Best Memoirs of Famous Photographers

[MTGseattle]

I really enjoyed this book:

THE LAST OF HIS KIND | Kirkus Reviews

From prolific mountaineering writer Roberts (Devil’s Gate: Brigham Young and the Great Mormon Handcart Tragedy, 2008, etc.), a well-crafted biography of “the greatest mountaineer in Alaskan history.”

www.kirkusreviews.com

Someone mentioned this book up above, but I'll throw it in here again since I just finished it and found it an enjoyable read. Timothy Egan is no slouch.

SHORT NIGHTS OF THE SHADOW CATCHER | Kirkus Reviews

New York Times Pulitzer Prize–winning writer Egan (The Big Burn: Teddy Roosevelt and the Fire that Saved America, 2009, etc.) returns with the story of the astonishing life of Edward Curtis (1868–1952), whose photographs of American Indians now command impressive prices at auction.

www.kirkusreviews.com

 

[shead]

This has been a helpful thread, successfully emptying my bank account to purchase some good books.

 

[snusmumriken]

This has been a helpful thread, successfully emptying my bank account to purchase some good books.

Please let us know in due course what you thought of those you bought.

 

[bjorke]

#1 Fact: Library Cards Are Usually Free!

Hockney's Secret Knowledge and related.

The recent "How I Take Photos" series (Meyerowitz, Moriyama, et al)

Various sometimes-overwrought volumes by Ralph Gibson, e.g. Reflections

Intros to various Avedon books

Intros to various Robert Adams books

Nakahira's For a Language to Come

John Berger's Another Way of Telling (and, not on photography per se, Ways of Seeing)

 

[Arthurwg]

The Daybooks by Weston is the real deal. In his own words and those words were what he was thinking every morning when he sat down to write. It is almost a shame that it was edited for content back in the day. I would love if an unedited volume came out some day.

+1

 

[Tom Taylor]

I'm a reader and love a good memoir. Hit me up with your best books written by photographers, even biographies might be good. Thinking the old great photographers that I don't even know about yet.

Edward Weston, Ansel Adams? I'd read their thoughts. Who else?

Histories of photography, such as Photography in Nineteenth Century America edited by Martha Sandweiss will introduce you to many of the now little- known photographers that made important contributions to the field and provides a jumping-off point for further study with their extensive biographical checklists and bibliographies.

 

[Two23]

I too read photo history books every night. So far the best two are:
1. Evelyn Cameron, Photographing Montana
2. William H Jackson's autobiography.


Kent in SD

 

[snusmumriken]

This isn’t book-form, but I have really enjoyed reading articles by the late Bill Jay.

 

[Jim Jones]

. . . I don't have W. Eugene Smith: Shadow and Substance, The Life and Work of an American Photographer. It's on my to buy list, but haven't had anyone recommend it (any body here read it?). . .

It is very good. A camera club friend must agree: it took me many months to get my copy back after loaning it to him. Another book I strongly recommend is Minamata by W. Eugene Smith and Aileen M. Smith (his wife). It may be difficult to find, and expensive. It is not a book on photography, but a book by Gene Smith about the mercury poisoning of thousands of Japanese by the Chisso Corporation. Even when it became obvious that effluents from the Chisso fertilizer plant were causing serious medical problems, Chisso was evasive about assuming responsibility and promptly correcting their operation. Meanwhile, thousands were affected and many died. Smith was badly beaten by Chisso union members. This book is obviously biased. A reader who absorbs the text and studies the many painfully honest illustrations will likely become biased, too.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Something one might want to add to his or her collection of biographical material, The Pleasure of Seeing: Conversations with Joel Meyerowitz on Sixty Years in the Life of Photography.

Available later this month. Amazon description:

"Joel Meyerowitz is one of the pioneers of color photography, street photography, large-format photography and portraiture. The Pleasure of Seeing offers a look behind the scenes of his life and career. In conversation with historian and photographer Lorenzo Braca, Meyerowitz describes meeting Robert Frank; photographing on the streets of New York City with Tony Ray-Jones and Garry Winogrand; traveling across America and Europe; learning from John Szarkowski; working on exhibitions and publications; photographing at Ground Zero in 2001 and 2002; and producing his most recent still lifes and self-portraits."

