The 100 most influential people in the photography industry
-
A
- Thread starter Alex Benjamin
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Linhof Recessed lens board
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
For Sale Leica M4-2
- Started by chriscrawfordphoto
-
For Sale FS: Toyo Sliding Back for 4x5 Graflok
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
The "best" winning is like the "most influential" in the thread title. It's not some kind of objective measure, especially not in art. It depends very much on who gets to decide what the "best" or "most influential" is, and what criteria.
perhaps they should have titled it “The 100 most influential people in the photography industry (of the western hemisphere)” or something like that.
It would be great to see the hundred most globally influential people in the photography industry.
It would be great to see the hundred most globally influential people in the photography industry.
I see Dawoud Bey even chimed in the comments on IG wishing for more people of color on the list, but not suggesting who they might be. I respect him so I would love to see his list actually.
Odd that the article claimed that the list was made with “a global perspective”.
Quick tally of their 100 most influential:
France: 38
US: 33
UK: 8
Germany: 6
Italy: 3
And some stragglers.
That's 88% of the most influential people in the photography industry, from countries that account for only 7.5% of the global population.
Meanwhile India + China + Indonesia + Pakistan + Nigeria + Brazil + Bangladesh + Russia + Mexico = zero influential people, apparently. (And that's half of the world's population.)
I'm done thinking about it.
Quick tally of their 100 most influential:
France: 38
US: 33
UK: 8
Germany: 6
Italy: 3
And some stragglers.
That's 88% of the most influential people in the photography industry, from countries that account for only 7.5% of the global population.
Meanwhile India + China + Indonesia + Pakistan + Nigeria + Brazil + Bangladesh + Russia + Mexico = zero influential people, apparently. (And that's half of the world's population.)
I'm done thinking about it.
And how much of the photo industry even exists outside those most represented? I am unaware of film coating in Nigeria or Pakistani lens designers. Perhaps there are great photographers there but I am unable to recall who they might be.
In related news, the best delis are in NYC. Why in earth is Azerbaijan never given credit here?
The sun sets because the street lights turn on...
China? A little googling ought to indicate that they should be on this list.
You mean just like, oh I don't know, France?
And I said I was done thinking about it.
China? A little googling ought to indicate that they should be on this list.
You mean just like, oh I don't know, France?
And I said I was done thinking about it.
ok ok, I'll be nice now
@chuckroast
Average daily photographic output in Asia-Pacific (including China) is ca. 4x that of the US output. Africa + Latin America combined have a higher output than the US.
www.lapseoftheshutter.com
Alright, financially, the US tops the list:
But this refers to photographic services, like wedding photography etc. And keep in mind the US, Canada and SA are combined here.
www.kentleyinsights.com
Although it depends on who you ask...
imageretouchinglab.com
The reason why there's so few people on that list from anywhere else than the US or Europe is simply because they didn't care to look. The definition of 'influential' is limited to 'influential in areas and on demographics we cared to investigate', which happens to ignore roughly two-thirds of the global population.
But of course there's absolutely no diversity problem here. There never is as long as you enjoy the comfortable simplicity granted by structural myopia.
Average daily photographic output in Asia-Pacific (including China) is ca. 4x that of the US output. Africa + Latin America combined have a higher output than the US.
Photography Statistics & Trends (2024)
See up to date photography statistics and trends data to fully understand the state of photography today.
www.lapseoftheshutter.com
Alright, financially, the US tops the list:
But this refers to photographic services, like wedding photography etc. And keep in mind the US, Canada and SA are combined here.
Photography Market Size & Growth: A Comprehensive Analysis
The 2025 Photography Global Market Size & Growth Report details historical statistics and forecasts on market size, revenues, share, and trends for 195 countries covering North & South America, Asia, Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
www.kentleyinsights.com
Photography Industry Statistics: 2025 Key Trends
The photography industry is an ever-evolving sector shaped by technological advancements, changing consumer behaviors, and emerging niches.
imageretouchinglab.com
The reason why there's so few people on that list from anywhere else than the US or Europe is simply because they didn't care to look. The definition of 'influential' is limited to 'influential in areas and on demographics we cared to investigate', which happens to ignore roughly two-thirds of the global population.
But of course there's absolutely no diversity problem here. There never is as long as you enjoy the comfortable simplicity granted by structural myopia.
@chuckroast
View attachment 402952
Average daily photographic output in Asia-Pacific (including China) is ca. 4x that of the US output. Africa + Latin America combined have a higher output than the US.
Photography Statistics & Trends (2024)
See up to date photography statistics and trends data to fully understand the state of photography today.
Alright, financially, the US tops the list:
View attachment 402953
But this refers to photographic services, like wedding photography etc. And keep in mind the US, Canada and SA are combined here.
Although it depends on who you ask...Photography Market Size & Growth: A Comprehensive Analysis
The 2025 Photography Global Market Size & Growth Report details historical statistics and forecasts on market size, revenues, share, and trends for 195 countries covering North & South America, Asia, Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
View attachment 402954
Photography Industry Statistics: 2025 Key Trends
The photography industry is an ever-evolving sector shaped by technological advancements, changing consumer behaviors, and emerging niches.
The reason why there's so few people on that list from anywhere else than the US or Europe is simply because they didn't care to look. The definition of 'influential' is limited to 'influential in areas and on demographics we cared to investigate', which happens to ignore roughly two-thirds of the global population.
But of course there's absolutely no diversity problem here. There never is as long as you enjoy the comfortable simplicity granted by structural myopia.
Begging The Question: Assumes there is a diversity problem and uses that to prove there is one.
One wonders how a photographer like Gordon Parks ever became significant without "help" recognizing his "underrepresentation".
Greatness wins and always trumps social engineering.
And no, the volume of iPhone shots pumped out on a on a national per capita basis isn't relevant, I don't think.
This comment, as well as the rest of your argumentation is so cynical that I'm literally lost for words.
It is in no way "cynical". Just pointing out that unproven assumptions are being used to make a case for which clear counterexamples exist. You can't make the claim without proof and then use it to prove itself.
It's like saying the absence of Moldovians is resounding demonstration of systematic anti Moldovian bias.
And THAT is the heart of diversity doctrine: Imagining sins by conflating cause with correlation.
-
- koraks
- Deleted
Read this. (The scan is a bit of a mess.)
Gordon Parks is a rare example of someone who managed to become significant in response to ubiquitous discrimination and oppression. Did you think Roy Stryker hired him to take photos of white society garden parties?
The entire list, save a few, is comprised of people who control what photos are published and collected. I didn’t notice any lens designers, and photographers were scarce. Surely there are at least a couple list-worthy individuals who make decisions about what the other 80% of the world’s population sees.
Speaking of representation in the time of Gordon Parks, I count 51 advertisements in that magazine, selling everything from toothpaste to cars, and none of the ads featured a single black person. They quite literally weren't represented.
Thanks for that article, Don. It is compelling reading from a great man.
OP
OP
Well, I told myself I wouldn't intervene, but considering the amount of nonsense and falsehoods written about Parks, I felt there was a need to set the record straight—i.e., to move away from opinion and consider actual history.
In 1942, when Parks arrived in Washington to work for Stryker at what was still—not for very long—the FSA, he was a young, promising photographer who had done mostly portraits of people in the Black community and had just started doing documentary work in Black communities in the south side of Chicago, some of which appeared in newspaper.
Realizing that he still had a lot to learn as a photographer, he applied for a Rosenwald Fund. Etablished in 1917, the Julius Rosenwald Fund was devoted mostly to bettering the lifes of poor southern Black communities who, because of segregation, had much less opportunities and very little resources, notably in education, as southern White communities. The Rosenwald Fund build thousand of schools in the South.
Recognizing that Black artists did not have the same opportunities as White artists, the Rosenwald Fund also had a fellowship program devoted to helping them pursue their artistic goals. There's a good description of Parks' application and goals in The New Tide :
Sorry for the lenghy quote. Just wanted to make sure everybody understood that Parks—who, of course, got the fellowship (the first photographer to do so) and was thus able to move to Washington got to work for Stryker at the FSA—got the boost he needed to get to where he needed to be from one of the "diversity" programs available at the time (anybody who has studied, even a little, the story of New Deal agencies such as the WPA knows that it had many of its programs devoted to give support in the 30s and 40s not only to Black farmers and workers, but also to Black artists at a time when it was nearly impossible for them to find funds to fulfill their artistic vocation, much less succeed. It wasn't called "diversity" then, but the principle is the same: to make it so the underprivileged has the same chance as the privileged).
