I don't see any illustration of influence in those photos.
I think there could be
I think there could be, in terms of choice of subject matter. Because of the precedent set by Atget, it’s OK to photograph a newspaper stall or a fire surround or do a selfie in a mirror. I’m not saying no-one else could have thought of this, but many people (eg the pictorialists) would have thought the subjects mundane. I have photos of my own where I realise I must have pressed the button because I subconsciously recognised a theme from somewhere else; so now I have a collection of pale imitations.
And that issue of precedents/influences is an example (IMHO) where critical commentary can discover things about a photographer that the photographer didn’t know themselves.
I'm not disagreeing with that. But there could be influence from any number of places. Undoubtedly, there was. But influence tends to appear more as the kind of hair used in a brush than the paint the brush applies.
Very interesting comments!
Just to give proper credit the screenshots from the photos I sent were part from a lecture given by John Szarkowsky on Eugène Atget
Szarkowsky went as far as to brand Evans as "Atget's most famous student", or something like that. As much as I admire Szarkowsky in general, I think his insistance in seeing in Atget an "influence" on Evans, as interesting as it is, was misguided.
To get back to the original spirit of this thread, lets contemplate:
Haha did he really say that?
He also admitted in the lecture that is his favourite photographer and the one he considers "First among equals"
To get back to the original spirit of this thread, lets contemplate:
To get back to the original spirit of this thread, lets contemplate:
I know that you are sharing that Szarkowski said that about Atget, but Atget’s name is missing from your post.
Have you tried putting your thumb over the vignetting at the top right? It completely changes the effect.
To get back to the original spirit of this thread, lets contemplate:
It’s like Fight Club — the first rule of admiring Atget is… you don’t need to say his name
I am pretty sure if you whisper ‘Atget’ three times into a darkroom mirror, a perfectly composed photo of an empty Parisian street appears
If you or I took a picture like this, just imagine how many photographic judges would say there is not enough shadow detail in the foreground and the print needs dodging. This is because they are not looking at picture presented before them.
To get back to the original spirit of this thread, let's contemplate:
this beige dominant
Atget used glass plates and contact printed them on printing-out-paper (mostly albumen) and gold toned them. All of his prints ranged from beige to reddish brown. Most images you find online seem to be from scanned prints. I don't know if any of these images are scans directly from his glass plates.
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?