Sparrow
Veteran
... those don't sound like Henri's quotes to me, maybe some art-historian talking as he warmed to his subject?
How to reveal significance...
- Thread starter BobYIL
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 57
- Views 7K
... those don't sound like Henri's quotes to me, maybe some art-historian talking as he warmed to his subject?
alistair.o
Well-known
Not HCB's quotes, but the facts of his early years stand up to scrutiny Stewart.
I have just checked a book by Clement Cheroux (Thames & Hudson) and it appears to be accurate.
Sparrow
Veteran
I would argue that while his Uncle, art school and his exposure to various early 20c artistic-isms may have informed the tender youth he was in 1927 those quotes by Clement Cheroux are made with the benefit of hindsight, and by the time they were made Henri was confidently at the forefront of a new genre in part of his own making ... I think he is more than sum of his teenage experiences, more a product of his friends and the momentous events of his era ...
alistair.o
Well-known
Agreed without argument. What I am pointing out is that there was a very disciplined, formative start - all lines, angles etc.
Last edited:
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
alistair.o
Well-known
Did you get excited doing your football pools?
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
alistair.o
Well-known
Sparrow
Veteran
I can't find the source but I'm pretty sure it was Capa who, during the war, advised Henri to "stick with the surrealist epithet" as it was good for business ... I still don't think his work was considered in an aesthetic way until the editing stage
Sparrow
Veteran
... I can do you an analysis if you like, but I don't think the red lines help
alistair.o
Well-known
As I mentioned I have been mulling it over (and that for some time as I have a copy of A Propos De Paris - HCB, which has set me thinking)
I am reaching the same conclusion, slowly.
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
That it was considered more at the editing stage wouldn't make it any less valid or important IMHO.
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
Sparrow
Veteran
... moi?
.
.
peterm1
Veteran
This was a very useful and interesting read. While I have read the usual stuff about composition and use it, what struck me in this is that I often instinctively see a shot though the finder and take it without really analysing why I thought it was worth taking. I just "knew" it looked right. When that happens it seems (now that I know what to look for) I am using some of the techniques laid out in the article and that results in some of my better shots. I am no HCB. He was also a trained artist so its likely that he consciously used his training and adapted it to photography. It is good to learn from him in a way that I can maybe find more good shots by a more conscious process of looking for them. One thing I know I do not do well that HCB did was "lurk". He would often hang around a promising location for a long time till the elements of an image came together. I am too impatient and go looking. I would like to train myself to be more like him in that respect. I have seen an exhibition of HCBs life work (it was on show in Brisnbane late last year.) He made a prodigious collection of photos and believe me many of his less well known ones are as good or in my view better than his most known works.
mdarnton
Well-known
Actually, Capa said the opposite (source, among others, p58 of the Cheroux book), but in a surrealist sense, yes is probably as good as no.
The other day I was shooting and noticed after the second shot that if I moved six inches to the right and rotated my camera up about 10 degrees, everything would fall together, HCB-style. It was a small move , quickly accomplished, that made a big difference, and could hardly be called "spontaneous". I wonder if I'm going to turn into an HCB clone now. 🙂
sreed2006
Well-known
I read the blog linked to by BobYIL in the OP, as well as the blog linked to by gns, and the discussion in this thread, and have to say I've learned a lot. Artistic composition has never been my strong suite, having pretty much mastered the Rule of Thirds and not going past that. For the most part, though, I have always tended to just take pictures of things that interest me, and to heck with the composition theories. As a result, I have a few really good pictures, and a whole lot of not-so-good pictures. Luck of the draw, in other words.
Yesterday, based on what I have learned in this thread (which includes the idea that this is not all to be taken too seriously), I went out and changed the way that I compose. I changed positions to find a better contrast between a subject and background, and I skipped shots without the contrast. I looked for subjects falling on lines within the frame, and skipped some shots that had nothing on the diagonal lines. I did this just to see if it makes a difference.
At the same time, it made composing pictures more difficult and less difficult. It was more difficult because I'm breaking years of bad habits of taking pictures without real thought or understanding as to good composition. It was less difficult because there were some simple rules of geometry to follow.
It was enjoyable hunting for a scene with good composition, and hunting some more to see if there wasn't a better composition possibility nearby. I'll process the negatives today and see if it really made for better photographs.
Yesterday, based on what I have learned in this thread (which includes the idea that this is not all to be taken too seriously), I went out and changed the way that I compose. I changed positions to find a better contrast between a subject and background, and I skipped shots without the contrast. I looked for subjects falling on lines within the frame, and skipped some shots that had nothing on the diagonal lines. I did this just to see if it makes a difference.
At the same time, it made composing pictures more difficult and less difficult. It was more difficult because I'm breaking years of bad habits of taking pictures without real thought or understanding as to good composition. It was less difficult because there were some simple rules of geometry to follow.
It was enjoyable hunting for a scene with good composition, and hunting some more to see if there wasn't a better composition possibility nearby. I'll process the negatives today and see if it really made for better photographs.
cambolt
Green Spotted Nose Turtle
I don't think one goes though these 'steps' before taking a photo as such. I think that with artistic training such as HCB's, one learns to see a good composition and act impulsively. In other words, "don't think, just shoot". The thinking can be done later. Having said that, the "thinking" in the article is a bit shallow IMO.
Anyway, I followed some of the tips discussed in the article, and have used them to create my lifetime masterpiece. I call it The Receipt.
receipt by d40monster, on Flickr
receipt marked by d40monster, on Flickr
As you can see it makes use of recurring horizontal lines for visual appeal. Furthermore, the receipt, which is a light object placed against a dark background for emphasis, fits almost perfectly into a rough rectangle, mirroring the wooden floorboards. I might add that the receipt did not know I was taking its photo, therefore the photo is unstaged and therefore exactly like one of Cartier Bresson's
Now, do I get an award for being the most obnoxious RFF member?
Anyway, I followed some of the tips discussed in the article, and have used them to create my lifetime masterpiece. I call it The Receipt.
receipt by d40monster, on Flickr
receipt marked by d40monster, on Flickr
As you can see it makes use of recurring horizontal lines for visual appeal. Furthermore, the receipt, which is a light object placed against a dark background for emphasis, fits almost perfectly into a rough rectangle, mirroring the wooden floorboards. I might add that the receipt did not know I was taking its photo, therefore the photo is unstaged and therefore exactly like one of Cartier Bresson's
Now, do I get an award for being the most obnoxious RFF member?
Similar threads