What's interesting is that there was a link between the Rosenwald Fund and the FSA. Stricker, who had heard of Parks from FSA photographers who had met him in Chicago, made it so that the arrangement was that the grant would enable Parks to work with him at the FSA. Stryker wanted Parks at the FSA essentially because he needed a Black photograper who knew and understood Black lifes, Black poverty and Black communities to photograph Black it all (glad we got this out of the way).
Stryker took Parks under his wing, but was well aware that, from a technical view, Parks had a lot to learn in terms of photography — especially documentary photography, which was the FSA's specialty. His first few assignments were essentially technical, to Parks' frustration (he talks about that in his first autobiography, A Choice of Weapons), and his early FSA photographs are uneven. Took him a while to find his vision. That came in the form of Ella Watson, who he approached after being encouraged by Stryker.
It's only after the Ella Watson project that Gordon Parks truly became Gordon Parks. He wasn't excellent before that. He became excellent because, well, diversity, and became excellent at photographing people nobody had before that deemed important enough to photograph.
Voilà.
In 1942, when Parks arrived in Washington to work for Stryker at what was still—not for very long—the FSA, he was a young, promising photographer who had done mostly portraits of people in the Black community and had just started doing documentary work in Black communities in the south side of Chicago, some of which appeared in newspaper.
Realizing that he still had a lot to learn as a photographer, he applied for a Rosenwald Fund. Etablished in 1917, the Julius Rosenwald Fund was devoted mostly to bettering the lifes of poor southern Black communities who, because of segregation, had much less opportunities and very little resources, notably in education, as southern White communities. The Rosenwald Fund build thousand of schools in the South.
Recognizing that Black artists did not have the same opportunities as White artists, the Rosenwald Fund also had a fellowship program devoted to helping them pursue their artistic goals. There's a good description of Parks' application and goals in The New Tide :
Sorry for the lenghy quote. Just wanted to make sure everybody understood that Parks—who, of course, got the fellowship (the first photographer to do so) and was thus able to move to Washington got to work for Stryker at the FSA—got the boost he needed to get to where he needed to be from one of the "diversity" programs available at the time (anybody who has studied, even a little, the story of New Deal agencies such as the WPA knows that it had many of its programs devoted to give support in the 30s and 40s not only to Black farmers and workers, but also to Black artists at a time when it was nearly impossible for them to find funds to fulfill their artistic vocation, much less succeed. It wasn't called "diversity" then, but the principle is the same: to make it so the underprivileged has the same chance as the privileged).
What's interesting is that there was a link between the Rosenwald Fund and the FSA. Stricker, who had heard of Parks from FSA photographers who had met him in Chicago, made it so that the arrangement was that the grant would enable Parks to work with him at the FSA. Stryker wanted Parks at the FSA essentially because he needed a Black photograper who knew and understood Black lifes, Black poverty and Black communities to photograph Black it all (glad we got this out of the way).
Stryker took Parks under his wing, but was well aware that, from a technical view, Parks had a lot to learn in terms of photography — especially documentary photography, which was the FSA's specialty. His first few assignments were essentially technical, to Parks' frustration (he talks about that in his first autobiography, A Choice of Weapons), and his early FSA photographs are uneven. Took him a while to find his vision. That came in the form of Ella Watson, who he approached after being encouraged by Stryker.
It's only after the Ella Watson project that Gordon Parks truly became Gordon Parks. He wasn't excellent before that. He became excellent because, well, diversity, and became excellent at photographing people nobody had before that deemed important enough to photograph.
Voilà.
Last edited:
OP
OP
So sorry. I totally forgot the rule that says no thread mentioning Gordon Parks should go without a Shaft reference.
Can you dig it?
Can you dig it?
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |