Daniel Magnussen: Going back to the beginning, I know you assisted Avedon. We talked briefly in Paris about your time together. Prior to that, how did your interest in photography begin?

Mikael Jansson: Since I always loved music and was very into Bowie, I began photographing bands that came to Stockholm. I was very into it, but this was actually before knowing I wanted to work in photography; it was just an interest. Then I met a girl at a Bowie concert who was a model and we talked a little. She told me that she worked with a great Swedish photographer, Carl Johan Ronn, who needed an assistant. So I went to see him, he hired me and I worked with him for 5 years in Stockholm.

DM: How was that experience, to go from not really knowing if you wanted to work with photography…

MJ: It was really exciting at the time, because he was a great person and he was into music, jazz, so he took me on a trip in life. He taught me about food and travelling. We travelled a lot. He was very important for me while I was growing up and learning. I discovered Avedon’s work through him along with Henri Cartier-Bresson, Brassaï, André Kertész and others, so it was a very important time.

DM: Around what time was this?

MJ: That was from ‘79 to ‘84.

DM: Then in ’84, what did you decide to do?

MJ: I really wanted to go to New York and work with Avedon. Carl Johan helped me. I freelanced as an assistant, making money on the side for a ticket to New York. I came here with enough money to stay for about 3 months, and if nothing happened I would have to go back. I stayed with a friend and the first person I called when I got here was Avedon. But he didn’t need anyone at the time and just told me to send a resume. Since I didn’t even know what a resume was, I had to find out from my friends (laughing). So I worked on my resume and sent it to Avedon, then started to do a little freelance work with other photographers. This continued for almost 3 months. One day, I got a call from Avedon’s studio telling me that they wanted me to come in for an interview. That was pretty exciting.

DM: So how was it meeting him the first time?

MJ: The first time I went, I met with two assistants. Then I went back for another meeting with the studio manager, and finally he called me back for a third meeting and said, “Richard Avedon is working on a commercial now, so he’s leaving the studio at 7. Can you be here at 6?” He had a studio on 75th street, and since I had a friend living up there I stayed with her that night, woke up early and arrived at the studio at 5.30 or something (laughing). When I got there, there were 2 other guys waiting in line.

DM: Like a model casting (laughing).

MJ: Exactly. Yeah, so we were waiting and then he came out. The studio was quite small, so we were sitting in a small make-up room at the back. It was great. I was nervous and he was asking me all sorts of things. He asked, “How long are you planning to stay?” I was thinking three months at first, but I said, “At least a year.” He looked at me and answered, “A year? That’s not possible; when you start here you have to stay at least four.” My reaction was that four years may as well be forever, and as I left I was thinking I’d fucked up everything. I felt that everything I’d said sounded really stupid, and back at my friend’s apartment I went to bed at eight o’clock. But then I got a call from the studio at half past eight. They said something like, “Mikael, we think you’re the right person for the job,” and I answered by saying, “Really? When do you want me to begin?” They said nine, so I just put my clothes back on and began right away…

DM: And how many years did you end up working for him?

MJ: Two.

DM: What was the most memorable shoot of that time?

MJ: The shoot with Chet Baker, because it was very personal to me. I don’t know if we talked about that in Paris… Anyway, Chet Baker had played in Stockholm in ’83 and I’d shot a portrait of him backstage. I brought my negative in and I printed the picture in the studio and gave it to Dick. I brought in some jazz music and we played Chet Baker in the studio. One day Dick said to me, “Mikael, do you know this trumpet player that is dead? He sang beautifully.” I replied that it was Chet Baker and he was still alive. Dick said, “Great, because someone told me that he has an amazing face and voice…that he almost sings like a woman. Next time he comes to New York, let me know.” Six months after that I found out that Chet was playing at Fat Tuesday, a jazz club downtown. I told Dick he’d be in town to play for three nights. Dick told me that part of the job of being an assistant and eventually becoming a photographer myself was to go down to Fat Tuesday, hear the concert and ask Chet Baker to let Dick take his picture. And that’s what I did; I went down to the concert and asked him. He answered, “Yeah, I know Dick. Call me in the morning. ”Next day at 12 o’clock, I called him, but got no answer. So I had to go down to Fat Tuesday again and listen to the concert once more… So after the concert I asked him what had happened and he was like, ”Ah man…I’m sorry, I couldn’t, it got really late last night. But call me tomorrow at 12…”

DM: (Laughing)

MJ: So I called him and when he actually picked up, he said, ”Come and get me at three.” So the studio arranged a car and I went over to a place on the West Side, and when I knocked on the door of the apartment there was smoke everywhere, like they had been smoking weed already and he said, ”Come in, come in, come in.” He got himself dressed and ready, and as we were leaving he said, ”Hey Mikael, can you carry this trumpet for me?” We went down to the car and he said, ”I have a little problem, we need to go downtown to pick up a suit from the laundry.” He was going to borrow a suit from the drummer, so we went to his drummer’s house first and got the laundry ticket and then we went to the cleaners to pick up the suit, Chet went in and then came back out saying,”Do you have 20 bucks?” (Laughing) He was amazing to talk to during the drive to the studio and Dick got the picture. That was a very memorable shoot, for Egoiste – you remember that magazine?

DM: Yes. You also worked on American West?

MJ: Yeah. But they’d finished all the portraits before I started. I was working on the printing and then we were touring with the show, to Texas and other states.

DM: Speaking of printing, I imagine that was a big eye-opener for you, working with Dick and learning the process at that level?

MJ: Yes, absolutely. It brought things to a new level for me, of course. The entire experience was amazing; to sort of run a studio. And in a way that was probably the most important thing for me.

DM: After the two years with Dick, why did you decide to move on?

MJ: I think I was scared of staying an assistant for too long. I’d been assisting for seven years, and knew assistants who never moved on. It seemed like a good time; I felt ready. Actually, you never feel entirely ready, but it felt like the right time to move on, so I came back to Stockholm and started my own studio, this was ’87.

DM: When did you think you began to develop a strong idea of your own personal style – was it while working with Dick?

MJ: When you’ve been an assistant for seven years, in a sense starting out, of course you don’t know exactly what you want. I mean, you hold on to what you learned in terms of lighting, but the images you want to create take time to develop.

DM: What jobs did you begin with? Was it only Swedish magazines and advertising, or did you have contacts in New York?

MJ: No, I didn’t have any sort of direct advertising or editorial contacts in New York. In Stockholm, people were curious, as they knew I’d worked with Avedon. I started working for a Swedish magazine called Clic, which was one of the few good fashion magazines, and that gave me the opportunity to work for each issue and try things out, which was very good. In the beginning I worked on smaller advertising jobs, but quite quickly I started to get bigger clients, such as H&M.

DM: When was the first time you shot editorials and advertising jobs for someone outside Sweden?

MJ: I started travelling in the early 90s, when I first came to Paris. I had tear sheets in my book of Helena Christiansen, with whom I had worked with early on. We’d done a few things for Clic magazine. So when I went to French Glamour they said, ”Wow, this is amazing,” and they wanted me to do something for them. I began working for French Glamour almost the same way I began working for Clic. I worked for them regularly, almost every month and it worked out very well for me. And in ’91, I moved to Paris with my family. Even though I was based in Paris I was constantly travelling around the world, almost every shoot I did for French Glamour was a trip. Things were different then. It was all about European clients for me in those days, it really became an international arena when my agent, Annette Wenzel, approached me, I felt ”Ok, let’s try this but I’m not going to move to New York” I had a lot going on then, I was shooting for French Vogue and British Vogue and I wasn’t ready to move. But she insisted and we have worked together ever since. My first shoot for US Vogue was a story with Grace Coddington that wasn’t published. It was a big story with Tatjana Patitz that we shot out in LA. I think it was too European; it was quite moody and sort of Bergman-ish, and I don’t think Anna (Wintour) was that into it. However they did call me back and we started collaborating. My first big campaign was Tiffany’s, and soon after I met Trey Laird who introduced me to Donna Karan. It was like a different world, we travelled extensively shooting in Morocco and Vietnam. We shot all their different lines with Cate Blanchett, Jeremy Irons, Karen Elson, Angela Lindvall, Amber Valetta and many others, later on we worked on The Gap campaigns.

DM: You mention you had a big obsession with David Bowie as a teenager; have you shot him yet?

MJ: No I haven’t, and I always wanted to. I actually came quite close to shooting him for the portraits I just did for New York Times. Last year I shot Iggy and Lou Reed. It would have been amazing to shoot Bowie as well, but unfortunately it didn’t work out.

DM: I interviewed Fabien (Baron) the other night for this issue. When was the first time you got in contact with Fabien?

MJ: I think it was through Joel Berg. He assisted Fabien at (Harper’s) Bazaar, and I think he wanted us to meet and shoot a story for Bazaar, which we did. Around the mid 90’s we started working together for Arena and Arena Homme+.

DM: When do you think your relationship with Fabien became closer – at French Vogue, or was it earlier?

MJ: It was earlier than French Vogue. It was during the time we worked together at Arena Homme+. We became really good friends and have worked together ever since on campaigns like Calvin Klein, Calvin Klein Jeans, Hugo Boss and fragrances like Eternity and Envy, we recently shot Dior.

DM: So how would you describe your collaborations with Fabien? Do you have some sort of routine when you begin discussing ideas?

MJ: No, I wouldn’t say we have a routine. It’s never a routine. It’s always different angles on the jobs. He brings out the best in a team and never settles for less. He’s taught me a lot.

DM: What is the most difficult phase in your creative process?

MJ: I feel that time is an aspect, it seems that we all have less and less of it. Which means that the creative process sometimes suffers.

DM: You did the book Speed of Life and I know you had an obsession with Formula 1. Was that the main reason for doing that book?

MJ: Yes and no. I follow it, and I especially enjoyed watching Formula 1 on TV when I was younger, but I wasn’t really a nerd, someone who knew everything about it. Then through Hugo Boss, which sponsors McLaren, I got the chance to see a race in 2000. We went to Monza, which was amazing. I discovered all the things surrounding the actual race, which I never really understood when I saw it on TV, and it was so mind-blowing, the whole thing. The audience was so much bigger, with families and kids. It’s not just 50 people with a glass of champagne; it’s a very big sport. So I thought I wanted to make a project around it.

DM: And what was the process going from that idea to having it published by Steidl?

MJ: I followed the F1 circuit over several years without having a specific plan from the outset, and then along the way I thought that the material was strong enough to become a book and an exhibition…

DM: Was that also your first solo show?

MJ: Yes, It was my first exhibition. I had works in group shows before, at MoMa in NYC, Saatchi Gallery in London, CNP in Paris, Moderna Museet in Stockholm amongst others.

DM: Why did you decide on Steidl?

MJ: That came through my friend and art director Greger Ulf Nilson. He had a relationship with Gerhard (Steidl) already, so we asked Gerhard if perhaps he would be interested in doing a Formula 1 book. And then he actually became very excited about it.
DM: In terms of the process, did Gerhard suggest papers, or was it all down to you and Greger?

MJ: It was Greger and I who worked on the design process; Gerhard was not really involved.

DM: Is that your only book so far?

MJ: I had previously published a selection of my earlier b/w works, with a small publisher in Stockholm.

DM: Since Speed of Life, have you had thoughts of making another big book?

MJ: I think the whole Speed of Life project was really important for me. I enjoyed doing that in between work, having the chance to go and focus on something else. I’ve actually done two book projects since. I had an exhibition in Stockholm called Dum Dum Boys with images of Iggy (Pop), and we made a publication to accompany that.

DM: I guess in the near future there won’t be a big book with all of your most important work?

MJ: Well, I’m thinking about it. It would be fun to do. Fabien has been asking me, ”When are you doing a book, when are you doing a book?” Since Fabien started at Interview, we have photographed so many interesting personalities; artists, designers, actors such as Michelle Williams, Marion Cotillard, James Franco, Ryan Gosling, Rihanna, Christopher Kane, Miuccia Prada and Marc Jacobs. It is really fantastic to meet these creatives and it would definitely be well worth bringing them all together in a book.

DM: Do you feel part of a generation?

MJ: I am definitely part of the analog generation. Although digital has its benefits, I am thankful for having been around at the time when photography was about film, darkroom work etc. I still get chills from looking at a beautiful b/w print.

DM: Which stylists do you have the closest relationship with?

MJ: Definitely Karl, of course…and Anastasia Barbieri, George Cortina and Edward Enninful.

DM: How do you view your collaborations with Karl – what makes him work for you as a photographer?

MJ: We’ve been working together for so long and we sort of grew together. But I think what’s so amazing about him is that he’s very much into photography, and making the image about more than…

DM: …just the clothes.

MJ: Exactly. I think that’s probably the most important thing to me, that he has such a strong point of view making the image.

DM: So looking back, which story holds the strongest memories and why?

MJ: I still think the Dutch story is one of my strongest. It was so unusual at the time to go with 80 pages of nude people, for a fashion magazine…

DM: When you look back at your career…what are you the most proud of?

MJ: That I have managed to combine my career and still have a family, as much as I love photography it is important to have something else outside the industry. I get a lot of inspiration from being in the world ”outside,” spending time in nature, the archipelago in Stockholm is a very inspiring place whenever I find time to go fishing, and just to hang out with friends.

DM: What excites you about the future, personally or in terms of fashion in general?

MJ: I have just recently moved to New York, which has been exciting. I’m now working on finding a space here, somewhere I can set up a small studio. I want to be able to work on projects that are more personal, and commissions, portraits and so on, in a smaller, more intimate setting – where it’s possible to focus on the subject, to scale away the superfluous…

Daniel Magnussen: What campaigns are you working on for spring/summer 2012?

Fabien Baron: Well, all the Calvin Klein campaigns of course, and a few fragrances – for Calvin Klein, Giorgio Armani, Fendi, and Madonna. We’re also doing Dior Homme with Karl Lagerfeld and the Dior womenswear campaign with Mila Kunis. Those are the few that come to mind right now.

DM: I wanted to ask you, looking back, do you have one campaign that means the most to you?

FB: That’s difficult to say. Maybe one of my favourite campaigns was the original ck One campaign with Steven Meisel and all the early Calvin Klein with Kate (Moss) and David Sims. I also like the work I did for Balenciaga with David as well as the Burberry campaigns with Mario Testino. But strangely enough, my fondest memories of all are the films, like ck One, Aqua di Giò for men, YSL Parisienne with Kate, Euphoria with Natalia (Vodianova), Fan di Fendi, and the Calvin Klein brand commercial with Lara (Stone). Maybe I have good memories of these films because I directed them all (laughing). I like films and I love to direct; it feels very natural for me, very similar to putting a magazine together.

DM: Do you have a favourite campaign from the past that isn’t one of yours?

FB: Oh there are plenty of those, there are plenty of campaigns I see every season that are fantastic and that I wish I’d worked on.

DM: Which campaign made the biggest impression on you growing up?

FB: It’s got to be Guy Bourdin’s for Jourdan. Those pictures, and his work in general, really grabbed my attention when I was around 15 or 16. I was looking at French Vogue every month back then and I would see all his work as well as the work of Helmut Newton and also those amazing still lives by Daniel Jouanneau. Later on, when I moved to New York, I was really impressed by what Bruce Weber had done for Calvin Klein. Those images were so iconic. It definitely made me want to work there.

DM: When do you think your interest in photography began?

FB: Very early – I got my first camera when I was 13 and I’ve been taking pictures ever since. For years, I did a lot of personal work, mostly landscapes with an 8×10 camera, but also some portraits and loads of still lifes. I never wanted to touch fashion because I felt it was a conflict with all the famous photographers I was working with. I thought, in their eyes, I am the Art Director, the guy that puts their pictures together on the page, and I am the guy who’s supposed to help them on set. I am certainly not the guy that takes the picture. It was only much later, after working at Harper’s Bazaar, that I decided it was fine for me to put myself out there as a photographer. I was not working for any magazine at that point so the time was right. Because I’d already been taking pictures for years on my own, by the time I started doing it professionally I was already very experienced and had developed my own style. I feel pictures have always been a part of my own identity, my own vision. As long as my images don’t look like someone else’s, then I don’t see why I shouldn’t do it. Now, if I’m really attracted to a certain subject matter, I shoot it myself and I enjoy it a lot.

DM: So when was the first time you actually shot for one of your magazines and had an image published?

FB: It was a men’s fashion story I did with Karl Templer for Arena Homme+, very high-speed flash photography, very technical and utilitarian – just like the fashion at the time. No one was taking that kind of picture then, so I wanted to try it out. Then I started shooting more men’s fashion, mostly action pictures, like someone jumping through glass, or on fire, or running at night into water – unusual stuff. Dennis Freedman from W Magazine gave me my first women’s fashion shoot. He wanted a story on the Olympic Games, since I was the action guy. I shot for W a few times after that, like this crazy concert story with Gisele (Bündchen) and a bunch of kids with tattoos all over just going wild. Gisele was crowd surfing.

