| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/07/2005 01:47:50 PM · #1 |
I think we should have a members only challenge, that we try to do photography like her. Her work is so cool!
Diane Arbus Opposite of Fake |
|
|
|
03/07/2005 01:49:48 PM · #2 |
I quite agree. I suggested her in a thread on this topic a few days ago. Another interesting one would be Richard Avedon.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 01:56:26 PM · #3 |
| Richard Avedon! Wow I love his work! |
|
|
|
03/07/2005 02:11:39 PM · #4 |
| Dorothea Lange. My favourite all time photographer. |
|
|
|
03/07/2005 03:24:10 PM · #5 |
I preface my comment by saying that a)I've seen a limited example of her work and b)I would like to grow an appreciation for her work if I can learn from it...
And here's my actual comment:
I don't 'get' her work. When I look at much of it, I see interesting subjects but no burden on the photographer to tell a story about those subjects...I see odd or unique people, and the appeal of the photograph seems to rest solely on the quirkiness of these subjects that have often been simply lined up and photographed with poor context provided.
Somebody help me out...what am I missing?
And before you answer, please make sure to check my disclaimer above...
Message edited by author 2005-03-07 15:27:11.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 03:29:38 PM · #6 |
Now Richard Avedon...that seems to be the next step. He displays what was missing in Diane Arbus's photo, as far as I can tell.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 03:31:42 PM · #7 |
I wanna shoot like Russi.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 03:34:08 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Jacko:
I wanna shoot like Russi. |
Do this canuck dream or are he just envious?
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 03:38:12 PM · #9 |
"I see odd or unique people"
Finding odd and unique people and keeping them odd and unique in your work is a talent in itself.
I'll give her credit for finding her subjects but I agree most of what you see in that link is pretty straightforward. |
|
|
|
03/07/2005 03:43:05 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Finding odd and unique people and keeping them odd and unique in your work is a talent in itself. |
Perhaps, although I'm not sure I agree with that either.
She has some great photos that I love (the tall jewish guy is a great shot in context)...but for the most part there is no emotion and seemingly no good reason for taking the photo. It's almost like the photos were taken with the intent of being used as evidence in a court of oddity.
Message edited by author 2005-03-07 15:43:45.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 03:57:51 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Finding odd and unique people and keeping them odd and unique in your work is a talent in itself. |
Perhaps, although I'm not sure I agree with that either.
She has some great photos that I love (the tall jewish guy is a great shot in context)...but for the most part there is no emotion and seemingly no good reason for taking the photo. It's almost like the photos were taken with the intent of being used as evidence in a court of oddity. |
That's exactly right; an Arbus photo is an artefact meant to be devoid of the personality of the photographer, a straight documentary capture. She is not in any way editorializing, except in the inescapable sense that she chooses her subjects. She is not making them odder, or prettier, or more or less anything than what they are. She gives them to us unadorned to make of what we will.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 04:05:56 PM · #12 |
So I can respect her for being a social explorer, more so than a photographer perhaps... (?)
Message edited by author 2005-03-07 16:06:28.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 04:33:14 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
So I can respect her for being a social explorer, more so than a photographer perhaps... (?) |
Then is photography purely art? Is photojournalism not photography? Lange, Arbis, Bill Owens and many others saw thier work as allowing people to see into a world that they would otherwise not see, that was their art. Though it lacks the burnished beauty of an Adams landscape or a Weston nude it has more to tell the viewer about the world, and therefore has an imort that can surpass the pretty. |
|
|
|
03/07/2005 04:35:22 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
So I can respect her for being a social explorer, more so than a photographer perhaps... (?) |
Then is photography purely art? Is photojournalism not photography? Lange, Arbis, Bill Owens and many others saw thier work as allowing people to see into a world that they would otherwise not see, that was their art. Though it lacks the burnished beauty of an Adams landscape or a Weston nude it has more to tell the viewer about the world, and therefore has an imort that can surpass the pretty. |
I would be the last to suggest that beauty is required in art. Perhaps emotion, perhaps a moment, perhaps the truth of ugliness...but:
Photojournalism tells a story. It is journalism through photographs.
Diane Arbus's photos (both by my observation and bear_music's description) are no more photojournalism than the word "war" is to written journalism.
Edit: I change my analogy. Her photos are like a statistics sheet of what happened at a baseball game. Fully accurate, containing information that I wouldn't have otherwise known, very practical...but other than that, so what?
Message edited by author 2005-03-07 16:38:38.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 04:56:09 PM · #15 |
There's a considerable virtue and discipline in revealing some segment of the world exactly as it is, no frills, no embellishments, no commentary, no aesthetic bias. I respect Arbus's work immensely.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 05:33:43 PM · #16 |
I find her work to be somewhat dark and voyeuristic. Snapshots into the fringes, allowing us to stare, in the privacy of our own minds... I totally enjoy her work too and would love to try an Arbus challenge.
Message edited by author 2005-03-07 17:34:01. |
|
|
|
03/07/2005 05:53:14 PM · #17 |
Too bad the picture of the kid holding the toy grenade is so small. I saw this image in much bigger and it rocks. The kid's expression is priceless.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 05:59:32 PM · #18 |
.... If this person we are talking about is talented,, then there are more masters on this site than we think.. Where is this kind of open mind when we are all voting?
Message edited by author 2005-03-07 17:59:43.
|
|
|
|
03/07/2005 06:05:42 PM · #19 |
| Hey, Mike (thatcloudthere), I don't think you're missing anything and I agree 100% with everything you said. Take the oddity out of the subject in each of those images and you have a picture that might have been found in an old shoebox in an attic. I don't get it either (even after reading the replies to your testament). |
|
|
|
03/07/2005 07:13:04 PM · #20 |
| Diane Arbus, might very well be considered a sociologist. Her pictures, accurate observations of people in time and place teach a lot about society of the 1960's. Viewed now they are part of the history of photography. At that time, her work appeared on the photography horizon with huge imact for good reason. There was no one else like her. Viewed in our time, she can appear conserative, however her images were radical and ground breaking. She follows the tradition of anomaly, in photography - It is not something she invented, but it is something she practiced and contributed to. I find her work as displayed on the web inadequate. Stand in front of one of her prints or find a book with decent reproductions. She is a modern master. |
|
|
|
03/07/2005 07:28:35 PM · #21 |
One of the limitations of viewing photography over the internet is that it is rather diffucult to guage the quality of the product. It is a bit like judging music that is coming out of a car radio with a bit of static, some types of music fare better than others, but all suffer. I like country music over the radio, but I can only listen to jazz on a decent sound system.
Do yourself a favor and don't decide you don't like a photographer who died before the internet, on the basis of a few 200 pixel images. There is a terrible beauty in her work, I just think it doesn't come across easily in pixels. She tended to get to know her subjects quite well and would shoot them over a period of days or weeks, what often comes across to me as uncomfortably voyeristic was her version of intimacy. Of course she was not a happy woman and ended up taking her own life, so the oddness and sense of dislocation in the photographs' was partially who she was.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/12/2025 08:25:36 AM EDT.
