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

[Bill Burk]

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?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

My pick: David Muench.

Unfortunately, with the prevalence of the internet, I'm afraid it will be Ken Rockwell.

 

[cliveh]

well...............need I say.

 

[Jerevan]

Why should it neccesarily be a man? Imogen Cunningham? Ruth Bernard?

To me it was actually Mary Ellen Mark. For the intensity and the feeling. Much later came ol' Adams - the technical stuff.

 

[eddie]

I'd wait until he expresses interest in a specific aspect of photography. If he gets into landscape, introduce him to landscape photographers. Likewise with portrait, still life, street, etc.

 

[removed account4]

someone from the years 1915 to about 1930
... man ray ...
he is able to show the full depth of what photography can be
a document, true to life+realist, surrealism, portraiture, camera less
solarism...
certainly hardcore photojournalist, human condition/street photographers as well
but as far as i remember, the first thing one does in photoclass is empty one's pockets on the paper
and turn the lights on and make a photogram ... there is an IMMEDIATE connection ...
ymmv

 

[RobC]

Why should he know who Ansel Adams is, he's just one of tens of thousands of photographers and represents a tiny minority of largely hobbyist landscape photographers. Photography is much bigger than that minority.

 

[Bill Burk]

well...............need I say.

That's two votes for Henri Cartier-Bresson

 

[Bill Burk]

Why should it neccesarily be a man? Imogen Cunningham? Ruth Bernard?

To me it was actually Mary Ellen Mark. For the intensity and the feeling.

I was thinking along that line, my list included Diane Arbus and Sally Mann... and I know where I can find a Ruth Bernard book by Jim Alinder

 

[Rick A]

All the Weston family.

 

[AgX]

At least for my generation I assume Adams was unknown when we started. He is kind of american phenomenon.

 

[ambaker]

Weegee for real street creds.

 

[Alan9940]

My vote goes to the Paul's: Strand and Caponigro.

 

[Old_Dick]

W. Eugene Smith or Dorothea Lange or Walker Evans

 

[Ian Grant]

It's an odd one, Ansel Adams was not included in the major exhibition "The Art of Photography" celebrating the 150th year of Photography as we know it, Daguerre and Fox Talbot's public announcements and display of their early work.

Adams was left out because it was deemed that much of his work copied the early pioneers of Topographic photography who's pioneering work documented the expansion ot the American West.

I think we will see a re-writing of photography's history and Adams will drop in importance compared to many of his US contemporaries who were creatively far more influential.

Don't get me wrong I like Ansel Adams work, some of his print quality is not that good, I saw an exhibition of images owned by his daughter in Oxford (UK) a few years ago and the prints were nowhere near the same quality of later prints from the same negatives. I wasn't the only person to think this. In his later years he re-invented himself and became commercial re-interpreting his earlier images.

I think I prefer the purity of Edward Weston and those that followed on, Minor White, Paul Capenegro, Thomas Joshua Cooper etc.

Ian

 

[Bill Burk]

Why should he know who Ansel Adams is, he's just one of tens of thousands of photographers and represents a tiny minority of largely hobbyist landscape photographers. Photography is much bigger than that minority.

I consider it a sorry state of affairs that usually Ansel Adams is the only photographer most people can name. So this is a good thing, and a chance to right a wrong.

 

[RobC]

I consider it a sorry state of affairs that usually Ansel Adams is the only photographer most people can name. So this is a good thing, and a chance to right a wrong.

That may just be the natural thing within the circles you move in. Move to another circle and things will be different. Do you think sports photographers know the first thing about adams. Would wildlife photographers know the first thing about adams. Most of them would be doing colour photography and the zone system would mean nothing to them. Would fashion photographers be zonies. Would photojounalists be Adams zealots and on and on and on.

The presumption of your question that everyone knows Adams is fundamentally wrong.

 

[pbromaghin]

W. Eugene

 

[OptiKen]

You didn't say how old your son is but a lot of young men think of Robert Capra because his story is appealing to young men.
Good looking young man chasing wars with a beautiful woman as a sometimes companion. Shooting from the front lines - always in eminent danger. Beating his competition to the BIG story and photo on the front page of the newspaper or magazine. Dying on the battlefield.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I don't think I miss anything with AA. He is here, but nothing for me.
I do learn a lot from GW. Landscapes included.

 

[jjphoto]

Photography is about 180 years old, how do you pick one photographer? In any case Adams wouldn't be on my list at all.

August Sander, William Mortensen, Edward Steichen, Horst P. Horst, Sebastiao Salgado, George Hurrell, the list can go on for ever.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I ran afoul of an #TeamAnsel worshipper the other day on Facebook. In a conversation about why when Ansel was listed as the inspiration of the day it only got 155 likes out of 3000+ members of the group, I merely suggested that Ansel was not a deity, merely an influential photographer and educator, and that photography did not begin and end with the f/64 school. That drew out an ad-hominem attack upon me, some assertions of dubious factuality (Ansel Adams was responsible for opening MoMA to fine-art photography, and fine-art photography in general, to name a few) and a flouncing off from the thread. I'll repeat again here that he created a tremendous legacy in photographic technique by codifying the Zone system, and by being a tireless educator of so many other photographers. But I don't think we need to constantly seek out his tripod holes, aspire to create another "Clearing Winter Storm", or print black-and-white silver-gelatin landscapes that are tack sharp from foreground to background.

 

[ic-racer]

Who should it be?

Someone you don't know. Kids will continue to surprise you until you are a senile old man and don't even recognize them any more...

 

[Peter Rockstroh01]

Although I like AA's work, I believe he deserves his status for writing "The well-tempered photography," and describing the science underneath the process, more than for his images. Liking his work is a matter of taste.

 

[DannL.]

Young folks today really need a contemporary photographer that they can look up too. My "contemporary photographer" was an uncle who work out of Crescent City, CA. He would occasionally come back east to visit, and bring some of his works. He introduced me to his portable darkroom in the '60s, and his color lithographs, and Cibachromes of redwood forests and coastline from where he lived. Having someone that was living, separated by only a few decades age-wise, and using contemporary processes was inspirational.