File :-(, x, )
Garry Winogrand Anonymous
Too much hate in /p/ lately and not enough photography.

Garry Winogrand. Considering that he took hundreds of thousands of photos and showed the public only a few select ones, was he really a good photographer or more of a good editor? Was he even an artist at all, or merely the child of good marketing?
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
Considering the general concept that only one in a hundred (or whatever it is) shots are any good, it's the same thing.
>> Anonymous
I think he had great raw talent, but his work's inconsistent, compromised by his over-experimentation and emphasis on just taking photographs, culminating in the end with him just being driven around LA in a convertible with either a motordrive or a Leicavit attached (I forget which). His best work is his early work.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Christ.

Okay, listen, Garry Winogrand is an amazing photographer. Being a street photographer does NOT mean that you approach an interesting situation, take one picture, and then walk away. It involves dedication, patience, cunning, and determination. You approach that situation, take dozens of pictures, and then walk on, find another cool situation, take even more pictures.

No one gets "the" shot on the first snap. No one. Not a single professional photographer would tell you that they only need one frame. Let's not talk about Ansel Adams here, but bear in mind, he still took multiple plates, and often made several different exposures for each of his most famous works. Read The Making of 40 Photographs and you'll see what I mean.

Part of being a good photographer is being a good editor of your own work. You HAVE to be a good editor. Being a photographer MEANS that you shoot in VOLUME. Please understand this. This is the reason bulk film backs for 35mm and modular back systems for larger formats and huge CF cards exist. YOU SHOOT A LOT. If Winogrand had access to a digital camera for the majority of his career, I guarantee you he would've shot an almost identical number of frames.

As far as marketing goes, of course he marketed himself. Of course it was good. Clearly, because we all know him. A professional photographer -- in fact, any freelancer -- HAS to market himself, especially to "make it". How do you think fine artists make a living? They just sit in their lofts, make art, and wait for the money to start pouring in? No, they send out mailers, network with gallery owners and curators, promote their openings and new work, and so on.

Garry Winogrand was a good photographer, good editor, and good marketer. And a good teacher, to boot.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Forgot to add:

PROVE ME WRONG

:D
>> Macheath !8b4g0BkNZg
http://www.mattstuart.com/

Check out this guy's street work. I wanna know where the guy finds the patience for this.
>> Anonymous
Winogrand's often compared to HCB and the HCB camp would put down Winogrand for his lack of finesse.
>> Anonymous
>>121653
With Matt's type of photography, it's a combination of patience, luck and a sense of humor.
>> Anonymous
>>121636
Here it is
http://rapidshare.com/files/89264181/Contacts_Henri_Cartier-Bresson_subbed.avi

>>121657
I dunno, but this is still worth watching.
>> Anonymous
I think Winogrand is a pretty cool guy. eh tilts photos and doesn't afraid of anything
>> anonymous
he sure doesnt afraid of anything
>> Anonymous
>>121734
cept cancer
>> Anonymous
If someone gets one good shot out of one hundred thousand shots and that shot is better than your one shot which you planned out for months, guess who took the better photograph?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>121653
DUDE, that guy is fucking awesome! Thanks for the link.
>> Anonymous
Photographers work in different ways, a lot of the time dictated by their equipment. There's a reason why street photographers don't use large format cameras.

Take, for a very obvious example, Sally Mann. Her shots are very structured, but that's because of the equipment she's using. She can't afford to take 300 large format pictures. But street photographers, using mainly 35mm film,(or digital, either one) have more versitility in that it's cheap, and quick.

You can't say what method is better, it just comes down to the type of work the artist is trying to do.
>> Anonymous
>>121946
A Leica M4 with a 28mm isn't exactly cheap
>> Anonymous
>>121681
Damn, before I saw this video, I thought HCB was some superphotographer who got "the moment" most of the time. I didn't know he also had to take a lot of photos of one subject. Much thanks for the video!
>> Anonymous
>>121946
You don't think how Sally Mann envisioned her work dictates the use of a LF view camera, or that she's using those because she wants her shots to be very structured?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>122135
It totally is. Talk to any wildlife, sports, or fine arts photographer. Street photographer is by FAR the cheapest, even counting getting a Leica and Leica glass. Compared to exotic telephotos or hella nice tripods and view cameras, even a Noctilux starts to look reasonable. When you're talking about an M6 + a few 'crons, it's chump change.
>> Anonymous
>>122135
Leica M4 isn't cheap, but Winogrand actually preferred a rather pedestrian-seeming 28mm Canon M-mount lens, not a Leica.

>>122159
Fine arts isn't expensive unless someone goes really far out on the production.

Besides, I'd say street photography is/can be a branch of fine art.
>> Anonymous
>>122152
Unless you ask her yourself one can't be sure what her motivation for using such a camera is.

Het shots are very structured though. The majority of them are reenactments, and her placement of props as well as people in the enviroment surroding them has a lot of thought behind it.

It could be that the expense of using large format hs caused her to structure her shots. I really have no idea. My point wasn't to say that photographers use different cameras depending on the amount of structure that they want, but that certain equipment, such as large format, is too expensive to shoot off 300 negatives just playing around.