DM: Obviously you enjoy taking pictures as much as everything else…

FB: Yes I do. For me, art direction, photography, directing and design in general, are all the same thing – there’s no difference in my mind. They are all forms of communication and ways to express a point of view with different languages and vocabularies, but the meaning is the same. For me, a fashion picture is not a finished product until it is in a magazine, with a title beside it, integrated into an environment. A fashion picture needs context, a specific reference of time and place . . . a reason to exist.

DM: Your father was an art director at a French newspaper. Tell me what you think that you learned from him?

FB: I started my career in newspapers with him. He was tough but a great teacher. What I learned from him was the concept of journalism – having a message to convey, having information to communicate, and how to deliver it in the best and fastest way possible. After a few years I wanted to work on a monthly magazine, though. On a basic level of art direction, the way a magazine works and the way a newspaper works are similar. The way information is relayed and how that information works structurally – once you learn that, you’re fine. But now you have to start putting some style into the page, to refine the skill of placing pictures and using type properly, meaningfully, and to work on the pacing and the beat of the magazine. It is almost like building a piece of music – you have a core structure, then you stylize the other elements. I think part of the reason I was successful was that I always remembered the importance of words and the basic concept of journalism. Yes I design, but the design is not gratuitous. If I make a word big on the page, or the other way around, that’s because it makes sense for what the words say. A lot of people play with lettering, or color, for no reason. It’s just decoration then.

DM: What is your first step when you’re starting out on a new magazine?

FB: Well, I want to build my team first and find out what team I really can have, in order to succeed. That’s very tricky because it involves many different individuals with many different egos. A magazine isn’t one person, the editor; it’s a team. If you have a weak link, the chain breaks. You need all layers to complement one another. From the journalists, writers, and fashion editors to the producers and photographers – you need the right people with the right spirit and attitude to convey your point of view in a precise way.

DM: Which team have you enjoyed working with the most?

FB: I think the team at (Harper’s) Bazaar, was really special. It was an amazing mix of people, but also such an interesting time for fashion. Liz Tilberis was a very special editor and we certainly did some of the most iconic works of the 90s there. At Interview, I have the right mix as well. I have such a longstanding relationship with Karl Templer that we barely need to talk. We’re exactly on the same page and I trust him the same way Liz Tilberis trusted me. We’re also a small team, with a small budget. But the amount of work we can put out there is tremendous and at such a high quality level that it just proves that the team is right. At French Vogue, it was different. Some elements of the team I thought weren’t right, even though the magazine was visually very strong. People weren’t on the same page, and it cracked at some point. That was a shame for Carine (Roitfeld) mostly, because I think she paid the consequence for that.

DM: Was that when you realized you needed to have your own magazine – to be in control?

FB: Yes, at that point, that’s exactly what I thought. And when I witnessed all that disruption and negativity there, which was really unnecessary, I told myself, never again. Funnily enough, right before taking on French Vogue I had gone to Jonathan Newhouse with this idea for a new magazine. He said the timing wasn’t right for them (Conde Nast) but that in the near future they might be interested. However, in the meantime, he said there’s a magazine that really needs your help – French Vogue. I met up with Carine, who had proposed me for the position a few years prior. I finally accepted because I was really intrigued by her and I liked her. I felt her point of view on fashion was different and right for the time, and that I could make her vision more accurate, more precise – give her a package that was tighter and more consistent. The magazine had been rather inconsistent – with stories that were very strong in some places, and very weak in others. I think I helped Carine gain confidence as a strong Editor, but mostly I sharpened the product and made it more consistent. I think that was my role there. And she quickly became a real star, and the magazine gained a lot of power on the international fashion scene. But having said that, there were elements in the team that were very destructive and after four years there it did not add up for me anymore, too much politics, not enough focus and good work. I knew that ultimately it wouldn’t work. I knew it was time for me to leave.

DM: And you went to Interview?

FB: Exactly. Back in New York. Home. I knew the subject matter of Interview, and I’d worked there before and thought it was an amazing cultural magazine because of its past, because of Andy Warhol’s legacy. It was also important for me to take on the challenge of being the Editor this time around. I knew I could do it and make it right. I think we’ve managed very well so far, considering the economic landscape in publishing right now. The magazine today, has become a bit of a cult product again, with a very strong following and a real point of view. We stand strong and we’ve certainly moved the magazine up the ladder of style. We’ve also been really forthcoming on the digital front. We have a very successful website, which the magazine never had before, and we were the first magazine on iPad.

DM: In terms of casting for Interview, do you always feature people whose work you like personally?

FB: Most of the time we pick people we like and that are in the news at the moment. But we always try to reinvent them, to twist things around photographically and fashion-wise. We need to put out a different product than Vanity Fair or W, which are our closest competitors.

DM: How much do you speak with Peter Brant? Is he very specific about what he expects from the magazine?

FB: At first, I think he was unsure as to whether we could do it or not. But then he saw the first few issues we’d done, and he said, “Okay, you guys know what you’re doing.” He basically leaves us alone. Or he calls to compliment us, “I loved the last issue, fantastic.” Sometimes he sends us an email with some ideas he has. Peter is a very cultured character with extremely good taste, and with loads of charm and charisma. He is a real asset to the magazine for us and we welcome his involvement anytime he feels like it.

DM: When you came to New York in ’82 and started at GQ, you worked with Bruce Weber. How did your collaborations with Patrick Demarchelier and Steven Meisel begin?

FB: Both Patrick and Bruce were already at GQ when I came there. Patrick was shooting the bathing suit stories GQ had always done twice a year, and we became friends right away. I was doing Bruce’s layouts at the time but he didn’t even know that. We never met until we worked together at Italian Vogue with Franca (Sozzani). I first heard of Steven Meisel when his portfolio came to GQ. When I looked at it I thought he was amazing. I was only a junior art director so I could not push for him at GQ, but I really wanted to work with him. So the first time I got an advertising job (Barney’s), I hired him.

DM: In 1990 you launched Baron & Baron. What was the idea behind that?

FB: Well, I’d started to do a few advertising campaigns for Valentino, and I thought it would be easier to have a proper set up. I wanted my own studio to be independent and have different clients so I didn’t have all my eggs in the same basket.

DM: How many people did you start with?

FB: At first it was me and an assistant. Now we’re 50 plus. We’re a full service agency; we do everything from A to Z.

DM: Do you still work a lot with Box (Studios)?

FB: Yes, all the time. We have to rotate the work sometimes because there’s so much of it. We can’t have all the work in one place.

DM: Actually I’m interviewing Pascal Dangin tonight…

FB: Pascal is amazing. He’s created a new standard for a finished image with Box and helped so many photographers, including me. His model has been copied by many. But he’s still the number one retoucher, and I think there’s something very special about the way he works with photographers – pulling the pictures up out of the crap sometimes. Believe me, he’s a magician and he’s very talented.

DM: Which other art directors working today do you really respect?

FB: I think M/M do a very good job. They’re original. They do their own thing and listen to their gut.

DM: What do you think of their work on Interview before you came back?

FB: I don’t think M/M was the right choice for Interview. The whole direction in which the magazine was going was wrong anyway and did not service the advertisers well.

DM: Is it true that you love to play the guitar?

FB: Yes. It’s nothing major though. I’m not classically trained; I just do my own thing. I’ve played all my life, and for me it’s just a way to relax and forget about everything.

DM: Have you recorded anything?

FB: At one point I started to, but actually I’m just really happy to know about music and I can really appreciate a good musician. I’m so passionate about people when they have a great skill. When I see someone playing the guitar, or someone drawing, performing, anything at a high level, I’m like a kid. It’s so exciting. I just love seeing people using their skills better than anyone else.

DM: Do you collect guitars?

FB: I have a few (laughing). I have about 10.

DM: Which fashion designer do you most admire working today?

FB: Well, Nicolas Ghesquière is amazing. He’s a true original. His work at Balenciaga is the most forward out there. He’s defining the future. Marc Jacobs is an amazing designer as well because he was able to make the business of fashion really big and at the same time keep the work interesting. Between Louis Vuitton and his own lines – it’s a huge business. He has an ability to marry art and commerce and be extremely relevant for today. Miuccia Prada is also on top of my list. She’s always pushing the limits of fashion and she has redefined the retail experience. I also like Riccardo Tisci. He was the only designer who was able to turn Givenchy around.

DM: What do you think of Marc Jacobs’ campaigns?

FB: I love them. Marc understands that in advertising, repetition gives you reputation. He got that down. He stuck with Juergen (Teller), with the small picture on a white background. So when you open the magazine you remember it, and you know what it is – there’s a familiarity. Fashion by principle is always changing; that is its strength but also its downfall. If you think about it from a customer’s perspective, you can get really confused about the image that some labels put out there because it’s all over the place and isn’t consistent. They change everything – the ideas, the photographer, the stylists, the layout – every season so they can conform to the trend of the moment, but do they really think about the long term? About their own DNA? And how will that reflect on their business? What do they stand for at the end?

DM: Whose idea was it to shoot Riccardo Tisci with all the dogs for a recent issue of Interview?

FB: It was Ludivine (Poiblanc). She thought that was good for Riccardo, because there’s a side of him that’s anchored in violence. He loves danger and you can feel that in his work. It was a perfect match for his Black Panther collection. Needless to say that Steven Klein just loved doing that story. He is so talented.

DM: How was Nicolas (Ghesquière) to work with?

FB: He was always very respectful of my knowledge, and he absorbed it all, and now he doesn’t need me any more. There’s no art direction for the Balenciaga campaigns now, it’s all him. He’s like a sponge. He takes from people and makes something of his own with it, and I mean that in a very positive way, like a great chef. And he’s a fighter – he won’t leave something alone until it’s exactly right. You only do the best work for these people. When I worked for Nicolas I tried harder than I did for anyone else. He keeps you on your toes and you have to roll with the challenge. The only other person who was like that, who could understand immediately what you say, forcing you to move up, challenging you more and more, all the time, was Calvin Klein.

DM: Recently interviewmagazine.com has been updated.

FB: Yes, we changed it entirely and we have a new iPad application as well. Because I really believe that’s the future. The landscape for magazines has changed entirely, and the problem facing magazines is that information that used to belong to them has disappeared. Now it’s on the internet. So what magazines have to do, I think, is reinforce a strong point of view, the core idea, the imagery, the quality. But when the day comes when someone says “I’m going to do a website that’s high quality, with great photography, great wording,” it’s going to be trouble for magazines. You have the moving image right there at your fingertips. Right now everyone’s playing
around with shitty cameras and it doesn’t matter because none of it means anything. But you have to remember that’s how TV started, and pretty soon things are going to change.

DM: So do you think Interview will one day be released 4 – 6 times a year, with everything else on the web?

FB: I believe so. I think magazines are going to have to put more quality into the product, something that has the quality of an object, something less disposable. The throwaway quality of magazines right now is going to be a problem in the future.

DM: How do you see a magazine like American Vogue fitting into that?

FB: I don’t think they’ll have a problem because they’re the leader. American Vogue is believable to women. Anna Wintour’s voice makes sense and is very powerful – she relates to women in a way that no one else does. I’m not saying what they do is the right solution for all magazines, but Vogue’s point of view is a valid one and the content they put out there is very exclusive.

DM: You published a book with SteidlDangin a few years ago. Do you have plans for anything similar in the future?

FB: Actually, I’m working on a new book and it’s being laid out as we speak. It’s going to include everything I’m interested in, from magazine work, typefaces, graphics, furniture, fragrances, ideas, concepts and campaigns. I’ve organized it chronologically. I still take a lot of personal pictures as well, and I am also planning for my second photography book.

DM: Can you tell me how your relationship with Mert & Marcus started?

FB: Well, it started about 10 years ago when I was the editor of Arena Homme+. We did a story together for the magazine and jumped almost immediately into an advertising campaign for a fragrance. After that, we worked together regularly. I brought them much later to French Vogue, which took me a long time and was very difficult because Mert & Marcus worked for Pop at the time, and Jonathan (Newhouse) didn’t want to use them because he thought it was a real conflict with Condé Nast. Ultimately, I got them there, we had everything all worked out, and I basically left them a month afterwards, (laughing), to go to Interview and they were like, ”How can you leave us all alone after you brought us here? You bastard… boo hoo…” but they worked it all out with Carine. They were also very excited to work for Interview and they shot the first cover with Kate Moss. They’re really great, fantastic to work with – one, they’re very warm; two, very funny; three, very talented. I get along with them well and I like the result when we work together.

DM: What are the differences and similarities between the two of them?

FB: It’s definitely a team effort with them. They have a bond. Sometimes Marcus will make sure things are going the right way, while Mert is doing the dirty work working on the set, and other times it’s the other way around, depending on the job. There are times when one or the other is more involved, depending on the chemistry of the situation.

DM: Does any one of your collaborations with them stand out in your mind?

FB: I think when I arranged for them to shoot Madonna for Interview, they did a really amazing job. I wanted to bring them and M together because I thought it would be a perfect match. She’s crazy about them now. They made her look incredible. I don’t think she has looked like that for a long time. And they got on very well on a personal level. Now we’re all working together on her fragrance campaign, and they’re probably going to be working on her album as well.

DM: Who else do you think shot her well?

FB: I think Meisel really got her perfectly many times. Of course there’s also Herb Ritts, Bruce Weber, and Steven Klein. Including Mert & Marcus, I think these five photographers were able to capture her character without losing their own identity in the process. It’s quite difficult for a photographer to deliver in front of someone that is so used to the camera and that has basically done it all. It’s hard to do something new, and she’s such a big star that often she can take over the image if you show any sign of weakness. But when you see Herb Ritts’ pictures of her, you see a Herb Ritts picture; Meisel, you see a Meisel picture, and so on.

DM: How would you compare the new generation of photographers to the ones you worked with in the past, such as Avedon and Newton?

FB: I think if you look at the older generation of photographers, such as Newton, Irving Penn, Avedon, Guy Bourdin, and so on, they defined the territory of fashion photography. They covered all the bases. They did absolutely everything. And I think what the newer generation is doing is an emulation of their work. I don’t think they can bring very much more to the plate. I am not saying they’re copying, but the reference points of Newton, Penn, Avedon, and Guy Bourdin are so iconic, so powerful, and so well defined, that it’s very difficult to step away from that. I think the older generation of photographers had the luck to be there at the beginning, so they were able to establish the dictionary of fashion, which photographers now take small words from, and make it into their work. Steven Meisel may be the exception to that phenomenon.

DM: You’re working a lot with Mert & Marcus, Mikael Jansson and Craig McDean. Is there a reason Mario Sorrenti or David Sims doesn’t work as much with you at Interview?

FB: I think Mario, who is a good friend of mine, is more interested in working with fashion than with personalities, which we obviously often have to do. Photographing a personality is a completely different ball game to using a model – it’s way more challenging, but at the same time, if you succeed, it’s much more powerful. The Mert & Marcus pictures I mentioned earlier, if you use a model, they can look great, but if you manage to make those pictures with Madonna, they become iconic. You’re going to remember them for a long time, because subject matter is important. David Sims has a contract with Condé Nast that prevents him from working with us.

DM: You’re very involved on set – how much freedom would you say your photographers are allowed?

FB: Well, Karl Templer and I have very strong points of view. I’ve never been the type of guy, nor has Karl, that just goes on-set and says to the photographer to just take some great pictures and we’ll do the layout. We have very specific ideas and we need to keep the magazine fresh, so we come with a precise point of view to establish a real dialogue with the photographers. We come up with concepts that fit their criteria in the first place so there are no surprises. We also push for good ideas that are really unique and properly researched and that make sense on the fashion landscape at the moment. We also want to push the photographers into areas that we believe are their territories, even if they have previously not explored them. Usually we rapidly end up on the same vibe, so it’s never a struggle. Ultimately, that’s why the magazine works I think, because we have new ideas and that those ideas are well executed, so they are believable. It also means we have consistency – the voice, the tone, the fashion, the imagery and so on, it’s all the same point of view.

DM: Who discusses the main ideas for upcoming issues? Is that only you and Karl?

FB: Mostly us. We’ve been working together for 15 years, and I know what he’s about. I know his strengths and weaknesses and he knows mine. So when we’re planning we’re fast and decisions are made on the spot. When we’re on shoots together, we know what we’re doing and where we’re going. That’s why we’re doing the magazine the way we do it and that’s how we get good results. Listen, the photographers bring a lot to the plate of course, and we’re there for them as much as we can, but at the end of the game, it’s also our solid point of view that makes the difference, and it is the direction that we’ve taken the magazine into that makes it what it is today. We’d rather do it this way because we’re not going to do trashy product, we just can’t. The work has to have a level of sophistication and creativity, which is why we only work with very creative photographers. I’m extremely interested in the details, which focuses the point of view. I think it probably helps the photographers to feel that they’re in good hands, because there’s a guarantee of a certain level of quality with us. And they know that if anything goes wrong, we’re going to pick up the pieces and make it work.

DM: You are using few new photographers at Interview. Why?

FB: To showcase a photographer requires a tremendous amount of time and energy. You need to help them, nurture them and appreciate them. Take the good and take the bad. I’ve always been very committed to helping new photographers, but because of the amount of pages I have with this particular magazine, I can’t work with 10 new people. I have to focus. I can only work with three or four. The ones we’ve used so far are already getting bigger assignments with other magazines and some advertising campaigns. It has already paid off. When you see the work that Sebastian Kim or Robbie Fimmano have done for the magazine it is quite impressive. They are so dedicated that maybe in 10 years these guys will be the new crop, just the same way Craig McDean, David Sims, and Mario Sorrenti were when they started with me at Harper’s Bazaar.

DM: Have there been photographers you’ve invested in that didn’t live up to expectations?

FB: Of course. It’s a bet – you put time and energy into managing talent, and sometimes it just doesn’t come out. It can’t all be coming from you – they have to be confident in their own vision. I mean, if you look at Mert & Marcus, of course they’re going to make a good picture because they’re so incredibly confident. Picture taking is mostly about confidence and conviction. There are a lot of young photographers who aren’t confident enough in their own ideas, and if the picture does not come out right away they abandon it. For a picture to be perfect after three clicks, that’s very rare. A studied image needs work on composition, light, colour, attitude, body expression, hair, make-up, and that’s only the tip of the iceberg. You have so many people involved in building the image, the photographer needs to be able to direct a whole team in the right direction to raise the image an extra five notches. You have to build your own authority. If you’re weak, everybody reads it. Why does Steven Meisel take such fantastic photos? Not only because he has the ability, but also because he knows what he wants; therefore, he can make every single person on set work harder towards creating the perfect image. And if you’re not on that level, you’re just out of the team. Only the best remain. And every bit counts, from the computer guy that gives you a nice coloration on set, to the hair stylist that makes the extra little flick, to the lighting assistant that puts the bounce card at just the right angle, and so on, all these little details can make the image 20 times better. And that’s how you arrive at a superior image.

DM: How did you first work with Karl?

FB: I looked at his portfolio because he was up for a job for Hugo Boss with Avedon and me. I liked what he was doing, but I thought he was maybe a bit too trendy. You know, Hugo Boss is a man’s man kind of brand. But when we met I thought he had an interesting point of view on fashion, so we decided to work together. We started to do other jobs as well, and as we started to become friends I realized we had a very similar way of seeing things. I feel we really complement each other well, and together we’re a really good team. I’ve worked with everybody in this business and I haven’t met anyone else I have that type of connection with. Karl is not only a stylist; he’s much more than that. He can make the most forward fashion story on one day and strike it right on a commercial level for a brand like Gap or H&M on the next day. To be able to navigate from highbrow fashion to a simple pair of jeans and T-shirt, to understand what the brand is all about, and avoid being pigeon-holed as a guy who can do only one thing is not so easy. He can work with anyone and do a good job, and it’s the same with me – that’s why we get along well. I don’t eliminate, I work across the board, and I love to, because it gives me a more complete understanding of fashion, from super-pointy to super-mass.

DM: How do you see the industry compared with 10 years ago?

FB: I think over the past five years it’s become an accessories business. Fashion has taken a backseat to accessories, which is where the money is. It’s also become a personality-driven business at the moment, meaning all the big brands rely on stars. It’s all about the bag, the shoe and the star. In terms of being creative, I think apart from a few brands, things aren’t being moved along very much. It’s step and repeat, step and repeat…

DM: So what would you suggest to your clients?

FB: I think they have to take risks. Success is not only about coming up with a very calculated equation; it has to have an element of risk because believe it or not, it is in risk taking that you find novelty. And the market out there wants new things. People love new things. There’s no real formula and everything has to work on a business level as well. And very few people can do that well.

DM: As creative director for Calvin Klein, do you have the freedom to do that?

FB: Yes, and the company has been extremely successful. At the same time, there’s a catalogue of images for Calvin Klein stuck in people’s minds. Everyone knows there is a very precise vision of what Calvin Klein is about. When you own that kind of vocabulary, you have to use it because it is your DNA and the repetition gives you a strong brand identity and allows you to mark out your territory. At the same time, you cannot forget about the novelty; it has to be added for the new generation, and that is quite challenging for big brands like Calvin Klein. So my job is to infuse newness into the brand, within an image that people already know. In fashion you always need to push, but it needs to be in the right direction.

DM: Looking back at your work for Calvin, which period was the most exciting?

FB: I think when Calvin was there, because he was really the voice of the company. When I was working for him, he appreciated my work because he felt that it was Calvin Klein. We felt very close to that philosophy and that specific image, and to the dream he was selling. We invented ck One together. We cast Marky Mark for underwear and Kate Moss for jeans and used new photographers, expanding the vision and redefining it at the same time. In the early ’90s, Calvin had a great authority and the work we were doing was one on one. Now it’s different – I have to respond to a group of people because it’s a public company. It’s still very creative and I’m still very proud of the work I do, but I think the work responds to what the company stands for today, which is Calvin Klein the brand, as opposed to the man.

DM: How did you start working together?

FB: He just called me. At that time I was thinking, oh my God, I must be so lucky because three very big things are happening all at the same time – Madonna’s Sex book, Harper’s Bazaar and Calvin Klein. Weeks apart. I thought, will I ever top this? I ended up having three full-time jobs at the same time: Calvin Klein, Bazaar, and my own company. It was such an amazing point in my career, because I had to learn so much so rapidly and I had to be very quick at decision making. Now it has become extremely professional since I’ve been doing this for 30 years and I know the job inside out.

DM: Which photographer do you think you’ve shared the most energy with over the years?

FB: I have to say, I’ve worked with Steven Meisel for almost 25 years, and still today Mr. Meisel always has a trick up his sleeve. He can solve any problem and respond to any challenge. He’s incredible.

DM: Which of the magazines you’ve worked for do you think brought out your strongest creative work?

FB: First of all, I enjoyed each magazine for different reasons. When I went to GQ, I was coming straight from France. I was very young and I got hired by Alex Liberman, the Editorial Director at Condé Nast. He liked me and I learned a lot working with him. He was a giant, the only one of that caliber at the time. We spoke French together and he liked that because nobody else could understand. He was wicked. Then I went to Italian Vogue and that was the first magazine I worked for where I could do whatever I liked, as an art director. Working with Franca Sozzani was so refreshing and innovative at the time. I was able to do a lot of very interesting layouts. She was the first one to give me a real break, a crack at the top, and that was the time when I really began to develop my personal style, and where I realized I could make a magazine very well. Then I went to Interview and I’m still very proud of the work I did at that time. I think it was truly groundbreaking, and the imagery we were making was new. But Ingrid (Sischy) and I didn’t see eye-to-eye, so she fired me. I did not want to work for any magazine after that. I started my own company instead. One day I was giving an interview, and I was asked which magazines I’d like to work on. I said only that Harper’s Bazaar could be an amazing redo. I got the phone call two days later. I couldn’t believe it. And when I met with Liz, it was an instant connection. I knew it was going to be great, and that was the first time I really put a real strong stamp on a magazine. I saw Harper’s Bazaar as a sleeping beauty, and Liz knew that I would bring newness to the magazine and a new crop of photographers, as well as the old guard. We gave Vogue a run for their money. It was a very exciting time.

DM: In the past, which editors-in-chief did you learn the most from?

FB: I learned from all of them. I think from Franca, I learned not to be scared, and with Liz I learned teamwork – how to create a positive environment for talent to be able to express themselves, and to get what you want from them with a smile. With Carine, it was about going back to my roots, and purely about fashion for fashion’s sake and with a twist of intrigue.

DM: When did you decide you wanted to be in charge of a magazine?

FB: You know what, for what I know, I could have done that a lot earlier, but who would have given me that opportunity, to be the editor-in-chief of a woman’s magazine? I have edited a men’s magazine and now Interview, a cultural magazine. You have to understand, since I am not a woman and since I am also not gay, I am not valid in people’s mind for a women’s fashion magazine. Can you tell me one women’s fashion magazine where the editor-in-chief is a straight man?

DM: Self-Service?

FB: Yes, sure, but he had to publish the magazine himself. The same with Purple. It’s not like they called them to edit any Vogues or Bazaars around the world. They don’t believe a straight guy can do it. It needs to be a woman so she can sit front row to give the good looks, and represent, represent, represent. But it doesn’t mean the magazine’s good… And that’s part of a bigger problem in fashion, where the persona they’re putting out there to represent the product is more important than the product itself.

DM: Is there anyone out there right now you think are doing a good job?

FB: There are obviously lots of smaller magazines that I think are great and I can appreciate their work. But to be honest, on the big level, I think the most impressive person out there is still Anna Wintour. She has a product that’s working exactly the way it should be working for what it is. Like it or not, it works and she does a good job. She’s the queen. If you asked me, which magazine has done the most to shape fashion in recent years, I’d say French Vogue, and before that Italian Vogue. But the one with the most power and the most relevance is American Vogue. I know there are a lot of people out there doing interesting things but it’s the noise that you put out there that actually gives your product a place to live. If you look at Love, or Purple, they’re doing a very good job, but it’s unfortunately small. That makes all the difference. Right now, I work in probably the smallest of the big magazines.

DM: So would you rather work on Vogue than Interview?

FB: That’s a good question… In terms of resonance, definitely. But on a practical level, would Anna work with someone like me? Would I do what she wants for Vogue? Probably not. I’d put more spice into it, and it would look better on the page, but would it really matter? Would it sell more? Maybe not. And she may say, we have the formula already so why mess around with it… repetition is reputation, right?

Available at Storm Fashion

Intermission: Location?

Gaia Repossi: Place Vendôme, Paris.

IM: Do you work here alone?

GR: Yes, on my own with inspiring music.

IM: For how long has this been your studio?

GR: Almost 8 years now.

IM: How is the neighborhood?

GR: Boring but there’s a lot of shopping possibilities.

IM: How would you describe the style of your studio?

GR: Essential – inspired only by the mind and its dreams.

IM: The style of your studio, is it arranged or has it evolved little by little?

GR: It has evolved into something more and more pure and more and more essential.

IM: What is the coolest thing in your studio?

GR: My mood board and my antique inspiration jewelry.

IM: If you should change one thing or add one thing what would it be?

GR: The neighborhood. Would love to be near the ocean.

IM: How much time do you approximately spend at your studio?

GR: Almost everyday of the week. Work, work, work.

IM; How influential are your surroundings when you work?

GR: It’s all chic around here.

IM: What are you unable to work without?

GR: Music.

IM: What would you save in a fire?

GR: Nothing. Nothing ever lasts.

IM: Chaos or order?

GR: Order. Bit maniac.

IM: Does your studio resemble your home?

GR: Yes, in a way. Though it misses my kitten.

IM: Which piece of furniture would you love to have in your studio?

GR: A couch to lie on and meditate.

IM: And which piece of art?

GR: I love empty walls.

IM: What are you working on at the moment?

GR: Tribal Combs as pendants (2012).

IM: Who would you like to work with?

GR: Yves Saint Laurent