Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Famous photographers


ade_mcfade e2
10 15.1k 216 England
30 Jul 2013 4:09PM

Quote:Ask any designer and they'll tell you photographers are the WORST judges of their own images Wink

I'd suggest that's a generalisation



well yeah, obviously !

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
30 Jul 2013 4:12PM

Quote:Also many famous photographer may have binned thousands of other images to quality control the ones released


I read somewhere that there must have been many thousands of glass plates covering aspects of the American civil war, and a lot of these plates ended up replacing glass in green houses.
779HOB
2 1.1k United Kingdom
30 Jul 2013 4:25PM

Quote:Also many famous photographer may have binned thousands of other images to quality control the ones released


Last summer I had the pleasure of working with Robin Ravilious - she was helping me edit a set of photos. I was finding it very hard. She went and got boxes of images that James (her husband) had printed but rejected. I have to say many where I think some of his best. This view might have been so as I hadn't seen them before and I know his "famous" work pretty well. I think photographers can be very critical of there own work and maybe the very best are. Maybe that's why they are the very best.
ade_mcfade e2
10 15.1k 216 England
30 Jul 2013 4:27PM
yeah - what's boring today may well be very interesting in 30 years time... e.g. how many people in the photo will still be alive then? Check out the dodgy clothes... ? Look at the wierd cars.....?

There's a FB group called "Leeds back in the day" - that got flooded with record shots, each one was amazing in its own way - seeing Briggate with trams, then buses... strange as its pedestrianised now...
ade_mcfade e2
10 15.1k 216 England
30 Jul 2013 4:33PM
To expand the point... Designers I know take a slightly different view on images - what's a "great photo" to we photographers, may have no use to a designer...

I've dropboxed 1000+ shots of Yorkshire to designers at yorkshire based firm, all the "popular" ones on photographer websites were overlooked, in favour of the bright, mid-day shots with people in...


All good fun
779HOB
2 1.1k United Kingdom
30 Jul 2013 4:54PM

Quote:Designers I know take a slightly different view on images


Editors too - sometimes I look at what they've picked and scratch my head.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
30 Jul 2013 5:33PM

Quote:Ask any designer and they'll tell you photographers are the WORST judges of their own images Wink

I'd suggest that's a generalisation

well yeah, obviously !



Ignoring the sarcasm, why are the tangential motives of a designer or editor even relevant? You talk as if there is some validation to be had by their approval, or the mass approval of photo websites, but all of that is meaningless. I'd presume the best photographers to be able to objectively evaluate their photos for their own worth, and I also think that level of objectivity is relatively rare, and isn't easily influenced by anyone or anything else.
ade_mcfade e2
10 15.1k 216 England
30 Jul 2013 5:43PM

Quote:You talk as if there is some validation to be had by their approval


its called money
keithh e2
11 23.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
30 Jul 2013 6:14PM
If money was a measure against which we judge photography, then this is one of the best photographs ever taken and how many could name the photographer without the aid of google.

6-image.jpg



And this one is $4 million worth of photograph that most photographers will claim to have taken better.

7-image.jpg



And finally, when this sort of thread crops up...which they do every year....nobody links to Cindy Sherman, yet her work sells for numbers rarely seen outside of a taxi cabs dashboard.
keith selmes
11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
30 Jul 2013 6:24PM

Quote: what's boring today may well be very interesting in 30 years time.
Roughly what happened with Eugene Atget - by the time he died, most of his subject matter had disappeared, buildings demolished, people changed their lifestyle. He made a living from his photography, but wasn't fully appreciated until later.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
30 Jul 2013 6:49PM

Quote:what's boring today may well be very interesting in 30 years time.Roughly what happened with Eugene Atget - by the time he died, most of his subject matter had disappeared, buildings demolished, people changed their lifestyle. He made a living from his photography, but wasn't fully appreciated until later.


Yes, the motives of Atget are interesting. He did try and make a meagre wage from his Parisian 'views', but he was also motivated in chronicling pre-Haussmann Paris, which was disappearing before his eyes. He only ever became known through the efforts of Berenice Abbott I think, who worked in a nearby studio with Man Ray in Montparnasse.

Another thing that interests me about him is his lugging that enormous view camera around rather than switching to the 'detective cameras' that were emerging at the time. Presumably that was a technical consideration.

I don't know that it's so easy to become 'famous' in the digital age is it? Most of the names I know came out of the film age, though that's probably more indicative of my advancing years.
mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
31 Jul 2013 8:13AM

Quote:what's boring today may well be very interesting in 30 years time.Roughly what happened with Eugene Atget - by the time he died, most of his subject matter had disappeared, buildings demolished, people changed their lifestyle. He made a living from his photography, but wasn't fully appreciated until later.

Yes, the motives of Atget are interesting. He did try and make a meagre wage from his Parisian 'views', but he was also motivated in chronicling pre-Haussmann Paris, which was disappearing before his eyes. He only ever became known through the efforts of Berenice Abbott I think, who worked in a nearby studio with Man Ray in Montparnasse.

Another thing that interests me about him is his lugging that enormous view camera around rather than switching to the 'detective cameras' that were emerging at the time. Presumably that was a technical consideration.

I don't know that it's so easy to become 'famous' in the digital age is it? Most of the names I know came out of the film age, though that's probably more indicative of my advancing years.



That begs the question as to whether atget is famous for taking excellent photos, or famous for having recorded a lost era. The former never changes, the latter is harder because of the sheer quantity of photos in the digital age.
keith selmes
11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
31 Jul 2013 8:34AM

Quote: famous for taking excellent photos, or famous for having recorded a lost era
it would have to be both surely ? if they weren't such good work, people wouldn't be so fascinated


Quote: harder because of the sheer quantity of photos in the digital age.
not sure about that. I half think there are huge quantities of photos of the same things, but sectors of our times and culture that are barely touched on. What we probably can't know, is what a future generation will consider worth keeping.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
31 Jul 2013 8:40AM

Quote:That begs the question as to whether atget is famous for taking excellent photos, or famous for having recorded a lost era. The former never changes, the latter is harder because of the sheer quantity of photos in the digital age.


He's famous mostly for the latter, but what is ever rarer is the single-mindedness with which he went about it. Of course he had extra motivation in knowing that few people were in a position to do it - he was a curiosity with his camera.

It's worth noting, too, that some people see a subtle style in Atget's work. He's not always seen purely as a recorder, even though he claimed nothing more himself.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
31 Jul 2013 9:21AM
I always found this an interesting Atget web page. Many have followed in Atget's footsteps since, but Christopher Rauschenberg did it before it was quite so trendy. The audio is worth listening to - it gives insight into a world of photographic interest that doesn't necessarily concentrate on the obvious; some people are fascinated by the photographer behind the picture, and his/her motives. A lot of us completely overlook such considerations I think, especially in the machine-gunning digital age.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.