colour photographer book suggestionss?

[game]

Hi,
I would like to check out the work of some more photographers and buy me some books. I search the internet from time to time, and browse stores as well, but since I live in a rather small city there is not much to explore...
I was hoping some of you guys can provide me with some suggestions of photographers that I could/should check out.
My personal tastes:

> colour photography
> landscape/cityscape
> no people, or politics etc.
> artistic point of view

I love joel meyerowitz for example, at least his cape cod works. There is some magic he is able to see, that I have not seen to often in anyone elses work. By artistic point of view I mean, I don't care to much about postcard like mountains or clouds or sunsets if you know what I mean. I like it if some underlying tension is felt.

Well, I hope I made my question clear and that some suggestions will follow.

THANKS and best regards Sam

 

[roteague]

I absolutely loathe anything by Joel Meyerowitz.

Check out the works of Joe Cornish, David Ward, Ken Duncan or Jack Dykinga.

 

[naturephoto1]

You may also wish to check the color work of David Muench, Tom Till, William (Bill) Neill, Eliot Porter, Philip Hyde, Galen Rowell, and Art Wolfe.

Rich

 

[noblebeast]

I'll second Galen Rowell, especially his book "Inner Game of Outdoor Photography." Lots of tips and points to ponder from his articles for Outdoor Photography magazine.

 

[Bill Hahn]

There is a site www.masters-of-photography.com which has examples of images by many (but not all) noted photographers. (For example, there's no Eliot Porter.) While most of the images there are black and white, there are color images by William Eggleston and Stephen Shore. (This is not a recommendation of these two gentlemen, I'm simply pointing out a site where you can see samples of various photographers.)

Of the people mentioned so far, I like Eliot Porter the best....

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Christopher Burkett.

He's changed his website - I now find it bothersome and had trouble finding links to his books...

www.christopherburkett.com

Murray

 

[naturephoto1]

Two additional color photographers that may be of interest are Carr Clifton and Jeff Gnass.

Rich

 

[tim atherton]

Stephen Shore

Joel Sternfeld

Jim Cooke

Jem Southam

Thomas Struth (Dandelion Room, some of Still etc)

Misrach

Virginia Beahan and Laura McPhee

And you probably should take a good look at Eggleston

 

[roteague]

Stephen Shore

Joel Sternfeld

Jim Cooke

Jem Southam

Thomas Struth (Dandelion Room, some of Still etc)

Misrach

Virginia Beahan and Laura McPhee

And you probably should take a good look at Eggleston

I must live a sheltered life. I've never heard of any of these photographers!!!

 

[Sanjay Sen]

I must live a sheltered life. I've never heard of any of these photographers!!!

You are not the only one, but glad you said it!

 

[roteague]

There is a site www.masters-of-photography.com ....

The site is also full of popup's and popunders.

 

[SeamusARyan]

have you checked out Simon Norfolk

http://www.simonnorfolk.com/

he shoots LF colour mostly and is as interested in beautiful images as he is in the message behind them

a lot of political stuff but mostly looking at the consequences of our political actions

and for you B&W buffs you must check out his book

"For most of it I have no words"

enjoy

Seamus

 

[leeturner]

Seamus, I'd never heard of Simon Norfolk but that is extremely powerful work. Thank you for the link.

 

[SeamusARyan]

Lee my pleasure

have you seen the work of Desiree Dolron http://www.desireedolron.com/

her xteriors series has to be seen in the flesh to be believed where as I just couldn't give a toss for her other work

enjoy

Seamus

 

[leeturner]

Keep them coming Seamus. I actually got goose bumps looking at the xteriors series, there's something both beautiful and slightly scary about them.

 

[game]

thanks averyone for their posts. I liked simon norfolk the most. Some other suggestions were more of the usual american landscape photography which I don't like.
http://www.desireedolron.com/ is indeed very nice.
Hope for some more.
Best regards Sam

 

[michaelsalomon]

You may want to take a look at Hardie Truesdale. Shoots mainly medium format, has two books published, one on the Adirondacks, and another on the Hudson River. I attended a day long workshop with him last summer in New Paltz, very nice guy and a good photographer.

Dead Link Removed

 

[game]

thanks micheal for your post, only I looked at the pictures the photographer you suggested has shot, and those are good examples of photograps I don't like. They are very nicely taken, but the subjects are rocks, trees, waterfalls, flowers sunsets etc. etc. All subjects that are very postcard like.
I think that's fine for what is is, just like wedding photography. But It's not what I am looking for. I like underlying beauty, tension. Meyerowitz is able to catch that from time 2 time. And it's mostly found not in sunsets, but in smaller things...
The fact wether there is a book published or not is not too important. I will change the thread's title maybe to make that clearer. But on the other hand, it would be nice if there is some published work or a decebt website so I can check it easily out. And buy a book maybe.

Thanks again Sam

 

[Richard Boutwell]

I wonder if anyone really read the original post? Nearly everything that was mentioned was pretty post-card pictures. I know that some people love them, just like some people love Thomas Kinkade. If someone were to say "I like art similar to that of Cezanne." I don't think it would be appropriate for someone else to say, "I loath Cezanne, but you should really check out Kinkade." One, it is irrevelant to the original question asked. And Two, it is a very narrow minded thing to say.

I love most of Meyerowtiz Tuscany photographs. You can sign up on his site and view his intire archive.

Mont Saint Victoire by Risaku Suzuki is pretty similar to Meyerowitz's Tuscany work, but still very nice.

One of the few photography books I have is Brovo 20: The Bombing of the American West by Richard Misrach. It was $40 more than I could afford but it was something I felt I couldn't live without.

Borderlands by Eirik Johnson. I don't really like the book design (mostly the full bleeds over the gutter) but the photographs are worth seeing.

