Most 35mm SLRs don;t show 100% of the view in the viewfinder unless you are using an expensive pro camera. Most are let;s say around 90-95%. So you can't see the edges of the photograph until you process the film. Also, the size varies. So while SLR's are better than a typical Leica viewfinder and you don't have to deal with parallax, it's still not an exact science.
This is a ridiculous squabble. I practised statistics professionally throughout my career. Frequency is indeed a rate: number of occurrences per something. In my post the ‘something’ was a lifetime. A wondrous number of perfectly framed photos per lifetime, despite the limitations of the viewfinder.We vehemently agree, except on the term "frequent/frequency". (Having graduate-level statistical background possibly makes me a bit literal on that topic. LOL) That's why I mentioned in Post #407 that his "large body of successful and well marketed photographs" is what is "wonderous" rather than "frequent successes", whatever that means.
Yes, but the garden house must have been pretty small in the viewfinder which again makes it harder to properly place the fence post. This is why i also referred to a reflex finder, there everything would be bigger and better visible. An offset viewfinder then adds to the problem a bit.
But:
Such on-top-viewfinders often have parallax-correction, making it a bit easier again.
It is ridiculous to even be discussing parallax with regard to the OP photograph.
I don't know I actually like it. It looks kind of like a drawing (or painting) with the foreground plants blurry. I like the composition that seems to divide the image into 3 sections top to bottom. In fact it's the first image of HCB that I like.
It is quite wondrous how he managed to nail the framing so precisely and so often, given the inaccuracy of any Leica viewfinder.
Do we know for sure that the picture(s) were printed full frame? Maybe he cheated on his own standards.
In at least one famous photo, he cropped. Not that it matters much as cropping improved the image significantly. But it does seem to dispel the myth that he "never" cropped.
Learn Street Photography Through the Eyes of Henri Cartier-Bresson
Learn composition, understand "the decisive moment", and discover whether to crop or not from Henri Cartier-Bresson AKA 'The Godfather of Street Photography'.www.dostreetphotography.com
This is an old discussion of the topic on another forum. I find the insights of Roger Hicks to be quite interesting. Roger was a fairly bright guy regarding photography. There are many pages to peruse...
HCB and Cropping
I picked up a book of some of his photos the other day. After some research I found out he never cropped anything. My question; Did he have a perfect level built in his head or just avoid horizons most of the time? I notice that the shots I have seen would not have been improved by cropping...rangefinderforum.com
18 pages and counting. Never has so much been said about such an inconsequential photograph.
Someone should engage a medium to ask HCB himself.
Whatever you can do.Seance or ouija?
Are trolls the ones who choose not to lose sleep over HCB and his self-proclaimed one-of-the-kind persona? A thread about a photo hardly anyone noticed until this started. Curiosity is free and fine, but blaming trolls, whoever they are, for hitting 18 mostly salivating pages over the greatness of HCB does not make a lot of sense. HCB hit some winners, and in his interviews he surely thinks a lot of himself. He was lucky to have come from a well off family, he had the luxury of shooting at will as he pleased, he chose to be highly selective of what he allowed public to see. It was his choice and his right, but if there is smoke, it's likely hiding something.
If HCB's photography is honestly stacked up against his contemporaries (to narrow this down to just direct "competition"), I don't see him winning all that much. It does not take away skill or vision he had. But being part of Magnum auto-promotes many images into iconic status, regardless of their actual documentary or aesthetic value. Significant part of HCB's recognition is marketing not true value. Having gone through probably all, certainly most, of his published albums, I fail to see what is being widely reported. In my opinion exceptions drive opinions of HCB, as is the case of many others, but putting all of his work into one general average ... it's ... about average.
I'm likely in a narrow minority saying above, yet to this I always have one thing to say - ANDRE KERTESZ. The man was in a different league, if entire creative life is considered.
If David Beckham were ever judged by skill, he would have never reached status he had. Is HCB a product of creative marketing before everything else?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?