"

 

[DF]

Anybody read Alex Kershaw's Blood and Champagne: The Life and Times of Robert Capa ?

(Hate the title, BTW.)

Another Great Capa read, "Capa" by Richard Whelan.

 

[snusmumriken]

I forgot, from my collection of photo books, to mention ‘Visions of a Nomad’ by Wilfred Thesiger. Although it is a collection of (b/w) photos selected by Thesiger for their success as photos, it also contains a lot of autobiographical text, and besides you can also read the books about the journeys from which these photos are drawn.

 

[Mike Crawford]

I really enjoyed Helen Gee's memoir Limelight about the first New York commercial photography gallery she ran in a coffee bar in the 50s. Have read it twice now. While she started as a photographer, she ended up working more as retoucher but her passion was running the gallery. It has nearly everyone you could think would be around the US photography scene from that time. And great as he was as a photographer, I would not have trusted W Eugene Smith to hang his own show in time!!!

Think it's out of print but I got mine from Abebooks a while back.
https://aperture.org/editorial/limelight-helen-gee/

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Not biography or autobiography per se, but I'm enjoying following Sasha Wolf's Photowork podcast, an offshoot of her eponym book.

Podcast – PhotoWork Foundation

photowork.foundation

Some photographers interviewed are close to what I generally like in terms of photography, others totally take me out of my comfort zone, which, for an hour or so conversation, is quite enjoyable. I've made some interesting discoveries, Tim Carpenter being the latest.

 

[faberryman]

Not biography or autobiography per se, but I'm enjoying following Sasha Wolf's Photowork podcast, an offshoot of her eponym book.

Podcast – PhotoWork Foundation

photowork.foundation

Some photographers interviewed are close to what I generally like in terms of photography, others totally take me out of my comfort zone, which, for an hour or so conversation, is quite enjoyable. I've made some interesting discoveries, Tim Carpenter being the latest.

I looked up the Photowork Foundation. In the About Us section, it says its mission is as follows:

"The PhotoWork Foundation supports the development and education of post-documentary photographic artists and cultivates an audience for their work."

I didn't know what a "post-documentary photographic artist" was and the PhotoWork Foundation website doesn't elaborate. Aperture defines a "post-documentary" as follows:

"The term “post-documentary” has described many things, including a photography that examines these issues of authenticity and power. It now frequently refers to a poetic or ambiguous style whose meaning or message is not overdetermined."

Not overdetermined?

Blind Magazine goes on:

"Liberated from the confines of storytelling, these photographers convey a mood, a sense of feeling and being that is more about capturing the spirit of a people and a place than explaining what we are looking at. By resisting the narrative arcs and decisive moments of traditional documentary work, these photographers search for new ways to explore the deeper, more complex mysteries of life."

Which only they can explain?

Seems a little vague to me. Perhaps that is intentional. I guess I need to see more of the work to get a feel for it.

 

[warden]

I looked up the Photowork Foundation. In the About Us section, it says its mission is as follows:

"The PhotoWork Foundation supports the development and education of post-documentary photographic artists and cultivates an audience for their work."

I didn't know what a "post-documentary photographic artist" was and the PhotoWork Foundation website doesn't elaborate. Aperture defines a "post-documentary" as follows:

"The term “post-documentary” has described many things, including a photography that examines these issues of authenticity and power. It now frequently refers to a poetic or ambiguous style whose meaning or message is not overdetermined."

Not overdetermined?

Blind Magazine goes on:

"Liberated from the confines of storytelling, these photographers convey a mood, a sense of feeling and being that is more about capturing the spirit of a people and a place than explaining what we are looking at. By resisting the narrative arcs and decisive moments of traditional documentary work, these photographers search for new ways to explore the deeper, more complex mysteries of life."

Which only they can explain?

Seems a little vague to me. Perhaps that is intentional. I guess I need to see more of the work to get a feel for it.

The Blind Magazine definition sounds a lot like the work of Todd Hido, Alec Soth, Catherine Opie, and Paul Graham, all of which have been featured on the show. I agree it's better to see the work than focus on definitions that the photographers didn't write and also may not agree with. I've found the interviews worth listening to.

Photowork is an interview show that focuses on ideas and photographers rather than gear.

The foundation is new btw, and an effort to offset the costs of producing the show. They have started accepting advertising, also new.

 

[juan]

I was once in a camera club that had a guy with a smug attitude who would always ask the photographer “What are you saying here?” Rather than spout some post-modernist doublespeak, I would just point to the photo and say, “That.”
What do they say about dancing about architectur?

 

[Don_ih]

Seems a little vague to me.

It more or less means the photographer is no longer pretending to be an observer only. So, you get posed photos - of people or situations - which carry as much validity about the reality they depict as a so-called "objective" documentary photo does.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I agree it's better to see the work than focus on definitions that the photographers didn't write and also may not agree with. I've found the interviews worth listening to.

I'm with you on this. The art-speak definition has little relevance. She knows her stuff, and is an excellent interviewer.

 

[faberryman]

What do they say about dancing about architectur?

The expression is: "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." Music is primarily an aesthetic experience. Photography can be about an aesthetic experience, but is usually about more. Just ask the conceptual photographers. So if a photograph is just about an aesthetic experience, and some of mine are, then the saying is apt. However, if the photographer maintains his photographs are about more than an aesthetic experience, then he ought to be able to tell you what he intended to convey.

 

[snusmumriken]

However, if the photographer maintains his photographs are about more than an aesthetic experience, then he ought to be able to tell you what he intended to convey.

I’m not sure about that. If it could be said in words, what extra does the photograph bring? And if you agree that it does bring something extra, how can you put that into words?

 

[faberryman]

I’m not sure about that. If it could be said in words, what extra does the photograph bring? And if you agree that it does bring something extra, how can you put that into words?

Ever written an artist statement? They are pretty much required if you want to have a show or pass a photography course of any kind where you present your work. If you want to earn an MFA, you are going to have to write a thesis explaining your work. Ever read or listen to an interview of a photographer? They usually have something to say about their work.

If a photographer were asked "What did you intend to convey by this photograph?" and he responded "I dunno.", he probably wouldn't have much credibility.

 

[Don_ih]

If it could be said in words, what extra does the photograph bring?

A picture is worth a thousand words.

Just a thousand.

They have to be the right ones, though.

 

[snusmumriken]

Ever written an artist statement? They are pretty much required if you want to have a show or pass a photography course of any kind where you present your work. If you want to earn an MFA, you are going to have to write a thesis explaining your work.

No, of course I haven’t, I’m just a dabbler. I can’t help thinking that the obligation to write something accounts for the pretentious woffle one quite often sees.

I appreciate that in an educational context, it will be important to have some clue what the student was trying to do in those cases where unfortunately they weren’t successful … because failure to understand can often be a shortcoming on the part of the viewer.

Ever read or listen to an interview of a photographer? They usually have something to say about their work.

I do like to watch such things. I find they generally tell me a lot more about the personality and circumstances of the photographer, than about the images. When it comes to specific images the photographer often seems quite tongue-tied.

If a photographer were asked "What did you intend to convey by this photograph?" and he responded "I dunno.", he probably wouldn't have much credibility.

HCB was arguably the best informed, most self-aware and most articulate of all famous photographers, but did he ever explain why he took a photo of a man jumping across a puddle?

I expect most photographs are taken because the photographer recognised something he/she wanted to capture. Whether they can or can’t later explain it to any extent seems irrelevant. If the viewer ‘gets’ it, the photo has been successful. If not, the viewer should move on: either it wasn’t for them, or it was a poor photo.

 

[Don_ih]

I expect most photographs are taken because the photographer recognised something he/she wanted to capture. Whether they can or can’t later explain it to any extent seems irrelevant.

I think the most important part of what you said there is that the ability to explain it is irrelevant - that a photo is to be judged as a photo. Explanations can be very "insightful" - especially when they see things in the image that you have to truly work to see (and work harder to believe).

However, just letting a photo sit and be whatever it is is not enough for a lot of people. They need to be able to discuss is.

Yet whenever an interviewer starts to try to get Eggleston to talk about the meaning of any of his photos, Eggleston gets pissed off and walks away.