stillshunter
Super Moderator Emeritus
- Location
- Down Under
- Name
- Mark
I feel bad having segued from Sue's Photography e-book thread. So here's a thread to keep us on topic. I'd be super keen on others opinions. Here's the thread first...
Well I'm no street photog, but my major gripes are, first, his approach and, second, with the relevance. Can't be bothered to reload the book to find the quotes that particularly irk me. Then again I think this footage of him at work, and the results, say it all.
[video=youtube_share;eU8VU4Cdm0g]
[video=youtube_share;XcAk07X2yiU]
Am I alone in thinking him a class Wally?
If not can someone please explain the relevance of his outputs? Honestly what is the point of these 'candid portraits'? I understand the relevance and power of documenting life, e.g., on the street, candidly, but this satisfies none of this for me. Where's the document or - more importantly - the dialogue? At very least where's the commentary? Does it say anything to you? I mean really!
Also is there something that grates with you about his 'style'?
Might just be me, so would love to hear other's opinions.
P.S., And I must make abundantly clear that it's not about 'being in your face'. Bruce Gilden is like the epitome of this style - especially with his simultaneously fired flash (see below).
[video=youtube_share;BepqQ3p4DKg]
No Bruce's work has a point and I clearly see art in his outputs. While on the other hand, Thomas, I don't know...is it more about bravado than the image?...it sort of strikes me that the photo is more akin to a trophy...
[...]having read both of Thomas Leuthard's first two street-photography how-tos (Collecting Souls and Going Candid) I must say that I, frankly, abhor his approach to photography. I sincerely believe that he should be gifted with an injury (physical, emotional, spiritual - who cares as long as it hurts) administered by his subjects....and on top of that his photos are average at best on every level. But your mileage might vary.
MARK, geez...! For those of us who are not street photographers, and who find it intimidating, his stuff is just fine. As are his photographs. Given that he himself admits that he's only been doing it for a couple of years, and actually doesn't hold himself up as an expert, but rather, "heres what I do, it might help you too, or not" rather than Weeks' "this is what you must do because I said so and I *AM* an expert and you are just a fool if you dont pay attention"... I like Leuthard. So there (but then, my photographs are also average, at best).
Well I'm no street photog, but my major gripes are, first, his approach and, second, with the relevance. Can't be bothered to reload the book to find the quotes that particularly irk me. Then again I think this footage of him at work, and the results, say it all.
[video=youtube_share;eU8VU4Cdm0g]
[video=youtube_share;XcAk07X2yiU]
Am I alone in thinking him a class Wally?
If not can someone please explain the relevance of his outputs? Honestly what is the point of these 'candid portraits'? I understand the relevance and power of documenting life, e.g., on the street, candidly, but this satisfies none of this for me. Where's the document or - more importantly - the dialogue? At very least where's the commentary? Does it say anything to you? I mean really!
Also is there something that grates with you about his 'style'?
Might just be me, so would love to hear other's opinions.
P.S., And I must make abundantly clear that it's not about 'being in your face'. Bruce Gilden is like the epitome of this style - especially with his simultaneously fired flash (see below).
[video=youtube_share;BepqQ3p4DKg]