Overrated photographers...

This thread has forced me to re-consider Eggleston and admit his red ceiling photograph turned inside out my way of seeing.
Overrated? He at least should be rated ...
 
Pablito said:
No, that would be what they call in the US "Swiss cheese." Or "pegboard."

Last time I saw him, H C-B was not wearing his halo. But no doubt he is now up in photographer's heaven albeit with his pencils and sketchbook.

Seriously, what a shame about the choice of word, "overrated." It seems to imply condescension and I do not believe that was the OP's intention.
Click to expand...

I think the whole discussion is getting out of control because of diffences in interpretation of the word "overrated" as used by the OP.
Which in my book is not negative perse and certainly not patronising, but a RELATIVE measure.
Overrated as opposed to underrated. Nothing more or less.

Bresson overrated, for instance compared to Kertesz....

It's hard to keep a discussion like this free from personal preferences.
 
Last edited:
Fawley said:
...
What I really feel is over rated is the collection of work from photographers in the first half of the 20th century. These people were pioneers and so of course their work should be remembered. I own several books of photographs from the "greats" and I love many of the images. But I regularly see collections of work from living photographers that I think is much better. Comparatively speaking, these more recent photographer's do not, and I suspect will never, get their due.
Click to expand...

The difference is that of being in the early stages of a form of expression (ie, Man Ray was an early maker of photograms, and thus recognized as a pioneering artist), and following artists who refine and define a particular style (ie, school children making sunprints as a class project.)

Contemporary photographers who extend the range of the art will stand the "test of time" and gain recognition in the future. Especially if a new generation emulates and expands on their works.
 
paulfish4570 said:
OK, Mapplethorpe was a genius pornographer ...
Click to expand...

You don't like his flower pics, then?

Arguably he was the Ansel Adams of a certain type of nude, which, by my understanding, he promoted in much the same way as AA promoted the Sierra Club.

Anyone who thinks that any photographer is God, or that he never took a bad picture, is overrating that photographer. (Obviously this isn't addressed at you, Paul).

Even the greatest of the greats (such as Willy Ronis, in my book) were sometimes patchy, and there's often a 'Winner Takes All' mentality, where a Well Known Name is praised over many others who were at least as good.

Also, as we get older, our tastes change, and some of us acquire more of a sense of proportion. We can look back and think, "Yes, he's good, but how was I ever so uncritical? He's not that good." Or, contrariwise, "Actually, he's quite good after all, despite my earlier dislike."

Cheers,

R.
 
I know a photographer who when he shot slides said he only kept one slide per box, as the other 35 were usually not up to his standards. So, we only saw what he considered his good stuff. I'm sure if we were to judge any photographer mentioned here by his rejects he or she didn't wish to be seen that they would obviously be considered overrated or even lousy.

I don't like Leibowitz at all, I think Mapplethorpe was a twisted pervert, and some of Helmut Newton's work was a bit on the pervert end of the scale as well.

To each their own. I'll stick with Ansel Adams and HCB as photographers worth their iconic status.
 
Honus said:
Ansel Adams? You may not like the content, but if you've ever spent time in front of one of his prints...
Click to expand...

yeah, i hear he was a decent printer. if he didn't charge too much i might try him for some of my frames... well-mixed paint and the finest brush won't make you a leonardo tho'. it's in the smile

thanks, juan, for an amusing thread i always thought too duh to start. glad to see common (visual) sense is alive and kickin'

:cool:
 
Mister E said:
Steve McCurry's work is easy some of my favorite. I challenge anyone not to be moved by one of his books. Afghan girl wasn't even that spectacular compared with the rest of his work. Just because someone else could match his work means nothing if they don't.
Click to expand...

I own one McCurry book and have spent time looking through both his books and online portfolios. But this is it: opinion. I personally do not find his work terribly moving because much of it I find contrived and formulaic, but that does not mean you are not right to love it. There was a point where I thought it was great, but the more I have 'gotten into' the work of other photographers I find myself looking back at his work and feeling there is something that lacks a ring of truth - rather like he plays to an audience. I could be entirely wrong, but that's the beauty of all of this: variety! If we all like the same hit list it wouldn't be much fun at all.
 
I am always amused by who supports & who disses both Adams & HCB. Both say more about the observer than the observed I sometimes think.

I have a suspicion that both would find it uproarious while they finished off a second bottle of wine.

William
 
Chris101 said:
Contemporary photographers who extend the range of the art will stand the "test of time" and gain recognition in the future. Especially if a new generation emulates and expands on their works.
Click to expand...

I hope you're right. I'm glad that the greats of the early 20th century are remembered and studied. It just seems to me that many of them are put on a pedestal a little more than they should be.
 
I can say without irony this thread is great... I enjoy a lot with all the different opinions even if I don't share some of them... I don't consider -when I read an opinion- the image the world or other forum members have on the member posting, and I don't stop to think what the posting member considers him/herself as a photographer or if his/her destiny was ever successful: anyone -to me- has interesting ways of seeing things, and I didn't start this thread to state post after post a true history of photography, but to see perceptions I don't have but could teach me different points of view from photographers of all kinds, styles, ages and experience... About the words overrated and underrated I want to comment I thought of both threads from the beginning... It all came to mind because today I remembered an old friend who started a series of e-mails between friends to write a list of the best 10 rock LPs ever, to be taken to a remote island for the rest of our lives... Apart from the list he asked for the most underrated and the most overrated band... Then it was interesting: I remember some bands were in both places... That was the origin of this thread... For me the word overrated is a soft one: someone who's good of course, but for some reason his/her image has public levels beyond photography, like Ansel Adams in the USA: highly overrated there if we take a look at what he means in a world level... I have enjoyed all the posting and discussions, and hope it can go on keeping the same passion and respect... Thanks!

Cheers,

Juan
 
Last edited:
I can't help but wonder if anyone would have noticed Mapplethorpe's flower shots if he not been known so well for his, uh, other subjects ...
 
paulfish4570 said:
I can't help but wonder if anyone would have noticed Mapplethorpe's flower shots if he not been known so well for his, uh, other subjects ...
Click to expand...

Mapplethorpe's other subjects - do you mean his portraits and figure studies of famous women and men, his precise use of black and white in representing the human form, or are you are you only talking about his homoerotic imagery?

I must admit that, when it comes to paraphilia, I prefer Nan Goldin's work, but for figure modeling, Mapplethorpe was the master.
 
It is fair to say that Ansel Adams is popular in the United States as he spent his life photographing it.

I guess you might have photographers that do that in Spain, or in other countries, and they will be more popular in their native countries than elsewhere. If you think highly of a Spanish photographer, are they over-rated? Or does their rating apply to popularity in Spain?

Ansel Adams is "highly rated" as a great photographer in the US. There is a bias because of his subject matter.

Do other countries have any photographers like Ansel Adams that spent a lifetime photographing the natural beauty of the land that they lived in? Are they popular? Or are they "also highly over-rated" because the rest of the world does not think as much of their work?
 
Photographers get recognized for a lot of reasons, sometimes it's self promotion, or promotion by a critic or gallery owner or getting published someplace. Maybe they somehow landed a show of their work in a known gallery. When I was studying photography there were some advanced students that weren't that great but they got shows because they hit the streets and promoted their work. They learned to do a great presentation of their work and got the attention of gallery owners. Some have great success and sometimes really a really excellent photographer never get recognized. It's like that in all the arts, music, painting etc. Just because I don't like someones work doesn't mean that they aren't a great photographer. - Jim
 
paulfish4570 said:
I can't help but wonder if anyone would have noticed Mapplethorpe's flower shots if he not been known so well for his, uh, other subjects ...
Click to expand...

Maybe the flower shots he did after recognition couldn't have given his fame, but maybe if he wouldn't have been recognized because of his classic B&W male photography, he would have placed all his efforts in flowers or any other subject and then he could have got to his destiny... Of course all this is speculation, but I think no one amongst the best photographers decades respect, is less than a great photographer... Like when Susan Sontag talked about Diane Arbus and all the things beyond photography that made people have a precise image of Arbus, or the use Arbus did of what's "pathetic" or "curious" or "sad" or any word anyone prefers to use for her subjects: Sontag was not talking about Arbus being a bad photographer, but about Arbus being a figure beyond photography... Maybe because of the masses or maybe because of herself...

I like to hear opinions on different photographers and the weight of their public image, and maybe photographers I've never considered that way because maybe I just haven't been exposed to some of their stories...

Cheers,

Juan
 
[quote It all came to mind because today I remembered an old friend who started a series of e-mails between friends to write a list of the best 10 rock LPs ever,
Juan[/quote]

Rock! Now there's an area where the pioneering greats have never been equalled.:) I only recently discovered the fantastic music, 1968 to 1970, from Fleetwood Mac when they were heavily blues influenced. Absolutely breathtaking guitar work. I've never heard anything like it before.

Thanks for the great thread Juan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom