Best book by Winogrand - your advice

sanmich

sanmich

Veteran
Local time
4:14 AM
Joined
Nov 3, 2006
Messages
3,420
What is, in your opinion, the best black and white book by Garry Winogrand?
the one that best graps his contribution to street photography...

Thanks
 
I'll be interested in people's recommendations too. I've had Animals recommended to me but have not seen it yet.
 
Considering the fact that Winogrand hated the term street photography and called it 'stupid'... It would be rather silly to make a judgement on one of his books as contributing 'something' to street photography.

The Animals is usually considered his best book, even though according to Garry that would make him a 'zoo photographer' and not a street photographer.
 
GSNfan said:
Considering the fact that Winogrand hated the term street photography and called it 'stupid'... It would be rather silly to make a judgement on one of his books as contributing 'something' to street photography.

The Animals is usually considered his best book, even though according to Garry that would make him a 'zoo photographer' and not a street photographer.
Click to expand...

OK, didn't know that...:)

It seems that some photographers don't like how they are classified.

See for an example the "artist" HCB...
 
Figments From the Real World is probably the best overall survey of Winogrand's work.

The Man in the Crowd is an excellent survey of his street photography.

But neither of the above is a monograph assembled and sequenced by the artist like the following (photos from which Figments includes):

The Animals is very good, but I wouldn't call it his best, nor a good introduction to his body of work.

If you can find a copy of Women Are Beautiful, you will get closer to the heart of Winogrand's early street work.

Public Relations and Stock Photographs are great (particularly the latter), but probably not what you're looking for in terms of "street".

Ari
 
I gave up on Winogrand books as majority of them seem to be extremely high priced collectors items. There are only a couple of them found in bookshops/Amazon - Animals, Public Relations and one other. But none of these are "street" books, those, as I've mentioned, fetch prices that I do not care paying.
 
kermaier said:
The Animals is very good, but I wouldn't call it his best, nor a good introduction to his body of work.

Ari
Click to expand...

When you speak of his body of work, do you refer to the developed and printed part or the thousands of undeveloped rolls of film -or combined?
 
Phantomas said:
I gave up on Winogrand books as majority of them seem to be extremely high priced collectors items. There are only a couple of them found in bookshops/Amazon - Animals, Public Relations and one other. But none of these are "street" books, those, as I've mentioned, fetch prices that I do not care paying.
Click to expand...

I start to see that myself...
too bad.
 
sanmich said:
I'm sure you are right,
but then, they do agree to be classified as photographers, right? ;)
Click to expand...

Possibly we are assigning to much significance to ourselves as the good ones seem to simply ignore what we say, think or do. I believe Winogrand fit into that mold.
 
GSNfan said:
When you speak of his body of work, do you refer to the developed and printed part or the thousands of undeveloped rolls of film -or combined?
Click to expand...

I mean the work that the artist edited and printed for display or publication.

I don't consider even pictures that never made it past the work print stage to be part of his body of work, much less negatives he never even contact printed.

So a number of the pictures presented at the end of Figments should not, IMO, have been published. I think Szarkowski went too far in his enthusiasm for Winogrand's work, and should not have "curated" material that the artist never proffered as artwork.
 
sanmich said:
I'm sure you are right,
but then, they do agree to be classified as photographers, right? ;)
Click to expand...

Not always -- I imagine that when HC-B retreated from photography in an effort to return to his self-professed true love of drawing/painting, he was rejecting his classification in the "photographer" sub-category of "artist".
 
Last edited:
Every time I feel overwhelmed by the whole photography-thing with Pros, amateurs, artists, gurus (and their groupies) and people handing me their business cards that say "fine art photographer", and exhibitions flyers etc... I sit back and watch one of Winogrand's interviews or video clips and feel much better afterwards.
 
kermaier said:
I mean the work that the artist edited and printed for display or publication.

I don't consider even pictures that never made it past the work print stage to be part of his body of work, much less negatives he never even contact printed.

So a number of the pictures presented at the end of Figments should not, IMO, have been published. I think Szarkowski went too far in his enthusiasm for Winogrand's work, and should not have "curated" material that the artist never proffered as artwork.
Click to expand...

Szarkowski's enthusiasm for Winogrand was justifiable, but he made the mistake of presenting Winogrand like a typical photographer while Garry was anything but 'typical'.

One of the reasons I hate the whole art shtick is this classification, neat little pigeon holes and a lot of fluffy nonsense that is used to "sell"...

Winogrand tried and before him Frank and Walker Evans to distance photography form the fuzzy, mostly European school of 'art photography' that was later to become a force of nature with HCB trade mark and magnum, but they failed... The last Winogrand-type photographer Gilden also sold out after joining magnum.

This whole 'art thing' actually killed photography in its raw and pure form. It still linger on in the painting-wannbe European style with the ghost of poor HCB as its guide, even though HCB left photography after so much success and many years to return to painting... irony is not that well understood in our times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom