Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/08/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]on 11/8/01 12:32 PM, Bob Walkden at bob@web-options.com wrote: > It's an interesting article and in it the writer briefly discusses a > photo of workers at an Indian nuclear plant by HCB, and wonders what > Salgado would do with the same subject. He concludes that Salgado's > treatment would be more 'theatrical' than HCB's (which I suppose could > also mean more 'dramatic') - he says that's not necessarily a bad > thing, of course. > > HCB is far more detached from his subjects than Salgado is from his. > Different photographers, different agendas. Well, what I do I admire in HCB works is precisely how objective he can be and how he manages to be so objective while, at the same time, he shows us his vision of reality with his own seal... IMO, HCB works seem to be more spontaneous, full of fresh air in spite what he's trying to say. On the other side, Salgado sounds to be more theatrical, as said above my text. That stuff sometimes bothers me a little since leaves the idea that some takes were suggested or ordered or asked by Salgado himself. This can be just my own idea but it is what I feel and think of one and the other. In other words, HCB seems to be more objective than HCB, but that should not lead anyone to think that one is better than other since a strictly photographic point of view. In a more photojournalistic or aesthetic way to "see" things between both I'd say that HCB is more valuable than Salgado. HCB is more "neutral" when showing us facts, while Salgado tends to impress more than showing us facts. At last, the two last lines sounds great... Pablo