Andrea Taurisano
il cimento
Hi!
I'm aware that I may get shot for some of my statements below, so feel free to load your guns..
Ipse dixit is a latin expression that refers to a truth to be accepted as it is, not questioned, for being the pronouncement of a master more than for its reason or evidence.
Now (getting close to the point where I may get shot), I sometimes have a hard time to understand what really makes many iconic photos THAT great and special, other than the fact they illustrate times now gone forever and nostalgically fascinating and / or the fact that they are... well, taken by a more or less universally accepted master (which includes some photos of contemporary masters).
In other words, do you ever think "If this one was taken by me, no one would even bother to leave a comment on it" (or you wouldn't even publish it)? Aren't the books of the masters perhaps also more or less full of fillers (which we respect and admire nonetheless) as well as containing some truly great stuff? Feel free to share a thought or ignore.
I'm aware that I may get shot for some of my statements below, so feel free to load your guns..
Ipse dixit is a latin expression that refers to a truth to be accepted as it is, not questioned, for being the pronouncement of a master more than for its reason or evidence.
Now (getting close to the point where I may get shot), I sometimes have a hard time to understand what really makes many iconic photos THAT great and special, other than the fact they illustrate times now gone forever and nostalgically fascinating and / or the fact that they are... well, taken by a more or less universally accepted master (which includes some photos of contemporary masters).
In other words, do you ever think "If this one was taken by me, no one would even bother to leave a comment on it" (or you wouldn't even publish it)? Aren't the books of the masters perhaps also more or less full of fillers (which we respect and admire nonetheless) as well as containing some truly great stuff? Feel free to share a thought or ignore.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I think part of this is that masters of the past exemplified or created styles / modes / types of photography which are well known and quite familiar now, but which were fresh, sometimes even shocking, and certainly unfamiliar at the time. Early examples have value because they were early, no matter how they compare with later, perhaps even better, examples.
...Mike
...Mike
Andrea Taurisano
il cimento
Yeah, that's the thing: the threshold to producing outstanding images must have been very much lower when photography was far from a mass hobby ("outstanding" comes from "stand out", and I guess it takes more to stand out of a billion than just of a hundred or a thousand other images..). Or am I wrong?
But that still doesn't explain the fame of many rather ordinary, contemporary images. No offense to them, I mean, cause I think this way even of some images taken by my idols like Daido Moriyama, just to give one name. His photos make generally stunning series, like in a book, but taken individually (or posted anonymously on a blog or forum) they wouldn't really impress. Or?
But that still doesn't explain the fame of many rather ordinary, contemporary images. No offense to them, I mean, cause I think this way even of some images taken by my idols like Daido Moriyama, just to give one name. His photos make generally stunning series, like in a book, but taken individually (or posted anonymously on a blog or forum) they wouldn't really impress. Or?
Sparrow
Veteran
... I don't think Latin has any place in a Greek noun myself
Andrea Taurisano
il cimento
That is mystical, I'll have to think about it ;-)
Richard G
Veteran
The noun being 'photography', the post being a play on the word 'in'.
Reputation counts for so much. Indifferent recordings by great pianists, posthumous collections of the second rate material of writers, and ultimately their laundry lists etc. all come to be published and sold and bought.
Reputation counts for so much. Indifferent recordings by great pianists, posthumous collections of the second rate material of writers, and ultimately their laundry lists etc. all come to be published and sold and bought.
daveleo
what?
"If this one was taken by me, no one would even bother to leave a comment on it" (or you wouldn't even publish it)? Aren't the books of the masters perhaps also more or less full of fillers (which we respect and admire nonetheless) as well as containing some truly great stuff?
I agree, though once the photographer's reputation is well established, we like to see what "other stuff" they produced, aside from the iconic images.
I agree, though once the photographer's reputation is well established, we like to see what "other stuff" they produced, aside from the iconic images.
Rodchenko
Olympian
Andrea Taurisano
il cimento
That's why I love books featuring contact sheets of great photographers. It proves to me that in order to take some outstanding images to be remembered for, you need to shoots loads of.. plain images. And the masters become thus more "human".
Richard G
Veteran
I read David Hurn and Bill Jay's book On Being a Photographer, recently recommended on Mike Johnston's The Online Photographer site. Hurn, a Magnum photographer, had a very particular way with contact sheets, and reckoned that all really good photographers have very similar contact sheets in terms of the progression of images from which the good shot can be extracted. He also mentions Joseph Koudelka staying with him in Wales and going outside and shooting for an hour each day, when there wasn't much to look at. Apparenly he had to shoot 3 rolls a day to keep in form. Finally, he spent some time with Winogrand, who apparently knew what was in his archives, and in line with Hurn's advice to shoot to a brief, Winogrand had an archive that fulfilled most briefs.
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
Historic context is important in understanding photographs (and photography), I believe; they rarely stand on their own, otherwise they'd just be decor - pretty pictures.
So the temptation to look at the work of a notable and say "I could have done that" ignores the fact that I didn't in fact create that image, I wasn't there first, even though I might be able to mimic the effect today with similar technology.
I sense this with contemporary large format B/W photography, and also rangefinder B/W street photography, following in the paths (or tripod holes) of the masters who've gone before us, derivative rather than original.
~Joe
So the temptation to look at the work of a notable and say "I could have done that" ignores the fact that I didn't in fact create that image, I wasn't there first, even though I might be able to mimic the effect today with similar technology.
I sense this with contemporary large format B/W photography, and also rangefinder B/W street photography, following in the paths (or tripod holes) of the masters who've gone before us, derivative rather than original.
~Joe
daveleo
what?
Reading these replies refreshes your memory how hard "the masters" actually worked to create those few iconic images.
They went into war zones, climbed mountains, crawled through swamps and
shot shot shot tons of film. Then they performed that lost art, only a few people remember today -
they *edited* their work and showed us the very best few pictures of their thousands!
It is enjoyable to see their lesser stuff too - as said above, it shows them "human" and hard working.
They went into war zones, climbed mountains, crawled through swamps and
shot shot shot tons of film. Then they performed that lost art, only a few people remember today -
they *edited* their work and showed us the very best few pictures of their thousands!
It is enjoyable to see their lesser stuff too - as said above, it shows them "human" and hard working.
Murchu
Well-known
I think it can be easy to dismiss great work because it is not to our taste. I think we all do this on a daily basis, as is our right. I don't think the stuff I don't get is rubbish though (and not implying others here do), but at the same time I don't worry about why I don't get it either, life's simply too short to me, although I imagine art/ photographic history is the way to go if one wanted to understand the significance/ importance of images we may not get.
btgc
Veteran
When first monkey learned how to raise and go on two feet, for some time others counted him a genius. Later monkeys learned walking and thought, wait, I'm doing it every day, what's so great about it?
Andrea Taurisano
il cimento
Well, agreed about the monkeys
But the original question wasn't really about the pioneers of photography or those who for the very first time went out documenting street life with a portable camera.
But the original question wasn't really about the pioneers of photography or those who for the very first time went out documenting street life with a portable camera.
Chris101
summicronia
This is an important aspect to this phenomenon. Doing something first - especially if it is unique, or at least very creative - entitles one to an exulted seat at the table. However to answer Andrea's refinement:
Well, agreed about the monkeys
But the original question wasn't really about the pioneers of photography or those who for the very first time went out documenting street life with a portable camera.
It is also about one's body of work. A single image is rarely a cause-celeb. So often single images viewed outside of the entirety of a photographer's portfolio fail to measure up to the reputation of the photographer. So upon seeing an image that elicits an "I could have done this" thought, place the image among all of that photographer's work, and then restate that thought as a question.
Sejanus.Aelianus
Veteran
Setting anyone up as a Golden Calf is just a recipe for disappointment, in my opinion. That is the point of Andrea's original posting, if I have it correct.
thegman
Veteran
I think this is completely correct. Obviously a lot of the 'greats' photos look cliched, but they were not cliched at the time. All the same, I think there is no question that many photographers and their work is considered wonderful, which for many of us would not even be a keeper. That's not say that it is, or is not a good photo, only that one man's art is another man's shrug of the shoulders.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
I would also say that tastes change. Some people build their reputation on a style that was popular when they earned their reputation. Their reputation sometimes lingers on long after the work itself has gone out of fashion. So sometimes we can look at their great old work and wonder what the deal was.
As well there is the case as mentioned above - basically be first to market. Being best is ok, but making an impression first generally is worth more. There are probably thousands of photographers today who could produce work up to and perhaps beyond the level of the "all time" greats of a few decades ago. But most of them are not going to get much notice simply because the greats have already blazed those trails.
As well there is the case as mentioned above - basically be first to market. Being best is ok, but making an impression first generally is worth more. There are probably thousands of photographers today who could produce work up to and perhaps beyond the level of the "all time" greats of a few decades ago. But most of them are not going to get much notice simply because the greats have already blazed those trails.
pete hogan
Well-known
Picasso: "Good artists copy, great artists steal."