Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012  (Read 2980 times)

Chairman Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3352
    • flickr page
Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« on: January 05, 2012, 02:24:11 pm »

Magnum photographer, Eve Arnold, has died, 3 months short of her centenary. Brief review in the Guardian,  here & an obituary here

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2012, 02:59:19 pm »

How very sad. She was a great photographer, and if you had the opportunity of watching the documentary about her a few years ago, she'd have grown into your heart. Inevitable, but still so sad.

Rob C

Kevin Gallagher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 963
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2012, 07:46:24 am »

Very sad indeed, looks like she left behind a great body of work.
Logged
Kevin In CT
All Animals Are Equal But Some Are More Equal
 George Orwell

Baxter

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • http://www.baxterbradford.com
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2012, 07:56:04 am »

Very sad news indeed. I have long admired her work.

Having deliberated for 2 years over affording one of her photogravure prints, 'Bar girl in Brothel, Havana, Cuba 1954', I went ahead with the purchase in the Autumn. It is simply fantastic and all who have seen it, none of whom were familiar with Eve Arnold, are taken with her artistry.
Logged

Chairman Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3352
    • flickr page
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2012, 08:19:08 am »

... 'Bar girl in Brothel, Havana, Cuba 1954', ...

One of my favourites

Riaan van Wyk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 812
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #5 on: January 09, 2012, 02:36:03 am »

Sad news indeed.

Pat Booth interviewed her some time ago - http://www.photoicon.com/modern_masters/42/

 

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2012, 08:44:32 am »

Fine article on Eve Arnold in this morning's (Thursday 1/12) Wall Street Journal.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

jalcocer

  • Guest
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2012, 11:22:34 am »

Amazing photographer, her pictures are really magnificent. It's a bless for all the pictures she left to be remembered.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #8 on: January 17, 2012, 01:38:12 am »

Brilliant photography indeed: http://everyday-i-show.livejournal.com/115212.html

What struck me once more looking at them is the total irrelevance of technical image quality. Most of these images contain no more than 5MP worth of detail, half of them are soft focused,...

Cheers,
Bernard

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Eve Arnold, 1912 - 2012
« Reply #9 on: January 17, 2012, 04:33:13 am »

Hi Bernard

I think that what you point out has far more than technical significance: I believe it's one of the factors that contributed to the star system existing and being sustained by legions of fans: believability.

You look at those candids of people like Gable and Marilyn, and what do you see? You see people. You do the same with contemporary movie/music people, and what do you see? You see plastic. And that's the difference: in the past you could empathise but now you simply can't: that closeness has been removed from the equation and you may as well be looking at a waxwork. There just isn't the humanity, the only thing that provides a bond beween the star and the public.

Now, it's only kids who follow anything/anybody, and that's good for five minutes. Who can be surprised? Was a time that adults were interested in stars just because they could see them as real, living similar, but richer, lives to themselves. You could see lines of maturity on faces, the look of pain or love in eyes. Now - it's all PS perfection even though it's actually nothing more than distortion. It must have been nice to work for Magnum or Globe in those days!

Rob C
« Last Edit: January 17, 2012, 03:41:42 pm by Rob C »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up