Harry Gruyaert

ClaremontPhoto

ClaremontPhoto

Jon Claremont
Local time
2:19 PM
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
5,214
In recent days we've talked about the work of Maki Kawakita and also Josef Koudelka.

Over the same time I've been looking at photos by Harry Gruyaert. You'll find him at Magnum and around the web and in print and exhibitions.

I love his use of color, especially when so many of his photos are from Belguim, which is good for chips, mussels and beer; but not famed for light.

Look at this for example.

CDocZ_MAG.aspx
 
Last edited:
Wow, Jon. I haven't thought of him for years. I agree, wonderfull use of color. In use of color as well, Alex Webb's images stand out too.
 
thank you jon for bringing his name to our attention. other than his color, his composition is also very charming.
 
Belgium is in many respects a very odd place. :) It feels a bit disheveled, a bit out of sync with them, a bit backwards. But on the other hand it's fashionable, avant garde and modern. For me as a Dutchman, Belgium is always a relief to visit. It's like Holland at first glance but entirely different when you take a second look. Belgium makes my head spin with recognition and unfamiliarity at the same time. Gruyaert captures that very well.
 
wtl said:
thank you jon for bringing his name to our attention. other than his color, his composition is also very charming.
Click to expand...

I agree, there are some elements that always make some interesting connections, which makes the difference, thx for the link Jon.
 
Jon Claremont said:
In recent days we've talked about the work of Maki Kawakita and also Josef Koudelka.

Over the same time I've been looking at photos by Harry Gruyaert. You'll find him at Magnum and around the web and in print and exhibitions.

I love his use of color, especially when so many of his photos are from Belguim, which is good for chips, mussels and beer; but not famed for light.

Look at this for example.

CDocZ_MAG.aspx
Click to expand...


Holy cow, this has blown my hair back !! Aamazing portfolio of an amazing photog, very inspiring . He makes exactly the photos I myself would like to make, too dumb tho.
There is nothing better than watching some REALLY good photos, it's like charging the batteries ! :)
Thanks,
bertram
 
There must be something wrong with me. I looked and looked, and this appears to me to be some of the ugliest, worst photography I've ever seen. It's horrible.

I'm not trying to be difficult, really. I just am not seeing what you guys are seeing, I guess.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
bmattock said:
There must be something wrong with me. I looked and looked, and this appears to me to be some of the ugliest, worst photography I've ever seen. It's horrible.
Click to expand...

I'm not a big fan of the initially linked image but I like the others. In fact, after looking at the whole, coming back the one jon claremont linked to had some renewed charm. Ugly can sometimes be beautiful, boring can sometimes be beautiful.

Just out of curiousity, what didn't you like? Comp, technique, subject or something, perhaps, undefinable? It's so hard for me understand and articulate what's good or bad sometimes.

Y.
 
Last edited:
bobomoon said:
I'm not a big fan of the initially linked image but I like the others. In fact, after looking at the whole, coming back the one copecake_ham linked to had some renewed charm. Ugly can sometimes be beautiful, boring can sometimes be beautiful.

Just out of curiousity, what didn't you like? Comp, technique, subject or something, perhaps, undefinable? It's so hard for me understand and articulate what's good or bad sometimes.

Y.
Click to expand...

It could be that because of my lack of normal color vision, I'm not seeing the 'subtle use of color' that I am reading about. However, composition and exposure are all turn-offs for me with his work. I don't even like his subjects.

I was looking at this one:

http://www.magnumphotos.com/c/htm/C...1KJ10Q&Pass=&Total=72&Pic=30&SubE=2S5RYDDW5IK

I don't know what's good about this. I am trying, but I see nothing interesting at all here.

And I do see the comparison with Arbus, except B&W versus color - and perhaps not surprisingly, I detest her work as well. I just never saw what there was to like about it. Well, I take that back. I 'got' the twins photo. But that is about all.

I don't agree that ugly can be beautiful. I feel that ugly can serve a purpose, ugly can signify, ugly can be important. But ugly is ugly. I don't mind looking at ugly photos if they are significant to me. These are not - they're just bad.

Bad, how? I dunno. A series of snapshops of my tennis shoes would be bad. Like that. No interest, unimportant, meaningless, and ugly for no sake I can follow.

Sorry to say it - seems to be a thread-killer. But I can't pretend I like Harry's work now that I see it. I'm no arbiter of public taste, and the world will decide how it likes his work without my input. Fair enough. I actually do wish I could see what ya'll are seeing.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
bobomoon said:
...coming back the one copecake_ham linked to had some renewed charm...
Click to expand...

This board is breaking down on me. I can't see that post or link. Would somebody be so kind as to re-post it please.
 
Jon Claremont said:
This board is breaking down on me. I can't see that post or link. Would somebody be so kind as to re-post it please.
Click to expand...


bobo meant you, not copake_ham. His post is edited now.
 
Jon Claremont said:
This board is breaking down on me. I can't see that post or link. Would somebody be so kind as to re-post it please.
Click to expand...

Jon--Sorry I meant you and not copecake_ham. I apologize for my misfire.

Bill--I hope you don't think I was being antagonistic or anything. It's just that lately I've been hopelessly confused/intruiged about how one can or cannot describe an image in words.
 
Thank you Bobomoon. Understood. I like the boredom in that picture. It sums up Belguim or northern France perfectly.

On your second point I think many people in around 1870 (?) had problems when artists were painting railway stations and not pretty pretty daisies.
 
bobomoon said:
Jon--Sorry I meant you and not copecake_ham. I apologize for my misfire.

Bill--I hope you don't think I was being antagonistic or anything. It's just that lately I've been hopelessly confused/intruiged about how one can or cannot describe an image in words.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't take anything you said amiss. I wish I could explain better why I find so many of the 'famous' photographers' work to be so bloody awful. Even more, sometimes I wish I could see what it is that others seem to see. I could say it is just down to personal taste, but in general, I tend to intensely dislike so much of what is 'famous' that I just feel like either I'm way off kilter or the world is. It can be frustrating.

I am not that way about everything. I mean, people like cheeseburgers, I like cheeseburgers. People like rock-n-roll, I like rock-n-roll. People say Jimi Hendrix was amazing, I agree. Then they show me a Diane Arbus photo and tell me it's great and I'm thinking - no, it's not only not great, it's bad. If it were a happy snap taken on vacation it would be bad. And I rack my brain and cannot figure out what I'm missing here.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Jon Claremont said:
On your second point I think many people in around 1870 (?) had problems when artists were painting railway stations and not pretty pretty daisies.
Click to expand...

I don't mind ugly - but not for the sake of ugly. If it does not have significance, I have no interest in it. If I cannot find the significance that the artist intended - same thing.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
"Belgium, man, Belgium!" - Zaphod Beeblebrox, The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy

I like a good deal (but not all) of Gruyaert's work, and how he makes the most of a, ahem, challenging subject, and in color at that. I think he misfires here and there, but the work as a whole is compelling. Not everyone's cup o' tea, of course, but that's what makes all this interesting (and we can cheerfully agree to disagree). Thanks for pointing his work out, Jon.


- Barrett
 
Does Gruyeart use a RF camera? His photographs appear to be very tightly composed and look like they were made with a normal or slightly wide lens. What kinds of film does he favor? John Henry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom