HCB Appreciation

[Alan Edward Klein]

The shots you don't end up using are never wasted.
And I include the film that those shots end up on when I say that.
When I do anything like the photography that we know HCB for, the shots that don't end up being shared aren't failures, they are part of the process.
And it is my involvement in the process that leads to the result.
I expect HCB would have refused a commission that required him to take only one shot.
In comparison, someone like Karsh worked in an environment where more of the variables were controlled by him, so there was an expectation that the number of shots would be limited. But anyone who has ever seen the two versions he shot of his famous Churchill portrait would know that even he shot more than one.
I acknowledge, of course, that when I use bigger/more expensive film, I feel more constrained in what experiments I undertake. But I still undertake them, because the process of taking the unchosen ones is part of what leads to the chosen result.

Pros don't show their mistakes.

 

[Milpool]

If Henri Cartier-Bresson was photography’s Bach with the power, discipline, and strictness of form, then André Kertész was its Mozart, where form becomes effortless, playful, and inseparable from the joy of content.

Nonsense. You can like HCB’s pictures to the moon and back and that’s great, but these kinds of desperate analogies are ridiculous.

Ok I apologize for taking a wrong turn into this thread again. Last time, I promise.

 

[Don_ih]

Pros don't show their mistakes.

They weren't mistakes. They were inferior options. And insecure "pros" pretend they don't make mistakes. But everyone makes mistakes - a real "pro" rectifies them.

 

[nikos79]

They weren't mistakes. They were inferior options. And insecure "pros" pretend they don't make mistakes. But everyone makes mistakes - a real "pro" rectifies them.

There is no such thing as a "professional" artist at least in my definition of one and HCB was for sure one artist.
He was also (as the majority of photographers at that time) a professional photographer which did a lot of assignments. I think he did his job pretty well there too.

 

[MattKing]

Pros don't show their mistakes.

My niece got married this summer.
The wedding photographer and her second shooter together shot around 4000 exposures of the event.
There are bunches and bunches of really fun and fine photographs amongst everything that the two women "captured" that day.
Some stand out a bit extra.
There are some duds interspersed through the 4000 - by duds I mean that there are much better examples of shots showing similar subjects.
Plus some shots from amongst the dancers on the very joyous and chaotic dance floor that revealed the uncertainties inherent in that very dark and very fluid environment - i.e. they were a bit screwed up.
Photos that aren't the very best in a bunch aren't mistakes.

 

[nikos79]

Nonsense. You can like HCB’s pictures to the moon and back and that’s great, but these kinds of desperate analogies are ridiculous.

Ok I apologize for taking a wrong turn into this thread again. Last time, I promise.

OK maybe say HCB was Le Bron James of photography and Andre Kertesz Michael Jordan? Or HCB was Pelle and Kertesz Maradona? Or HCB Bergmann and Kertesz Fellini?

Don't take these things too seriously I am mostly joking. We are not worshipping HCB or pray to the bible of decisive moment here

 

[Don_ih]

There is no such thing as a "professional" artist

You may want to consider a less idealized notion of "artist". There are plenty of professional artists.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

My niece got married this summer.
The wedding photographer and her second shooter together shot around 4000 exposures of the event.
There are bunches and bunches of really fun and fine photographs amongst everything that the two women "captured" that day.
Some stand out a bit extra.
There are some duds interspersed through the 4000 - by duds I mean that there are much better examples of shots showing similar subjects.
Plus some shots from amongst the dancers on the very joyous and chaotic dance floor that revealed the uncertainties inherent in that very dark and very fluid environment - i.e. they were a bit screwed up.
Photos that aren't the very best in a bunch aren't mistakes.

Pros only show the best of their work in their portfolios and websites. Why would they show their seconds and losers? What they do with their wedding clients is a different matter. By the way, I never said a "fun" picture is a loser. It could be the best of the bunch.

 

[MattKing]

Why would they show their seconds and losers?

Because what you refer to as the "seconds" may very well provide a more thorough revelation of the photographer's depth and flexibility and creativity.
And what you consider a "loser" may very well be someone else's winner.
Thus the popularity of the photographic series, as well as projects documenting a place/event/people or evolutionary change.
HCB did documentary type projects too you know.

 

[nikos79]

Some stand out a bit extra.

Exactly simple as that.

Photos that aren't the very best in a bunch aren't mistakes.

In the digital era we can do that. Mistakes cost nothing

 

[cliveh]

My niece got married this summer.
The wedding photographer and her second shooter together shot around 4000 exposures of the event.
There are bunches and bunches of really fun and fine photographs amongst everything that the two women "captured" that day.
Some stand out a bit extra.
There are some duds interspersed through the 4000 - by duds I mean that there are much better examples of shots showing similar subjects.
Plus some shots from amongst the dancers on the very joyous and chaotic dance floor that revealed the uncertainties inherent in that very dark and very fluid environment - i.e. they were a bit screwed up.
Photos that aren't the very best in a bunch aren't mistakes.

4000 exposures belongs to the digital age. I have never shot more than about 7 exposures of a similar view. Film photography is not spray and pray, but a much more considered contemplation of that moment within the composition..

 

[nikos79]

4000 exposures belongs to the digital age. I have never shot more than about 7 exposures of a similar view. Film photography is not spray and pray, but a much more considered contemplation of that moment within the composition..

Imagine poor Sudek.. One arm and 20kg camera ... and don't how many, 12 exposures?