from the front page: adam krawesky

[Ivophoto]

Gene Smith's Walk to Paradise Garden.

https://huxleyparlour.com/w-eugene-smith-hope-and-innocence-2/

+1

[Rob C]

Nono, Amolitor, not the generic reference to what is already said about this HCB picture. That’s to easy.

What is going on in this picture of HCB, and leave out the projection, please.
The issue is that there is a lot to read, but much less to see. (Blasphemy, I know)

If the same willingness to see would be applied to contemporary street Photography, men could fill another million of pages.

If we don’t see it (I often have the same reaction) it is because we look with expectations.

No, no!

The HC-B shot has a whole pile of visual stuff going down, even without any written explanations from the man.

We were informed that the angle was forced upon him, that he shot through a fence or similar obstruction, forcing him to crop (may he be forgiven!) and that's bourne out by the negative; what we - or at least I - don't know is whether the guy jumping was forced to do that as consequence of using that route from wherever to wherever and there was no dry walk-around; whether he was a one-off, or whether it was a frequently used route and so gave HC-B the opportunity to visualise the shot well before making it. Many of the shooters of the time spoke about choosing the stage and waiting for the actors to pop around and do their thing. Was the guy a paid actor, as with Doisneau's kissing lovers before the Hôtel de Ville (reads like a Cadillac advertisement)?

Did he note the reversed image of his main action in the poster at the back? Did it come first? Did it even register until he had the negative printed? Did the cat get his shoes wet or did he have enough momentum to land dry?

Was he, HC-B the originator of the puddler-jumper ethic, which has even been utilised in fashion photography, never mind by several other notable street names?

But Ivo, nearly all of that's in the photograph, not in a personal projection. Hence, ambiguity that's visible as well as that which can spawn from our own imaginations. Of course, as with everything, the viewer does have to have at least a reasonably developed curiosity about life.

Rob

[Martin Kristiansen]

Gene Smith's Walk to Paradise Garden.

https://huxleyparlour.com/w-eugene-smith-hope-and-innocence-2/

That image amazed me when I first saw it. Must have been 15 years old. I just didn’t understand it. It always seemed overly romantic and something that belonged on a chocolate box.

[Ivophoto]

Of course, as with everything, the viewer does have to have at least a reasonably developed curiosity about life.

Rob

And this does not count for contemporary photography?

[faberryman]

It always seemed overly romantic and something that belonged on a chocolate box.

It is what my art history professor would refer to as a bonbon.

[32BT]

To Rob e.a.,

Does it make sense if you look at these as streetart images where the color collage is an essential part of the typographical narrative?

The hunchback image for example is explicitly about color, me thinks, and the shape is used to represent a shape of dance, not a shape of deformation.

The jumping person on the other hand is entirely about the metaphorical narrative. The little kid, almost literally standing in the shadow of his taller brother/father, replicating his behavior in a quest to reach ever higher goals, in the line of life. The extended arm and widespread hand in the shadow clearly depicting an inviting gesture of friendly support. Anybody who says this is merely about clicking at the high jump is severely missing the point.

[Ivophoto]

To Rob e.a.,

Does it make sense if you look at these as streetart images where the color collage is an essential part of the typographical narrative?

The hunchback image for example is explicitly about color, me thinks, and the shape is used to represent a shape of dance, not a shape of deformation.

The jumping person on the other hand is entirely about the metaphorical narrative. The little kid, almost literally standing in the shadow of his taller brother/father, replicating his behavior in a quest to reach ever higher goals, in the line of life. The extended arm and widespread hand in the shadow clearly depicting an inviting gesture of friendly support. Anybody who says this is merely about clicking at the high jump is severely missing the point.

And that’s all in the picture if you look at it with a reasonable developed curiosity about live.

[Rob C]

"Of course, as with everything, the viewer does have to have at least a reasonably developed curiosity about life."

Rob

And does this not count for contemporary photography?

Not on that level. First if all, the work has to have the power to engage. For me, the stuff in the article does not engage at all - in a positive manner. If you posit that contemporary photography should somehow be absolved from the requirement of interesting content, then you win: I could have nothing further to add to the conversation.

And you may well be right: my daughter has been a fully qualified teacher for more years than she may like to realise, and she tells me that today's standards have dropped from her days at school, never mind from mine, all those years before her. Grades are lowered and methods of testing changed to influence the pass figures - Owellian 1984 ethics? Successive governments of different colours afraid to show things are sinking under their watch? In a society where an abject scholastic failure still has a certificate at the end of the day just for turning up, says as much about the system as of the poor guy without the ability. Political correctness dictates that it's not the kid's fault but that of society. Crap. I have two kids, each entirely different in abilities, yet each coached after school to the exent of my wife's power so to do. And she was no slouch. None of which means that the kid with less scholastic ability is barred from making a success of his/her life: it depends on what he/she decides to do with it after school. Back to the individual's responsibility.

Anyone with the ability to write a sentence can write a load of nonsense about any collection of pictures; many do that in their own websites via their artist's statement, a key that really does open the door to my judgement when I get to see the images. In order to preclude such judgments from forming within my own mind and colouring my view of the photography, I tend to look at the shots first and reserve the "statement" lollipop for last.

So really, having that curiosity about life in spades (which is at least one reason I still engage with people online) has not led me to appreciate empty exposures; I'd rather enjoy absolute abstracts!

;-)

[Ivophoto]

"Of course, as with everything, the viewer does have to have at least a reasonably developed curiosity about life."

Rob


Not on that level. First if all, the work has to have the power to engage. For me, the stuff in the article does not engage at all - in a positive manner. If you posit that contemporary photography should somehow be absolved from the requirement of interesting content, then you win: I could have nothing further to add to the conversation.

And you may well be right: my daughter has been a fully qualified teacher for more years than she may like to realise, and she tells me that today's standards have dropped from her days at school, never mind from mine, all those years before her. Grades are lowered and methods of testing changed to influence the pass figures - Owellian 1984 ethics? Successive governments of different colours afraid to show things are sinking under their watch? In a society where an abject scholastic failure still has a certificate at the end of the day just for turning up, says as much about the system as of the poor guy without the ability. Political correctness dictates that it's not the kid's fault but that of society. Crap. I have two kids, each entirely different in abilities, yet each coached after school to the exent of my wife's power so to do. And she was no slouch. None of which means that the kid with less scholastic ability is barred from making a success of his life: it depends on what he decides to do with it after school. Back to the individual's responsibility.

Anyone with the ability to write a sentence can write a load of nonsense about any collection of pictures; many do that in their own websites via their artist's statement, a key that really does open the door to my judgement when I get to see the images. In order to preclude such judgments from forming within my own mind and colouring my view of the photography, I tend to look at the shots first and reserve the "statement" lollipop for last.

So really, having that curiosity about life in spades (which is at least one reason I still engage with people online) has not led me to appreciate empty exposures; I'd rather enjoy absolute abstracts!

;-)

Could it be possible we loose the openness to be curious by getting older?

About school. If the success of kids depends on individual responsibility and after school sensibilisation, more than on scholastic abilities, is it not a good evolution to lower the importance of scholastic education?

In short, what you say in a lot of words: We, older generation, have the key to understand the important things of life, you, younger generation are not able to grasp it because you are a bunch of intellectual and emotional retards.

(And If younger generations are putting the bar lower, which I think is not incorrect on certain matters, it’s probably the fault of the ones who raised that generation)

[Rob C]

To Rob e.a.,

Does it make sense if you look at these as streetart images where the color collage is an essential part of the typographical narrative?

The hunchback image for example is explicitly about color, me thinks, and the shape is used to represent a shape of dance, not a shape of deformation.

The jumping person on the other hand is entirely about the metaphorical narrative. The little kid, almost literally standing in the shadow of his taller brother/father, replicating his behavior in a quest to reach ever higher goals, in the line of life. The extended arm and widespread hand in the shadow clearly depicting an inviting gesture of friendly support. Anybody who says this is merely about clicking at the high jump is severely missing the point.

Okay, Oscar, you've brought out the generosity in my soul.

The very last shot, the guy with the orange sack of something makes a nice composition with good internal framing. It might even get into the street art genre [ ;-) ] which some might question exists, but as "street", it does nothing for me other than show a guy opening or locking a door. Street is supposed to have ambiguity beyond asking whether a door is opening of closing. It's no longer enough to make a technically competent photograph. Nor to parody Parr. (In another shot.)

;-)

[amolitor]

Just because you can always whip up some arty bollocks for any picture doesn't mean that it's always applicable to the picture.

[32BT]

Just because you can always whip up some arty bollocks for any picture doesn't mean that it's always applicable to the picture.

Correct, which has already been mentioned: whether we are merely projecting or whether it is more universally recognisable by an average (but educated) viewer. There certainly exists a broad gray area...

[32BT]

Okay, Oscar, you've brought out the generosity in my soul.

The very last shot, the guy with the orange sack of something makes a nice composition with good internal framing. It might even get into the street art genre [ ;-) ] which some might question exists, but as "street", it does nothing for me other than show a guy opening or locking a door. Street is supposed to have ambiguity beyond asking whether a door is opening of closing. It's no longer enough to make a technically competent photograph. Nor to parody Parr. (In another shot.)

;-)

Well, only one shot in the article struck me as true street in the narrow sense of the word.

[amolitor]

What does it mean when a body of work consists of pictures of a sort that are easily, and are commonly, knocked out by anyone with a modicum of technical ability and patience?

[32BT]

Could it be that if you're firmly grounded in b&w, the images may not have the same appeal as for someone raised in colorimaging?

[Rob C]

1. Could it be possible we loose the openness to be curious by getting older?

2. About school. If the success of kids depends on individual responsibility and after school sensibilisation, more than on scholastic abilities, is it not a good evolution to lower the importance of scholastic education?

3. In short, what you say in a lot of words: We, older generation, have the key to understand the important things of life, you, younger generation are not able to grasp it because you are a bunch of intellectual and emotional retards.

4. (And If younger generations are putting the bar lower, which I think is not incorrect on certain matters, it’s probably the fault of the ones who raised that generation)

1. For some, yes; my own curiosity grows by the day as I discover more people I'd never heard of prior to the Internet. Patricia's introduction to Anne Brigman comes instantly to mind. Technology, on the other hand, drives me away.

2. No, of course not; I never suggested that. It (life success) depends very much on all the kid's abilities, and when he/she has earned some worthwhile certificates those bits of paper open doors to other educational facilities and opportunities perfectly reasonably denied the less capable child. Those further opportunities, in turn, lead to far better adult opportunities.

3. No, I'm saying some photographs have real value whereas others do not. You are just consciously, and for the sake of argument, extrapolating to the near absurd. There are perhaps nearly as many old idiots as young ones; there might never be as many old ones because the old, idiots or otherwise die off. The number of young and middle-aged ones could vary from land to land, depending on reproduction rates...

4. It is certainly the fault of some of them. Back to education: much of it depends on keeping control of a classroom. When my daughter came home for lunch on her first day of promotion to senior school - early 70s - she told us that her teacher had started out by saying to the class: "I suppose I'd better advise you of your rights..." And that cat expected to control a class? I could hardly control my lunch on hearing the news!

From her own experiences as a teacher, today, she can't take cellphones from the pupils, and they use them all through the class. If that is not political correctness gone mad, and cart before horse, then what is? How can education compete with chat? As that precludes using proper words, how can these kids learn to spell or express themselves clearly? I saw an item on the news yesterday about kids in China: many are becoming myopic because of constant gaming, and most now require glasses. (I could be a bit adrift here, though, because I was also listening to music at the time, but I think the point thought more worrying than the eyesight was its possible effect on the Chinese gaming industry.

Rob

[Rob C]

Could it be that if you're firmly grounded in b&w, the images may not have the same appeal as for someone raised in colorimaging?

