nicoy3k
Member
am I the only one who cant get that picture to load?
chikne
Well-known
fbf said:
Wouldn't that be in his interest?
MickH
Well-known
nicoy3k said:
Count yourself lucky
nicoy3k
Member
I think they are a little over done, and a couple of them are pretty week. Overall, I like what he is doing.
jack palmer
Well-known
The first shot is the best of the four, but "brilliant", and "very very good and even "great"".? This is the photo of the week? Were these the only photos considered? I don't get it. Interesting at best.
3js
Established
BillP said:
Maybe that´s the reason you don´t work for Magnum? Off
course you don´t even want to...
Sorry, I did not understand that wining makes an opinion. Wow.
jack palmer
Well-known
Yea Bill, that's the reason you don't work for Magnum, you deleated all your good Magnum photos.
BillP
Rangefinder General
3js said:
Do you mean whining?
Not sure why this is such an emotive thing for you. My opinion is that they are rubbish, yours differs. C'est la vie.
Regards,
Bill
BillP
Rangefinder General
jack palmer said:Yea Bill, that's the reason you don't work for Magnum, you deleated all your good Magnum photos.
Regards,
Bill
larmarv916
Well-known
Ok...Lets cut to the chase, IF this is the "Best" that Magnum can put out then the historical level of quality is at a all time low. Those photos are what you would expect from your grammar school kid to do after showing mom he can take kool pictures too. I hate to sound so nasty but these really are just bad.
They have such a forced feel and the bad use of strobe is almost Monty Python. Like a comic sketch on really bad photos......I mean can you really see guys like HCB or CAPA saying....wow thats great Never in a million years.
I think the cream has gone sour at Magnum. What a shame
They have such a forced feel and the bad use of strobe is almost Monty Python. Like a comic sketch on really bad photos......I mean can you really see guys like HCB or CAPA saying....wow thats great Never in a million years.
I think the cream has gone sour at Magnum. What a shame
ZebGoesZeiss
Established
Magnum is doing fine, let's not go bonkers over 4 photos. I just got a book by the photographer Jonas Bendiksen, he's a keeper for sure.
BillP
Rangefinder General
emraphoto said:
Agreed. I would also hope that we can respect each other's opinion, and right to express it.
Regards,
Bill
sjw617
Panoramist
I am surprised that the first photo is the picture of the week. And I did look at the World Press shots also. Mr. Anderson's shot there is better but most of the "winners" are very pedestrian. Who exactly are World Press?
amateriat
We're all light!
To begin at the beginning:
Magnum put this image up for presentation and commentary. I don't think anybody here was spoiling for a scrap over it.
IMO, as general/generic reportage, the photo is okay, i.e. par for the course for contemporary PJ work--no more, no less.
Having worked cheek-to-jowl next to Magnum for a few years (I worked at a lab located next to the old Magnum HQ in midtown Manhattan, and we did a lot of printing work for them), I understood that every day isn't necessarily a good day for a Magnum shooter of any stripe. And, in any kind of PJ work, you've got to deliver the goods somehow, and on-deadline. (I've had just enough of a taste of PJ stuff to decide I'm more a feature-type shooter at best.) But Magnum set a bar for themselves quite some time ago; sometimes they thrive on it, sometimes they choke on it. But it's there. This image doesn't reach that bar, as far as I'm concerned, but Anderson did his job, and on some days it's all one can do to accomplish just that.
Great shooters take so-so shots, too!
- Barrett
Magnum put this image up for presentation and commentary. I don't think anybody here was spoiling for a scrap over it.
IMO, as general/generic reportage, the photo is okay, i.e. par for the course for contemporary PJ work--no more, no less.
