Brajan Rašić captured the history of rock with his lens

Few were able to witness how the rock scene developed all these years.

Photography as an art was never appreciated in the Balkans, but the photographer Brian Rasic he had the opportunity to publish his works in world magazines, to work for well-known agencies, but also for big rock stars.

Rašić has been involved in photography for 40 years, as he says, he combined the beautiful and the useful, because he loved photography as well as rock and roll. He had the opportunity to see almost every world legend of pop and rock music through the lens, and he was the official photographer of the Stones and David Bowie.

It was his photos from Amy Winehouse's concert in Serbia that went around the world.

Brian talks to Magazin about his career, but also what it was like to work with films and an analog camera in the past, and how today, when technology has advanced...

Thanks to the lens, you recorded the history of rock music. Also, some pop artists stood in front of your lens. For four decades you have been doing a very creative job. How did you fall in love with photography in the first place?

It all started when I was little, analog photography. Interest in knowing how to "develop" a film, and then make black and white photos myself. It was all a kind of magic, which attracted me, photographing "artistic photos" as well as scenes from everyday socializing. It is worth noting that photography attracted only a few at that time. Rather, I was different in a way.

At the beginning of your career, you photographed many concerts, although you did not work for any newsroom officially. How did you get your accreditations?

The beginning is finding your way. It used to be possible, today it's difficult, let me tell you right away. I presented myself as a journalist/photographer of a Yugoslav music magazine and people simply believed me. Now, that doesn't go on forever either. They check you with the license associates and I remember that later those people told me that they supported me even though they didn't even know about me.

But, little by little, my photos started to appear in the jukebox and it was obvious that I justified the trust shown. It was all a lot of fun for me. You look at your idols, take photos, and the photos come out, and then you show them to the people who made it possible, and the development of events follows. Simply, you become a part of the music industry. My photos "sold records" ... that's how it used to be. I, that is, the photographers helped make it all happen, the business in the music industry.

They say that you are a "witness to fame", but have you also witnessed what fame brings?

Well, you know, if, like I said, you're part of the music industry, then it's only normal that things happen. You'll be at the beginning of Duran Duran's career, for example, and then they become a big global band. And there are many such examples.

In the early 80s, there was the so-called "second British invasion" of the US, and it was quite a big deal. The Beatles were the first, and nothing similar happened after them. Kajagoogoo, Eurythmics, Culture Club, Duran Duran, … were selling a lot of records at that time in the US as well as heavy metal Iron Maiden and the like. And I had their photos. That's it.

When you believe and do Frankie Goes to Hollywood and let's say during a photo shoot, their PR comes in and says, "guys, you're No.1 on the charts today" with Relax. Of course, later I worked with greats like Bowie, the Stones, Gilmore, ... all that was immortalized with my camera and those photos went around the world.

You've made rock and roll history. Can this musical direction experience its peak again, as it did in the '70s and '80s of the last century?

Well, that was in the '80s, and as I said, that was the last time that a new musical direction 'did business' in the US, that is globally. New Romanticism as it was called. After that, everything became different and individuals were sold, no longer trends and music trends. Heavy Metal and Hip Hop probably last the longest, but it is no longer a direction, but now individuals do the work.

You are most associated with Bowie and the Rolling Stones, you were even their official photographer. Is it complicated to work for such big stars, do they have desires and angles from which they don't like to be filmed?

In principle no. It is true that there are more 'butterflies' in the stomach than when you do something less, but in principle everything is the same. Bigger stage, stadiums, ... but photography is to immortalize what is happening in front of you. There are no requirements. Except when the Stones put me on stage to take pictures of the audience with him. Everyone is doing their job. They have theirs and I have mine.

Sometimes they don't like to see you working, sometimes they tell me through security to be careful not to fall, sometimes it's "dangerous" for a good photo. There are also individuals, who are photographed only from the left side, for example. Brian Adams just let the photographers from the side that 'suits' him. Barbra Streisand also.

But these are rare individuals. Only when they review the photos, if I am obliged to show them, they like some less than others, which is completely normal. But, in principle, everyone wants a good photo, and that's why I'm here, to take it.

You are one of the few photographers that the Stones allowed, as you said before, to get on stage. How does it feel to share the stage with them?

I was on stage with the Stones for the first time in Rio de Janeiro, in 2006, in front of almost two million people. What to say? Instead of panicking, you go into a kind of 'bubble' and hear nothing, just look for a photo. Next to me Charlie, that's me next to him, he looks at me, smiles, it's some other world, theirs and a little bit mine, within which everyone has to do what is expected.

Only later, in some photos or video, when you see yourself, you can't believe it. It is a special privilege. I was on stage with them at Glastonbury Festival, and two more times in Hyde Park. I was, I say, on the planet Stones.

Let me brag, the other day The Rolling Stones released a new live album, officially on their own label. It is actually the famous Rio concert in all possible formats. On the front cover are my photos of course. And inside of course. Now I can proudly say that I also have one 'cover', that is the front page of the Stones.

While they are on stage, there is energy, ecstasy and everything that makes up the atmosphere at a concert. How hard is it to capture all that in one photo?

It probably is and it isn't. If you have photos, then it's easy. If you don't have it, it means that it is difficult, only that it must not happen. It's normal for me. There are so many opportunities to take a good photo. If you are there, you just 'catch' her. Now, it seems that not everyone can do it. And it seems that I can since I have been going for so many years and they still call me. It means that they believe that I can, and I thank them. It's something you either have or you don't. Others know it, see it and respect it. I'm just here to work!

Today, anyone with a camera can be a photographer. How much does such an approach to this art degrade it?

In many ways. Less respect, less money, ... more work, all upside down.

We have witnessed that many photographers also use Photoshop. Does anyone know the limit up to which filters can be used, because that was not the case with analog cameras either?

I can speak for myself. I certainly use photoshop, but only as much as I have to. When a shot is taken, we make a RAW file, which is different from a JPG file. JPG is a formed photo, where minor interventions can also be done. When it comes to RAW, there is a recording that is "intended" to extract from it the image that we actually saw.

Larger interventions are possible there, but with the aim of making it "the way it was". I don't use photoshop to make someone look "better" or anything like that. My photo is to show how it really was. Only some artists require "corrections" of this kind. That's what their people do.

You had the opportunity to photograph our bands that marked the new wave. How do those moments you recorded look to you today?

Nice. All young and beautiful, 40 years have passed. I also like how I, say, saw them, or rather recorded them. You can see that I had a different approach than other photographers.

You have worked for global agencies and magazines. All those photos are used by us, but copyright is not respected. How difficult is it to protect your work in the Balkans, where the person who pays the photographer thinks that he has received all the rights?

I do not know. But I don't worry too much about it. Whoever wants to work, he knows how to do it and you can't do anything to him. You can, but only when more serious matters are involved. There's a lot you don't even know. There are no rules here. If someone has given you permission to photograph them, they are automatically considered to have the rights to your photos.

Of course it's not like that. But here people do this kind of photography after the work they do and what they do for a living. I still live only from my photography. From my copyright and sold by the Getty agency that represents them! It is serious business if you are successful at it.

Were you attracted to studio photography, as well as making them for album covers?

Not that it wasn't, but the road was taking me in a different direction. I also have covers of lesser-known bands, but from video recordings, for example. These are minor things compared to what I really do. But what I was doing got me the cover of the Stones.

Finished work with two films

You used to take photos with an analog camera, there was film, and you knew exactly how many times you had to press the shutter before it ran out. Were you waiting for the right moments then and how much did digitization make your job easier?

The film contains 36 shots. With two films, I learned to "do the job". That's how it was. So I hardened myself. Of course, that part, “first three, no flash” … the law that still exists. Today, with digital photography, you don't have to wait for anything. "You shoot a film" ... sometimes several hundred shots are shot, for those 72 sometimes.

Of course, I also take far more photos than with film. But, I still have the brain of an analog photographer and I kind of 'wait' for a photo. I tried another way, but it doesn't work. Young people shoot 800 photos for three songs and then deal with it much longer.

Today we just do everything. You take pictures, then you upload the photos, choose the best ones, process them, and just like that, you send them ready. And that's the time. Sometimes, I just put two films in my agency's inbox. Everything else, developing the film, selecting photos, shooting sets of selected photos and final distribution, all of this is done by the agency. Today they do nothing but sales.

And most photographers are given 30 percent of their earnings. So the more you work, the less money you get. These are the "advantages" of digital photography... as well as the 'we are all photographers today'. There is no longer the respect that existed when photographers were photographers.