Favourite photographers?

Greggorios

Poster Extraordinaire
Gold Supporter
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Posts
6,035
Location
NY
William Wegman and his Weinmaramers

1643047155609.png


1643047095118.png
 

buster poser

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
May 1, 2018
Posts
6,271
Location
Tewa Land NM
Forgot my current favorite, Ryan Vizzions. His images are tremendous, his work ethic is without peer to me (lives out of a conversion van, currently doing a lot of national parks). He's repped by a local gallery, I send him a little coin every month on Patreon.

 
Last edited:

Sea Devil

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Sep 23, 2006
Posts
3,480
Age
59
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Apologies for both my misattribution of the NYPD photo to WeeGee and my failure to notice Cartier-Bresson's name in the first post! I have the Luc Santé book, btw; I grabbed my supposed WeeGee photo from a website that identified it as his work. Everyone else was showing a sample photo, and I thought I should too.

Telemnemonics, when were you living in Williamsburg? I've been in the area since 1988. I was never into the hard stuff myself, but boy did I ever know a lot of people who were. The odds are pretty good that we knew each other, at least by sight.
 
Last edited:

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,400
Age
62
Location
Maine
I think this is true of some, but by no means all constantly-shooting photographers. Art is made for all sorts of reasons.
True enough that art comes from many places in the human spirit.

But I'm going to stand by my sense that all humans have "internal conflict" and that any real artist connects that internal conflict to their chosen media.

But when I say real artist I open up a can o' worms because an electrical engineer makes "artwork" when they design circuits and many commercial artists arrange product propaganda for pay.

So at the risk of claiming commercial and technical art is made by unreal artists is of course a fail.
What I mean is from my view that the artist does whatever they feel like doing an hopes you'll feel it too.
How can an individual possibly have internal conflicts and make art yet not connect the two?
If we could succeed, we would be like the parent who does the polar opposite of their own parents in hopes to avoid making the same mistakes, then in so doing we make the flip side of the coin.

Separate internal conflict and make art with none of our soul?
Cold cold art does exist but is a message from a cold frozen soul.

I've delved into Folk Art and even made it myself, which is to me art made without any intention of making art. Might be a weathervane or a shop sign.
Can it be devoid of any soul from the maker?
I think not.
But it can be argued.

How about copying art we like?
Maybe as novices with no education or practiced technique?
Yeah maybe that individual can "make art" that is devoid of their own internal conflict.

But similar to making "free music"; if we do it long enough to be able to say it is something we DO, then connections form and structure emerges which is inextricably connected to our soul, which is by nature internally conflicted.
Even the simple act of not destroying whatever we make, is a conflict negotiation, and a move toward conflict resolution.

Of course we can move and move and move without getting anywhere!
Sonny Rollins was upset that his audiences liked his worst live performances best.
We may think we need to make our art perfect, and that does attract certain patrons.
But IMO perfecting the final product is in and of itself a form of conflict resolution.

Isn't why humans do what we do the main unanswered question?
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,400
Age
62
Location
Maine
Glen Friedman for his music and skate stuff

image-asset.png


Alva2_465_349_int.jpg
I’m guessing that’s Tony Alva based on hair and hat but the deck looks just like my Hobie Mike Weed model and mine has the same mid tracks but different wheels. Nobody took no pics of me getting air (in the ‘70s) though!

E5812407-E196-42DE-961B-78B64E0F867E.jpeg
 

SneakyPup

Tele-Meister
Silver Supporter
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
Posts
124
Age
72
Location
Georgia
That's what he claimed in public, most of the time, but I seem to remember that it wasn't quite true. In fact, his most-famous image, the one of the puddle-jumper, is cropped in post.

As far as trusting what you see in past photos, well, you really can't. Photographer's position and a lense's angle of view can tell a lie, and darkroom and scene manipulation started as soon as photography did.

Fineman has a decent overview of the subject:
You may be right about that image being cropped. But I have several books of his photos that all show images to the edge of the negative. And while position and lens angle can tell a lie, I appreciate the effort. I won't lie that I didn't dodge and burn in the darkroom.
 

pixeljammer

Tele-Afflicted
Gold Supporter
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Posts
1,022
Age
54
Location
Colorado
You may be right about that image being cropped. But I have several books of his photos that all show images to the edge of the negative. And while position and lens angle can tell a lie, I appreciate the effort. I won't lie that I didn't dodge and burn in the darkroom.

You're quite right. He rarely cropped, as far as I can tell.

The image in question, before and after his manipulations, is here:


I think I understand what you're saying about the "purity" of no-crop, feet-only, little to no manipulation in the darkroom. I disagree that it's any more pure, and I don't think it makes any sort of value difference. For me, the end product is the end product; the process doesn't matter to me as a viewer. It does matter to me as the photographer, though. I'm actually more interested in the process most of the time in my own work.

Cartier-Bresson has said in interviews that he sometimes sat and waited for a scene to come together—his photo "The Cyclist" comes to mind—and I see that as a sort of passive manipulation of the scene. It's sort of like setting up the shot in a studio.

Though many of his iconic shots look like "street photography", Elliot Irwin does even more, arranging people and objects on the street to suit his idea. Alex Webb does this, too, though he doesn't seem to talk about it very much.

I don't think there is any way to avoid manipulation of one sort or another, so it's a matter of degree what you like or don't. Ansel Adams was a huge manipulator; cameras, films, darkroom all got the business so that he could achieve the prints he saw in his mind's eye.
 
Last edited:

nojazzhere

Doctor of Teleocity
Ad Free Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Posts
18,180
Age
70
Location
Foat Wuth, Texas
I got to know Duane a bit, one of my assistants went on to work with him for many years. He is a character, boundless energy, and very funny. Reminded me of Robin Williams in many ways - he certainly told you what he thought. He spoke very simply about writing on his images - he wanted you (the viewer) to know exactly what he was thinking. He has to be close to 90 now.
Good guess on age.....he'll be 90 on this coming Feb. 18.
I find your connection to him interesting. I was introduced to him (not in person) by my best friend in the late 1970's, who was an artist. Dennis worked mainly in pottery, but was deeply into photography. and showed me a lot of tricks, including processing and printing my own film. I think Duane made an impression on me because he wasn't JUST visual.....it was his cerebral techniques that (at least to me) set him apart from most other photographers.His lack of concern about "gear", and more on the end result, appeals to me. (as it does in musical stuff, too) I suppose I assumed he had died.....I'm glad to hear otherwise.
Added....BTW, you (bdkphoto) should have mentioned yourself in this thread. I just glanced briefly at your website.....most impressive.
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,400
Age
62
Location
Maine
You're quite right. He rarely cropped, as far as I can tell.

The image in question, before and after his manipulations, is here:


I think I understand what you're saying about the "purity" of no-crop, feet-only, little to no manipulation in the darkroom. I disagree that it's any more pure, and I don't think it makes any sort of value difference. For me, the end product is the end product; the process doesn't matter to me as a viewer. It does matter to me as the photographer, though. I'm actually more interested in the process most of the time in my own work.

Cartier-Bresson has said in interviews that he sometimes sat and waited for a scene to come together—his photo "The Cyclist" comes to mind—and I see that as a sort of passive manipulation of the scene. It's sort of like setting up the shot in a studio.

Though many of his iconic shots look like "street photography", Elliot Irwin does even more, arranging people and objects on the street to suit his idea. Alex Webb does this, too, though he doesn't seem to talk about it very much.

I don't think there is any way to avoid manipulation of one sort or another, so it's a matter of degree what you like or don't. Ansel Adams was a huge manipulator; cameras, films, darkroom all got the business so that he could achieve the prints he saw in his mind's eye.
The whole no cropping ideal is a strange one for the medium and I recall many in the ‘70s seemed to value that. My reaction was opposite and I kind of think using a tripod for 35mm is nutty, I almost had the codfish eggs/ digital ethic when shooting film as if the results didn’t even matter as long as I was always in place and my speed and aperture was set and reset going in and out of light whether subject was present or not.
Shooting from the hip was my response to total control of a media as freeing as a camera.
But here’s a couple of no crop shots with ragged edge yet cropped anyhow.
These were printed for a short notice show I had to set up a darkroom for snd could not get 8x12 mats snd frames for. Nutty that the photo standard is 8x10 while a 24x36 beg only fits 8x12 FF.
Old customs from the view era?

A8A4F1CE-52E8-46CE-9AD6-005D6F0074A9.jpeg
FD341179-F611-481B-BB81-E4D8A16E7A23.jpeg

The bottom image was shot in maybe 1993 and the roll wasn't processed until maybe 2010.
Part of my crop/ not crop think relates to phenomenology, or synchronicity.
I really dug the fact that the image of Detroit steel cut up by car thieves and the image of the Twin Towers from my loft rooftop slept next to each other for decades, and when they came out to again see the light of day, Detroit steel and the Trade Center were both kind of gone, to a similar fate of globalism.
 
Last edited:

bdkphoto

Tele-Holic
Joined
Mar 16, 2003
Posts
520
Location
NYC
Good guess on age.....he'll be 90 on this coming Feb. 18.
I find your connection to him interesting. I was introduced to him (not in person) by my best friend in the late 1970's, who was an artist. Dennis worked mainly in pottery, but was deeply into photography. and showed me a lot of tricks, including processing and printing my own film. I think Duane made an impression on me because he wasn't JUST visual.....it was his cerebral techniques that (at least to me) set him apart from most other photographers.His lack of concern about "gear", and more on the end result, appeals to me. (as it does in musical stuff, too) I suppose I assumed he had died.....I'm glad to hear otherwise.
Added....BTW, you (bdkphoto) should have mentioned yourself in this thread. I just glanced briefly at your website.....most impressive.
One of the reasons I knew his age was that he nearly chewed my head off for assuming he didn't enjoy being 80 - he read me the riot act about that (in a fun way -)) The other thing that impressed me was that he owned his commercial work, that is he made no apologies for doing annual reports and other commercial photography it was as important to him as his personal adventures.

Thanks for the kind words about my work - I feel incredibly privileged to have made this my career for 40 years and counting, and to have my work hanging on the gallery walls with the likes of Bruce Davidson - and noted by the New Yorker ;-)
 

buster poser

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
May 1, 2018
Posts
6,271
Location
Tewa Land NM
Took a course on "the art of photography" years ago and did my final talk on him. Singular doesn't get close. He stands astride basically the next 70 years of fine art photography and was also unflinching as a documentarian (duh, Lewis Hine). I saw a great monograph the Met did 25 years ago or so... all the above are in it. Thick, frame-able prints on every page. This is one I keep in the living room :)

1643073463046.png
 

Mike M

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Posts
1,544
Location
07040
Took a course on "the art of photography" years ago and did my final talk on him. Singular doesn't get close. He stands astride basically the next 70 years of fine art photography and was also unflinching as a documentarian (duh, Lewis Hine). I saw a great monograph the Met did 25 years ago or so... all the above are in it. Thick, frame-able prints on every page. This is one I keep in the living room :)

View attachment 944077

I totally remember that show!, Thx
 

richa

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Posts
1,677
Location
Washington
Some great fodder for follow up in this thread. My top of head list pretty much runs out at Alfred Steiglitz, Alfred Eisenstaedt and Ansel Adams.
 




Top