Edward Burtinsky has yet to be mentioned. I preffer him to Chris Jordan, but Jordon does have a few that are incredible.

Robert Flick's Los Angels Photographs.

David Graham who takes a good look at what makes America America (the cover of his book, Land of the Free is one of my favorite pictures)

Color photography has really become more accessable because of digital printing, and now has become somewhat glutted (I know that statement can get more than a few peoples' panties in knot---especially here) You have to look through a lot of work to find things that really stand out as being excelent. The same thing can be said about photograpy books in general (there are 415 monographs now on Photo-Eye).

The New Color Photography by Sally Eauclaire (actually written in 1981 and is out of print) is, "The first major publication devoted entirely to contemporary color photography." (photo-eye.com)

 

[naturephoto1]

Richard,

I did read the original posting. Though some of these photographers do sell post cards, most of their work is well beyond the post card type of images. In fact, like it or not many are considered the masters of the landscape genre in the United States.

And by the way I do not like Kinkade.

Rich

 

[Richard Boutwell]

I must live a sheltered life. I've never heard of any of these photographers!!!

Robert, I was shocked when I read that. It is slightly unbelievable that you have never heard of William Eggleston. You know, the tricycle? A few of those names on that list are a little obscure, but most are the really important people in color photography---the people that shaped it.

Can please explain your reason for automatically disliking anything other than oversaturated color photography---something that many people would call calender art?

 

[Richard Boutwell]

. . . By artistic point of view I mean, I don't care to much about postcard like mountains or clouds or sunsets if you know what I mean. I like it if some underlying tension is felt.

Well, I hope I made my question clear and that some suggestions will follow.

Rich, my point is that he clearly states what he is not interested in, and that is totally ignored in the very first post. You are right that Eliot Porter and Philip Hyde should be mentioned because there were some of the first to use color in the landscape, and what they did for conservation is truly important (the same is true for Gallen Rowell). But, most of their photographs lack the underlying tension that Sam is talking about. Most color landscape photography, past the initial "wow. that place is beautiful", is emotionally empty.

Robert Adams was asked why he doesn't photograph in color. His reply was that it is "the same reason that he does not write in free verse. It is all too close to how it really is in life." I take that to mean that it doesn't tell us more than we already know and can see without the camera.

It could even be said that post card pictures are a real problem with modern culture. Most people are too quick to replace the experience with an image. But can also be said that some people go and have an experience because of an image.

Tim had it right with all of his suggestions.

 

[roteague]

Robert, I was shocked when I read that. It is slightly unbelievable that you have never heard of William Eggleston. You know, the tricycle? A few of those names on that list are a little obscure, but most are the really important people in color photography---the people that shaped it.

Can please explain your reason for automatically disliking anything other than oversaturated color photography---something that many people would call calender art?

What I like is nature, landscapes. I have no interest in urban landscapes, or people on the street.

You can call my work, or the work of those I admire, oversaturated, if you like, but that is the way I see color (with our without a lens). And frankly, I don't care of you call it calendar art or not. I would have to disagree with you when you say these are the ones who shaped color photography - in my mind I think of people like David Muench, Eliot Porter, and some of the early color work by Ansel Adams.

I hate Meyerowtiz's "Tuscany." I've seen the book, it is now selling in the reject bin at the bookstore, where it belongs. The pictures are horrid; his composition lacks any kind of life. He seems not to understand that that leading lines impart a sense of dynamism, depth and rhythm to an image, nor does he seem to understand how to use color in his work.

You may not like my assessment of his work, but that is the way I see it.

 

[Richard Boutwell]

I've seen the book, it is now selling in the reject bin at the bookstore, where it belongs.

His work is also in the collection at the Met, MOMA, Eastman House, Pompidou, etc., where it belongs.

I didn't mean to turn this into a pissing contest. I know clearly what you interests are---you have stateted them time and again. My question was why.

He seems not to understand that that leading lines impart a sense of dynamism, depth and rhythm to an image, nor does he seem to understand how to use color in his work.

That sounds like rules you read somewhere in Popular Photography. I do not think there are rules that can be applied to picture making. There really is only how you respond to what you see through the camera and what you can translate into a finished photograph.

I think he knows exceptionally well how to use color in making a picture. I say exceptionally because it is usually very, very sublte. You said that you see color in the world as being very saturated. That is the likely cause for you not seeing it in his photographs. It is like hearing loud pop music all your life and then hearing Thelonious Monk. You would say, "I hate it! He is playing wrong notes all over the place, and he has no sense of time!" I don't think I have to tell you what I feel is more satisfying.

Robert, as you said, that is the way you see it. And although I don't agree, I don't think you will alter your view. I can say in the course of this brief debate I have enjoyed looking quickly through nearly one thousand of Meyerowitz's pictures, and very closely at several dozen. I am now visually exhuasted and satisfied. Something I can't say after looking at several hundered of David Muench's or Jack Dykinga's.

 

[game]

Well, it's pretty clear that Richard Boutwell understands what I am talking about and roteague not. I too don't want to turn this into a argueing topic But if you can't relate to meyorowitz than there are no similarities in our view at photograpy. I love his work on toscany.
Joel is not trying to do what all these calander dudes do. If you think he is, than you are missing the point on so many levels. If one reads the intro to the cape cod book, than one can find an interview with meyerowitz. He too is asked why he uses colour film, and his reply is so much deeper than what Robert Adams apperently answered. I don't say this to show joel is 'better'.
Only to show it's something else.
I can't keep thinking of all these postcard images but as the musak of photography. I DON'T LIKE IT. To me I can understand people that say WOW, but to me it's empty.
So guys that are with me on this, I'd love to hear some of your suggestions
And thanks richard for your effort to push this thread in the right direction.

Best regards sam