Was HCB Really "All That"??? [Archive]

NickTrop

04-30-2008, 20:03

Cartier-Bresson was born in Chanteloup-en-Brie, near Paris, France, the eldest of five children. His father was a wealthy textile manufacturer whose Cartier-Bresson thread was a staple of French sewing kits. (Wikipedia)
------

Here's my take on HCB. Dude was born way wealthy in France. Of course, he didn't actually have to do anything useful for a living so he studied art. Gave him a good handle on composition - sorta like David Lynch and other film directors who first study painting and art. Due to his family wealth, did the kinda "cool" (but unuseful things) trust fund babies get to do - get "involved" with "art movements", hook up with "intellectuals", read Heart of Darkness - jaunts off to Africa for a while...

He then - for much of his life, walked around France and other places and took a ton of pics with his Leica. Yeah! I'd love to do that! He was credited as the first "Street Photographer" but was he really the first "digital photographer"? Shooting pic, after pic, after pic - hundreds of feet of film - never bothering with the tedious "grunt work" of developing the negatives and making prints (which is 1/2 of the art when you "make" a picture). Never. Even amateurs do this. Should we be crediting his printer as much as him? Would A.A. ever outsource this critical part of the work flow? Are his more compelling pieces a function of "even the blind monkey stumbles upon the occasional banana" - shooting pic after pic until a cool one come out, like a digital "photographer"? If I took some photos I like off the galleries in this very forum - black and white stuff, and slapped them into a book and called it an HCB collection, would people gush that it's "brilliant" because the think it's HCB? Is his work really that good or is it a function of the "Halo Effect"? Does some of his "genius" result because they're old black and white pics of a different time, a different culture, a different era - French men with thick handle bar mustaches wearing derbies and trench coats posting bill boards in Paris? Looks cool now, but during its era was it really all "that"? Or is 2/3's of its appeal (and that of all his work) attributable to the nostalgia effect and we like old black and whites pics taken during another time, another place? We like catch-phrases, and HCB came up with a doozey - right up there with "hold the pickles, hold the lettuce" in "the decisive moment". Did he play into our love of bumper sticker/T-shirt catch phrases? He does have a cool French designer name. It can even be initialized - HCB, like "BK" for Burger King. Do you see the marketing forces at work here?

Are we "expected" - as amateur photographers, to like certain "names" in photography - so we "do"? Are we like kids who allege to like "Frank Zappa" "music" because - ya know, all real cool people like Frank Zappa even though we all know he kinda sucked and his music is unlistenable (but - shhhh, don't admit it because people won't think you're cool...) Back to "the decisive moment" - is it really all that profound? Yeah - miss that kid blowing out the candles on his birthday cake, blew "the decisive moment". Of course you want to capture the image at the "exact" point in time when it has max impact. Is he overstating the obvious but (again) it makes for a good catch-phrase?

Do you really like, appreciate, understand HCB? Or is it hype, marketing, and mythology? Do you nod along like you did when someone says they dig Zappa - because, ya know, you're kinda expected to? And, saying he isn't "all that" sorta taboo, a sacrilege? Thou shall not take the name of HCB in vain! Was HCB really "all that"?

Brennotdan

04-30-2008, 20:12

yea boyee!

antiquark

04-30-2008, 20:20

Was HCB really "all that"?

Yes.

As far as whipping off hundreds of pictures, I understand HCB photographed Gandhi and his funeral with only 5 rolls of film. I think I saw that in an interview with Charlie Rose.

back alley

04-30-2008, 20:21

zappa was a genius easily...

adams is considered a god but i can't stand most of his calender art.
karsh was a portrait genius too but it was mostly butterfly lighting and boring to me.

hcb is a genius no matter if he printed his own stuff or not. he was not the first street shooter btw, lots of larger format guys shooting before him.

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 20:27

Of course, he didn't actually have to do anything useful for a living so he studied art. Gave him a good handle on composition - sorta like David Lynch and other film directors who first study painting and art. Due to his family wealth, did the kinda "cool" (but unuseful things) trust fund babies get to do - get "involved" with "art movements", hook up with "intellectuals", read Heart of Darkness - jaunts off to Africa for a while...

He then - for much of his life, walked around France and other places and took a ton of pics with his Leica. Yeah! I'd love to do that!

...

Was HCB really "all that"?

I got to do all that, and more, but my family were farmers and lead miners. It is all just a state of mind, it has nothing to do with money.

Never too late to do what you want, no one is stopping you. A ticket to Africa is about $975 from the US.

Back the HBC question, maybe not that interesting as you mature, but he did have his moments. You can learn a more about composition from him that just about anyone. You cannot however learn much about content, or involvement with your subjects. He is a pretty passive artist.

f/stopblues

04-30-2008, 20:34

I very much enjoy looking at his photos. I don't really care if they're a result of "accuracy by volume" or that he had nothing better to do. I don't believe merit should have anything to do with the final result of a piece of art. Same as my indifference on the format (35mm, MF, LF, digi, fabrication). A good photo stands on its own, and I believe his body of work, indeed, stands on its own.

Of course, enjoying it is subjective, so YMMV!

rich815

04-30-2008, 20:38

Finally a photography thread discussing HCB. About time.

NB23

04-30-2008, 20:43

The problem with HCB is not how much good he was but rather the large amount of bad photographers...

Berliner

04-30-2008, 20:51

The fact that he took most of his photos with a 50mm lens... Never cropped his images...., never had Photoshop to tweak his negative, and yet has thousands of images that WERE printable, let alone (subjectively) meaningful, is really amazing. He's not MY favorite, but, he IS known for the decisive moment...he just’ clicked the shutter' as he stated... I wish I could 'click' the shutter, and send the cartridge to Wal-Mart and get something like he got.

Yes, he was a trust fund baby. Yes, he got to do what most of us can only dream of doing. He was a lucky dude...obviously, but a great artist/genius none the less...

I appreciate him, but do not understand him—I don’t think it is possible to ‘understand’ his work. I am not sure HE did. I don't think it's marketing, as he was famous WELL before he was dead, and well before marketing was SUCH the deciding factor it is now. I think he was all that and more....But what do I know...my photo instructor taught me that if I could take well composed images with a 50mm lens without having to crop, then I could call myself a photographer...

Anupam Basu

04-30-2008, 20:55

Yes. He was that good!

NickTrop

04-30-2008, 21:03

I say you allege to like the work of HCB mainly because you're expected to like HCB. His work has taken on a mythology, has a halo effect. Much of its appeal has to do with the film (black and white) and era (France, decades ago) it was shot and the fact he shot with a Leica. I think if I plucked some interesting black and white stuff from RFF, you would praise it because you thought it was HCB. I think "the decisive moment" is overstating something painfully obvious.

NickTrop

04-30-2008, 21:06

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 21:12

Nick you have to go back and look again. Yes it is in Paris, but the photo of Truman Capote has nothing to do with the film or the decade.

The photos of Mexico are still waiting there for you, but they may have moved to Morocco or Iran. His photos from the United States are still there waiting for you, as are the slums of India.

No point in running this genius down, better to look at his work and improve on it.

Pitxu

04-30-2008, 21:14

His work should stand for itself.

You either like it or you don't.

Why so many knock him for being a "rich kid" I"ll never understand.

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 21:17

But if you got to run a round France leading a life of leasure, and 24/7, that's all you did all day, snapped away, would your portfolio be as good as his?

He was not doing anything you cannot do. Take a year off and shoot photos, do nothing else. Anyone can do it.

The only way to test your theory, that time brings success. Having known many dilettantes personally not sure I buy your argument.

NickTrop

04-30-2008, 21:21

Serious questions. Reconsider. How much is talent? How much is mythology, "halo effect", inadvertent "catch-phrases", expectation, nostalgia, style? Does his work really effect you? Would you praise it if it didn't have his moniker attached? Would you even recognize it? Is it really any better than any competent amatuer? Would your work be as good if you traveled the globe and took pictures with a Leica and Tri-X film and had a great printer print them? He shot only with a 50mm. Big deal. Any owner of a fixed lens camera shoots only with the lens on the camera. Again - mythology. Is the "decisive moment" really profound? Or is it a catch-phrase?

Is it the "Jackson Pollock Effect"(tm). People say it's great, genius! A buzz is created. Everyone goes with the flow... You like it and think its "genius" before you even look at it.

Pitxu

04-30-2008, 21:23

Don't fall for the "propoganda" Nick.

Like it or leave it. Make up your own mind.

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 21:27

Gezz Nick is someone making you write a term paper on him?

The guy is dead, the world of photography is open to interpretation by anyone new. The trick is to learn from him if possible. I did. And I learned how/why to take photographs from watching BlowUp, the path to inspiration is not well marked.

HCB is just on our shelves and at MoMA, nothing more, nothing less. He is not an evil conspiracy.

CK Dexter Haven

04-30-2008, 21:28

I've never understood the hoopla.

For a guy who spent a lifetime as a photographer, traveling the world with access to virtually everything/everyone, i can only find a handful of his images that do anything for me. I'm not criticizing him. But, i don't think his body of work is nearly as great as his acclaim. Not even close.

Personally, i think Doisneau, Erwitt, Boubat, Levitt, Duncan, Claxton, etc. were all better. There are guys on Flickr who are better. But, hey, that's life.

NickTrop

04-30-2008, 21:30

Don't fall for the "propoganda" Nick.

Like it or leave it. Make up your own mind.

Hey - I'm just asking "intellectually honest" questions. Get it? I didn't say I liked it or hated it. I'm not bashing HCB. Get what I'm saying here.

The questions I've posed would apply to all great artists. Be intellectually honest. Are you really moved by his work? How much is it a function of someones reputation of "genius" preceding them?

Citizen Kane - best movie EVER. Brilliant! Genius! Why Orsen Wells boy genius... blah, blah, blah. So you watch the film. It's okay. Seen better. But it's brilliant! Genius! Incredible! You're a lover of cine-E-mah! You're expected to say you Citizen Kane is brilliant, genius, incredible! Say it sucks? Like Terminator II better? You're kicked out of the Cinema Snob club. You'll be looked down upon. Thought an idiot...

Does this apply to HCB?

NickTrop

04-30-2008, 21:31

Pitxu

04-30-2008, 21:33

NickTrop

04-30-2008, 21:36

It applies to everyone and everything, again, make up your own mind.

Are you making up your own mind? Or was your mind made up before you even saw his work?

steamer

04-30-2008, 21:40

Like HCB fine, a great talent he took some mighty fine pictures, but not the greatest photographer to walk the face of the Earth. As for Zappa he was a genius and I will always enjoy his music, don't have to pretend.

I was close to taking a year off and wandering, but I got married instead and now my family would be in a world of hurt if I just took off. I know Gauguin and others have done that, but guess I missed the train this time. Could be worse, home is Tokyo and it is a good place to take photos.

Pitxu

04-30-2008, 21:45

Are you making up your own mind? Or was your mind made up before you even saw his work?

As a European I was aware of his work before getting seriously into photography. I don't think he's a genius or a god, though he has made a few photos that could be called great.

In fact, HCB has done me more harm than good. I had a big important exhibition open the day his death was announced in the press. Someone had the bright idea to bring all the French dailies to my show with "HCB DIES" on the front page of every one.
Everybody stood around drinking my wine and talking HCB, I didn't sell a print.

NB23

04-30-2008, 21:54

As a European I was aware of his work before getting seriously into photography. I don't think he's a genius or a god, though he has made a few photos that could be called great.

In fact, HCB has done me more harm than good. I had a big important exhibition open the day his death was announced in the press. Someone had the bright idea to bring all the French dailies to my show with "HCB DIES" on the front page of every one.
Everybody stood around drinking my wine and talking HCB, I didn't sell a print.

ROFL!!! Man, that's a tough one!

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 21:54

I was close to taking a year off and wandering, but I got married instead and now my family would be in a world of hurt if I just took off. I know Gauguin and others have done that, but guess I missed the train this time. Could be worse, home is Tokyo and it is a good place to take photos.

One does not have to destroy one's family to take off. You can take the year "off" in Tokyo. It is all about state of mind, not about the time or money you have.

I don't think an artist should attempt to build his work on the corpses of others. There is no point to running down HCB, just go look at what you like, if you don't like it, don't go again. Looking at HCB is free at Borders, or Barnes and Noble, not a penny spent other than the coffee you might want while looking.

I often wonder at those who do not like Sponge Bob SqP and HCB at the same time... I have that issue with my GF, but she does seem to understand “One can’t live without Rossellini.”

larmarv916

04-30-2008, 21:59

Ok Nick...I think your asking some honest questions. But for what it's worth the one of the main issues that irks you and many people, and to me a great extent is that the "Hype" around these people like HCB, Adams, Weston, Brassai, not to metion the most over rated media hyped shooter..."Annie L." Is that these people for the most part have been the cash cow that has given many people a free ride in the gallery and publishing work of many years. Also let's do not forget the self proclaimed "Art / Photo Intelletcual's "

Also when photography was just getting on it's legs....which commerically only began with Magnum....Started by mostly HBC and Robert Capa.....was nothing more than a platform for cashing in and using photos to create hyoe for the publishing industry !!!

Follow the money......Adams basicly was the only photographer to benefit from the Sierra Club. Why well lets see he was president what...7 times. Do not forget Adams had a long commerical with Polaroid and Dr Land that did not put him into poverty. The Hype machine I think is real demon that is building up people all for the reason they are making lots of money for other people. It's hard for me to decide who is worse the Hype merchants or people enable them to keep pull this crap on the world.

No matter how you feal about anyone work.....at the end of the day. Most..Not all photogrpahers who are not trying to sell their "soul" to the devil for fame or money are really only trying to share a vision of something they find interesting or beautiful.

To many people want to go with the flow just so they can be accepted and in the end....on a creative level that is the kiss of death. Once you have a foundation pushing to make you legacy a profitable one there is no honest apperciation for your work. HCB more than anyone would be outright ashamed to have people worshiping his work. He was his own harshest critic.

Best Regards......Laurance

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 22:07

not to metion the most over rated media hyped shooter..."Annie L."

The HYPE is that she not very good, that somehow she must be awful.

The reality, driven home by her retrospective recently at the Brooklyn Museum of Art, is that she is a powerful photographer, that lives outside of her Rolling Stone cover hype. Her photos of Susan Sontaq are among the best taken by anyone of a dying friend.

steamer

04-30-2008, 22:29

One does not have to destroy one's family to take off. You can take the year "off" in Tokyo. It is all about state of mind, not about the time or money you have.

Oh in that respect I agree completely, need to get on that. But I would choose SBSP over HCB, as for Rossellini, really enjoyed her cosmetic ads and Blue Velvet:)

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 22:32

Oh in that respect I agree completely, need to get on that. But I would choose SBSP over HCB, as for Rossellini, really enjoyed her cosmetic ads and Blue Velvet:)

Ah not that Rossellini, not that I don't love her work with David Lynch,

but her father, Roberto Rossellini.

“One can’t live without Rossellini,” a character declares in Bernardo Bertolucci’s 1964 film “Before the Revolution.”

WoolenMammoth

04-30-2008, 22:53

steamer

04-30-2008, 22:59

Ah not that Rossellini, not that I don't love her work with David Lynch,

but her father, Roberto Rossellini.

“One can’t live without Rossellini,” a character declares in Bernardo Bertolucci’s 1964 film “Before the Revolution.”

I was just joshing, but I didn't get the reference to Before the Revolution. Strange but I'd been thinking of Bernardo lately because we are in the midst of a butter shortage in Japan.

NB23

04-30-2008, 23:07

If you are an artist hard at work on your own trip how can you be bothered to really a) get particularly consumed by another artist's work but really b) bother to care for half an instant of what other people think of some other artist. I mean, really, who cares but beyond that, if you are out creating how can you have time...

I have the people that inspire me, hcb isnt on my list and looking at where and what he shot, I cant really relate to what he did. Maybe someday, after more life experience I will. France really isnt on my shortlist... But for now, who cares. The only thing I care less about than his work, precisely a billion times less, is what anyone else thinks about the guy, there is not enough time in the day to keep on top of the film that Im generating here, developing, scanning it and editing it, Im always behind, hundreds of rolls behind...

This board used to be relaxing to read. Perhaps my perspective is changing.

I will say that usually when I see a HCB photograph Im usually inspired to look at Willy Ronis. Which one is better? Who cares. really.

Lastly, if being rich had any impact on art, every idiot out there with a porsche and a noctilux would be the best photographer ever... Didnt HCB *work* for Magnum?

While I agree with you, mostly, I have to stop you at the "rich", "Noctilux" and "idiot" links you are creating. The Notcilux is a lifetime lens that only costs you 100$ a week for a year. Any average worker in a western country can do it. And when you calculate its resale value, you soon realize you can use it for free during years, less the interest en vogue. And if its value goes up you gain. If it goes down, you lose a Grand or two. Big deal.

No, really, a noctilux comes down to being a much cheaper then a summilux and even a summicron.

Okay... back to HCB.

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 23:08

I don't like to think of butter in that context... :) At least not with MB in my head at the same time.

nikonhswebmaster

04-30-2008, 23:18

Sorry Ned. "Any average worker in a western country can do it"

Average take home pay in the US, for a blue collar worker, is about $500 a week, few could afford to set aside $100 each week on a lens.

NB23

04-30-2008, 23:27

Fred, sorry. You say "few could afford to set aside $100 each week on a lens" but you seem to forget they allocate that kinda money on other things. Cut off all the Big Macs, the Cokes, the extra beers, the pretty Nike shoes, the extra soft toilet papers instead of the regular rough ones, cut that useless cell phone, add a bit of will and there you are with 100$ saved each week.

Come on.

larmarv916

04-30-2008, 23:52

[quote=nikonhswebmaster;810535]The HYPE is that she not very good, that somehow she must be awful.

Sorry but let face it she really is the poster child hype. If I stuck in front of anyone of the Rolling Stone subjects and the same point in time. Most likley you would have produced the same generic images ....actually you probably would have done better. Her entire existance has been built on snaps of the prime "hype" media "darlings.....who are the very roots of hype.

She look at this " MC" shoot for Vanity Fair.....All a very shrewd media scam and she was pulling the trigger for another mega dose of hype.

Also Iam not a fan of Sontaq...on any level. You like the feelings of that shot. Thats fine. I have seen many better images of the pain of impending death.

Annie is as over rated and many really famous photogrpahers are unknow or underated. Don't for one moment think that she could even hold a flash bulb for someone like Dorothea Lange, Eisenstaedt, Horst, Hass, or Rene Burri.

The shooting images of famous faces have been done by many other and much better. Contrived and Generic is a better definition of Annie. It's like the people who think an actor getting a star on hollywoods walk of fame is anything real. You write a check to the chamber of commerce and you get a star...complete with local news coverage.

This may all seem harsh but when you a lacky of hype that is your legacy.

Best Regards....Laurance

manfromh

05-01-2008, 00:51

I skipped the second page of this thread, so there might be something I missed.

Anyway, Yes I do like HCB's images, but not all of them. Last year his book "The Decisive Moment" was scanned and posted on the internet. I "browsed" through it and was suprised at how many of his images were just okay. Nothing special for me. If you do a google image search on his name, you will see his better photos. Bad ones are just hidden away somewhere.

I have this video on my computer called "Contacts". HCB talks about his work while his contact sheets are shown on screen. There was one image there which I loved, but hadnt seen before anywhere.

chikne

05-01-2008, 02:17

I have this video on my computer called "Contacts". HCB talks about his work while his contact sheets are shown on screen. There was one image there which I loved, but hadnt seen before anywhere.

Oh so you also know that he took numbers of frames of the same scene which makes the "decisive moment" sound like some commercial for Concorde.

HCB was the type of guy who would sleep with the enemy. Becaused of people like him, a lot of people think that esotericism plays a part in photography. How many times did you hear or read "I wonder if HCB ever took a bad photograph" or "How can I learn how to see like he did".... But the best one has to be "He wrapped his camera in a tissue and pretended to blow is nose when taking a shot", yes yes and he also took a whole roll of the same shot, but that isn't a good catch phrase.
There's a journalist called Amy Goodman, she claims to be anti corporate, anti emperialism etc, yet she wrote two books and at least one of them was published by Hyperion which is a division of Disney.

I much prefer someone like Winogrand who had his feet on earth, he was aware that he shot thousands of frames and ackowledged to people around him that most of the stuff he took didn't really made it, lately I've been enjoying taking loads of photographs without too much care as well.

HCB = HexaChloroBenzene

sjones

05-01-2008, 03:20

I fist saw Cartier-Bresson's photos before I was cognitive of his position in photography, and I liked them. Just started this photography pursuit three years ago, so in what was basically a crash course process, I learned about Cartier-Bresson, Capa, Alfred Eisenstaedt, Gordon Parks, Julia Margaret Cameron, David Octavius Hill, and the likes pretty much at the same time, and I am still learning.

After reading this thread, now I have the political angle on all of this; and in the end; somewhat irrelevant; I still appreciate Adams and Cartier-Bresson.

Anyway, Erwitt is one of my favorites. He likes dogs, I like dogs.

Also, I am in Tokyo; I am not married; I spend most of my leisurely time taking photos; and I have yet to reach the level of all the folks listed above…far from it.

bobbyrab

05-01-2008, 03:41

I thought the earlier analogy with Citizen Kane was very appropriate. Citizen Kane brought a number of technical and artistic innovations to film making, and has had an big influence on many film directors, right through to the present day, it's certainly one of the most influential films ever made. Perhaps HCB doesn't ring your bell, but if you look at the body of work he produced, it pretty much lays the foundation for most of what the great photojournalists have been doing ever since. I know there where a great many of his contemporaries who where doing great things as well, but I don't think any of them had quite the breadth of work, or have been so influential over the years as he has been. An example, and one that's used quite often on this forum, is the shot of the face on the billboard/poster, juxtaposed with the pedestrian/shopper walking underneath, well that's HCB, but he did it better, there was always some visual connection between the image and the subject, but more importantly he did it first. have a look at his shots of the London Stock exchange where he makes the bodies and legs look like a wallpaper pattern, brilliant. I've gone back to images of his that I didn't get initially, to find they now make sense to me, sometime due to being exposed to the work of a later photographer influenced by HCB. Photography has moved on, but it has roots, and a great many lead to him.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 03:53

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 04:02

[quote=nikonhswebmaster;810535]The HYPE is that she not very good, that somehow she must be awful.

Sorry but let face it she really is the poster child hype. If I stuck in front of anyone of the Rolling Stone subjects and the same point in time. Most likley you would have produced the same generic images ....actually you probably would have done better. Her entire existance has been built on snaps of the prime "hype" media "darlings.....who are the very roots of hype.

....

Annie is as over rated and many really famous photogrpahers are unknow or underated. Don't for one moment think that she could even hold a flash bulb for someone like Dorothea Lange, Eisenstaedt, Horst, Hass, or Rene Burri.

...

This may all seem harsh but when you a lacky of hype that is your legacy.

Best Regards....Laurance

As an artist I am having a hard time with your harsh stance. I mean were you in line to have a show at the Brooklyn Museum and she forced you out?

Were you applying for a cover at Vanity Fair and her agent got there first?

Do you feel she is somehow impacting your career as a photographer, because her work is in favor and should not be? This would be a reason to feel angry or put her down, if she is taking the photography world in the wrong direction.

This feeling seems all over the RFF, that somehow people have to take a stance against, rather than just not personally liking someone, and yet they are not even earning their living as photographers.

Are you seeking a magazine photography or editorial career? Are you in one?

I know one thing for sure Dorothea Lange is not looking to do a Rolling Stone cover.

Why do you care if she has a show, you seem personally offended that others are "fooled" into liking her work.

Did you get one of these yesterday, like everyone else I know?

mfunnell

05-01-2008, 04:11

Oh so you also know that he took numbers of frames of the same scene which makes the "decisive moment" sound like some commercial for Concorde.Hey, who says you can't take multiple frames of a subject before spotting the decisive moment and capturing it? In reportage, in particular, I thought one principle was to make sure you had a shot before worrying about getting a good, great or decisive one. Not that I've done it for a living, but the approach always made sense to me.

...Mike

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 04:21

Hey, who says you can't take multiple frames of a subject before spotting the decisive moment and capturing it? In reportage, in particular, I thought one principle was to make sure you had a shot before worrying about getting a good, great or decisive one. Not that I've done it for a living, but the approach always made sense to me.

...Mike

As Mike points out you can do whatever you want. HCB is not keeping anyone from making work, or taking any food out of your mouths.

Do your own work, if you work hard enough, go to some openings, smooze with some artists and publishers (or not) -- good work will get noticed, it always does.

You cannot however hide under a rock, you must show your work, every chance you get.

chikne

05-01-2008, 04:32

Hey, who says you can't take multiple frames of a subject before spotting the decisive moment and capturing it?

You are correct, only half way though :)

What does "decisive moment mean"? Is it a good shot, an expression, a fleeting moment?
If so why giving complicated names to simple things, personally I find "decisive moment" to sound esoteric and makes it sound as if Bresson had a special gift, a bit like a guru (con artist) does.

Absolutely right to take multiple frames to get the right shot!

mfunnell

05-01-2008, 04:34

The questions I've posed would apply to all great artists. Be intellectually honest. Are you really moved by his work? How much is it a function of someones reputation of "genius" preceding them?In HCB's case: some of his stuff I like a lot, some less so and some I probably wouldn't have looked at twice if not for the name. One of the things I've tried to do with his work (and others, and not just photography) is to work out why I like what I like and why others like things I don't care much for. So I can say "I see what he's doing, though its not to my taste". And see things that might, or might not, inform the things I want to do for myself. And so on.

The "big name" thing helps when trying to understand things that aren't to my taste but are well worth understanding. If I don't like something it doesn't seem worth trying to understand it if its just crap - which it might well be. If lots of other people like it then its probably not crap (though it might be) so it becomes worthwhile trying to understand it. And why I don't care for it . After all, I might change my mind.

...Mike

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 04:44

You are correct, only half way though :)

What does "decisive moment mean"? Is it a good shot, an expression, a fleeting moment?
If so why giving complicated names to simple things, personally I find "decisive moment" to sound esoteric and makes it sound as if Bresson had a special gift, a bit like a guru (con artist) does.

Absolutely right to take multiple frames to get the right shot!

You have an interesting take there, you think "guru" is synonymous with "con artist?"

"Decisive Moment" was a book title, HCB never used the phrase, he did not snap photos and mumble to himself "another Decisive Moment in the can."

mfunnell

05-01-2008, 05:01

What does "decisive moment mean"? Is it a good shot, an expression, a fleeting moment?I'd like to say something like "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it" except I suspect I might not, which may well be a problem :( How can I photograph it if I don't recognise it?

For myself, I tend to be quite simple-minded about it (to the small extent I think about it at all). Something like "when all the key elements in the scene come into the right arrangement". This can be very simple-minded indeed. In a sporting scene "when the player catches the ball" might do it. Or, say, when someone walks into the right spot by a sign. Or when the geometry just looks right (or, at least, how I want it). Maybe there's something super-complex in the concept but, for now, I'm happy enough with my own "Idiot's Guide" simplification. YMMV.

...Mike

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 05:01

I say: HCB stinks.

Well good to know, we won't put you on the HCB book club mailing list, or suggest you visit any of his shows. Stay away from MoMA when in New York.

Rick Waldroup

05-01-2008, 05:17

Nick lost me when he started comparing HCB to digital photographers. I really do not understand why some people think that digital photographers just rattle off shots like they are using a machine gun. I shot film, in different formats, for over 25 years. But mostly using 35mm cameras. And I shot a lot of B&W film. When I went completely digital a few years back, my shooting habits did not suddenly change overnight. I still pretty much shoot the way I always have.

For what it is worth, HCB is one of my favorite photographers.

Andrew Sowerby

05-01-2008, 05:32

The only thing I care less about than his work, precisely a billion times less, is what anyone else thinks about the guy ...

... and I care about why people like or dislike HBC even less!

Pitxu

05-01-2008, 05:32

Stop kicking the dead guy for something you imagined he did.
As Fred has pointed out, Cartier-Bresson never used the term "decisive moment". He hated that it was attributed to him.
Here's what wiki has to say:

"Tériade (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%A9riade), the Greek-born French publisher whom Cartier-Bresson idolized, gave the book its French title, Images à la Sauvette, which can loosely be translated as "images on the run" or "stolen images." Dick Simon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_L._Simon) of Simon & Schuster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_%26_Schuster) came up with the English title The Decisive Moment. "

kbg32

05-01-2008, 07:30

I don't think Adams would have been half of what he is made out to be if it wasn't for Beaumont Newhall.

Critics and writers often do that - instill their prejudices with absolute abandon until there is nothing left. What is history anyway? For those of us that lived through certain times, there is our truth in what we know and experienced. For those of us that wish to write what those truths might be, there is our prejudices.

I hope I'm being clear.....

Follow the money......Adams basicly was the only photographer to benefit from the Sierra Club. Why well lets see he was president what...7 times. Do not forget Adams had a long commerical with Polaroid and Dr Land that did not put him into poverty. The Hype machine I think is real demon that is building up people all for the reason they are making lots of money for other people. It's hard for me to decide who is worse the Hype merchants or people enable them to keep pull this crap on the world.

Best Regards......Laurance

nzeeman

05-01-2008, 07:36

personally i think that both zappa and hcb didnt do anything extremely original. in music i think the residents are much more original than zappa and they started abut at same time and from later bands legendary pink dots and skinny puppy made much much more interesting music. also in photography i respect atget and to some level capa and i found almost all of their work beautiful but i could easily live without hcb... i love things that shows personal signature of author and zappa and hcb dont show that to me... they are too sterile and very unspontaneous...

varjag

05-01-2008, 07:42

Some people just have no taste.

furcafe

05-01-2008, 07:56

Ha! Agreed.

this thread reminds me of a moment on the weekend after a friendly kick around with the fella's. afterwards, as we were aoncuming the post match "beverage" on the sidelines and quietly admiring each others "beverage container" (read beer belly) the subject of david beckham arose...
much grumbling ensued and the end consensus was that beckham was a bum. usually i take no notice of said conclusion re; mr beckham as it almost 99.9 percent of the time ends in the same fashion. however this time i couldn't help but notice the absurdity of it all. a group of mostly dishevelled, largely out of shape, slightly overweight "backyard footballers" standing about declaring that a man who was twice fifa's footballer of the year, made 58 appearances as captain of the english national team, was the first british footballer to play 100 european championship matches, signed to manchester united at 17 years old was a bum. certainly not "all that".
sheesh, hcb stinks and lebovitz is over-rated. equally absurd...

Nh3

05-01-2008, 07:57

The only way to find out if HCB really deserves his reputation is to try and take a single photo which is as well composed and structured as one of his photos and that also on the street and without staging and cropping and manipulating the pic later on.

The same way, try to take a single black and white landscape shot using Ansel Adam's methods and equipment and then find out if you could do better.

Aziz

05-01-2008, 07:58

He had an excellent eye for a mixture of composition and subject matter, something very few photographers managed to do successfully. He also managed to make a photo with a 50mm lens look like it was taken with a 35.

In short, he is one of many great photographers.

Nh3

05-01-2008, 08:03

I have proof that HCB did not use 50m lenses only.

ravnish

05-01-2008, 08:14

a good shot is a good shot...full stop !
doisneau , atget, hcb , ronis all roamed the streets...whether HCB did lab work himself is irrelevant i think

Harry Lime

05-01-2008, 08:14

Citizen Kane - best movie EVER. Brilliant! Genius! Why Orsen Wells boy genius... blah, blah, blah. So you watch the film. It's okay. Seen better. But it's brilliant! Genius! Incredible! You're a lover of cine-E-mah! You're expected to say you Citizen Kane is brilliant, genius, incredible! Say it sucks? Like Terminator II better? You're kicked out of the Cinema Snob club. You'll be looked down upon. Thought an idiot...

Does this apply to HCB?

Sometimes a certain amount of knowledge and insight is needed to understand something that otherwise does not seem all that impressive or important.

chikne

05-01-2008, 08:18

I'd like to say something like "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it" except I suspect I might not, which may well be a problem :( How can I photograph it if I don't recognise it?

For myself, I tend to be quite simple-minded about it (to the small extent I think about it at all). Something like "when all the key elements in the scene come into the right arrangement". This can be very simple-minded indeed. In a sporting scene "when the player catches the ball" might do it. Or, say, when someone walks into the right spot by a sign. Or when the geometry just looks right (or, at least, how I want it). Maybe there's something super-complex in the concept but, for now, I'm happy enough with my own "Idiot's Guide" simplification. YMMV.

...Mike

It's OK, and that simply translates to a well composed picture, which sounds like something anyone can do or learn how to do, not some magic superpower rhetoric!

Charlie Lemay

05-01-2008, 08:41

Koudelka obviously stands on HCB's shoulders, but IMO Koudelka is way taller.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 08:54

Koudelka IMHO has a more quirky vision. He is not the master of composition, but excels in content. Some of his photos are so bizarre, you would think they are posed, much like Diane Arbus. You cannot believe his world exists.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 08:59

It's OK, and that simply translates to a well composed picture, which sounds like something anyone can do or learn how to do, not some magic superpower rhetoric!

I would say that is not a skill someone can learn, you can perfect it, but it is a gift.

It is magic, in that since it cannot be learned, its origins remain mysterious.

Everyone can learn to ride a bicycle, but everyone cannot learn to be Lance Armstrong.

I have been around many SERIOUS [want-to-be] artists, and often I just want to say -- "I admire how very hard you try, but you do not understand what this is about, consider another profession."

Students often ask "if I do more work can I raise my grade to an A?" "No, more work will just be more, you are not an A student in this field." Everyone cannot learn everything.

Nh3

05-01-2008, 09:13

I have been around many SERIOUS [want-to-be] artists, and often I just want to say -- "I admire how very hard you try, but you do not understand what this is about, consider another profession."

So, how did you came to the conclusion that you have the insight and qualifications to decide before hand who "understands it and who does not"?

That was an incredibly arrogant statement to make. For instance, if you "really understood it", do you think you would be making such an outrageous statement?

chikne

05-01-2008, 09:14

I would say that is not a skill someone can learn, you can perfect it, but it is a gift.

It is magic, in that since it cannot be learned, its origins remain mysterious.

Everyone can learn to ride a bicycle, but everyone cannot learn to be Lance Armstrong.

I have been around many SERIOUS [want-to-be] artists, and often I just want to say -- "I admire how very hard you try, but you do not understand what this is about, consider another profession."

Students often ask "if I do more work can I raise my grade to an A?" "No, more work will just be more, you are not an A student in this field." Everyone cannot learn everything.

You've got a point, I will maintain that it can learned by anyone, whether one succeeds or not is a different matter. Some time ago I got into computer programming; C, Python, BASH, whatever; just for the hell of it, everything made sense on paper but I have never been able to get my head around writing or modifying a software, though I am very comfortable using command line interfaces.

But the more simple it is the easiest it should be to learn, even though one needs the gift, and lot of people refer to "decisive moment" nowadays, which will people understand the easiest? "Decisive moment" or well composed picture?

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 09:26

So, how did you came to the conclusion that you have the insight and qualifications to decide before hand who "understands it and who does not"?

That was an incredibly arrogant statement to make. For instance, if you "really understood it", do you think you would be making such an outrageous statement?

One thing for sure you get an "F" in reading.

I said "I want," not that "I do." One thing you learn as time goes by when teaching is you cannot predict the moment of "ah ha." Many artists spend a lot of time, not getting it and suddenly do. I would never have the arrogance to say so-and-so sucks as many have on this thread. The point is it is easy to be critical, not easy to be positive. i have learned to keep my mouth shut, a skill not everyone seems to have mastered when it comes to other people's creative work. As I said earlier you do not have to build your creative life on the corpses of other artists.

But I still stand on my statement that you have what you have, you are not going to learn creativity. But it might be there all along, hidden from sight, even to the person that possesses it.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 09:31

You've got a point, I will maintain that it can learned by anyone, whether one succeeds or not is a different matter. Some time ago I got into computer programming; C, Python, BASH, whatever; just for the hell of it, everything made sense on paper but I have never been able to get my head around writing or modifying a software, though I am very comfortable using command line interfaces.

I am in about the same place programming wise. I can modify a PERL script, and write PHP (well a monkey can do that) but now that my partner and I have moved to Ruby on Rails I am in the dust.

But my biz partner writes code like he is sitting in front of the screens in the Matrix. Any new language just makes sense to him in a few hours, he is like one of those people who can move to Spain, and they are speaking Spanish pretty well in a few weeks. Me -- I studied Spanish for 6 years in school, lived in Madrid and am still hard pressed to put together a sentence.

Nh3

05-01-2008, 09:35

One thing for sure you get an "F" in reading.

I said "I want," not that "I do." One thing you learn as time goes by when teaching is you cannot predict the moment of "Ah ha." Many artists spend a lot of time, not getting it and suddenly do. I would never have the arrogance to say so-and-so sucks as many have on this thread. The point is it is easy to be critical, not easy to be positive.

But I still stand on my statement that you have what you have, you are not going to learn creativity. But it might be there all along, hidden from sight, even to the person that possesses it.

I agree that not everyone is equal but that does not mean we create a ten step guide to weeding the lesser ones out.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 09:49

I have proof that HCB did not use 50m lenses only.

"Picnic on the River Marne" was shot with a 35mm Elmar.

He also carried a 90. But the collapsible 50 was his mainstay, with the cap in his hand.

The cap in the left hand, was kind of his crutch. Taking it off was part of his photo process.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 09:52

I agree that not everyone is equal but that does not mean we create a ten step guide to weeding the lesser ones out.

Don't have to -- most of the time, we see genius, we do not always reward it however. All creativity is not a commodity, to the exasperation of many creative people.

Nh3

05-01-2008, 09:55

"Picnic on the River Marne" was shot with a 35mm Elmar.

He also carried a 90. But the collapsible 50 was his mainstay, with the cap in his hand.

The cap in the left hand, was kind of his crutch. Taking it off was part of his photo process.

Thanks, especially his indoor shots of many famous people that he photographed were taken with a wide angle lens.

I also just posted a clip of him working and he is carrying three cameras, but its hard to judge which lenses his using. Click here http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=58458

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 10:04

Thanks, especially his indoor shots of many famous people that he photographed were taken with a wide angle lens.

I also just posted a clip of him working and he is carrying three cameras, but its hard to judge which lenses his using. Click here http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=58458

You can often guess, since he so seldom cropped, the lens used.

Sadly there are not many photos of him with equipment, and when they exist, he is usually holding someone else's camera.

here is the famous photo of his lens cap -- in the palm of his hand. It is important to remember he was not this old, during most of his career!

chikne

05-01-2008, 10:17

http://www.pitoresco.com.br/espelho/destaques/cartier-bresson/00.jpg

morgan

05-01-2008, 10:22

This is an odd thread. Frankly Nick, comparing HCB to digital photographers is like comparing Interpol to Joy Division. Most progression in the arts is based upon previous work and it's the ability to create in a relative vacuum that to me shows originality. Interpol (and all those other 80's bands) just knocked off and built on Joy Divisions original sound. There's a reason his work has stood up over time, and perhaps a lot of it has to do with the time/place context in which he worked. You're comparing apples to oranges. I like HCB, but not sure he'd be my favorite from the time period (Capa earns that). But Nick, you seem to be bitter and angry over HCB's success. If you think you can do better, go ahead.

Nh3

05-01-2008, 10:26

You can often guess, since he so seldom cropped, the lens used.

Sadly there are not many photos of him with equipment, and when they exist, he is usually holding someone else's camera.

here is the famous photo of his lens cap -- in the palm of his hand. It is important to remember he was not this old, during most of his career!

You mentioned that he "seldom cropped", from what I have read he never cropped and was pretty adamant about it.

furcafe

05-01-2008, 10:36

No, he definitely cropped occasionally, e.g., the famous shot of the man leaping over a puddle behind Gare Saint-Lazare. I think 1 RFF member was using a shot of the original negative as his/her icon.

You mentioned that he "seldom cropped", from what I have read he never cropped and was pretty adamant about it.

jespin00

05-01-2008, 10:47

Congratulation. You are intellectually honest. You understand RFF-style photography. Welcome to the club.

Now NickTrop, I see you congratulating someone for being intellectually honest. And to also have understood the "RFF-style photography" (whatever that means, im sure you'll give us a rant eventually)

Notice he shares the same opinion as yourself.

Were there not people here on this thread who have been intellectually honest as well? Wasn't that all you were looking for when you started this thread? Was it ego? I look at your display picture and I see someone whose just angry with no clear direction or output, so why not pick on an artist like Henri Cartier Bresson. I mean, why not! It'll stir things up! If we can do it to George W. Bush, Charles Bukowski, Picasso, Van Gogh, Jack Kerouac and the girl nextdoor, we could do it for anybody!
So you post, and then you sit and wait. You cause a hurricane of a thread and you sit. You reply, playing as if the least ignorant person on this thread, this forum, this life
is yourself and oh, of course, CK Dexter Haven. But I wonder, why should I even care? He's just a guy with a laptop talking to another guy with a laptop. But this whole talk about congratulating someone for being honest.... SO intellectually honest you'll invite him in a metaphorical club has got me urked.

You talk about the "Halo Effect", marketing, Frank Zappa.

From the looks of it, you're no better than the Frank Zappa fans after all.

Now I've been reading the this whole thread from Page 1 to this Page and i'm excited to see what Nick Trop will say(which will inevitably leave to more pages). Now people are going to bitch because HBC came from a well off family and were given more opportunities to take photos, especially around the world. Any case, given that privilege who here in this forum would turn that down? Some people have money, some people don't, yet we all seem to inevitably die?
His type photography dealt with living. So while you guys reply to this thread, I'll be out taking photos.

williams473

05-01-2008, 11:25

Generally people or things that aren't all they are cracked up to be are shown to be farces in time, like the pogo stick :) In this case Cartier-Bresson's work has stood the test of time, and will continue to do so. His work is part of the collection of great Western Art photography and isn't going anywhere. So people can tear him down and wonder why it is a guy can get so much acclaim, but it's for a reason. Time has shown that. If someone doesn't connect with his work - who cares? Henri certainly doesn't, being 6 feet under and all.

Nando

05-01-2008, 11:29

In reply to the original post, what trollish bull****! Whether or not one likes Henri Cartier-Bresson's work, why disrespect him as a photographer and as a human being? Pierre Assouline's biography of HCB provides a lot of insight about this man and life that he lead. HCB's life was not always rosey.

jan normandale

05-01-2008, 11:29

This is a pretty good thread and a lot of people I like are here, Nick, antiq, Fred, Rich, Steamer, Keith, Christoph, Harry L. I also think that most of the artists here that are being slammed are good. As bobbyrab said in this thread, sometimes you come back and what never made sense does make sense or as Fred/Nikon said an “ah ha” moment.

I know many of these names but have not delved into their work for various reasons however I will. I know some will not be for me others will. I also know that in 5 years some of the ones I like won’t interest me and ones I dismissed I’ll probably find interesting.

Trying to “get it” by knocking someone down who has a big reputation won’t provide an insight to make better photographs. I’ve seen people spend tons of money on equipment and they make better photos technically however the still “don’t get it” I’ve seen people pick up pinholes, jump to busted cameras, grab a Leica , move to a folder and then use a disposable. They consistently get shots that show they have a perception and skill many don’t.

We all recognize those people. Just go through RFF’s galleries you can see the ones who are consistent. They may miss the ball on occasion but they are consistent shooters who know what and how to shoot when the see it. HCB and Leibowitz annoy me on a personal level however I would carry their camera equipment for a day if I had the chance. Some people can change things and when it’s over people look back and say “what’s the big deal, anyone could do that”. Imagine what the world was before the Cubists existed. Now people incorporate this in their work and no one even thinks about it. But the “first guy” is not always the one to get the fame. Picasso was famous for appropriation of other artists ideas. This dilutes and muddies the water over time so lay people don’t understand what is happening, however people in the mainstream or academics do.

Most of the names thrown out in this thread deserve to be here for different reasons but they do deserve their reputation and to be recognized.

BTW Fred..on the NYFA, that sucks. Better luck next year

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 11:45

You mentioned that he "seldom cropped", from what I have read he never cropped and was pretty adamant about it.

The balance was somewhat thrown off by the fact that he cropped what may certainly be his most recognizable work, and the photo that rather of defines decisive, the 1917 photo in Paris. It may be one out of a thousand, but we associate it with HCB.

williams473

05-01-2008, 11:53

Funny how people can also accuse a photographer like Leibowitz of being a "sellout" or whatever, and yet the only work they see of these artists is in mainstream publications - so maybe she's not selling out - maybe your taste in photography is just owned by one or two publishers. Like Leibowitz never did anything other than Rolling Stone. Like she doesn't have boxes of prints from her life we've never seen. Gimme a break.

And this kind of post uncovers another pet peev of mine - How many artists complain about how hard it is to make a living as an artist, but then tear the ones who WORK hard enough to make it to shreds? It honestly hurts the insulter more than the insulted, but it still amazes me.

Al Patterson

05-01-2008, 12:12

But I actually LIKE Zappa. HCB, well I don't "get" his stuff, but the catch phrase "the decisive moment", THAT was brilliant.

Al Patterson

05-01-2008, 12:18

Hey - I'm just asking "intellectually honest" questions. Get it? I didn't say I liked it or hated it. I'm not bashing HCB. Get what I'm saying here.

The questions I've posed would apply to all great artists. Be intellectually honest. Are you really moved by his work? How much is it a function of someones reputation of "genius" preceding them?

Citizen Kane - best movie EVER. Brilliant! Genius! Why Orsen Wells boy genius... blah, blah, blah. So you watch the film. It's okay. Seen better. But it's brilliant! Genius! Incredible! You're a lover of cine-E-mah! You're expected to say you Citizen Kane is brilliant, genius, incredible! Say it sucks? Like Terminator II better? You're kicked out of the Cinema Snob club. You'll be looked down upon. Thought an idiot...

Does this apply to HCB?

Maybe.

I liked Citizen Kane a lot. It IS a great film. But, if I just want to watch a film I like, it would be "Blade Runner". Ridley Scoot is a true genius. After all, he did do the "1984" Apple commercial...

Dave Wilkinson

05-01-2008, 12:21

Was HCB really 'all that ' ???

- he must have been, Nick!....he did it all without a Yashica 'Electro' GT :D

varjag

05-01-2008, 12:35

Dunno about Citizen Kane, but that Battleship Potemkin thing was really cheesy. I mean, that stroller-down-the-steps thing is really overdone, cliche and not as nice as in The Untouchables anyway.

Al Patterson

05-01-2008, 12:36

BigSteveG

05-01-2008, 13:04

HCB is far from my favorite photog. I do like some of his images. He did contrubute to the medium in a great and meaningful way by promoting the "street" genre.

Chriscrawfordphoto

05-01-2008, 13:04

He was not doing anything you cannot do. Take a year off and shoot photos, do nothing else. Anyone can do it.

Sure, Fred, anyone can do it. Why don't you send me $20,000 so I can feed myself and my son and keep my apartment while I take a year off. Most people don't have the money to do that. Not even close.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 13:06

this thread reminds me of a moment on the weekend after a friendly kick around with the fella's. afterwards, as we were aoncuming the post match "beverage" on the sidelines and quietly admiring each others "beverage container" (read beer belly) the subject of david beckham arose...
much grumbling ensued and the end consensus was that beckham was a bum. usually i take no notice of said conclusion re; mr beckham as it almost 99.9 percent of the time ends in the same fashion. however this time i couldn't help but notice the absurdity of it all. a group of mostly dishevelled, largely out of shape, slightly overweight "backyard footballers" standing about declaring that a man who was twice fifa's footballer of the year, made 58 appearances as captain of the english national team, was the first british footballer to play 100 european championship matches, signed to manchester united at 17 years old was a bum. certainly not "all that".
sheesh, hcb stinks and lebovitz is over-rated. equally absurd...

Maybe it is the clean water in Canada, but does this guy make sense, and remain clear headed, time after time?

bobbyrab

05-01-2008, 13:28

With regards Annie Liebovitz, part of her talent is having a personality and reputation that gives her access to some of the worlds most popular entertainers, politicians, and cultural Icons as subjects for her portraits. They seem to be very willing to do her bidding in order to get the images and even if you don't rate her as a photographer, you have to take your hat off to her for achieving what she has, I can't think of anyone else who has engineered that kind of access for themselves. Much as I like her work, I prefer the work of Jane Bowen who usually has ten minutes with an Olympus and a 50mm lens, and on a good day a window. Horses for courses.

sjones

05-01-2008, 13:38

So just to clarify, denouncing something simply because of the 'hype' it may attract, whether intentional or not, is considered "intellectually honest"?

Florian1234

05-01-2008, 14:06

Well, for me he certainly made some great photos.

But surely there's a myth around him. On the other hand - doesn't this make it more fascinating? You don't know exactly how he worked out with a certain photo that you like. Thus it is even maybe a bit harder to try yourself to shoot this kind of style.
If you see his contacts (we had that topic a while ago, I think) which one usually does not, because a contact is the "secret" of the photog., then you might get better into how he worked.

In the end I would say: Do your own thing, but you can - of course - admire the work of others, among them also HCB.

For me personally: I like his work, and I like some parts of his character. Certainly not all parts. :D

As for the "hype" thing: I think on the one hand side there's this "past is more interesting" factor, yes. But there are a lot of people out there (also posting here) who do amazing shots right now, also "street"-style or reportage. But there are tons of more rather "boring" shots, too. It is, generally speaking, the fact that the societies change in how they look at photos. This look will change as it changes.

Hope this makes sense. :D

jan normandale

05-01-2008, 14:23

Maybe it is the clean water in Canada, but does this guy make sense, and remain clear headed, time after time?

Fred, there are two official languages in Canada. Some of the members there speak French. Their ability with the other language is akin to your success with Spanish.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 14:40

Fred, there are two official languages in Canada. Some of the members there speak French. Their ability with the other language is akin to your success with Spanish.

That was meant as a compliment, maybe my English is failing too? I just just go with hand signals?:p

Bnack

05-01-2008, 15:13

I hope this isn't too much of a digression... but in regards to the trust fund baby comments. Charles Darwin came from a privileged family and was able to spend his life on a boat researching whatever he felt like, and he had countless hours on the boat to sit and write, or philosophize about the world and science. I don't think his discoveries are at all diminished because he had the time and resources to do what others did not.

WoolenMammoth

05-01-2008, 16:27

Chriscrawfordphoto

05-01-2008, 17:14

again, coming from money is the biggest nonsequitor possible. If it were the case every lawyer and doctor that bought their status leica to go with all thier other status objects would by that logic be an amazing photographer by proxy of the fact that they have the time to use it. Every message board dealing with rangefinders and leicas would be overflowing with talent from all the rich people with cameras... There couldnt be a more pedestrian way to look at life if you tried. Money buys you time, money does not buy talent and time does not sharpen talent. You are either born with it or you are not. The end.

Ive worked with both very wealthy artists and very very poor artists and functionally, the only difference between both groups was who was buying dinner for whom and not much more.

Its a shame that being a rich, privelaged photographer in addition to creating talent doesnt also stop bullets, Sean Flynn would still be alive today.

Having money opens doors for an artist that remain slammed tighly shut to an artist who hasn't got money. I've seen it many, many times here in the midwest and even more so in Santa Fe when I lived there., though maybe it is different in New York City. Almost all of the artists in Santa Fe had family wealth behind them, and it certainly didn't make them better artists than people who didn't have that wealth, but it sure made it easier for them to get their work into galleries, etc. People who control the art world simply do not respect the poor, and often don't even see them as people. Not that such attitudes are exclusive to wealthy people in the art world...they'e found among the powerful everywhere.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 17:15

Al Patterson

05-01-2008, 17:33

Do you have a huge welfare class in Santa Fe?

I've been to Santa Fe. It's pretty expensive, so I'd bet the welfare class lives over in Espanola, or down in Albuquerque.

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 17:48

Having money opens doors for an artist that remain slammed tighly shut to an artist who hasn't got money. I've seen it many, many times here in the midwest and even more so in Santa Fe when I lived there., though maybe it is different in New York City. Almost all of the artists in Santa Fe had family wealth behind them, and it certainly didn't make them better artists than people who didn't have that wealth, but it sure made it easier for them to get their work into galleries, etc. People who control the art world simply do not respect the poor, and often don't even see them as people. Not that such attitudes are exclusive to wealthy people in the art world...they'e found among the powerful everywhere.

Chris I wrote something off the cuff then thought better of it, after I looked at photos of you and your GF and realized how young you are.

The money thing... here's a true story.

I had an artist friend from the midwest, who came to NYC without much money, during the recession of the 70s and lived with his friends, and then in an unfinished loft without any heat, to speak of, for years.

He worked with his friends as a carpenter, and made art all the time (he was an awful carpenter). He went to drawing classes all the time. He worked and never spent a cent on clothes or much on food. He used to borrow small amounts of money from his friends just to survive. He lived with his work all around him.

He kept doing this until he became a rich and famous artist.

That is how it works in the real world.

That story fits about 10 people I know, and is not that far from my own. You have to want, really know why you want it.

Zathras

05-01-2008, 18:15

HCB kinda leaves me cold. W. Eugene Smith, Bill Pierce, Peter Stackpole and Ralph Gibson are much more interesting to me.

antiquark

05-01-2008, 19:07

For everyone's interest, here's an online HCB photobook. The scan quality is poor, but still you can see the artistry.
http://www.e-photobooks.com/cartier-bresson/decisive-moment.html

WoolenMammoth

05-01-2008, 19:08

No one makes comments about the leisure of the rich unless they feel trapped in their many responsibilities, and of course feel like they have no down-time of their own.

I bring this up for exactly the opposite reason. People use "the leisure of the rich" to qualify HCB (and so many other's) work as the product of privelage, as opposed to the product of the talent that an artist is born with. Every time someone wants to knock HCB one of the first things I see someone bring up is that he came from a wealthy family and it grinds against my tolerance like nothing else.

Unless Im mistaken, the discussion is not about how you get into galleries, its all politics no matter where you go. People were discussing wether or not the guys photography is worth looking at or not or making some qualification about the talent he had. It is doubtful that if the people knocking the guy were given a year's grant to go and photograph about that they would come back 12 months later with stuff worth looking at in the first place. If they have the talent, the work is likely already filed away in a binder already...

And I say all this and Im not even really a fan of HCB, nothing he's shot that I have seen has really resonated with me at all. Its just a lousy ground to be taken seriously in a debate. If you dont like his photgraphy, high five, you are awesome, but come up with some concrete reason why his photography sucks. The fact that he was some rich guy certainly does not come across in the body of work that I have seen, which in many ways isnt so distinguishable from many of the other magnum photographers who were hanging around paris at the time.

Its fully awesome if you dont like the guy. Hooray. Who cares. But to qualify his wealth is really pedestrian, right up there with talking about his race, or skin color or any of the other ridiculous crap that have nothing to do with the creative process that people always want to inject in there to take a stab at someone. Rich or poor, that guy would have taken the exact same photographs the same way that banker with a lousy P&S takes the same lousy pictures when he gets his $12k leica setup. My photography did not improve after investing $20K into rangefinders and nobody elses does either. Its just a hammer, you have to decide what nails you are going to hit with it... Money really has no impact on when you are inspired to depress the shutter release, with what force to agitate a developer tank or with what crop to print your photograph.

Imagine you work hard all your life to achieve something and then some bitter guy tries to scathingly take it all away from you because you had money. As an artist, that kind of thing is really appalling to me.

In rock and roll, we have to deal with the phrase "sell out" and now that my generation is getting older we have this new disease apparently, "punk rock guilt". Whatever, the output is either good or its not and thats the end of it.

The work is good or its not, make up your mind. If its good or bad because the artist was rich or poor, thats a weird bit of baggage to be carrying around with you through life.

Pablito

05-01-2008, 19:20

What is this a popularity contest? I like this one or the other one better than Cartier-Bresson, nyah nyah. Personal taste aside, Cartier-Bresson was a Monster, one of the Big Ones, as influential as Picasso or Matisse or Duchamp. Contemporary photojounalism would not be the same without him, contemporary photography book design would not be the same without him. Contemporary THINKING about photography would not be the same without him. As far as my personal taste is concerned, which is as irrelevant as anyone else's Cartier-Bresson's images are full of life, they cut to the chase, get at the essence, in a way that Smith and especially Salgado don't. To those who argue that his images are cold or distant, take a look at the photographs from India or China. His photographs of suffering, of life and death, of the human condition resonate with truth without the sentimentality sometimes found in Smith and often in Salgado. But who cares? That's my taste, which you can argue with all you like. You can't argue with his place in history or the influence he has had on generations of photographers. Acknowledge his place and let him R.I.P.

le vrai rdu

05-01-2008, 19:23

on peut épiloguer longtemps sur HBC, le fait est simple, il avait l'oeil , c'est suffisant

gb hill

05-01-2008, 19:23

Now Nick you know good & well if HCB carried a Yashica instead if a Leica you would be all over the Yashica forum praising the man!:D

Different strokes for different folks. I get cranked by HCB. While he is not my favorite, his work enspires me. Annie L. rocks IMO. She knows how to take a portrait. Capa, R. Gibson, for instance doesn't appeal to me, but thats not to say they aren't great photographers. They certainly are. Many called Bill Egglestons work "just snapshots" but to me that shot of the tricycle is a work of art. I do agree with you on Zappa. Never been a big fan. More into Alice Cooper myself. Oh yea Patti Smith is a hellova good rocker & outstanding photographer too.
http://www.lensculture.com/webloglc/mt_files/archives/2008/03/patti-smith-polaroids.html

Nh3

05-01-2008, 19:28

No, he definitely cropped occasionally, e.g., the famous shot of the man leaping over a puddle behind Gare Saint-Lazare. I think 1 RFF member was using a shot of the original negative as his/her icon.

I'm certainly surprised, but it seems he only had an intrusive fence cropped from the left.

Its ironic that the definitive "decisive moment" photo is cropped!

Vics

05-01-2008, 19:31

HCB was all that and a lot more.
Vic

nikonhswebmaster

05-01-2008, 19:46

I'm certainly surprised, but it seems he only had an intrusive fence cropped from the left.

Its ironic that the definitive "decisive moment" photo is cropped!

Actually much more than that was cropped, the neg was about 1/3 black on the left.

NickTrop

05-01-2008, 19:46

In HCB's case: some of his stuff I like a lot, some less so and some I probably wouldn't have looked at twice if not for the name.
...Mike

Congratulations. Your are intellectually honest, and understand RF-style photography. Welcome to the club.

williams473

05-01-2008, 20:07

Nick,

I have an honest question - can you define what "RF-style" photography is? Do you mean if one is "intellectually honest" and carries a rangefinder camera, one somehow qualifies for some kind of club membership? I'm just not understanding what club we're talking about here. I shoot with all sorts of cameras (actually rangefinders are my least favorite, I just enjoy this forum) but don't see how either of those facts somehow make my opinion any more valid or in line with some group. It seems obvious to me from this thread that there is no main stream opinion here on this site at all, although we do seem to talk about Cartier Bresson a lot :)

jan normandale

05-01-2008, 21:18

on peut épiloguer longtemps sur HBC, le fait est simple, il avait l'oeil , c'est suffisant

what made Wayne Gretzky one of the greatest hockey players ever was not his ability to know where the puck was; but where it was going to be. I think HCB was like that. He didn't just "avait l'oeil" he knew what was going to unfold in front of him and he was set up for it when it happened. C'est significatif.

mike kim

05-01-2008, 22:35

Dunno about Citizen Kane, but that Battleship Potemkin thing was really cheesy. I mean, that stroller-down-the-steps thing is really overdone, cliche and not as nice as in The Untouchables anyway.
The scene in The Untouchables (1987) is a homage to The Battleship Potemkin (1925). The film was revolutionary at the time mostly because of Eisenstein's theory of montage and film editing, still studied today in film universities around the world along with D.W. Griffith's films. Personally, I find these films boring, but one cannot deny their influence on modern cinema.

sirius

05-01-2008, 22:55

I love HCB's work. His work is a lot more than pretty compositions (I don't think there is anything here on RFF that compares to his best). He had an incredible quickness of eye and spirit to be able to capture moments that speak so eloquently of the human condition. His art was rigorous and and restrained and betrays a beautiful depth of thinking and humor. He considered himself a surrealist. It's part of photographic history and was tremendously influential. If only our work could matter so much. It's a little bazaar to compare Lascaux to Picasso in the history of photography...but Winogrand definitely emerges from the HCB tradition. I'll bet you Winogrand would not speak ill of his work.

However, Nick, your question is moot. Art history has judged HCB and he has been anointed. There's no need to explain it or justify it. History has deemed his work significant and worthy, and it will continue to no matter what you say here.

chikne

05-02-2008, 02:10

I'm certainly surprised, but it seems he only had an intrusive fence cropped from the left.

Its ironic that the definitive "decisive moment" photo is cropped!

5893058932

Yammerman

05-02-2008, 02:10

My reading of this thread coincided with the arrival of The Man, the Image and the World a retrospective on HCB’s work. I hadn’t even opened it when I started reading this stuff and I began to wonder if I was in for a disappointment of perhaps my absorbing of hype would see me through. The only real picture I could remember was the jumping pool image which I’d always thought was stunning. The discussion increased my anticipation a fair amount so thanks for that.

So last night I finally thumbed through the images and for me the hits are exceptional and the misses not so bad. It seems to me he was that and then some. It surprising that it should be a question. After thumbing through the whole book, with some of he images I felt I could feel him thinking (not explained that too well). The humour and playfulness he gets across just by clicking the shutter at the right time means for me he doesn’t have too many equals.

Rogrund

05-02-2008, 02:38

Its ironic that the definitive "decisive moment" photo is cropped!

Where's the irony? The "decisive moment" and cropping concern different dimensions. First, the dimension of time, second, the dimension of space.

varjag

05-02-2008, 02:56

The scene in The Untouchables (1987) is a homage to The Battleship Potemkin (1925). The film was revolutionary at the time mostly because of Eisenstein's theory of montage and film editing, still studied today in film universities around the world along with D.W. Griffith's films. Personally, I find these films boring, but one cannot deny their influence on modern cinema.
OK, guess I should've placed a smiley there. Just was sarcastic to HCB-is-overrated consensus here, you know :)

chikne

05-02-2008, 02:57

Where's the irony? The "decisive moment" and cropping concern different dimensions. First, the dimension of time, second, the dimension of space.

Where is this written? Have you passed a degree in "decisive moments"? How do you know?

Or could it be something that is left to your own imagination, desire, wishful thinking.....

Rogrund

05-02-2008, 03:19

Where is this written? Have you passed a degree in "decisive moments"? How do you know?

Or could it be something that is left to your own imagination, desire, wishful thinking.....

Just common sense. I didn't mean to upset you, I'm sorry. :o

BTW, "a degree in decisive moments", that was kind of funny. I've had quite a lot of them in my life, so maybe you could say I have passed a degree! :D

chikne

05-02-2008, 03:44

BTW, "a degree in decisive moments", that was kind of funny. I've had quite a lot of them in my life, so maybe you could say I have passed a degree! :D

Again, what you might see or think as "decisive moment", others might call "non-decisive moment", but fairy nuff :)

Spider67

05-02-2008, 04:29

There's a series of books named "Bluff your way through....." giving people some hinmts how to behave, what to say in ordfer to pretend expertise in various fields like the occult etc.
If they wrote a book on photography it would contain a chapter like "Pleasing the purist crowd" it would read somehow like that:
"Never forget to mention HCB. Actually you could well pass for an expert using only this particular name. Sneer at those who call him Henri Cartier Bresson. Look down at those who don't know him. All you have to know HCB invented street photography and used a Leica. This provides a good grip whenever another photographer is mentioned who does street photography or uses a Leica you can always add or finish by saysing "..but she/he's no HCB". Be sure to know about the decisive moment, easy to remember as it's the moment seen on any of HCB's photographs. I you are really daring or reckless in your wish to excel you could drop in a conversation that HCB himself never used the term "decisive moment" in his writings"
So yes there's a certain value in thinking about great photographers as humans and not as gods.

M. Valdemar

05-02-2008, 05:39

I've listened to "Hot Rats" hundreds of times. If that isn't a work of near-genius, I don't know what is.

"Willy the Pimp" is especially good, and so is "Peaches in Regalia".

williams473

05-02-2008, 05:49

Thanks for the person who posted the image of the hand holding the Cartier-Bresson negative that we've been talking about - there's no real "irony" that one of his most famous images is "cropped." In fact, it wasn't cropped to leave out any signifcant visual information of the recorded image. The fact is, Cartier-Bresson himself, in "Just About Love" which someone posted a link to here a month or so ago, said that it's funny, but he wasn't even looking through his camera when he made that image. He had the camera shoved through a gap in the boards of a fence, and you can see in the actual negative the board of the fence is what "crops" out the left side of the negative - it wasn't an decision on the part of Cartier-Bresson to leave out any visiable information after the fact, because the boards of the fence would just print out as a black line with a blurry edge because the camera was right up against it. In the same conversation he still stood by his opinion that if you don't have what you want in the viewfinder when you take the picture, why are you taking the picture? If you don't have it in, don't shoot - move.

In this case, he is as befuddled as anyone that one of his most famous images was made basically shooting from the hip, but even so, it wasn't cropped in the sense that he eliminated significant visual information from the frame. Cartier Bresson is my all time favorite, so I just wanted to clarify.

NickTrop

05-02-2008, 06:01

As for the "cropped" image discussed here. HCB didn't make his own prints. So how do we know he cropped or didn't crop any of his images? Did HCB even know if his images were cropped? He outsourced that part of the creative process of photography. Too much grunt work, I guess, for the rich Frenchman - too tedious. He just wanted to run around exotic locales and France and take pictures.

M. Valdemar

05-02-2008, 06:06

http://www.lyseo.edu.ouka.fi/kuvataide/albums/album02/cartier_bresson_gestapo_120.sized.jpg

Holy Cow, now this is a great photo. I don't care who took it. If I never heard the name HCB I would stop in my tracks and look at this photo.

How much of it is talent, and how many great photos depended on "being there" at a historical moment, I don't know, but to me a great photo stuns you for a moment.

nikonhswebmaster

05-02-2008, 06:16

Too much grunt work, I guess, for the rich Frenchman - too tedious. He just wanted to run around exotic locales and France and take pictures.

Nick why this "rich" jag. Most photographers of that era, and almost all journalists did not print their own work. I learned to print working for a pro, who never printed. HCB worked closely with his printers, there is a film around showing him working with a printer. He knew exactly how his prints were made, including dodging and burning.

I never printed any of my professional color work, I had it all printed by Duggal in NYC, as do most photographers. Digital printers brought us all back to printing color in our studios.

You have an odd take on photography, pretty out of touch with reality.

M. Valdemar

05-02-2008, 06:22

Now this photo is also very good. You also had to "be there" to take it. Would HCB have made a better photo if he were in the same spot?

Hey, I envy a "rich Frenchman" who can wander around the world and witness important historical events taking photos.

Where can i sign up?

http://www.lyseo.edu.ouka.fi/kuvataide/albums/album02/hine.sized.jpg

varjag

05-02-2008, 06:29

He just wanted to run around exotic locales and France and take pictures.
And now, what's wrong with that and how's that inartistic? If you have idea that breathing Dektol fumes in red light is creative, fine - many people think like that. But again, many don't.

williams473

05-02-2008, 06:31

I think Nick just enjoys trying to upset people. Lots of short, general statements clearly out of touch. He takes a great photographer who he knows a lot of people admire and insults him. I'm not upset - his tactis are obvious.

BUT, to answer your question Nick, if you had spent any time in a darkroom you would know how any photographer who ever got their hands wet can tell his images are full frame and not cropped.

M. Valdemar

05-02-2008, 06:36

How many people condemned to "dull care"* and lives/jobs of drudgery would turn into geniuses if freed to pursue a life of art and introspection?**

* Thanx and a tip of the Hatlo hat to Winsor McCay ("if I could only put down this valise")

** OK, maybe not so many, but a few. If you want to look at the "art" of the masses, take a gander at the tens of thousands of Flickr Disneyland albums taken with Canon Rebels.

.

nikonhswebmaster

05-02-2008, 06:46

** OK, maybe not so many, but a few. If you want to look at the "art" of the masses, take a gander at the tens of thousands of Flickr Disneyland albums taken with Canon Rebels.

I am a big fan of those sites, I could look at them forever.

I have been agonizing lately about how easily work can become pretentious, the issue is how to look like those photo streams, and still satisfy the desire to make a statement with continuity.

Have you noticed how easy it is to fall into boring pretentious attempts at making art?

Marc-A.

05-02-2008, 06:51

It seems that HCB is the one we love to loath. First of all, let me tell you that I’m not a big fan of HCB; at least, I prefer Doisneau, Ronis, Koudelka, Salgado or Lange.
Now, one shoudl remind some facts in order to make fair criticism of HCB's work:
- He started to shoot in the 1930’s and was one of the most brilliant photographers of his time.
- Because of that, he has been copied and copied again, and now his pictures belong to our common photographical knowledge.
- Obviously, triggering the shutter button is something anybody can do; does that imply that anybody can be HCB? Of course no! Anybody can hold brushes; does that mean anybody can be Van Gogh?
- Any informed amateur can copy HCB now. Does that mean any amateur could have been HCB? Of course no! Any good painter can reproduce the Sunflowers by Van Gogh (as a matter of fact, nowadays in China, there are professional painters who can copy the Sunflowers in 15minutes); does that mean any good painter could have been Van Gogh?
If you want to play the game "Was HCB all that?”, change the name and put instead “Is Koudelka is all that”, “Was Winogrand is all that” etc. Anybody in RFF could make a Koudelka or a Winogrand, and as a matter of fact a lot of photographers here make the same … but they make a Koudelka, a Winogrand, a HCB AFTER Koudelka, Winogrand or HCB. Afterwards, it’s easy to say: “oh I could have done the same? The puddle picture? The bicycle picture? Well I could have done that.” But these are just empty words …

How much of it is talent, and how many great photos depended on "being there" at a historical moment, I don't know, but to me a great photo stuns you for a moment.

I totally agree with Valdemar: a great photographer is someone who is where the event is. And it’s the most difficult thing to achieve: forcing one's way, anticipating the action, foreseeing the good frame etc. That’s what turns someone who can shoot into a photographer.

M. Valdemar

05-02-2008, 06:56

I've never made art, so I don't know.

All my work has been photography and writing (now mostly writing) for financial compensation.

Posting comments on forums is the closest thing to "art" that I do. I take photos that please me but rarely post them, except on one other forum.

I agree, though, that the images of the masses in the form of monstrous gluts of endless photostreams is art in itself, I guess, the same way that the public expresses itself and it's highest aspirations by, say, for example, electing George Bush twice.

M. Valdemar

05-02-2008, 06:58

The first one to do something actually creates the visual language.

Yes, lots of people can "shoot" now but who created the mental paradigms that even allow you to comprehend what an image is?

It seems that HCB is the one we love to loath. First of all, let me tell you that I’m not a big fan of HCB; at least, I prefer Doisneau, Ronis, Koudelka, Salgado or Lange.
Now, one shoudl remind some facts in order to make fair criticism of HCB's work:
- He started to shoot in the 1930’s and was one of the most brilliant photographers of his time.
- Because of that, he has been copied and copied again, and now his pictures belong to our common photographical knowledge.
- Obviously, triggering the shutter button is something anybody can do; does that imply that anybody can be HCB? Of course no! Anybody can hold brushes; does that mean anybody can be Van Gogh?
- Any informed amateur can copy HCB now. Does that mean any amateur could have been HCB? Of course no! Any good painter can reproduce the Sunflowers by Van Gogh (as a matter of fact, nowadays in China, there are professional painters who can copy the Sunflowers in 15minutes); does that mean any good painter could have been Van Gogh?
If you want to play the game "Was HCB all that?”, change the name and put instead “Is Koudelka is all that”, “Was Winogrand is all that” etc. Anybody in RFF could make a Koudelka or a Winogrand, and as a matter of fact a lot of photographers here make the same … but they make a Koudelka, a Winogrand, a HCB AFTER Koudelka, Winogrand or HCB. Afterwards, it’s easy to say: “oh I could have done the same? The puddle picture? The bicycle picture? Well I could have done that.” But these are just empty words …

I totally agree with Valdemar: a great photographer is someone who is where the event is. And it’s the most difficult thing to achieve: forcing one's way, anticipating the action, foreseeing the good frame etc. That’s what turns someone who can shoot into a photographer.

M. Valdemar

05-02-2008, 07:03

Here's the future of photography.

Everyone will record everything, from every angle, in a continuous stream. Everything will be infinitely retrievable, an electronic Akashic Record.

Good photographers will turn into good archivists/editors.

Rewind to the day you met your wife and just pick which images you like.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sousveillance

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/WearableWirelessWebcamSteveMannVisualFilter1994Dec ember13th.png/450px-WearableWirelessWebcamSteveMannVisualFilter1994Dec ember13th.png

Marc-A.

05-02-2008, 07:05

About the rich Frenchman argument: why all rich kids are not HCB? If there was an obvious link between wealth and talent, then all rich kids (or a major part of them) should be great artists? It’s not the case. Weegee was poor, HCB was rich; Salgado was rich, Doisneau was poor ... they all are outstanding photographers, and being rich is not what made them master photographers. Besides, IMHO, being rich makes it less easy to be an artist: when you are a “bourgeois”, you are expected to have a “serious” job … being an artist is just considered as a debasement for rich people.

About the cropping thing, it’s a well known fact that HCB’s pictures were often marginally cropped. Besides, it’s true he did not make his own prints, but let me tell you that he was/is not the only one (Salgado for instance works with different pro labs in Paris that I know). What is important is not who makes the print, but who thinks it.

chikne

05-02-2008, 07:11

nikonhswebmaster

05-02-2008, 07:19

Do you kids have any fun being this sour on the photography/art world?

Personally I like to go to MoMA look at the photographs, have a bite to eat in their swell new cafeteria, and look at the girls. You guys just have this photography thing all wrong.

If you are worried about rich photographers, and money, spend less, worry less.

Nh3

05-02-2008, 07:40

Nh3

05-02-2008, 07:44

5893058932

I know that he had to stick the lens through a fence and also the part cropped is basically black - he did not crop any visible part of the picture which had detail.

I don't think it diminishes from the impact of that photo... It was not as a bad as i thought. :)

MikeL

05-02-2008, 08:14

Good photographers will turn into good archivists/editors.
]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/WearableWirelessWebcamSteveMannVisualFilter1994Dec ember13th.png/450px-WearableWirelessWebcamSteveMannVisualFilter1994Dec ember13th.png[/img]

30 years from now......
"MV's true contribution was his ability to show us decisive moments, not just the single dimensionality of HCB et al. His ability as an editor to select the simultaneous moments occurring in front of and behind a person wearing an omnisensor dramatically altered the consciousness of many editors and ..................... Some could argue his work was the final nail in the coffin of people's interest in 'single' moment imagery.";)

chikne

05-02-2008, 08:17

I know that he had to stick the lens through a fence and also the part cropped is basically black - he did not crop any visible part of the picture which had detail.

I don't think it diminishes from the impact of that photo... It was not as a bad as i thought. :)

Sure.

But look at the final print, it's printed with a black frame around, as if it was full frame!

nikonhswebmaster

05-02-2008, 08:22

30 years from now......
"Some could argue his work was the nail in the coffin of people's interest in 'single' moment imagery.";)

An interesting dialog could be formed around this concept.

An artist friend of mine and I were thinking along those lines after we left the Whitney Museum Biennial this year.

Artists in the show are not using new media, certainly not exploiting it.

One of the interesting aspects of the RFF forum is the historical context of it.

I am not here because i use rangefinders any longer, but to think about their history, both personally and in a broader scope. Many of the users on the RFF are taking RFs into territory that was never thought of during the classic era of the RF, which is interesting. No on would ever have thought of using an RF wide open except in an emergency, for instance.

I like looking at single images myself, and I like making them, but I do wonder if they have a future? Or better, what that future will bring.