Having worked cheek-to-jowl next to Magnum for a few years (I worked at a lab located next to the old Magnum HQ in midtown Manhattan, and we did a lot of printing work for them), I understood that every day isn't necessarily a good day for a Magnum shooter of any stripe. And, in any kind of PJ work, you've got to deliver the goods somehow, and on-deadline. (I've had just enough of a taste of PJ stuff to decide I'm more a feature-type shooter at best.) But Magnum set a bar for themselves quite some time ago; sometimes they thrive on it, sometimes they choke on it. But it's there. This image doesn't reach that bar, as far as I'm concerned, but Anderson did his job, and on some days it's all one can do to accomplish just that.
Great shooters take so-so shots, too!
- Barrett
Last edited:
Ororaro
Well-known
amateriat said:
Of course! Instead of having a 1% ratio keeper they have a 5% ratio, but they still shoot lotsa crap.
kipkeston
Well-known
I liked it, I don't know what the problem is. He's got a nice portfolio.
dshugar
RF newbie
I like the first two images, but not the second two. I have to say though, hat at first glance, I didn't like any of them. On further viewing, they're growing on me...
Christopher Anderson's response from the blog:
"These comments are wonderful. Well, I guess I don't have a defense for the amateurish and mediocre part. And while "art" might be a loaded word (crap is good though), I guess I just wanted it to feel like what I was seeing there. These events are rather ridiculous. they are staged and repetitive. While it may not look like it in these pictures, I do in fact know how to balance my flash and expose. It was a conscious decision to flash with this technique. It is as if throwing too much light on it might somehow expose these campaign photo ops for what the really are. The designers of these events want us to make a pretty picture. but a pretty picture to me felt like something that would be false to this event. I almost thought of the flash as being like an xray that would reveal what I really see at an event like this.
And to answer the question, yes, I was on assignment for Newsweek magazine and they even published this crass ugliness."
Christopher Anderson's response from the blog:
"These comments are wonderful. Well, I guess I don't have a defense for the amateurish and mediocre part. And while "art" might be a loaded word (crap is good though), I guess I just wanted it to feel like what I was seeing there. These events are rather ridiculous. they are staged and repetitive. While it may not look like it in these pictures, I do in fact know how to balance my flash and expose. It was a conscious decision to flash with this technique. It is as if throwing too much light on it might somehow expose these campaign photo ops for what the really are. The designers of these events want us to make a pretty picture. but a pretty picture to me felt like something that would be false to this event. I almost thought of the flash as being like an xray that would reveal what I really see at an event like this.
And to answer the question, yes, I was on assignment for Newsweek magazine and they even published this crass ugliness."
pfoto
Well-known
I don't personally like any of the pictures but Mr. Anderson is certainly articulate.
antiquark
Derek Ross
It's about time they forgot about pretty pictures and showed politicians for what they really are.
Photojournalists really got suckered with the current president. They took the settings they were given, and the political PR people played the journalists like cheap fiddles. Anyone remember these Bush pics:
Captain Codpiece:
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=bush+codpiece
Mr. Mission Accomplished:
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=bush+mission+accomplished
Bush the Savior:
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=bush+halo
Yep, the PR people know full well how to organize an event to create photographic opportunities that will flatter their dear leader. Well maybe the PJs got tired of being suckered and want to take control of the pictures they create.
Photojournalists really got suckered with the current president. They took the settings they were given, and the political PR people played the journalists like cheap fiddles. Anyone remember these Bush pics:
Captain Codpiece:
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=bush+codpiece
Mr. Mission Accomplished:
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=bush+mission+accomplished
Bush the Savior:
http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=bush+halo
Yep, the PR people know full well how to organize an event to create photographic opportunities that will flatter their dear leader. Well maybe the PJs got tired of being suckered and want to take control of the pictures they create.
retnull
Well-known
I like the first and third photos.
Chris Anderson's comments did help a lot.
Sometimes the best photography is subtle; the tone may be too complex to get at one glance. I did not like or understand Diane Arbus at first look. Now I think her work is very special and so complex that it's nearly indefinable.
Chris Anderson's comments did help a lot.
Sometimes the best photography is subtle; the tone may be too complex to get at one glance. I did not like or understand Diane Arbus at first look. Now I think her work is very special and so complex that it's nearly indefinable.