Are you able to master luck?

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Preserving some myths about the greats has always been part of the deal

I think the technical term for that is "lying". :angel:

😀

 

[Sparrow]

... economy with the truth, more than lying?

 

[noisycheese]

The well prepared seem to get lucky consistently. He got lucky a lot.

Bresson also talked a lot about and in his words "a developed instinct" which he definitely had developed.

I suspect that many of Messr. Cartier-Bresson's images are just the result of simply being there and waiting for a photographable moment. - a moment that would produce an image with visual impact.

Wayne Gretzsky said "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take." I'd say the same applies to photography and not being there to begin with...

 

[Sam Kanga]

"Are you able to master luck?"

Good question.
For photographers, luck comes for those who are prepared.

Regarding HCB, he knew what he wanted. He had determined a method or style of shooting, and worked toward that.

Part of being a good photographer is working out your own "philosophy" or style or whatever you want to call it, and following that.

HCB's work was a great influence on me when I was a young photographer, but there were a number of other photographers that also interested me. Look at Erwitt, he has his own "style", but he can also do commercial work, advertising etc. Be yourself, be true to yourself, get in touch with your own creativity.

Thanks
Sam

 

[vfioravanti]

Funny HCb always claimed that he never cropped his pictures but the picture the OP posted is severely cropped... Go figure maybe HCB is not that honest after all.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Funny HCb always claimed that he never cropped his pictures but the picture the OP posted is severely cropped... Go figure maybe HCB is not that honest after all.

Where? I've always suspected that this is a myth put about by his worshippers, perhaps based on a misunderstanding of his refusal to let others crop his pictures.

Cheers,

R.

 

[vfioravanti]

28579_std by vitor fioravanti, on Flickr

 

[airfrogusmc]

Bresson cropped how he wanted his final image to look. He just wouldn't let editors crop differently from the way he wanted his final work to shown.

 

[OurManInTangier]

I'm a big believer in luck but would agree that luck alone will get you nowhere (at least in terms of HCB's type of photography...the lottery may be another matter 🙂 )

 

[Pioneer]

"Are you able to master luck?"

Good question.
For photographers, luck comes for those who are prepared.

Regarding HCB, he knew what he wanted. He had determined a method or style of shooting, and worked toward that.

Part of being a good photographer is working out your own "philosophy" or style or whatever you want to call it, and following that.

HCB's work was a great influence on me when I was a young photographer, but there were a number of other photographers that also interested me. Look at Erwitt, he has his own "style", but he can also do commercial work, advertising etc. Be yourself, be true to yourself, get in touch with your own creativity.

Thanks
Sam

Luck comes for everybody at one point or another.

My question has always been; How do you prepare for a lucky event?? You have no idea when it is coming or how.

I think this is another of those pithy little sayings that really mean nothing.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Luck comes for everybody at one point or another.

My question has always been; How do you prepare for a lucky event?? You have no idea when it is coming or how.

I think this is another of those pithy little sayings that really mean nothing.

Hardly.

Consider two different scenarios.

One person is staring vacantly into space -- in the old Royal Navy saying, with his thumb in his bum and his mind in neutral -- or wondering whether he should have used his Version III or Version IV Summicron. In his spare time he watches football or buys and sells cameras.

The other has his camera set up, ready for use, looking for pictures. He can shoot almost instinctively. He is looking for shapes, colour, juxtapositions and indeed the unexpected. In his spare time he goes to exhibitions, reads books on photography, thinks.

Which is prepared? And which is likelier to be able to take advantage of luck when it happens? Or even to notice that it is happening?

Cheers,

R.

 

[gns]

Funny HCb always claimed that he never cropped his pictures but the picture the OP posted is severely cropped... Go figure maybe HCB is not that honest after all.

Can you show me where he said he never cropped a picture.

 

[Pioneer]

Hardly.

Consider two different scenarios.

One person is staring vacantly into space -- in the old Royal Navy saying, with his thumb in his bum and his mind in neutral -- or wondering whether he should have used his Version III or Version IV Summicron. In his spare time he watches football or buys and sells cameras.

The other has his camera set up, ready for use, looking for pictures. He can shoot almost instinctively. He is looking for shapes, colour, juxtapositions and indeed the unexpected. In his spare time he goes to exhibitions, reads books on photography, thinks.

Which is prepared? And which is likelier to be able to take advantage of luck when it happens? Or even to notice that it is happening?

Cheers,

R.

Nice thought Roger but I still don't buy it.

I am taking pictures at the baseball game.

A couple of foul balls are hit. I have lot of shots of batters, runners and fielders. Maybe I can catch a foul ball being caught. So I put my Canon 135mm on my trusty M3 and wait for another foul ball.

Later in the game a foul ball IS hit. I follow the ball as it flies toward the stands. Suddenly a fan leans out over the wall trying to catch the ball. His friend reaches out and grabs the back of his t-shirt as he catches the ball.

I get the shot.

Now, was that luck?

I suspect this happens a lot, a lot more then luck does. Someone recognizes a potential scenario and prepares for it. When that scenario occurs they take the picture. Everyone else thinks it was luck, but it really wasn't luck at all. But it makes us feel better to think that it was.

 

[Sam Kanga]

Luck, Cartier-Bresson and the whole damn thing.

I just came across this piece in the NY Times Lens blog about Bill Rauhauser:
http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/14/detroit-from-both-sides-of-the-coin/

He's sums it all up nicely.

As a secondary point, it is amazing how many photographers were influenced by Cartier-Bresson's 1947 touring show. I knew the Canadian photographer Sam Tata very well, and was asked to write a short appreciation of him upon his passing in 2005. http://www.samkanga.com/samtata.appreciation.pdf A friend of Tata's insisted he see a show by HCB in Bombay, which inspired him to change his method and style of shooting.

Whatever one thinks of Cartier-Bresson, he was one of the earliest to use the small 35mm camera as a way of catching "Images à la sauvette" - ("images on the run" or "stolen images"). He had is own philosophy and method of shooting, let's leave it at that.

thanks
Sam

 

[vfioravanti]

In Chinese folklore, a man has both a son and a horse. One day, his horse runs away, and his neighbors feel sorry for him. “Oh, what bad luck for you,” they say.

But the old man replies, “Maybe so, maybe not.”

The next week, the horse returns, bringing another horse with it. “You are very lucky!” say his neighbors. The old man says only, “Maybe so, maybe not.”

The old man’s son likes this new horse very much and undertakes to train it, but one day, he is thrown from the horse and breaks his leg. The villagers tell the old man, “That is bad luck.”

The old man responds, “Maybe so, maybe not.”

Soon after this, there is war in the land, and all the young men in the village must join the emperor’s army, but because his leg is broken, the old man’s son does not have to go. “Ah, you are very lucky,” the villagers tell the old man.

He says only, “Maybe so, maybe not.”

 

[Pioneer]

In Chinese folklore, a man has both a son and a horse. One day, his horse runs away, and his neighbors feel sorry for him. “Oh, what bad luck for you,” they say.

But the old man replies, “Maybe so, maybe not.”

The next week, the horse returns, bringing another horse with it. “You are very lucky!” say his neighbors. The old man says only, “Maybe so, maybe not.”

The old man’s son likes this new horse very much and undertakes to train it, but one day, he is thrown from the horse and breaks his leg. The villagers tell the old man, “That is bad luck.”

The old man responds, “Maybe so, maybe not.”

Soon after this, there is war in the land, and all the young men in the village must join the emperor’s army, but because his leg is broken, the old man’s son does not have to go. “Ah, you are very lucky,” the villagers tell the old man.

He says only, “Maybe so, maybe not.”

I remember the story but thanks for refreshing my memory vfioravanti. 🙂

 

[Berth]

When did Henri do all that developing I wonder ... 20 rolls eh? whats that two maybe three hours? then perhaps the same agin to do the contacts and go through them and reject any that would need cropping, then a quick nap and off again the next day

At 36 exposures/roll, if he took one picture every 60 seconds it would take him 14 hours to shoot 20 rolls. Assuming he could rewind then reload his Leica in 5 minutes. Then taking them to his processor and, after waiting a couple of hours for the results, spending, say 10 seconds, reviewing each image, another 2 hours. That makes an 18 hour day. I assume he took time to eat, and perhaps have a conversation or two with one of his lovers or wives or friends, play with his daughter, and sleep?

No, the math doesn't support anything remotely like 20 rolls a day.

Myth.

 

[DNG]

HCB, if, you combine his training, his desire, his drive along with his discipline, it becomes obvious that having a good understanding of form, light, composition, with talent.... add a bit of luck (because with photography, there is always a lag time). He was prepared, he was looking for a future opportunity (lag time) to capture the moment.

Preparation, a keen eye, and the ability to foresee a few seconds ahead, to try to capture the right moment... is his idea of luck... I think

 

[vfioravanti]

"I remember the story but thanks for refreshing my memory vfioravanti."

No worries🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

At 36 exposures/roll, if he took one picture every 60 seconds it would take him 14 hours to shoot 20 rolls. Assuming he could rewind then reload his Leica in 5 minutes. Then taking them to his processor and, after waiting a couple of hours for the results, spending, say 10 seconds, reviewing each image, another 2 hours. That makes an 18 hour day. I assume he took time to eat, and perhaps have a conversation or two with one of his lovers or wives or friends, play with his daughter, and sleep?

No, the math doesn't support anything remotely like 20 rolls a day.

Myth.

You're right, it doesn't, on those figures and assumptions. But they're not valid. It's quite easy, even with a screw-mount Leica, to shoot a whole roll in a couple of minutes; if I can reload a Leica in two minutes I'm sure HCB could; I don't think it necessarily takes 10 seconds per shot, 6 minutes per film, to review a contact sheet (of course it can take a lot longer). Bear in mind that if you're shooting a LOT of film there can be whole sequences you just ignore, because you got something better later.

Like you, I don't believe the figures. But not for the reasons you give. On the one hand, 20 rolls a day is easy. HCB might even have shot 40 some days: at 10 minutes a roll including reloading (quite easy) it's only 200 minutes, well under 4 hours. On the other, 20 rolls EVERY day is extremely unlikely, because of time spent travelling and waiting, in meetings with printers, editors, etc.

Cheers,

R.