Does anybody besides me think Ralph Gibson's "Leica Picture of the Year"...

raydm6 said:
Interesting short article on why he shifted from his B&W analog oeuvre to Leica digital:

Why a Master Photographer Went Digital After 55 Years
"Ralph Gibson, who’s been shooting analog since 1956, highlights the qualities inherent to digital photography in this new show, Digital Color."
Click to expand...

Through it all, he has discovered that digital has its own unique visual language. The images are more compressed, foreshortened and unpredictable
Click to expand...

I feel this should be the subject of another thread. I can agree on the first two points, compressed & foreshortened, as the digital has a larger dynamic range that I try to reduce in post. The unpredictable I fail to see.
 
Color sadly is not Ralph Gibson's forte! Years ago I found a book in color, Brazil and many abstract. I simply did not like any!
I was with a friend and shown the entire exhibition all B/W in Toronto, as it was being packed up for transport. It was magic.
I have many of his books, that I love. Perhaps my way, close to another film photographer. I love color and take great pains to achieve my goals.
These images plus image of year are wasted. ...
 
Well, I certainly see a decent composition since every line works. It balances right. It is subtle. I think it is a nod to the early color photos of Keld-Helmer-Petersen: https://www.artbook.com/9781935004271.html I have no issue with it at all, but I enjoy these types of photos. Certainly a philosophical change in the way he chooses to work that is not going to be as popular as his old work. Color and without people is never popular concept on RFF.

Who was winning this Photo of the year was probably decided by Leica and then he lobbied for this image since it is relatively new. I like it more than his older work, but I was never a fan.
 
Erik van Straten said:
I've never seen an unforgettable picture by Gibson. I don't know what his fame is based on.That could be because of my very bad memory.Erik.
Click to expand...

haha Ned
always Pkaying the Prankster ... Welcome back !


Gandy has taken You out of Siberia, he so needs more numbers & heads on Rff !
 
helenhill said:
haha Ned
always Pkaying the Prankster ... Welcome back !


Gandy has taken You out of Siberia, he so needs more numbers & heads on Rff !
Click to expand...

Thanks.

But I’m serious, I really like it. Make things simple takes a lot if time and knowledge. There is mastery in that image for sure.
 
The photo epitomize whats good and bad about leica. A photo stated as photo of the year is bound to ruffle peoples feathers, furthermore it encourages discussion and thus probably fullfills its intent. As in all art it encourages dialogue, much like dada or pop art art.

Imo its purpose is partly a marketing vehicle for Leica though i could be wrong. Post #8 describes it well
 
I once thought I was a photographer, in my late teens and early twenties. One day a relative saw all the prints in the trash outside my closet darkroom and said "so you throw out all these so no one will see them?".....implying that I was hiding my failures.....after that I thought, well, if I just have some fun. If I like some of them, that is enough for me. I have not seen this Leica photograph....not really interested. Today, I am as interested in the physics involved in the design of cameras, maybe even more so, than having been determined to be an artist as a photographer. I do appreciate the detail available in digital and find it amazing to have the results available without all the chemicals and wait time. And I like some of the other camera designs and the glass....
 
The picture bends reality and dimension. It appears art like, a blend of abstract shape and color, you can see “a boat”, or rather the impression of a boat. The three dimension look is absent. Curiosity wants more....but only sees shape and color.
 
cboy said:
Imo its purpose is partly a marketing vehicle for Leica though i could be wrong.
Click to expand...
It is not partly a marketing vehicle. It is entirely a marketing vehicle. And Leica needs to get a new translation service. In English on its website it is called "Leica Picture of the Year 2021". Picture?
 
Erik van Straten said:
I've never seen an unforgettable picture by Gibson. I don't know what his fame is based on.That could be because of my very bad memory.
Click to expand...

His first book, The Somnambulist, is what put him on the critical map, and I would say deservedly. His photos then were black-and-white, dark, moody, richly toned, and with a strong visual design combined with a vaguely menacing surrealistic air. Incidentally, if you have a nice clean copy of the original 1970 edition of The Somnambulist, it's putatively worth several thousand dollars, which -- if combined with the haul you could apparently make if you have a nice clean Canon 35mm f/1.5 LTM lens suitable for zombie movies -- would easily net you enough to buy a Leica M11!

My point here is that Gibson is one of those photographers who seem to work well in the book medium, where you can see a good selection of related images in a controlled succession that helps you grasp what he's trying to express. It could be that his "Photo of the Year" is part of such a selection that would hang together better if seen as a group, but looks nicely done but underwhelming when snipped out on its own.

Another vaguely interesting tea leaf to be read from this award is that demographically speaking, Leica apparently is targeting people roughly in my age bracket, who remember when The Somnambulist was a big deal and and have a vague reverence for the name of Ralph Gibson as a result. I guess it's a nice reminder that some people in my cohort – people who grew up when you could hear the Kinks' Lola and Eric Clapton's Layla on Mom's car radio on the way to school – grew up to be rich, even if I didn't...
 
Looks like a photorealist painting. I think a very large print would be perfect opposite the bar in my pool house.
 
Thank you, Ranger, I've never seen one of his books. I only remember him because there was, long ago, an item in Popular Photography about the then new Leica M6 that he was testing. I think he is in the US better known than in Europe. Maybe because of his age he missed somehow the internet years. Again many thanks for your clarification.

Erik.
 
If the gallery is representative of the taste, preferences, interests of most of the photographers of RFF I'm not surprised that there are many negative comments. And of course there's nothing wrong with having these tastes and practicing these kinds of photography. Street, portraits, landscape are all good and interesting, sure.

But from that to calling the photo in question "lame" there is a lot of difference. Personally I find it excessive :)

In Ralph Gibson's photography the search for forms, lights, lines colors or shades of gray beyond the simple representation of a subject is often present, perhaps has intensified in recent times.
Think about the work "The Vertical Horizon" or for the lovers of B&W the photos visible on his site http://www.ralphgibson.com/ in the archive under the label 2013-2014 MONO. Or the cover of "The Black Trilogy" book.

It's a simple photo , with lines, light and shadows, colours. It is essential. Very graphic. Nothing more. Of course we can like it, as I do or not.

I think he has a vision, he likes to take risks, probably he's tired of the photos already made and seen a many thousand times. Our world is changing, photography as well. As music, painting, other expressive arts. The desire, the need for someone to push the limits is part of what we are.

Does Ralph Gibson deserve the fame Leica gives him? I thinkl so, for sure. I would like to take a workshop with him, if money and covid were not a problem!
Could the photo have been made with a camera different from the M11? I think so, for sure! Is the photo part of a "marketing strategy" decided by Leica? Probably yes, it is the world in which we live.

Having said this in the spirit of a constructive discussion I admit that I would like to hang such a picture on one wall at home. But...am i ready to pay a few thousand $ for it? No thanks! I'm not a collector!

PS: and for the friends who say "I could have taken such a photo" I quote a sentence from the Italian designer Bruno Munari : When someone says: I can do this too, it means that he can do it again, otherwise he would have done it before. (from Verbale scritto, Il melangolo, 1992)

Just my 2 cents opinion, which of course could be wrong !!! With friendship ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom