Photo Essay
by ubique

Comment by ubique:
Thanks for the Trent Parke link, John. He is one of my two most admired and influential photographic heroes, the other being his fellow Magnum Paolo Pellegrin.

Both are documentary artists; both exert a personal transformative effect on reality. But the reality remains key. The staging, if it can be called staging, occurs only within the photographer's mind.

They're both supreme essayists, not just in their 'formal' essays but in every individual image.

They're both technically competent of course, but they never let photography get in the way of a great photograph.

They are, for me, the two most interesting photographers on the planet

Photo Essay
by ubique

Comment by daisydavid:
An interesting proposition Paul. In my limited capacity, I considered your essay and points from as many perspectives that I could, but still couldn't find a way of expressing myself the way I was feeling. Just as I was about to put finger to keyboard I remembered seeing this video today about Trent Parke, and in particular the second half of his story. That kind of nailed it for me (at least for the moment). So I'll leave it at that for the moment until I can summon the what for to make a response.

Photo Essay
by ubique

Comment by mariuca:
Thanks Paul. I got it now. Yes, the lifeblood. (Picasso would probably disagree but his ego was of a cosmic size and his vanity so far, unsurpassed!)

There are also the little secondary arteries.

As the Ecclesiastes said:

All things are full of weariness;
a man cannot utter it;
the eye is not satisfied with seeing,
nor the ear filled with hearing.
What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done,
and there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there a thing of which it is said,
�See, this is new�?
It has been already
in the ages before us.
There is no remembrance of former things,
nor will there be any remembrance
of later things yet to be
among those who come after

We are just trying. Therefore your essay is a little jewel with many facets.

Naively, I never really asked myself what is photography. It started for me as an adjuvant. An extension to memory and to the way to try to capture one single moment of understanding before it vanishes in thin air.
I used what it was at hand. A pencil, a brush�Never thought though of playing an instrument.
We live quite fantastic lives scattered here and there and photography is one way of learning about each other and the world.

Photo Essay
by ubique

Comment by ubique:
Well, what I mean is that there can only be one snapshot of this woman in this field at this time. No other superficially similar photograph (woman in field) can be compared with mine. For me. And for this kind of picture, nobody's point of view matters but my own.

The lions are not so personal. Yes it was an event I witnessed, but another photographer's picture of another lion kill can legitimately be compared. I make such a comparison myself, and my picture is merely middle of the pack in the genre. Easily trumped.

No so my snapshot of my wife in that place at that time. You can't take that particular picture (that woman, that field, that occasion), nor can Annie Leibovitz. So I win, forever and ever.

The point is that snapshots have more meaning to particular viewers than do any high art photographs, even their own. And Leibovitz no doubt treasures her own private snapshots more than she does her most celebrated work, And so do you.

That's the lifeblood of photography. The glue that makes it stick. All else is vanity, by comparison.

Message edited by author 2014-12-09 15:15:58.

Photo Essay
by ubique

Comment by mariuca:
�All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.�
Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina

This came to my mind as I briefly looked at your two-photo essay.
The happy family/snapshots and the unhappy family/the elaborate tragedy snapped and subsequently processed by mechanical methods. This consideration came to my mind only because you put into balance the value of the two hypostases.

I am somehow confused though and this is probably because of my inability of understanding photography deeply.
I took plenty of family pictures that I initially called by their French word, "instantanés". In my mind they were equivalent (instantané or snapshot = family pic where the sentimental element was the first motive of taking the picture while in a "candid" or "street photography" a lot of other factors were the incentive such as curiosity, documentation, research, quick response to a stimulus�and this before getting into studio photography or commercial etc)
This is when I had a dark room and was processing all my shots. I learned quickly to manipulate the light with my palm to cover or expose more parts of the photo paper during the developing time or cropping parts of it. Was I just "distorting" the snapshot the way you said you did with the lion shot?

This is not a comment on your essay but a string of questions.
Why do you question such different images in terms of "better or worse"?
When you question their importance you rightly add "for whom" one will be more important then the other and add that one of them has sentimental value for you.
You wrote:
"The lion kill photograph is already at a disadvantage because there are plenty of other similar pictures, or at least pictures of much the same thing".
Is it not an image with a woman in a field equally common?

I seem to miss your point completely and am deeply curious to understand it.
Perhaps instead of the lion picture you should have put a studio shot, or a "studied" shot, a gravely edited one by means of all these digital applications. But it seems to me that you compared two quite similar types.
Paul, do explain to me that I am wrong. I value your thinking a lot.

This is the reason why I love the photo essays for all these questions.

diabolique
by ubique

Comment by tnun:
we will have shivers for days... and you must have been close, with your tiny xz1. the Durer effect only adds to the frisson.

diabolique
by ubique

Comment by LevT:
An iconic composition of Jesus, Peter and Paul in a nightmarish dream. Fantastic catch!

Photo Essay
by ubique

Comment by jin_tonic:
I like the two snap shoots, both.

I like the first one because it shows the loving feeling of a precise moment. I like the second one because it shows the cruel reality of life.

I agree with you, one of the photographs will eventually fade. To me though, the second one will not be the one that turns grey.

It�s not because the person in the first photograph is unknown to me. It�s not because the second snapshot is more appealing to my eyes. It�s just that, as time passes, I�ll only remembers the teeth of that lion.

Just like, I still remember your last essay, the girl standing under a cloudy sky.

Photo Essay
by ubique

Comment by mariuca:
Looked twice already and my mind's mechanism is in full action to respond to the impulse.
I need a few calm days .... Your essay needs a thorough reply.

Photo Essay
by ubique

Comment by insteps:
Paul,

Your essays, photographs for that matter, always make me stop and think. You have a private guest house in the bush?

The snapshot is probably the most important photograph for most of us. Family, friends, and events that we didn�t seek out. It�s life unfolding while we�re making plans and go about our business. We might not remember the capture date but we know our outlook at the time.

For the analog snapshot, in particular the polaroid you mentioned, there is typically only one. We can make copies but there is only one original. It�s the photograph that�s been passed around and viewed by so many. The finger prints, rubbed edges, creases and maybe handwriting become a part of the photograph. It�s a fragile piece of our history. A matter of fact document.

All that being said, it�s just a photograph. Photographs are flat, silent, have no odor, and ignorant of everything outside the frame. The photographer, you in this case, knows so much more. It�s history now and can�t be recreated only interpreted.

Great essay!