Three Winogrands from a closet

They were in a closet, not the trash. :)

I find this quite the understatement: "The Winogrand photograph collection is not fully cataloged"
 
I love the history of ... almost anything. This find is awesome. Thanks for sharing it with us here.
 
digitalintrigue said:
They were in a closet, not the trash. :)

I find this quite the understatement: "The Winogrand photograph collection is not fully cataloged"
Click to expand...

The OP stated that Winogrand discarded them, that's trash.

If they were not Winogrand photos they would be deleted anyway, they are not very good. Most of the posts in the RFF gallery are better. I hope they are copyrighted.

The Arbus estate does the same thing, can't touch an image unless they approve (get paid for) it.

Both Arbus and Winogrand took thousands of photos. An infinite # monkeys typing etc. . .
 
I think the second and third photos are excellent... and way to diss Winogrand & Arbus. The trick isn't in taking a bazillion photos. The trick is in picking the good ones!
 
dfoo said:
I think the second and third photos are excellent... and way to diss Winogrand & Arbus. The trick isn't in taking a bazillion photos. The trick is in picking the good ones!
Click to expand...

I wasn't dissing Winogrand or Arbus so much as the silliness of the copyright system and the zealous way the guardians of the estates protect every scrap of film.

You are right in saying that the trick is picking the good ones but the estates seem to think every image is a jewel. I'm sure some of the images were on the light table less than 30 seconds before being dismissed by the photographer as trash.
 
At least in the US, works of art are automatically copyrighted without having to register them. The message was just a reminder that you can't sell the images (say, to a magazine or stock agency) without permission. However, you can certainly sell the physical prints for however much you can get for them.

It's sorta like buying a DVD. By law, you can't use that DVD to run your own movie theater or resell copies of it; you only get property rights over the physical media itself.
 
Just to clarify...

Just to clarify...

They were recycled as poster paper long ago. The posters were stored by my mother, who recently realized that they are nice pictures.

I saw that she put them up, and photographed them to share with you.

On the topic of intellectual property:
Putting that all aside, I am active in the public domain programming community; I am proposing an open EOS mount for component cameras, and see a relationship between the public domain lands "annexed" by the weathy, along with their "serfs," and intellectual property (Mumford, et al). In other words, it is in the end all about either sharing or stealing, where the stealing includes humans as an asset.
 
Last edited:
I think the photos are cool, even if part of it is the connection to some guy who used to take a lot of pictures :)

I don't think there is anything wrong with the lady's letter. I thought it was conscientious of them to mention the legal status in case there was any question. No hard feelings, no misunderstandings.

I have a hard time with the idea that Winogrand's work was "stolen" by an estate. I think that was kind of the best thing for his family. As long as his descendents can benefit from his work in a tangible way, so be it.

My local co-op organic grocery convinced the city to clear a half-block of houses under eminent domain. The homeowners had been there for up to 40 years and the property had rapidly escalating value and the only greenspace for blocks around - until they built a brown cinderblock expansion on it and paved the rest as parking lot. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
 
Last edited:
Damn 40!! You really got my mind rolling (and I have other things to do)

I rather discuss photography and leave these issues to research because they are barely understood.

My approach is neurological: some do and some don't. There is a difference at the most basic level. People that don't spend their lives attempting to accumulate others' resources tend to take good pictures.

If someone wants to waddle around in the pseudo-criminal legalistics of property and resource consumption, that's fine.

But know that this is what war is made of: the annexation others' property and often their selves. The WIPO** directly (and openly) descends from the accumulation of land by the wealthy throughout time through annexation.



**World Intellectual Property Organization
 
The more Winogrand I see, the more I like his images. At first, I did not know what to make of him, now I look for his work and will soon buy a book. Thanks for sharing these images and post more if you find them!
 
From what I understand, he was quite an obsessive photographer. When his heirs went through his apartment after he died, they found 2500 rolls of unprocessed film. Imagine trying to separate the good from the bad in all those rolls!
 
They should run internships to catalogue all the contact sheets and films. I would volunteer if someone would pay accomodation. :D
 
Thanks for posting them!
That's close to a VIP invitation. OK they are copyrighted so that no one can print them on coffeemugs.
I like the especially the first one.
@number of apes:
The "ape and the camera" that would be a great title for title development of photography (or "The Ape and the Box"
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom