What would HC Bresson Do?

[antiquark]

Didn't HCB dislike using color film? I think he said it was "ridiculous."

If he never got into color film, I can't see him embracing digital.

[eddie1960]

Originally Posted by antiquark

Didn't HCB dislike using color film? I think he said it was "ridiculous."

If he never got into color film, I can't see him embracing digital.

he'd have the sway to get a custom b/w filter installed

[ZlatkoBatistich]

There's no way to know, but we can still have fun discussing it. If he were a young man today, he would likely use digital as the speed of digital is now often required for photojournalism. He would likely use an M9, but might also have some other small camera.

[savantcreative]

He would be digital if he was able to learn PhotoShop

[Kiyoshi]

this thread is ridiculous.

[rolleistef]

He would keep doing what he was doing since the late 1970s - draw with a pencil.

[brandonmsweet]

Originally Posted by rolleistef

He would keep doing what he was doing since the late 1970s - draw with a pencil.

so so true

[erik]

IF he was still alive, IF he had not already given up photography all together. IF he wasn't already HCB and just starting out. Could go anyway you would like to argue it. Consider others who are at similar points in their careers. Lee Friedlander has not switched, why would he? He has a work flow that he has perfected over decades and serves him well. IF he were 25 and had to make a living the answer would be different. But then he would not yet be the master that we now know. I think HCB would scoff at this question.

[wlewisiii]

Paint.

William

[obama6493]

Originally Posted by varjag

Uh, he died in 2004, mind you. Digital cameras at this point were widely available, he could use one if he wanted.

Case closed.

None of the above: He'd tell us to stop wasting so much time worrying about what he would do and just go out and take some F'n pictures. Or better yet learn how to paint.

[tom.w.bn]

Either he would paint or he would use a modern camcorder.

[ramosa]

Originally Posted by Mcary

None of the above: He'd tell us to stop wasting so much time worrying about what he would do and just go out and take some F'n pictures. Or better yet learn how to paint.

Full agreement here

[dave lackey]

HCB did not care about image quality? First time anyone has ever said that and it is incorrect.

How many times have I seen a video of Bresson making sure his prints were just so before he signed them? Maybe there is a difference in describing image quality here?

[TaoPhoto]

I couldn't choose one of the poll choices, as they simply don't offer enough breadth. There is no reason to assume that HCB wouldn't choose SLR's over RF's, another brand over Leica, some kinds of digital over some kinds of film. In his day, choices were more limited, and he choose tools from what was available to him. With today's much broader choices, who knows? If he were starting today he might choose a digital P&S. I don't get the impression that he credits the camera, per se, for his successes.

This obsession with hardware does us a disservice. If any one of us took thousands of pictures every year, for a decade or so, with nothing but a Brownie and Tri-X, we'd begin to produce some amazing results. There is something to be said for really, really knowing your tools, for all their strengths and flaws. The master woodcarver does not spend his days on the 'net lusting after better chisels. Choose good tools, know your tools, master your tools. It's a very old progression that gets one from apprentice to journeyman to master.

[dallard]

If a pig sprouts wings, how far can it fly?

[Erik van Straten]

Cartier-Bresson would never use digital camera's. He liked (and sold) only silver gelatine prints. It is not possible to make silver gelatine prints from digital files.

Erik.

[ctham]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

Cartier-Bresson would never use digital camera's. He liked (and sold) only silver gelatine prints. It is not possible to make silver gelatine prints from digital files.

Erik.

Actually, that isn't true: http://www.digitalsilverimaging.com/

It may not be "traditional", but it is silver gelatin prints made from digital files.

As for HC-B, he'd probably laugh at the poll, but it is good fun to speculate

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by ctham

It may not be "traditional", but it is silver gelatin prints made from digital files.

In fact I knew this, but it a very expensive way. For Cartier-Bresson that was no problem, but for me it is.

Erik.

[Scrambler]

I believe HCB saw photography as a shortcut way of doing a sketch. We can bang on about equipment quality but I have always seen his use of his original Leica as his discovery of a technique to reduce the quality of photography while increasing the timeliness. After all most cameras of the era had larger (= higher definition) films or plates, many with lenses highly regarded even today. The game-changing features of the Leica were its small size, rapid turnaround between photographs and large depth of field. HCB rather famously zone focused so I don't think the rangefinder element came into it for him.

Today HCB would use his iPhone (the least conspicuous camera, simply because everyone uses it) and then render in monochrome on his Mac. He would develop an app to eliminate the autofocus and instead have 2-3 zone focus buttons, plus minimal shutter lag.

Or perhaps with modern "left-brain" training he would have been a better sketcher and would never have taken up photography.

It was his artistic eye not his equipment that made him a great photographer.

Imho.

[Chris101]

Originally Posted by ctham

Actually, that isn't true: http://www.digitalsilverimaging.com/

...

There is also a DIY method of silver printing a digital file:

http://www.danburkholder.com/Pages/m...main_page1.htm

[KM-25]

Originally Posted by bizarrius

One of many reasons on why people use film is: "i like film because big photographers used it and they didn't need anything more"
yes but they never had digital :S

So...what do you think that HC Bresson would do if he was alive today?
Would he still use film or would he go M9? or even D700?

For starters, the opening statement about "Big photographers use it" tells me that you spend far too much time on the Internet instead of out in the real world, in short, its kind of a load of BS, totally unfounded.

I have used digital for over 17 years, most of my career, but I use more film now days because I like the process, the result and the fact that it never has to touch a computer, it has nothing to do with a big photographer.

And I think that if HCB were alive today, he would be too old to shoot or care for that matter but if the age were lower, say, 60-70, he would still shoot film because he was not the next greatest fad, technology or gear type of guy. Add to that he did not much care for color, I doubt he would appreciate nor bond very well with the often distracting and overwhelming myriad of options on a digital camera, ability to see the image right away included.

HCB was about pure and very simple but highly stylized photography, not about gear like many on here are, I have full confidence he would have passed on digital...

[dave lackey]

Originally Posted by KM-25

For starters, the opening statement about "Big photographers use it" tells me that you spend far too much time on the Internet instead of out in the real world, in short, its kind of a load of BS, totally unfounded.

I have used digital for over 17 years, most of my career, but I use more film now days because I like the process, the result and the fact that it never has to touch a computer, it has nothing to do with a big photographer.

And I think that if HCB were alive today, he would be too old to shoot or care for that matter but if the age were lower, say, 60-70, he would still shoot film because he was not the next greatest fad, technology or gear type of guy. Add to that he did not much care for color, I doubt he would appreciate nor bond very well with the often distracting and overwhelming myriad of options on a digital camera, ability to see the image right away included.

HCB was about pure and very simple but highly stylized photography, not about gear like many on here are, I have full confidence he would have passed on digital...

Can't argue with that! Well stated.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by TaoPhoto

I couldn't choose one of the poll choices, as they simply don't offer enough breadth. There is no reason to assume that HCB wouldn't choose SLR's over RF's, another brand over Leica, some kinds of digital over some kinds of film. In his day, choices were more limited, and he choose tools from what was available to him. With today's much broader choices, who knows? If he were starting today he might choose a digital P&S. I don't get the impression that he credits the camera, per se, for his successes.

This obsession with hardware does us a disservice. If any one of us took thousands of pictures every year, for a decade or so, with nothing but a Brownie and Tri-X, we'd begin to produce some amazing results. There is something to be said for really, really knowing your tools, for all their strengths and flaws. The master woodcarver does not spend his days on the 'net lusting after better chisels. Choose good tools, know your tools, master your tools. It's a very old progression that gets one from apprentice to journeyman to master.

Very true. And even better with (let's say) a Kodak Retina. It's the 'quality threshold' criterion, the level at which better camera = better pics or better photographer = better pics.

Boaz,

R.

[BobYIL]

Contrary to what many people believe of him, Henri Cartier-Bresson was meticulous about his signature in his photography and he was utterly conservative in maintaining his style. I remember from the days of the HP3 on that he was consistently using Ilford hi-speed films up until the HP5 as long as they were available on his “path” or carrying them in 30ft rolls to cut in hotel rooms. He never used a lightmeter and always rated his film at 400ASA, not even needed to push higher. His favorite developer was (almost always) Harvey’s 777 (a soft working, fine grain formula) and his processing/printing was done by first Pierre Gassman and later (through the end of ‘60s I think) by Voja Mitrovic. His lens was the collapsible Summicron from the day it was introduced until he left photography for painting. This lens has been several times to Wetzlar for cleaning and recoating, the same lens... His printing paper was Ilford Multigrade for most of the prints. How many photographers we know of such exacting standards? (When I met Marc Riboud in 1979 I was told he was already into painting but seeming around with a CL.)

Look at his photographs especially the prints in the exhibitions; you will note a long and smooth gradation of mid-grays until highlights. This was also a part of his style. Mr. Cartier-Bresson was one of the rare photographers who cared to have a distinct signature in his photographs to be recognized as much as he cared his face to be not recognized.

What would he be using in our day? Do you know any digital camera including the M9 to duplicate the tones we enjoy with fine B&W film photography?

[Roger Hicks]

If he didn't use a meter, it's a bit difficult to say that he used a consistent ISO speed. And his printers have said, at various times and to various people, that his negatives were not always perfect: sometimes quite a long way from perfect. But a good printer can wring excellent quality out of less-than-perfect negative. He used a number of lenses --- the Summicron was still far in the future when he started -- so if I were you I'd query the sources of your information.

Cheers,

R.