Any other Robert Frank lovers here?

Because...I'm as already said a Robert Frank's fan and because I like Polaroid, being my birthday next monday I decided to make myself a special present: just ordered "Come Again" a book I saw a long time ago but I didn't buy (simply because of limited budget!) but I always desired!

robert

"Come Again" is also mentioned in this interview with Robert Frank @ NYPL, it is also possible to download the transcript of the interview.
 
Yup, love Robert Frank. Big influence along with Moriyama, Plossu and Larrain

Fans of The Americans should check out another couple of books. Robert Depardon's USA book blew me away when I flicked through it, immediate purchase.
Also Trent Parke's Minutes to Midnight, very much a modern Australian version of The Americans.

For Frank himself I love the London/Wales book that the top image is taken from. Has anyone bought any of his more recent books ? He's still knocking them out and perhaps more intimate and personal than his previous work.

Love this video of him shooting an instant camera on a bus. At first confused why the camera didn't work, then trying to be innocent when it did (flash and motor popping the photo out)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axHqPLIhCwE&frags=pl%2Cwn
 
Long before I had ever heard of Robert Frank, I shot this one on a stroll through Boston's North End.
 

Attachments

  • PICT0427-1.jpg
    PICT0427-1.jpg
    186.6 KB · Views: 0
Always enjoyed this image of Frank and Tom Waits. Two very skewed but penetrating observers of America and humanity.

06thinking-popup.jpg
 
As someone that was interested in cameras and photography for much of my young life I remain terribly ignorant of the many notable photographers whose work is considered to be monumental in the eyes of many. Even though I might be familiar with some of the images they've created it's rare that I can identify an image with it's creator. Fortunately Robert Frank is amongst those photographers that I am aware of and I do own The Americans.

I realize that most here are probably all too aware of the works of other such photographers and maybe even take such knowledge (or perhaps familiarity) for granted. Given my lack of exposure (pun intended) to their work, I'm grateful to anyone here who takes the time to mention other photographers that they hold in high regard in threads such as this. Thanks to the OP for posing your question. Over time I'm hoping to expand my collection of books featuring the works of individual photographers and threads like this one are of benefit to me.

(I would have started a new thread regarding my plight, but fortunately a search revealed there are already a number of other threads for me to explore.)
 
Guth said:
(I would have started a new thread regarding my plight, but fortunately a search revealed there are already a number of other threads for me to explore.)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't feel bad about starting another thread, I think most of us would be happy to talk about photobooks and photographers. Beats all the gear talk anyhoo.
 
I am certain that I am in a very small minority here but I do not like Robert Frank's work at all. Before everyone gets all worked up at the rest of my post I need to say that I have nothing whatsoever against Robert Frank as a person. I don't know him and for all I know he may be a terrific person. Neither do I have anything against legal immigration. I know that being an immigrant is not a bowl of roses and trying to find your way in a new country with totally different attitudes and a culture foreign to you has to be very difficult.

I have had a copy of The Americans for years and I go through it from time to time trying to figure out why his collection of poorly composed, poorly focused and poorly exposed photographs (sometimes all in the same photograph) are considered to be such a wonderful example of 1950s photography and so indicative of 1950s America. To me most of those photographs don't even achieve the status of decent snapshots.

After reviewing his work in The Americans I have had no interest in buying any of his other books. I do hope he got better at photography as he got older because he certainly wasn't very good at first.

The 1950s in the United States was a period of massive growth, great prosperity and a blooming in hope for the entire world. The great War was over and there was huge optimism within the US and people from all over were clamoring to immigrate. It was also a time that created the economic engine that, for better or worse, has defined the world for over 70 years. But it seems that all we want to celebrate is the myopic view of one displaced and unhappy European immigrant who did not understand our country, and obviously did not like it. The irony and melancholy evident in his photos make his attitude abundantly clear.

Nuff said. Just a different perspective from someone who does not worship his work.
 
Pioneer said:
After reviewing his work in The Americans I have had no interest in buying any of his other books. I do hope he got better at photography as he got older because he certainly wasn't very good at first.

The 1950s in the United States was a period of massive growth, great prosperity and a blooming in hope for the entire world. The great War was over and there was huge optimism within the US and people from all over were clamoring to immigrate. It was also a time that created the economic engine that, for better or worse, has defined the world for over 70 years. But it seems that all we want to celebrate is the myopic view of one displaced and unhappy European immigrant who did not understand our country, and obviously did not like it. The irony and melancholy evident in his photos make his attitude abundantly clear.
Click to expand...