That could be a valid point, but it doesn't explain lack of emotional content beyond the obvious: here is a big guy jumping higher than can a little kid - wow, no shit! but as white guys can't jump... or I am the one with the lack of sufficient visual insight? Could be; it's all a judgement call at the best of times.

I'll give you a personal example of calls: during my years with stock, my best sales invariably came from France, but the images were all edited in London. I asked the agency if my submissions could go directly to the French branch for editing, as my eye was clearly more in tune with the continent than with life in the British media. I was refused. It was the start of a lot of doubts in my mind about the system, and I contacted TIB in Paris with the intention of switching to them, only to be told that as I lived in Spain, I'd have to submit to Madrid and could not do so to Paris. Hey ho. Both agencies missed the point, but established systems are clearly stronger than some realities.

Rob

[Rob C]

What does it mean when a body of work consists of pictures of a sort that are easily, and are commonly, knocked out by anyone with a modicum of technical ability and patience?

It means exactly what you have asked!

The problem is not really with the individual photographer here, and I feel uncomfortable writing my comments because they are actually aimed at a generic condition; it's just this chap's bad luck to be the current exponent of the thing right here and now, and the altenative course would be for the membership to lapse into silence, achieving nothing much at all for itself and neither, for that matter, for the photographer.

At least it is generating conversation and thought. Which might well be the objective of the exercise, for all I know.

;-)

[Ivophoto]

Rob, thanks for the clarification.

If you’re daughter started to teach in ‘70, she’s old generation.
Our youngest son is 18 (my wife and I have together 5 kids, oldest 29) and uses smart boards, iPads, smartphones since elementary. Home work is distributed over internet ‘smart school’ we even get his points by message before the kid gets home. How unfair! He even doesn’t have the chance to learn how to duplicate my signature to hide low grades from his parents. Poor lad.

He doesn’t have a clue how to use a calculation table book and he doesn’t have an idea how to calculate X cubed without smartphone.
But the stuff he knows about where to get the information he needs to do what he wants is beyond belief.
His social skills, despite all horror stories about iPad generation, are amazing.

It’s us who cannot deal with technological progress, the youth can and have it nicely placed into their world.

When I see my daughter, despite here smartphone addiction she graduated as social counselor and here real live social contacts are an exponent of the contacts I had in my time.

I had a ersatz Sony Walkman and a handful of cassettes.  A pile of magazines with pictures (some of them with clothes) and Happy days on TV. That was it.
Of course I valued and weighted that scarce information differently than my daughter handles here overflow of information coming to here on line.
It didn’t make her an emotional disabled person, in the contrary.

All this probably leads into a fragmentation of focus but not necessarily into an impoverishment of the total scale of emotional and intellectual intelligence.
Maybe for younger peoples photography and possibly also literature is not anymore the view on the world as it was for me and you and it’s function is changed over the past decades. That could explain shifts in visual language.

My point is: different is not lesser.

[32BT]

That could be a valid point, but it doesn't explain lack of emotional content beyond the obvious: here is a big guy jumping higher than can a little kid - wow, no shit! but as white guys can't jump... or I am the one with the lack of sufficient visual insight? Could be; it's all a judgement call at the best of times.

That particular image is very specifcally not about color. It could work equally well, if not better, in b&w. It's one of those images where color may distract. It does have emotional content though, and lots of it. I almost feel like you're pulling our leg about this one.

A kid looking up to his big brother or father, wanting to be like him, replicating his behavior, an extended  hand, we'll do it together. That teaches us something about life. That is proper street in any sense of the word. It even has a street in it, ffs... ;-)

The accupuncture image could work in b&w because its primary interest is graphics. If there is some kind of ambiguous meaning in a frozen strenuous posture that therefore requires accupuncture, it would still fly in b&w. But true, no emotion, no life's teachings there.

The hunchback is one to be decided. I distinctly get the impression that the colorscheme and shape helps us to think beyond it being merely about some random deformation. By thinking of it as a dancing shape with quircky colors it tells us there is an odd sort of beauty in even a deformed quircky life. And yes, that is a projection, but I'm fairly certain that the image is specifically NOT about "hey, look at this deformed dude!".