Color, B&W and senility.

Originally Posted by Bill Pierce
"When I look at your picture" Which pictures... I don't recall seeing any of your pictures. Or do you share with the famous, only?
 
Growing up with LIFE magazine in the 1960's, seeing so much beautiful B&W work, that's what I'm drawn to. When I look at the photo books on my bookshelf, the books by photographers that inspire me, almost every single one is a book of B&W images.

Color certainly has it's place. And that seems to be what everyone who is paying, wants. But for work that inspires, I'll stick to B&W.

Best,
-Tim
 
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=297323&showall=1

I started with B/w in my younger days, of course. Then I switched to colour slides for landscape photos and colour negatives for people photos. Since switching to digital, I mainly shoot in colour, but convert some photos into B/W on occasions.

See the next post for my converted photo. The colour photos posted here is the original, the B/w was created in Photoshop with the strongest red filter added.
 
Would I be amiss to bet that the majority (all?) of the b&w work hanging on your wall pre-dates the "digital revolution?
 
Franko said:
Would I be amiss to bet that the majority (all?) of the b&w work hanging on your wall pre-dates the "digital revolution?)
Click to expand...

You’re right. But that’s because I and the people I worked with did the majority or all of our work before digital became mainstream. The majority of color images on my walls are also film images. This is not some sudden cry against digital; it’s just the work of people who are old.

That is not to say that making a good black-and-whte print yourself in the predigital days was not a lot easier and more affordable than making color prints. A lot of folks for whom the print was the final goal, the final step of interpreting the subject, chose black-and-white and their own darkroom for just that reason. It's a far step from today where a lot of folks find it easier to make a good color print from a digital file than to make a good black-and-white; it's the opposite of yesteryear.
 
When I walk into a gallery with a wall of images, if there's only one in monochrome, I will view it first everytime.
 
Out to Lunch said:
On color photography, this movie presents the life and work of Saul Leiter, one of the early 'colorists': "In No Great Hurry 13 Lessons in Life with Saul Leiter". The trailer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6-sXRc_xZ4 The full movie used to be on YouTube but it seems to have been removed. The DVD is for sale on Amazon.
Click to expand...

Howard Greenberg is having a show of Leiter's work at his NYC gallery. I got an email from the gallery with this interview from Howard. I couldn't find a web address that would just bring up the piece; so, I copied it. (Howard is rather amazing himself. Maybe more on that later.)

The World Is Full of Endless Things:
Saul Leiter's New York
*
On the occasion of our current viewing room exhibition of Saul Leiter's work, Howard Greenberg reflected on his friendship with Saul, and the qualities of his photography that were most memorable and distinctive.
*
*
Q: What was the experience like of going through the first boxes of Saul’s work, in black and white, and then in color?
*
HG:*When we first met, in his apartment, he had prepared a few boxes to show me. We sat in his “living room” which was also his painting studio, storage facility, resting place and more. If you’ve ever seen the documentary, In No Great Hurry, you saw what I saw. I should say that I was only expecting to see black and white work. This is what the New York School was about and I really had no knowledge of his career in fashion which was primarily done in color. And black and white I did see. The boxes were old and dusty. When I opened them, I experienced what Eikoh Hosoe used to talk to me about - the aura of the prints. They glowed and were, to my eye, the embodiment of what I loved about vintage work from the 50’s, with the wonderful papers available then. Of course there were the images, pure Saul, and as I came to understand, could only be so. It didn’t take me long to ask him if I could show his work. He tested me in his way, and in no great hurry, said yes.
*
About two or three years after our first show, which was successful, he came into the gallery to show me some of his color work. One box, about 25 recently printed 11x14’s of older work. They were quite good - Saul’s sensibility was very much there. However, I wasn’t sure of the color palette and at first I had the feeling that his slides may have faded. So, foolishly, I asked him. He looked at me and quickly said "Howard, I don’t think these are for you," and then promptly got up and started to walk out. Carrie Springer, who worked for me then, and was the point person for Saul, looked at me with terror in her eyes. So I rushed to Saul before he could get out the door, semi-apologized, and asked him if I could have the photos for a few days and look at them without rushing. He agreed, and the next year we had the first Saul Leiter “In Color” show.





Q: How was Saul’s work, in terms of both prints and imagery, distinct from the broader New York School?
*
HG:*Well, by now his work is well known, and I believe the success comes from the poetic and painterly quality of the color, and regardless of the cars or fashion in his images, the sense of being lost in time. It doesn’t really matter whether you are looking at color or black and white. Saul’s sensibility transcends his medium, and this includes painting. He is a great artist, immediately recognizable, original, and so true to himself.
*
I’m not saying that any of the other so-called New York School photographers are lesser. They all have their own sensibilities within the genre, and each in his or her own way is a great photo-artist. But Saul is different, partially because of being a painter and having a distinctive ability with color photography, and partially because of his unique brand of artistry.
*
Q:*From the time you spent with Saul, both professionally and personally, what has stuck with you the most?
*
HG:*Much has stayed with me about Saul. I dare say I never felt as emotionally close to any other photographer. Saul became part of the gallery family. He attended our party’s, spent hours and hours of time in the gallery kitchen, “kibitzing” with staff and visitors, and enjoying all of it. Personally, although he could also be an impetuous artist, I thought of him as an uncle, or a close cousin, one to whom I was terminally committed. I often think of his voice, the way he spoke. I think about his little pearls of wisdom, “Saulism’s” as Margit (Erb, now director of the Saul Leiter Foundation) and I liked to called them. His giggle was infectious. Perhaps I was in love with him? Why not, everyone else was. Yes, I guess you can say Saul and his photographs are one and the same; you don’t like them, you love them.
 
B&W. Started in '68, early influences W.E. Smith, Adams, Strand, later others including Walter Rosenblum. They still inspire me. Speaking with a high school friend after 50 years recently, I was interested to hear him tell me that the light on Martha's Vineyard, where he has lived for 30 years, is beautiful, but he doesn't see it in the garish, over-saturated work done today there. He said that, as he looked around his office, all the photos were B&W.

I recently spent some time looking at Salgado's work, and was reinvigorated to see the power of a single image, which stunned me so much when I first saw Smith's work. That is important. That is why I became a photographer.
 
Bill, thanks for putting up those gems from Howard Greenberg about Saul Leiter. Lovely anecdotes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom