hawkeye
steve
Please take a minute to read my new piece "The Most Famous Photograph in the World."
http://www.pixiq.com/article/the-most-famous-photograph-in-the-world
It was shot with an Leica M2 rangefinder and a 90mm lens!
Enjoy
Steve
http://www.pixiq.com/article/the-most-famous-photograph-in-the-world
It was shot with an Leica M2 rangefinder and a 90mm lens!
Enjoy
Steve
Last edited:
FrankS
Registered User
Very enjoyable read, well done, and thank you!
(No need to get hung up about whether it is THE most famous photo or not.)
(No need to get hung up about whether it is THE most famous photo or not.)
malcD
Well-known
Probably one of the most iconic image's in the world but not photo
alistair.o
Well-known
Just to say thanks and then get out as quick as I can before the seemingly inexorable decline into bickering ...
FrankS
Registered User
Clearly, most famous, is subjective and cultural and generational. Let's just agree that Che Guevara is one of the most famous images based on a photograph. If it is or isn't is not the topic/point of this thread. If you want to debate which is YOUR most favourite pic, there is currently another thread for that discussion.
Last edited:
hawkeye
steve
I wrote the piece because I think its a great story. I'm surprised that the issue is whether it was the most famous photo or not.
As photographers there are so many other elements in this story to think about. How the Communist attitude towards copyright meant that while Korda and Che's family got nothing a lot of capitalist sure did and still do.
I don't know how many of you are old enough to remember the 60s but Che was very much a celebrity. New York society loved him and he really was like a rock star. His death was a cause celebre. Executed in the hills of Bolivia and brutal photos of him in death sparked riots and demos around the world.
And this was a grab shot, a "decisive moment" and isn't interesting that Korda himself puts it down and trivializes it. Oh anyone with a $4 camera could have done this. What's that about?
Most famous or not it the story is filled with irony and raises a lot of issues.
Steve
As photographers there are so many other elements in this story to think about. How the Communist attitude towards copyright meant that while Korda and Che's family got nothing a lot of capitalist sure did and still do.
I don't know how many of you are old enough to remember the 60s but Che was very much a celebrity. New York society loved him and he really was like a rock star. His death was a cause celebre. Executed in the hills of Bolivia and brutal photos of him in death sparked riots and demos around the world.
And this was a grab shot, a "decisive moment" and isn't interesting that Korda himself puts it down and trivializes it. Oh anyone with a $4 camera could have done this. What's that about?
Most famous or not it the story is filled with irony and raises a lot of issues.
Steve
Neare
Well-known
At the end of the day, its success lies with the fact that it is a photo of Che, nothing else.
Sparrow
Veteran
The first one? or the staged version?
Personally it's always seemed a little parochial to me, not really that well known outside the US
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Che in the right clothes, the right light, the right pose, the right moment.... A lot of the things that the OP talks about, in a very good summary/analysis. I already knew most of it but there's always something to learn. There are lots of other pictures of Ernesto Guevara too, so it can't be 'nothing else'. It's distinguishable from all of them. Somehow, it encapsulates the idea of a revolutionary -- and again, there are lots of other photos of other revolutionaries.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Jamie123
Veteran
I agree. René Buchi's photo of Ché, while also well known, is much less iconic.
One also has to say, though, that the actual photograph is much less known than the screen print made from it. Much like Shepard Fairey's "Hope" picture of Obama, the cultural icon is the screen print, not the photograph it was made after. Of course the whole propaganda screen-print theme is what Fairey plays off. That's why I would personally consider his effort in the creation of the Obama picture artistic while the creation of the Ché screen-print is just propaganda.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Roger, I agree. I have seen many photos of Che Guevara. There are 3 photos of him shot that day by different photographers and all capture that particular expression on his face. It was an emotional day. He was attending a memorial service for almost 100 who had died in a ship explosion the day before. Che was a doctor who happened to be near the harbor when the ship exploded and spent all day tending to the injured and dying. While his political views are debated, it is universally acknowledged that he was caring emotional intellectual. Remember his initial role in the revolution was army doctor and he did not carry a weapon. Additionally, this photo was shot during one of Fidel's speeches. Again, while Fidel's politics are debated, his legend as an orator evoking emotion is acknowledged.
I believe the emotion shown in the photo was a result of the confluence of circumstances. Korda modestly minimizes his part and basically said he was just in the right place at the right time.
Interestingly this iconic photo was not published for several decades. Korda's own newspaper chose not to use it.
Jamie123
Veteran
I agree the two cases are very much comparable but there are some differences. I think Korda's image is a good one by itself while Manny Garcia's image of Obama is mediocre at best. However, in both cases it was not the photographer who made the image into what later became an icon.
As stated in my previous post, I'm inclined to side with Fairey on the issue of the "Hope" image. It is really his art IMO. He took a mediocre shot of Obama and made it into a propaganda type icon that was quickly embraced by the masses who don't seem to know or care about the political background such imagery is usually based upon. Brilliant.
I think the difference between the Ché icon and the Obama icon is ultimately comparable to that between, say, Hitler and a Hitler impersonator. The impersonator is funny and ironic while the original isn't.
(By the way, Hitler is just a random example. I'm not equating Ché with Hitler or Marxism with Fascism. I'm actually quite fond of Marx' work.)
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Beside combat operations, Che racked up numerous executions within his ranks, what some have termed paranoia. To be sure, there were traitors to his cause; others were simply murdered on suspicion. Eventually Castro sent Che into exile -- first to Africa, than to South America.
The Obama photo has yet to stand the test of time. 3-4 yrs for Obama vs. 50 years for Che is a world apart. No comparison.
The Obama photo has yet to stand the test of time. 3-4 yrs for Obama vs. 50 years for Che is a world apart. No comparison.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Which raises the interesting question: why are there so few iconic pictures of politicians, soldiers and revolutionaries, Jamie's excellent point about the screen print notwithstanding? Karsh's Churchill springs to mind, but (for example) Mussolini was let down by his comic-opera uniforms, and although there are many excellent picures of Hitler (PICTURES, I'm not supporting hs politics), it is the Nuremberg Rally pics that stick in the mind. Mao's looks seem to transcend photography: everyone recognizes the old bar steward, but most of the pics look alike (and slightly constipated).
This in turn drifts sideways into the power of propaganda pics. A friend of mine joined the Communist Party in the 30s (and resigned in the 60s, then rejoined for the pleasure of being thrown out), but he always said that if he'd been a teenager in Germany instead of England, he suspected that he might as easily have been taken in by the Nazis."Besides, the girls were prettier and there were more of them." This from someone who fought in North Africa and was shipped from there to Italy...
Cheers,
R.
This in turn drifts sideways into the power of propaganda pics. A friend of mine joined the Communist Party in the 30s (and resigned in the 60s, then rejoined for the pleasure of being thrown out), but he always said that if he'd been a teenager in Germany instead of England, he suspected that he might as easily have been taken in by the Nazis."Besides, the girls were prettier and there were more of them." This from someone who fought in North Africa and was shipped from there to Italy...
Cheers,
R.
Neare
Well-known
@Roger, Jamie & Bob
Of course, there isn't any doubt that it is a great picture if you take into consideration all those compositional factors. But as I said, the only reason it is iconic is because it is Che. If is was a picture of your average Joe Blog dressed in the same clothes, under the same light and pulling the same face... no one would actually care.
We can all take great photos, but it is the subject and the relationship it has to its audience that makes a photo famous, not our skill. Skill is the thing that gets one to the point to pressing the shutter button.
@Roger,
People don't like politicians generally. I know this is a pretty vague statement but it is true. People don't want to see and idolize a photo of a man or woman whom they find to be two faced. While there are probably a few people around the world who would love to have Bush's portrait up on the wall there isn't that innate connection to a politician that there is to other people.
It comes down to the type of authority one has, Rational-Legal, Traditional or Charismatic. Now the first two which most politicians fall under will be those without photo's everywhere. People have very little connection to these people, they only hope that they do a good job on behalf of them. The Charismatic leader on the other hand is the rarer type and these people actually form a connection with their audience. This is the case if you look a music photography, you'd be more likely to find pictures of Hendrix on peoples walls than you are of politicians. But that is also why you are more likely to find pictures of those characters such as Che around the place. Because these are people who others believe had a profound effect on the world, not in simply what they did for a county's government, but what messages they instilled in the people themselves.
But politicians? There a dime a dozen and when one leaves, another comes in and continues the same old job. Whatever.
Of course, there isn't any doubt that it is a great picture if you take into consideration all those compositional factors. But as I said, the only reason it is iconic is because it is Che. If is was a picture of your average Joe Blog dressed in the same clothes, under the same light and pulling the same face... no one would actually care.
We can all take great photos, but it is the subject and the relationship it has to its audience that makes a photo famous, not our skill. Skill is the thing that gets one to the point to pressing the shutter button.
@Roger,
People don't like politicians generally. I know this is a pretty vague statement but it is true. People don't want to see and idolize a photo of a man or woman whom they find to be two faced. While there are probably a few people around the world who would love to have Bush's portrait up on the wall there isn't that innate connection to a politician that there is to other people.
It comes down to the type of authority one has, Rational-Legal, Traditional or Charismatic. Now the first two which most politicians fall under will be those without photo's everywhere. People have very little connection to these people, they only hope that they do a good job on behalf of them. The Charismatic leader on the other hand is the rarer type and these people actually form a connection with their audience. This is the case if you look a music photography, you'd be more likely to find pictures of Hendrix on peoples walls than you are of politicians. But that is also why you are more likely to find pictures of those characters such as Che around the place. Because these are people who others believe had a profound effect on the world, not in simply what they did for a county's government, but what messages they instilled in the people themselves.
But politicians? There a dime a dozen and when one leaves, another comes in and continues the same old job. Whatever.
umcelinho
Marcelo
I think probably the Afghan Girl by Steve McCurry would be the most well known photograph, and Che's the most well known image,since its strength comes partially from many reworkings of the photo, from bicolor illustrations to pop art.
Iwo Jima is def not well known as the 2 above where I live (Brazil).
Iwo Jima is def not well known as the 2 above where I live (Brazil).
Stravinsky
Leitz Fellowship
Thank you for a very good read.
Perhaps one of the morale of the story is that if you want your photograph to have the opportunity to be famous you need to give up the copyrights...
Perhaps one of the morale of the story is that if you want your photograph to have the opportunity to be famous you need to give up the copyrights...
hawkeye
steve
Or that blind, dumb fortune is perhaps 99% of the game and talent a mere 1% of it.