do with their own work if they want it to be preserved? This session outlines the latest thinking on photographers and their archives; developing best practice guidance specific to photography, deciding on the most appropriate content of archives, and the role of institutions. Speakers: 

Jem Southam, photographer and professor in the School of Art and Media at Plymouth University

Pete James, Head of Photographs, Birmingham Central Library

Brigitte Lardinois, Deputy Director of the Photography and Archive Research Centre at University of the Arts London

Introduced by Paul Herrmann, Director of Redeye


14:00: Copyright discussion. This session, led by photographer David Hoffman, aims to be a frank exchange of thoughts on copyright, looking at the growth in infringements, new ways of discovering these, and how photographers can recover what is owed to them. David will outline his recent court case establishing that the belief of innocence is no defence to a copyright infringement claim. What will be the role of the forthcoming UK small claims court for intellectual property, and why does the Intellectual Property Office think that the court will only handle 150 cases per year? Please come with your experiences and ideas on this subject.


16:00: Break


17:00: The ethics of press and public photography, with particular reference to the implications of the Leveson Inquiry. At what stage does photography become harassment? Should there be controls? More broadly, where is the press heading in its use of photography? Should the press, citizen journalists, and members of the public all be treated the same or differently, whether in general or at newsworthy events? This panel discussion features a range of points of view – that of a photographer who gave evidence at the Leveson Enquiry, a leading picture editor and a champion of citizen photography.


Neil Turner, photographer and vice-chair of the British Press Photographers’ Association

Pauline Hadaway, Director of Belfast Exposed Photography

Alan Sparrow, Chairman of the Picture Editors Guild and Executive Picture Editor of Metro UK

Chaired by Andrew Wiard, photographer


17:00: The print market. A relaxed, informal and open ended discussion of the photographic print market with three leading figures, starting with a quick run-down of the state of the market. Which areas of the market are doing the best, what work is popular with collectors, and why? Speakers:

Zelda Cheatle, Gallery Director of Margaret Street Gallery

WM Hunt, collector, curator and photographic consultant

Chair: Jeffrey Boloten, Managing Director, ArtInsight



Saturday 28 April 2012


09:00 onwards: Registration in Portico Room / Photographer’s Lounge, Somerset House.


10:00 to 10:45 (Strand Palace Hotel): Keynote – Peter Kennard, the UK’s most influential photomontage artist, talks on his life and career.


11:00 to 12:45 (Strand Palace Hotel): Work and the economy. If the Western economy is settling into a slow decline what are the implications for expenditure on photography? How should organisations and photographers plan for the future? How are photographers reinventing themselves for new audiences and the new economy? What are our responsibilities as organisations and individuals to talented, but increasingly unemployed, young people? Speakers: 

Esther Teichmann, photographic artist

John Wright, portrait and fashion photographer, and board member of the Young Photographers’ Alliance

Sara T’Rula, documentary photographer

Chaired by Paul Herrmann of Redeye


11:15 to 12:15 (Somerset House): In conversation: critical to commercial. What compromises are made when photographers articulate their critical approaches and aesthetic styles into commercial vernaculars? While it’s not unusual for clients to take the best artistic imagery and then shape it for their own ends, it’s more interesting and arguably less of a compromise when photographers take the initiative, often by working more closely with appropriate clients. In this open-ended session the photographic artists David Moore and Ewen Spencer explore these issues in relation to their own and others’ work. Introduced by Dewi Lewis, publisher.


12:45: Break


14:00: (Strand Palace Hotel): Collaborations, whether between organisations or individuals, can generate new thinking, save on resources and increase profile. But they often don’t seem to go as smoothly as they might, and both people and organisations are protective of their own ideas and projects. At the organisational level in photography, is there more we could do together on collaborative ventures? Between individuals, how can we encourage more collective and collaborative work – perhaps across disciplines or professions – or can it be counter-productive for photographers to work this way? Each member of this panel has a special interest in collaboration in their work.


Anna Fox, photographer and Professor of Photography, University for the Creative Arts, Farnham; 

Anthony Luvera, artist, writer and educator;

Chaired by Anne McNeill, Director, Impressions Gallery, Bradford.


14:00 (Somerset House): Women in Photojournalism. While women outnumber men on photography courses, the opposite is still true in many areas of photography; none more so than photojournalism, news and editorial photography. What are the reasons for this? Is there a “boys’ club” mentality among some photographers, pressure or pigeonholing from the picture desks and commissioners, or are there reasons why women are less interested in certain areas of work? What advantages do women photojournalists have over their male counterparts? And how does the UK compare with other areas? Accomplished photojournalists will talk briefly about their own work, and discuss this area: the freelance photojournalist Laura El-Tantawy, Reuters staff photographer Suzanne Plunkett; Chaired by Carmen Valino, photographer.


15:45 Break


16:15 (Strand Palace) Photography Question Time: the format is familiar from the BBC, but the subject matter is all photography; this is a chance to put your questions to a panel of the most interesting and influential people in photography. In your pack you’ll find a question slip. Please fill it in with any questions you would like to put to the panel and hand it back to the registration desk by 15:45 on Saturday.

On the panel:

Simon Norfolk, photographer

Dewi Lewis, publisher

Anne McNeill, Impressions Gallery

Andrew Wiard, photographer

Chaired by Paul Herrmann of Redeye

Submit your questions to Photography Question TIme via Twitter with the hashtag #NPSQT.



17:30 Break


18:15 (Strand Palace): WPO session – tickets must be booked separately. In the Photographer’s Studio with William Klein and Vanessa Winship.



Sunday 29th April 2012


10:30 Informal gallery visits. Details to follow.



Speakers include:

Alan Sparrow

Andrew Wiard

Anna Fox

Anne McNeill

Anthony Luvera

Brigitte Lardinois

Carmen Valino

David Hoffman

David Moore

Dewi Lewis

Esther Teichmann

Ewen Spencer

Jeffrey Boloten

Jem Southam

John Wright

Laura El-Tantawy

Neil Turner

Pauline Hadaway

Pete James

Peter Kennard

Sara T’Rula

Simon Norfolk

Suzanne Plunkett

W.M. Hunt

Zelda Cheatle