I wasn't under the impression that Frank's work is all we want to celebrate, however he was the topic of this particular thread. If I understand you correctly, you have a problem with both his photography and his particular vision of this country during the 1950s. Out of curiosity, what other photographers do you feel did a better job of photographing this country during this same period of time while presenting an image of it that you're more in agreement with?
 
Pioneer said:
I ... do not like Robert Frank's work at all. ... I have nothing whatsoever against Robert Frank as a person.
Click to expand...

Usually its the other way round: most people like his photography but can't stand him as a person. :D

BTW, he's still alive and lives very secluded in a simple home off the coast of Nova Scotia.
 
Pioneer said:
I am certain that I am in a very small minority here but I do not like Robert Frank's work at all. Before everyone gets all worked up at the rest of my post I need to say that I have nothing whatsoever against Robert Frank as a person. I don't know him and for all I know he may be a terrific person. Neither do I have anything against legal immigration. I know that being an immigrant is not a bowl of roses and trying to find your way in a new country with totally different attitudes and a culture foreign to you has to be very difficult.

I have had a copy of The Americans for years and I go through it from time to time trying to figure out why his collection of poorly composed, poorly focused and poorly exposed photographs (sometimes all in the same photograph) are considered to be such a wonderful example of 1950s photography and so indicative of 1950s America. To me most of those photographs don't even achieve the status of decent snapshots.

After reviewing his work in The Americans I have had no interest in buying any of his other books. I do hope he got better at photography as he got older because he certainly wasn't very good at first.

The 1950s in the United States was a period of massive growth, great prosperity and a blooming in hope for the entire world. The great War was over and there was huge optimism within the US and people from all over were clamoring to immigrate. It was also a time that created the economic engine that, for better or worse, has defined the world for over 70 years. But it seems that all we want to celebrate is the myopic view of one displaced and unhappy European immigrant who did not understand our country, and obviously did not like it. The irony and melancholy evident in his photos make his attitude abundantly clear.

Nuff said. Just a different perspective from someone who does not worship his work.
Click to expand...

Everyone has the right to like the work of a particular photographer's work or not.

I think that Robert Frank's Americans series of photos is liked by many, as he showed a reverse image of the USA as opposed to the hyped Ozzie and Harriet , Leave it to Beaver and shiny huge two toned fin-tailed car stereotyped USA in the 1950s, of greasy pompadours and poodle sklrts and saddle shoes and Elvis and Buddy Holly and Levitt town suburbia.

Some say he was able to do this easier as a foreigner, but really the photo work of Walker Evans and Dorothea Lange and the majority of the FSA photographers already covered that pessimistic ground, but that was in the hungry America of the 1930s and not the optimistic atomic age America of the 1950s. Maybe no one expected that in the USA of the 1950s?
 
Guth said:
I wasn't under the impression that Frank's work is all we want to celebrate, however he was the topic of this particular thread. If I understand you correctly, you have a problem with both his photography and his particular vision of this country during the 1950s. Out of curiosity, what other photographers do you feel did a better job of photographing this country during this same period of time while presenting an image of it that you're more in agreement with?
Click to expand...

Probably a better topic for another thread rather than hijacking this one, and I can't say I've given it a whole lot of thought, but I much prefer Walker Evans, Elliott Erwitt, Eve Arnold or Richard Avedon from this period. With the possible exception of Elliott Erwitt I'm not sure that any of these are really considered street photographers. David Douglas Duncan is also very good in my opinion and though he was not a street photographer he was still in the business of reacting quickly to accomplish his work.

I am also very fond of Angus McBean and Jane Bown, but they worked more in England and probably worked more in the 60s, or at least were better known for their later work. Even Diane Arbus was a better photographer in my mind, though her subject matter was certainly a trifle odd and not really to my taste.

But truthfully, any one of these are much better photographers than Robert Franks was when he did the photography for The American. In my perhaps not so humble opinion of course.
 
Pioneer said:
I am certain that I am in a very small minority here but I do not like Robert Frank's work at all. ..
Click to expand...

Pioneer, this is what is nice in RFF ! We can have very different ideas and this makes it interesting otherwise it would be a boring place :)
What is important is that we can still stay together under the same roof!

robert
 
Pioneer said:
I am certain that I am in a very small minority here but I do not like Robert Frank's work at all. Before everyone gets all worked up at the rest of my post I need to say that I have nothing whatsoever against Robert Frank as a person. I don't know him and for all I know he may be a terrific person. Neither do I have anything against legal immigration. I know that being an immigrant is not a bowl of roses and trying to find your way in a new country with totally different attitudes and a culture foreign to you has to be very difficult.

I have had a copy of The Americans for years and I go through it from time to time trying to figure out why his collection of poorly composed, poorly focused and poorly exposed photographs (sometimes all in the same photograph) are considered to be such a wonderful example of 1950s photography and so indicative of 1950s America. To me most of those photographs don't even achieve the status of decent snapshots.

After reviewing his work in The Americans I have had no interest in buying any of his other books. I do hope he got better at photography as he got older because he certainly wasn't very good at first.

The 1950s in the United States was a period of massive growth, great prosperity and a blooming in hope for the entire world. The great War was over and there was huge optimism within the US and people from all over were clamoring to immigrate. It was also a time that created the economic engine that, for better or worse, has defined the world for over 70 years. But it seems that all we want to celebrate is the myopic view of one displaced and unhappy European immigrant who did not understand our country, and obviously did not like it. The irony and melancholy evident in his photos make his attitude abundantly clear.

Nuff said. Just a different perspective from someone who does not worship his work.
Click to expand...

When i read Jack Kerouac, Gore Vidal, Mailer, Faulkner or Cormac McCarthy i see a country close to Robert Frank´s images.
Probably the reason for his success is this similarity w/ good American literature.

What you describe as a vision of the US is close to Russia before Kruchev spilled the beans: an optimistic engine made of hope and economic boom.
 
I think we see in Frank's photographs what we want to see. I recall reading an interview with Frank several years ago in which he denied his photos were meant to be a negative view of America at the time. He said he was just documenting what he saw and he really wasn't trying to be critical. He seemed surprised the book took on the interpretation it did. Of course he could have been posturing for the interviewer, I dunno.

(Don't ask me where I read the interview. It was a few years ago and I was on a big Robert Frank binge at the time.)
 
Dogman said:
I think we see in Frank's photographs what we want to see. I recall reading an interview with Frank several years ago in which he denied his photos were meant to be a negative view of America at the time. He said he was just documenting what he saw and he really wasn't trying to be critical. He seemed surprised the book took on the interpretation it did. Of course he could have been posturing for the interviewer, I dunno.

(Don't ask me where I read the interview. It was a few years ago and I was on a big Robert Frank binge at the time.)
Click to expand...

Well... the preface of Americans was written by Jack Kerouac. People tend to side w/ ready made impressions when reacting to art.. If it´s Kerouac then it´s this or that.
Otoh i find his compositions close to free jazz and that´s the impression i get. It´s loose, intense and events seem looking for meaning instead of meaning arranged into form. The latter is always contrived and far from life.
 
He is one the great ones.
I had his Americans book, but send it as gift to Russia.
I watched documentary about him. He is strong...
 
Pioneer said:
Probably a better topic for another thread rather than hijacking this one
Click to expand...

Yes of course (maybe you'll start one?). As someone who is compiling a list of photographers whose work I might want to explore I appreciate the additional input.
 
Pioneer said:
Probably a better topic for another thread rather than hijacking this one, and I can't say I've given it a whole lot of thought, but I much prefer Walker Evans, Elliott Erwitt, Eve Arnold or Richard Avedon from this period. With the possible exception of Elliott Erwitt I'm not sure that any of these are really considered street photographers. David Douglas Duncan is also very good in my opinion and though he was not a street photographer he was still in the business of reacting quickly to accomplish his work.

I am also very fond of Angus McBean and Jane Bown, but they worked more in England and probably worked more in the 60s, or at least were better known for their later work. Even Diane Arbus was a better photographer in my mind, though her subject matter was certainly a trifle odd and not really to my taste.

But truthfully, any one of these are much better photographers than Robert Franks was when he did the photography for The American. In my perhaps not so humble opinion of course.
Click to expand...

Whilst I like some of Erwitt's photos, I don't like him as much as Frank.

Frank for me is a realist - I love photographers who capture the essence of the street where you can almost smell and feel the texture of the photographers surroundings.

Erwitt is perhaps more fantasy often using juxtaposition as the basis of the photo. I'll look at some of his photos and smirk, but it quickly becomes dull looking at a series of his images in a book.

So Frank compared to Erwitt - Frank is an 'album' artist who is based in reality. Erwitt is a 'singles' artist who is more based in fantasy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom