A photographer who doesn't know who Ansel Adams is... still.

Arklatexian · Jan 2, 2016

Bill Burk said:
Sal Santamaura, frank and I were discussing "how" my son, who is taking a photography course, does not know who Ansel Adams is.

I know little of what my father does, so it makes sense. We live our lives together but I haven't been focusing too much on "teaching" my children to take over the family business.

I often cringe to find Ansel Adams is the first photographer that comes to "most" people's minds.

Now that he's taking a class, I'm actually excited by the prospect of introducing him to photographers who I consider important.

So that maybe the first person he will think of is someone else.

Who should it be?

That is an easy one to answer. Bill Burk, of course! If you consider Ansel Adams among those you consider important, he probably knows that by now if he has ever perused your photo-book library. Try dropping a quote, now and then, from a photographer that you admire and your son will probably take it from there and it (important) will be HIS idea, not yours if you know what I mean.....Regards!

Richard S. (rich815) · Jan 2, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
I think that Ansel Adams, Alfred Stieglitz, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Sebastião Salgado et al earned their reputations and that should be respected. You may or may not like some of their work but their reputations are still deserved.

Agreed. I can respect a photographer without necessarily loving their work. And many are indeed overrated (heck 99.9% of people who call themselves "fine art photographers" are anything but) however none that you mention can ever be characterized as overrated IMO.

Tony Egan · Jan 2, 2016

What about the devil Mortensen? I'll throw in a contemporary Australian, Trent Parke for consideration.
Having a quick scan of my bookshelf:
Elliott Erwitt (for humour and tenderness)
O Winston Link (for technical virtuosity, and who doesn't like a steam train)
Herman Leonard (shooting what you love and who doesn't like great photos of musicians)
Ray Metzger (for a different take on the landscape)
Ralph Gibson
George Tice

The two photographers who "whacked me in the side of the head" in my early '20s were HCB and Arbus.

removed account4 · Jan 2, 2016

whenever anyone is put on a pedestal and can do no wrong, they become over rated for me

and being over rated doesn't mean they don't have a reputation, it just means they don't do it fo me

it's better to have a well rounded knowledge base and understanding/ appreciation than a narrow minded one

Sirius Glass · Jan 2, 2016

jnanian said:
whenever anyone is put on a pedestal and can do no wrong, they become over rated for me

and being over rated doesn't mean they don't have a reputation, it just means they don't do it fo me

it's better to have a well rounded knowledge base and understanding/ appreciation than a narrow minded one

Jackie Kennedy after the assassination complained about being put on a pedestal. When someone said that she was revered and respected and that is why she was on a pedestal, she replied, "it is cold up there."

removed account4 · Jan 2, 2016

i imagine she might be right, if you are on a pedestal its cold up there,
and idol worship doesn't do anyone any good
... with photographers, it churns out boring wannabes and mediocre images made by hero-worshipers
instead of anything interesting, that might be more than a photograph that looks like someone else's work...
having a well rounded base allows one to see from a variety of perspectives, not just one ...
this isn't directed towards AA or people that like him, it can be directed towards just about anyone who
is/has been put on a pedistal by idol worshipers ...

fdonadio · Jan 2, 2016

Richard S. (rich815) said:
Adams and Salgado overrated, eh? So show me who you think is not. Their popularity might be over the top like many celebrities and while I find some other photographers more to my liking both of them are/were geniuses and top of their game.

Richard,

I never said they are not good or that they don't deserve the recognition. But they are, IMHO, overrated.

And you're right: who isn't these days?

fdonadio · Jan 2, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
I think that Ansel Adams, Alfred Stieglitz, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Sebastião Salgado et al earned their reputations and that should be respected. You may or may not like some of their work but their reputations are still deserved.

Sirius,

My problem is when people take what these "geniuses" say as law. Remember that some of their genius is having broken the "laws" that other guys set before them.

alanrockwood · Jan 2, 2016

How about Weegee (aka Arthur Fellig, aka Ashur Fellig)?

By the way, to be a contrarian and to put in a plug for Ansel Adams, he is my favorite.

Sirius Glass · Jan 2, 2016

fdonadio said:
Sirius,

My problem is when people take what these "geniuses" say as law. Remember that some of their genius is having broken the "laws" that other guys set before them.

Generally I found that will all advice, it is good to use cognitive thinking to evaluate the advice before putting such in action.

Sirius Glass · Jan 2, 2016

alanrockwood said:
How about Weegee (aka Arthur Fellig, aka Ashur Fellig)?

By the way, to be a contrarian and to put in a plug for Ansel Adams, he is my favorite.

Yes, him too.

fdonadio · Jan 2, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
Generally I found that will all advice, it is good to use cognitive thinking to evaluate the advice before putting such in action.

Agreed.

jnanian expressed himself a lot better than me – what he said about "people on pedestals".

