airfrogusmc
Mentor
I agree.
The funny in an odd way thing about the decisive moment is Bresson later disliked the phrase. Also I kind of agree with Winogrand about story telling qualities of single photographs and I also agree with his statement about a photographers need to do it. For those not familiar or haven't seen it about a min and a half in but watch the entire piece if you can. Its very interesting. Rich you have probably seen both pieces.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl4f-QFCUek
Also a very cool piece on Franks The Americans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHtRZBDOgag
Also wanted to add that just because I truly admire both of these photographers doesn't mean in any way that my work trying to be anything like either or that it even comes close in terms of vision or that this is where this kind of work should be today. But the basic language is still very relevant and will continue to be.
Rich my work tends to be more in the vain you don't like (LoL). But my work at times is subtle and hopefully shows some of the language that makes it more than just folks on the streets or some kind of in your face moment that is immediate and usually has little repeat viewing power (for lack of a better way of phrasing) because those immediate images usually have little of the elements that make it suitable holding interest and for return visits.
The funny in an odd way thing about the decisive moment is Bresson later disliked the phrase. Also I kind of agree with Winogrand about story telling qualities of single photographs and I also agree with his statement about a photographers need to do it. For those not familiar or haven't seen it about a min and a half in but watch the entire piece if you can. Its very interesting. Rich you have probably seen both pieces.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tl4f-QFCUek
Also a very cool piece on Franks The Americans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHtRZBDOgag
Also wanted to add that just because I truly admire both of these photographers doesn't mean in any way that my work trying to be anything like either or that it even comes close in terms of vision or that this is where this kind of work should be today. But the basic language is still very relevant and will continue to be.
Rich my work tends to be more in the vain you don't like (LoL). But my work at times is subtle and hopefully shows some of the language that makes it more than just folks on the streets or some kind of in your face moment that is immediate and usually has little repeat viewing power (for lack of a better way of phrasing) because those immediate images usually have little of the elements that make it suitable holding interest and for return visits.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Brilliant. Thanks so much for sharing that.
franco
Newbie
Lauffray
Invisible Cities
ok so appreciation of these pictures is all relative I can understand that, but to me it's not enough that someone says "I like the winning shot", if you can't articulate why you like it too
To follow on that and speaking for myself, I would say that I see the winning picture as part of this "modernist" trend of Parr influenced HCSP snapshots being touted as of great fine art value. What's wrong with that ? Nothing really, tastes change and the medium too I suppose. What I don't like is that unlike Parr's work, these don't seem to communicate anything. The aesthetics are a little bland, the editing loose and the contents and thematic of the sets a little hard to follow. Pictures of people on the beach, a set of people with a raised knee, flash foregrounds of people gathering at night...great, and ? How's this stimulating in any way ? To me it doesn't seem to say anything, and while it may on occasion look nice, I think there's more to photography that looking pretty on a wall.
I'm not a old school HCB fanatic, I like the works of modernists as much as the next guy, I guess I'm just a little more difficult to convince
To follow on that and speaking for myself, I would say that I see the winning picture as part of this "modernist" trend of Parr influenced HCSP snapshots being touted as of great fine art value. What's wrong with that ? Nothing really, tastes change and the medium too I suppose. What I don't like is that unlike Parr's work, these don't seem to communicate anything. The aesthetics are a little bland, the editing loose and the contents and thematic of the sets a little hard to follow. Pictures of people on the beach, a set of people with a raised knee, flash foregrounds of people gathering at night...great, and ? How's this stimulating in any way ? To me it doesn't seem to say anything, and while it may on occasion look nice, I think there's more to photography that looking pretty on a wall.
I'm not a old school HCB fanatic, I like the works of modernists as much as the next guy, I guess I'm just a little more difficult to convince
RichC
Well-known
I'm sure I'll like it fine! I may tend more towards contemporary still life, but I still appreciate photographers who make good work that's unlike mine. And despite preferring contemporary photography, one of my favourite images remains Cartier-Bresson's: "Siphnos, Greece, 1961".
robbiechad
RobbieChad
And they charge £30 to enter!!
hlockwood
Well-known
Perhaps as a closer to this thread, along with new found knowledge on including an image (thanks Mod,) here is another one of my favorite street scenes.
It shows a beautiful ethnic mix on a sunny day in Washington Square Park (Greenwich Village, NY)
It shows a beautiful ethnic mix on a sunny day in Washington Square Park (Greenwich Village, NY)
Last edited:
-doomed-
film is exciting
Javier Arcenillas' work as a runner-up is great. I don't know if it is so much street photography, but I feel his work speaks to me.