Gary Winogrand From A Subject's POV

willie_901

Veteran
Local time
11:52 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
5,693
GW photographed a boxer named Nick Biondi at length for Sports Illustrated in the mid 1950s.


This link contains a lengthy contemporary interview with Bondi.

http://blog.sfmoma.org/2013/05/the-boxer/

I think this piece gives an interesting perspective on GW as a person and on his skills as a documentary photographer early in his career.

One take home message for me was that technical skill and the ability to work well and fast is important for documentary photography. The other is that large, loud cameras with large lenses would be a severe handicap to achieve what GW did during this project.

Here is one quote from Bondi.

"Biondi: One of the things that still amazes me about the encounter was that neither I nor any of the other participants in the photographs were even remotely self-conscious. Normally when there’s a guy with a camera focusing his attention on you, a person might become self-conscious. Self-consciousness didn’t exist for me then, and looking at the photographs it doesn’t show itself in the pictures. I wasn’t aware of Garry the Photographer’s presence. He was like a ghost, and we simply went about our daily tasks. It helped enormously that he didn’t use flash, but it also made us wonder if he actually had film in the camera! In my opinion this ghostliness was a major component of his talent."
 
That's simply a matter of style.
But look at McCurry's work: all in your face, even arranging the scene, the subjects are almost actors. And yet, his images are galaxies beyond ours and Winogrand's.
 
That's simply a matter of style.
But look at McCurry's work: all in your face, even arranging the scene, the subjects are almost actors. And yet, his images are galaxies beyond ours and Winogrand's.

I wouldn't say his work is galaxies beyond Winogrand's, just very different from Winogrands.
 
Well, there are absolutes. McCurry's endless 70-200mm portraits may get the job done, but if you google image search, page after page just aren't very interesting. One's pretty much the same as another. McCurry also can't use the frame nearly as well as Winogrand, McCurry is really formal. Stiff. The picture I linked is a hurricane, comparatively. It's a bit dark on the link, though.
 
As far as I'm concerned, about all of my photos are as good as this one you're linking. But very, very few are as good as McCurry's.

We're probably hitting the famous wall of subjectivity here, from both sides.

you're trying to compare a photojournalist with a street photographer.. LOL.

apples and oranges buddy. they're great in their own ways. McCurry has some great images but they are all "photojournalistic-travel porn" images in my opinion. Winogrand photographed "home" and he did it extremely well. his compositions, subject matter, everything is solid. not to mention both their styles are totally different. the major difference imo is that McCurry was in a position where he had great subjects everywhere and he took full advantage of that fact (not to say it was easy.. you can take **** pics of an interesting scene). Winogrand had to work with what we're used to seeing everyday. much harder imo.

if you'd like to post your own work, I'd love to rip it apart and let you know why you're not like Garry Winogrand. 😉
 
As far as I'm concerned, about all of my photos are as good as this one you're linking. But very, very few are as good as McCurry's.

We're probably hitting the famous wall of subjectivity here, from both sides.

I might be your next biggest fan then since I love Winogrand.

The proof is in the pudding, let's see some shots! See if you can live up to that claim.🙄


As far as the comparison between Winogrand and McCurry goes, it's apples and oranges indeed and as a result, proclaiming the one 'better' than the other is stupid. Define 'better', for starters...😱


Thanks for posting the link to that interview, I did enjoy reading it!
 
IMHO for what its worth the linked Winogrand would be in my personal top five photographs ever taken. If Winogrand took pictures to see what they looked like as photographs I'll bet he crapped his pants when he saw that one.
 
Thanks for the link, an interesting read and offering a different insight into a photographer who often seems derided as a mere voyeur with few of the attributes that Nick found within him.
 
much enjoyed the link, willie.

this clint troy reminds me of a guy on a bushcrafting site who claims he shot a 6-7-incn group with a suspect borrowed rifle at 800 yards. in neither case is there photographic evidence, only provocative threads/posts ...
 
Paul,
I am not provoking. I just said that as far as photography goes, and photojournalism/street, some folks rock more then others, IMO.
I do rate my personal photography pretty high. Now why is that provocative? I mean, one decides to feel provoked or not but by no means am I provoking anyone by simply saying that *I feel that my photography is good*. That would be a long shot.

About posting my pictures, I will soon. Doing it from an iphone is not easy... And I'm always on the go.
 
I crap my pants half the time when I see that photo, too. Amazing.

Luckily I don't need to go change right now. But next time . . . .

IMHO for what its worth the linked Winogrand would be in my personal top five photographs ever taken. If Winogrand took pictures to see what they looked like as photographs I'll bet he crapped his pants when he saw that one.
 
Back
Top Bottom