Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a way this kind of debate is useless--one person likes Marshall (or HCB, or whoever), someone else does not--so what is the point of trying to convince each other? The diversity of tastes is one of the things that makes life interesting. I happen to enjoy Marshall's book, but sometimes I wonder if I enjoy it because the people in the pictures are the greatest rock musicians of all time. In other words, I am not sure if the pictures would be equally interesting if they were of Joe Blow instead of Janis Joplin. But that is the issue with all celebrity photos. Nathan Paul Chefurka wrote: > Jim was *there*, doing it, creating a whole new genre of photography. His > shot of Hendrix defined the man. His shots of Janis let us in on who the > person was behind the "Pearl" mask. I don't know what your criteria are for > "bad/not-too-bad/ok/good/best", but Marshall ranks right up there for me. > Now there may be some clinkers in the book (the shot of Jim Morrison springs > to mind), but as a documenter of that era I think Marshall ranks right up > there at the head of the parade. > > And to think that he did most of that while he was stoned, too! I always > ended up wondering why the colours in the viewfinder were so bright, when I > was sure I had loaded Tri-X... > > Paul Chefurka - -- Nathan Wajsman Overijse, Belgium General photo site: http://belgiangator.tripod.com/ Belgium photo site: http://members.xoom.com/wajsman/ Motorcycle site: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/1704/