What were your sources, in fact?
Oh, I agree with that. I just wasn't aware we were discussing depth of field. Is there something similar going on with depth of field as with saturation and contrast?
By enhancing the contrast, you also mask lack of depth of field.
For me, an exchange like this is similar to comments (amateur) photographers sometimes make about each other's work - "you should have cropped half an inch here" or "it would have been better if that element wasn't included in the frame" etc. Such remarks always make me think "then it would have been a different photograph and we're now looking at this one - so go out and make your own version of it if you feel it should be done differently." I've said it before in threads like this one - you like the image or you don't. Maybe you can express a little why you think you like it, but the response is primarily an emotional one. At the very least, if you try to rationalize an emotional response, a lot is lost in the process. At worst, you totally miss the point.
Was he really that selective in the so called "decisive" moment or part of his skill was a clear and sharp judgement afterwards in the selection process?
I've always had a question about one of HCB's pictures, the one of a French women being chastised by another woman as a NAZI collaborator after the liberation of Paris. That apparently identical frame exists in a film he made at the time, making me wonder if it was taken from the film.
Already answered here:
Robert Doisneau
I have a few of his books. I was looking at ........ 3 Seconds From Eternity. It really strikes that a lot of his (and many other photographers) pics were of "immediate" post-war Paris and France. Sort of that 1945-1949 period. I am sure there was all kinds of rubble, desperation, struggle...www.photrio.com
The fact that he is wearing white socks with his loafers says everything.
I could write a 500 word essay about this image and how it compares to a painting by someone I can't quite bring to mind at present.
maybe El Greco?Have you remembered yet? I am intrigued to know. There are any number of Adoration paintings to choose from, but I can’t find one that compares. So it’s likely something else. Joseph Wright of Derby came to mind, but I drew a blank there too.
This has been talked about endlessly. It's well-established that he would take numerous photos, change position, wait for something to happen, etc. - the same as everyone else - and pick the ones he liked best after. Why would anyone expect any different?
Who cares how you got there; the question is what you have to show by the end of it.
He also said that his photos are always a "Yes" never a "maybe". So I am curious to see if that was true
how the masters did it
The most important aspect to what he did was to be there. The second was to watch.
'Interesting' - sure, I guess. Anything can be interesting. Whether it's very relevant in finding your own voice, I really doubt it.
But HCB gives me the impression (as other photographers too) that even if he was locked in a prison cell he would make interesting photos
Did he during the three years he was in prison? I'm sure he could have if he'd had a camera. Not many if he was just locked in a cell all day and night long every day.
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?