chikne
Well-known
sanmich
Veteran
A few thoughts:
What seems obvious today because we have seen it a lot, and it have been very influential to lots of other may well have been revolutionary in its time.
Question is: even with no time/money/gear limitation, would you be able to do what HCB have done BEFORE HCB have done it. Have a look at what the PJ was in the 30's.
Also
When not in the right mood, I can systematically miss picture after picture of a good situation over a film. I find it incredibely furstrating, but also, it teaches me that you may need luck in photography, but you need an eye to grasp that luck.
For one, I love HCB's work. I like others too but he is still one of the very few that I really feel in resonance with their work. Last discovery of mine was Irving Penn (best portraits I've seen so far), Koudelka, Michael Kenna etc. Really nothing to do with all the fuss around him. From what I heard from him, I don't really think I like it's personality. It's no idol reallly...
About films, well, I like Citizen Kane, but have you tried "the third man"? Fantastic photography!!
One last thing. Long before having discovered HCB, I had a towel marked "Cartier-Bresson". Although the towel was not bad at all, I am happy that little Henri decided not to stay in the family business...
What seems obvious today because we have seen it a lot, and it have been very influential to lots of other may well have been revolutionary in its time.
Question is: even with no time/money/gear limitation, would you be able to do what HCB have done BEFORE HCB have done it. Have a look at what the PJ was in the 30's.
Also
When not in the right mood, I can systematically miss picture after picture of a good situation over a film. I find it incredibely furstrating, but also, it teaches me that you may need luck in photography, but you need an eye to grasp that luck.
For one, I love HCB's work. I like others too but he is still one of the very few that I really feel in resonance with their work. Last discovery of mine was Irving Penn (best portraits I've seen so far), Koudelka, Michael Kenna etc. Really nothing to do with all the fuss around him. From what I heard from him, I don't really think I like it's personality. It's no idol reallly...
About films, well, I like Citizen Kane, but have you tried "the third man"? Fantastic photography!!
One last thing. Long before having discovered HCB, I had a towel marked "Cartier-Bresson". Although the towel was not bad at all, I am happy that little Henri decided not to stay in the family business...
Nh3
Well-known
The negative size is bigger than a 35mm frame so the bottom part is of a different frame which was not exposed or this was first shot of the roll.
The only way you can diminish the power of that image is if you proof that it was staged.
chikne
Well-known
I'd be curious to know how you came to that conclusion
Look, his pictures had some impact on me. The fact is that some of his pictures are cropped, he took a lot of frames of the same scene and he shot loads of rolls. Now some people really believe that he could do in in 1 single shot every time and that his pictures weren't manipulated, yet they were/are.
What would be the point of diminishing the pictures?
steamer
Well-known
A great film directed by Carol Reed, many folks think Orson Wells was the director.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
The "Decive Moment" was one of the few books on photography that my local library had when I was getting into photography. Aaron Siskind and Ernst Haas were the others, as well as photo annuals from the late 50's and early 60's. I was trying to absorb and see as much imagery as I could to understand what the medium could and couldn't do. HC-B influenced many generations of photographers. Whether you like him or not is a moot point. With all due respect, the examples of his work posted here do not do the man's work justice. He was so much more than "The Deecisive Moment". If you ever heard him speak, his main influences were surrealism. He had a very graphic, compositional sense.
When I look at his work, I see Frank, Friedlander, Klein, Winogrand, Ray-Jones, to name a few. He was an "honest" photographer who used a minimum of equipment to make his vision. He was an admitted poor painter and sketcher. That was his first love that he returned to later in life.
I'm not a tremendous fan, but in thinking he was overrated, I believe is wrong. His work may look dated, but he deserves his place in history and contributed much. Unlike Adams, HC-B was no showman. He let his work do his talking.
When I look at his work, I see Frank, Friedlander, Klein, Winogrand, Ray-Jones, to name a few. He was an "honest" photographer who used a minimum of equipment to make his vision. He was an admitted poor painter and sketcher. That was his first love that he returned to later in life.
I'm not a tremendous fan, but in thinking he was overrated, I believe is wrong. His work may look dated, but he deserves his place in history and contributed much. Unlike Adams, HC-B was no showman. He let his work do his talking.
