You’d think I was Chinese if you knew how often I seem to be killing time before a dim sum, but a damp Sunday morning is also good for getting to an exhibition so yesterday I nipped into the National Portrait Gallery for the Taylor Wessing photographic portrait prize (I saw Jason Bell‘s An Englishman in New York show too).

What did I think? Well, it was OK, not too bad. Plenty of fine portraits such as this one of Charlie Waite or Felix Carpio’s Wafa, but nothing that really wowed me (Bell’s show had a few stunners). I suppose I wasn’t too taken with the predominance of not-quite-heroin-chic – undernourished bored-looking people stuck onto drab environments (for example). Nowhere near enough b&w either, though I liked Sylvain Deleu’s gymnast (better ones on his web site?) and far too many pictures claiming to be “explorations”.

The winner itself doesn’t do much for me. The subject matter, a teenage girl who has just killed her first wild animal for sport, is well-framed and provocative. I couldn’t help feeling the picture would have been stronger if she’d found some other animal to slaughter – the bock’s chestnut brown fur doesn’t stand out against the horse’s chestnut browns. It does match her hair though. So again, that’s faint praise for the winning entry. But even seen in the flesh I still couldn’t work out what made the judges choose the runner-up – an artfully-casual composition personal snap showing the photographer’s wife (oh she’s British) having her breakfast with her legs wide open. Is it art or “readers wives”?

So a pretty underwhelming view, but if you’re in central London it’s a small but worthwhile show – and the ticket costs less than the price of a prawn cheung fun (though there are three on each plate).

Can’t wait to see the Eadweard Muybridge exhibition at Tate Britain (the old Tate):

Look closely at a stunning image of the Yosemite valley with its striking cloud formation; then look at a photograph taken a year later of a lighthouse at Pigeon Point in California – the sky is the same. A stunning image of Lake Tenaya, similarly, has had additional rocks added to its foreground, evident because they’re differently lit.

“He was doing all sorts of things to manipulate his images, from cutting and pasting and different negatives laid in,” said Warrell. “He would also have people touching up his photographs, improving them, painting out imperfections. He was a master of blending different elements.”

Also see “Feet off the ground“.

I’m busy for the next few weekends but the show runs until January. With my usual apology as a non-Londoner for those not living in London….

"Westminster CCTV Making our streets safer" Isn’t it good to know they’re looking after us?

Killing time on Saturday morning after seeing Delaroche’s Charles I Insulted (a 19th century conservative propaganda piece but a curiosity worth seeing) and on my way to a long-overdue dim sum (the withdrawal symptoms can be serious), this was one of a series of paintings which decorated a building site in Soho, central London. Such a welcome change from the exhaustive safety notices like “children not allowed to play on site” and well-honed corporate slogans about how their dirty great wall of plywood and scaffolding is somehow saving the planet or “working to improve the image of construction”….

The artist seems to be a certain Nathan Bowen. Nice work.

London’s new City Hall is one of the city’s more photogenic recent developments. If you don’t know it, the Norman Foster-designed building stands alone on the riverside and is surrounded by an open paved space laid out in swirls echoing the building’s strange shape. The area is completely open to the public.

Early Sunday morning – so early no-one else was about – I was at City Hall with my camera and tripod. As I had already got the pictures I wanted, and the sun was now causing flare with the 14mm Sigma wide-angle, so I was going to move on, but first I just wanted to try some alternative compositions and had the camera in my hand and the tripod over to one side. A security guard passed me and stopped about 25 metres away, and as I had the feeling he was watching me I decided to put the camera on the tripod.

Within seconds he came over and asked (politely) if I had a permit to photograph with a tripod. I told him very firmly but politely that I had not, and saw absolutely no reason why he should expect me to. After being told I supposedly needed such a permit to use a tripod, I tanked him for the information and let him know this restriction was ridiculous and I would ignore him and continue taking pictures.

We discussed it for over 10 minutes during which time he agreed there was no security issue and that no-one was liable to trip over my tripod. I continued taking pictures and, to reinforce my point, moved position two or three times. He tagged along, and radioed his supervisor, repeating my assurance that I was photographing as a hobby and that my council and income taxes helped pay for the building (maybe I should have added that I also voted for the current mayor). Eventually he was told I could continue using the tripod to photograph City Hall, but not the office blocks on the same development.

Frankly, if I want to photograph those buildings with a tripod, I will do so. If I don’t require a permit to walk right up to them or photograph there, then I won’t accept being told what type of camera equipment I can use, tripod or not, film or digital!

So go there if you’re in London and freely take your tripod. We’ve 1000 years of fighting for liberties great and small. Frankly, I also like a good argument – my next stop this morning was Speakers Corner.

Went to Somerset House recently and was blown away by its permanent Gilbert collection. Gilbert was a wealthy LA-based Brit who collected silverware, gold objects and pietre dure (pictures made from precious stone and minerals) and left it all to the country 2-3 years ago. I had heard it was world class but I’m not really into this type of thing and only saw it when I went to the chess. But it is stupendous. Definitely set some time aside!