Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/08/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Capa: If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough. Yeah, we all know that old one, but it's relevant here. I feel I'm going to go out on a limb here, because the recent conflict is so sad, but.... I think his pictures are mediocre *at best*. Basically amateurish snapshots. My favorites are: #28 of the photographs and the wounded leg; #33 of pro Hezbollah protesters. And in that order of strong preference. But most of the pics, well, aren't close enough! Go through the series, and most of the shots have a voyeuristic distance - I feel no intimacy with the subjects. Most of the pics are of "collateral damage." I get it, the human face, and human cost, of a battle (war if you want). But they fall flat for me. Here's where I think of Chim Seymour's work. I count myself fortunate to have seen a collection of Chim Seymour's photos recently at the National Gallery, and most were his pics of children in the aftermath of WWII. My Lord, what a remarkable and moving set of photographs!!!! I think it's in part because they somehow show *life*, both the pathos and the tidbits of joy and humanity (the famous one of the nun playing ball with the orphans, just for example). Anderson's pics pretty much suck by comparison: a blown up building; another one; a tiny figure of a man crawling around on a blown up building; blown up buildings at night; a dead person; a crowd of protesters; a parking garage with refugees; more blown up buildings. Horrors all, but such a bland rendition. Even his pic of the children playing in the shopping carts - there's no movement. Instead of a picture of children at play, the play is halted and we get a mugshot of a few children. These are moving subjects, yet I'm left completely unmoved. The majority of Anderson's pics are like snapshots - to use Eugene Smith's somewhat hyperbolic language, I don't feel like his pics make me "see into the heart, the very truth of the subject," in this case the devastation and the people who so sadly suffered it. And I'm only 40 and know Capa and Seymour only as historical figures. I'm not worshiping the PJ past or anything. I think Nachtewey's (sp?) work on this same kind of subject matter is far, far superior (just thinking of his Bosnia and African famine photos, for example). OK, so Nachtewey is a real ace, creme de la creme, and comparison isn't fair? OK. I can accept that. But still.... Am I the only one who thinks Anderson's pics fall short and just aren't very compelling? And with subject matter like that, what is his excuse? Scott -- Pics @ http://www.adrenaline.com/snaps Leica M6TTL, Bessa R, Nikon FM3a, Nikon D70, Rollei AFM35 (Jihad Sigint NSA FBI Patriot Act)