M. Valdemar
Well-known
What I really like best are funny monkey pictures. All the big photo/news agencies used to send them out on the wires every couple of weeks.
sanmich
Veteran
I'd be curious to know how you came to that conclusion
Look, his pictures had some impact on me. The fact is that some of his pictures are cropped, he took a lot of frames of the same scene and he shot loads of rolls. Now some people really believe that he could do in in 1 single shot every time and that his pictures weren't manipulated, yet they were/are.
What would be the point of diminishing the pictures?
See the series "contact" showing short films (13 min) of the contact prints of great photogs, commented by them. IIRC, HCB is the first one. Really instructive. I think William Klein did the film...
furcafe
Veteran
chikne
Well-known
There is an interview with Charlie Rose where he clearly states that he didn't crop his pictures, and that cropping is something you can't do because of "geometry", whatever.
If you've never seen written "he could do it in one shot", then you're in for a treat.
Correct, his name is Henri Cartier-Bresson!
furcafe
Veteran
I'm shocked, shocked, to hear that. And coming from an artist, no less.
So the guy exaggerated his exploits & helped foster his own myth, big freakin' deal.
So the guy exaggerated his exploits & helped foster his own myth, big freakin' deal.
chikne
Well-known
I'm shocked, shocked, to hear that. And coming from an artist, no less.
I'm shocked that there are foreign troops in Iraq.
Last edited:
michaelging
Established
You look at the cave drawings in France and say I could have done better. Its all about the context of the time the image was drawn or photographed. HCB and others were the top people of their time, many of the photos he shot have stood the test of time and are still great photographs and some have not. Trying to compare one place and time over another is not a fair comparison. I too believe that I read that he used only a 50mm lens and did not crop his photos. He is what he is, and you can look at and enjoy his photos for what they tell you , or not.
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
True enough. Last year I made it down to Roanoke to see the O. Winston Link Museum. I've seen postcards of his work and a few books, but even the small prints on the wall just had a life to them you just don't get on the Web or in a book.
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
I'm shocked, shocked, to hear that. And coming from an artist, no less.
So the guy exaggerated his exploits & helped foster his own myth, big freakin' deal.
So if his greatest talent was self-promotion, so what?
Kind of like Andy Warhol and Madonna. It works for them, so why knock it?
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Nick, you're wrong.
Printing is not that critical for his kind of photography.
It is for Ansel Adams type of over-perfectioned black and white landscapes, but not for 35mm street shots.
Besides, nobody discredited his printer.
Is the sound mixer of a pink floyd concert getting half of the applause? not really, no. But he shows up on an album.
Are the musicians that are relying on technicians worse than the ones who do it all?
Printing is not that critical for his kind of photography.
It is for Ansel Adams type of over-perfectioned black and white landscapes, but not for 35mm street shots.
Besides, nobody discredited his printer.
Is the sound mixer of a pink floyd concert getting half of the applause? not really, no. But he shows up on an album.
Are the musicians that are relying on technicians worse than the ones who do it all?
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
And, BK stands for british knights. Not for burger king.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Sorry for the previous comments - i think they are useless. I wrote them before i realized that you don't understand Frank Zappa.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
I used to think Rembrandt was an over-rated technical painter who was something that art school teachers pushed. I had folio sized books of art including his. He was forgettable.
Then I went to the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam and saw "Night Watch". I ate crow and recanted on the spot. You "have to be there" is all I can say. So, for these photographers you have to see the originals. It is different. No book or screen really delivers the reality.
furcafe
Veteran
But HCB's greatest talent wasn't self-promotion, it was his photography, regardless of one's personal opinion of that photography. Like many creative types (Picasso, Whistler, Frank Lloyd Wright, or any # of Renaissance artists come to mind) he probably had a huge ego & built up his own myth, but that doesn't take away from his achievements. Nor does the fact that many of his fans seemed to have bought into the hype excessively.
As far as Warhol & Madonna, I'm not a huge fan of either, but the fact that they were/are skilled @ self-promotion doesn't necessarily mean they had/have less talent than contemporaries who lacked/lack that skill. Which is kind of the way I feel about both Annie Leibovitz & her archrival, David LaChapelle.
As far as Warhol & Madonna, I'm not a huge fan of either, but the fact that they were/are skilled @ self-promotion doesn't necessarily mean they had/have less talent than contemporaries who lacked/lack that skill. Which is kind of the way I feel about both Annie Leibovitz & her archrival, David LaChapelle.