So, again, referring to the thread's subject: a photographer that doesn't know Ansel Adams, and still... A soccer player that doesn't know Pelé, and still... A skateboarder that doesn't know Tony Hawk, and still... A baseball player that doesn't know Babe Ruth, and still... I could go on for days...

Bill Burk · Jan 2, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
Jackie Kennedy after the assassination complained about being put on a pedestal. When someone said that she was revered and respected and that is why she was on a pedestal, she replied, "it is cold up there."

Over the holidays I picked up a 1969 Magnum photographs book. She was in the book, consoling her sister-in-law... I ended up giving that book to our friend's son who's getting his PhD in African American studies... figured it would do more good for him to have that book than me, because it was a pivotal year.

They gave me a signed 'Range of Light, so I have my first real Ansel Adams signature...

Semester's over, my son handed me a stack of books, including Max Yavno, and said "They're taking up too much space in my room, put them back in the garage."

Jim Jones · Jan 2, 2016

Ansel Adams did one thing better than any of the others: he made his images available to almost everybody in one form or another. The reproductions he approved in Little Brown and company books and calendars let perhaps millions appreciate his work, and many thousands like Bill and me own something touched by the master himself.

RSalles · Jan 3, 2016

Flavio,

Don't agree, both in a historical perspective and by their "body of work": it's a bad advice to refuse the real value of the art work of anyone just because its spread over the hole world - we fall in the vicious of anti-media driving, a media driven indeed, but in the opposite sense. Worst then that would be the advice to the new generation of photographers that it's a sort of work that can be ignored, bypassed, what's a fool idea IMHO. Both are very good examples of photographers which could have never been discovered neither by the grand media nor the market, and even so, their work remained impossible to be bought down to a futile level, rated as "ignorable". It's not just a matter of taste, or pedestal merit - as noted above - its a question of taking their work always with the correct perspective, both by the historical and artistic sense. But there are people just like Peter Lik who thinks that AA was just someone in the right place at the right time (10 thousand of times :lol), or even those folks who thinks Vivian Meyer is THE photographer of the century,

Cheers,

Renato

Sirius Glass · Jan 3, 2016

Mankind learns by standing on the shoulder of those who came before. For one to ignore the works of famous artists and famous photographers and start from scratch is to photograph with ones eyes close. I appreciate the Zone System, I have learned from the Zone System, at times I use parts of the Zone System but I am not a Zonista. From such people as X I have learned to see things in different way that I would not have thought up on my own.

Sirius Glass · Jan 3, 2016

Mankind learns by standing on the shoulder of those who came before. For one to ignore the works of famous artists and famous photographers and start from scratch is to photograph with ones eyes closed. I appreciate the Zone System, I have learned from the Zone System, at times I use parts of the Zone System but I am not a Zonista. From such people as Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, Alfred Stieglitz, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Sebastião Salgado, Weegee and Dorothea Lange I have learned to see things in different way that I would not have thought up on my own.

fdonadio · Jan 3, 2016

Both you Renato and Sirius, show signs of what I tried to exemplify.

First, both of you talk about ignoring their works. I never proposed that. What I said is that their "personas" and opinion have an importance that is not really "healthy" (for lack of a better word) for them or to photography as a whole.

Of course, one has to respect Ansel Adams for his work, not only as a photographer, but as a writer and a researcher of photographic techniques and methods.

But assuming it is mandatory for a photographer to know the works of anyone to be good at it... That's a bit of a stretch, IMHO. It's something that's good to have, but not mandatory.

RSalles · Jan 3, 2016

Flavio,

Choose one: or "you talked about ignoring their works. I never proposed that." or "It's something that's good to have, but not mandatory." it sounds illogic for me as one sentence denies the other one.

And "What I said is that their "personas" and opinion have an importance that is not really "healthy" (for lack of a better word) for them or to photography as a whole" it's a not good start for a critic as it takes the author by its work or the work by the author, mixing both. BTW I don't see any "sin" in both life histories which could be detrimental to the value of their work, as far as I can tell. But it's a common mistake, I recognise.
I can give an example: I worked some years in Paris having photography as a living work, and Landscape photography is a branch which is not very well known in France when compared to photojournalism or street photography. My impression is that AA is less known by the pro photography community than the f64 group or Edward Weston, at least by the French public. Myself, I found his work by accident, searching for better metering practices for film, when came across the Zone System, which I think its better to have been conceived then not, and I use it at great extent,

Sirius, about "going on the shoulders of the giants" I have read this sentence in a book of F. Nietzsche, don't know if your source is the same, and your remark made me remember of Man Ray when he sad "I choose my masters..."

Cheers,

Renato

fdonadio · Jan 3, 2016

Renato,

Ok, let me make myself clear, as I think I didn't make it so: I don't propose willfully ignoring their work, experience or teachings. But, if one just grabs his/her camera and go out to take beautiful pictures and never cares to study about the works of "the greatest minds in photography", it's still possible to become a great photographer.

But, if one likes studying other people's works or techniques, that's great! That's good to have.

From the moment one considers no one can be a great photographer without knowing Adams', Cartier-Bresson's or Salgado's works, or following their teachings... Well, that's putting these great photographers on a pedestal. That's overrating them.

Please, let me be even clearer in that I understand "overrating" as something done by others, not by the ones being overrated. Its not that Salgado being overrated is his fault; it's quite the opposite!

I don't see sins in Adams' life history and it's not my business to do so. I would have to study his life (and life's work) much more deeply, and that's something I don't want put my efforts into. And, by the way, I am certain I would come up with my hands empty!

I've watched a couple of later interviews with Salgado and regarded half of what he said as BS. Stupid advices such as using the same camera, film or developer until blah-blah... Some people will just clap their hands no matter what he (or some other "genius") says and that is just stupid.

I don't think I can be clearer now.

removed account4 · Jan 3, 2016

if it was me doing my best to infect someone with an open mind regarding photography
i wouldn't show them the work of any photographers at all, but other discplines of art.
i'd give them a copy ( outdated is fine by me ! ) of gardener's art through the ages,
books on the history of architecture, trips to the museum to look at everything BUT photography.
when someone who is learning camera-work and image making with a camera
is inundated by masters of photography they just become clones and while they might be inspired
because they see great photographs and can make stuff " just like that "

then again, now that i think of it,
i guess the putting on a pedestal / hero worship thing keeps everyone in business ..
it keeps the books being sold, it keeps film off the shelves and in cameras, it keeps web-sites traffic'ed
it keeps labs busy printing 40x60 prints just like ( fill in the blank ) makes ..
and it keeps classifid areas on websites, crags list, eBay and other auction sites
filled with buy-sell -trade-action so when the person gets tired of making giant dollar store images
he or she can sell off that camera, get a giant camera and photograph the american west after
sinking thousands of dollars into wet plate manuals, jamboree accommodations, collodion materials
like mr brady, and while they are at it they can make collodion NEGATIVES and PT/PD prints of people
in the native american nations like curtis.
i take back everything i said about putting poeple on pedistals and showing them regular art-stuff and not photo stuff
we need more people hero worshipping to keep chemical photography limping along...

fdonadio · Jan 3, 2016

I disagree. If we would really need something, I think we would need more passion for photography in itself, not worshipping the greatest photographers of the past.

Wayne · Jan 3, 2016

This thread is silly.

Bill Burk · Jan 3, 2016

fdonadio said:
Ok, let me make myself clear, as I think I didn't make it so: I don't propose willfully ignoring their work, experience or teachings. But, if one just grabs his/her camera and go out to take beautiful pictures and never cares to study about the works of "the greatest minds in photography", it's still possible to become a great photographer.

fdonadio,

This is a great post, you cover a lot of ground. The thought here is one that I wrestled with...

Of course in one semester, my son couldn't be exposed to enough great photography to be say "Max Yavno was a major influence in my work". My son's work is his own right now. And I am occasionally in awe of raw talented young photographers who couldn't by their circumstances, have access to examples of great work to be inspired by.

A local non-profit, Zanmi Lakay, makes trips to Haiti to teach photography to kids on the street. The student photographs are often quite compelling, and I don't know how they could have time to be influenced by the greats, unless they pick it up very fast.

Sirius Glass · Jan 3, 2016

Sirius Glass said:
Mankind learns by standing on the shoulder of those who came before. For one to ignore the works of famous artists and famous photographers and start from scratch is to photograph with ones eyes closed. I appreciate the Zone System, I have learned from the Zone System, at times I use parts of the Zone System but I am not a Zonista. From such people as Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, Alfred Stieglitz, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Sebastião Salgado, Weegee and Dorothea Lange I have learned to see things in different way that I would not have thought up on my own.

fdonadio said:
Both you Renato and Sirius, show signs of what I tried to exemplify.

First, both of you talk about ignoring their works. I never proposed that. What I said is that their "personas" and opinion have an importance that is not really "healthy" (for lack of a better word) for them or to photography as a whole.

Of course, one has to respect Ansel Adams for his work, not only as a photographer, but as a writer and a researcher of photographic techniques and methods.

But assuming it is mandatory for a photographer to know the works of anyone to be good at it... That's a bit of a stretch, IMHO. It's something that's good to have, but not mandatory.

I said learn ways to see as they did not to blindly follow and copy. As I said

Sirius Glass said:
Generally I found that will all advice, it is good to use cognitive thinking to evaluate the advice before putting such in action.

A photographer who doesn't know who Ansel Adams is... still.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency