Re: [Leica] Salgado

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

He is indeed more detached....and Salgado is passionately
involved....which may or may not be a good thing for 'the historical
record.' However, I happen to think that Salgado is, from a technical
standpoint, much better than HCB. I know I'm going to get jumped all
over, and I know I'm exagerating, but I often think that it's harder to
find an HCB image that is perfectly exposed, and perfectly in focus,
than it is one which is not. In fact, a LUGer whom I see very frequently
'in the flesh,' often kids me about my 'worrying' about focus and
exposure, saying, "look at the work of HCB." He's kidding. Sort of.

The other way to look at this is...how many of HCB's images really blow
you away...and how does that compare to the proportion of Salgado's
images that do the same thing....I really am convinced that a large part
of why we celebrate HCB is his vision and explication of the 'decisive
moment,' for his pioneering work with 35 mm - which happened to be done
with Leicas...;-) - and for his very clever use of the cult of
personality....by making such a big deal out of avoiding having his one
photo taken, etc., he made himself more mysterious, and mysterious
translates to 'interesting,' which  then translates to the work.

Please, don't get me wrong - I'd kill to be half as good as HCB. But
that doesn't mean that Salgado isn't 'better.' What ever that means.

Wait...What it means is that in 50 years...if anyone but three scholars
is talking about or paying any attention to what we now call
photography, I'd be willing to be that Salgado's work and 'myth' will be
greater than HCBs. At that point HCB will be seen as an important
historical figure, not as the be-all and end-all 35 mm photographer.

B.e D.ucking for cover real fast! 

Bob Walkden wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> there's a book of HCB's landscape photos coming out in a few weeks
> called, iirc, 'Landscapes and Cityscapes'. So today's "Weekend
> Guardian" (UK newspaper Saturday magazine) has a puff article with a
> few of his landscapes.
> 
> 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.
> 
> ---
> 
>  Bob
> 
> mailto:bob@web-options.com
> 
> "If it's sunny, try f16;
>  if it's not, try f5.6"
> 
> --Walker Evans
> 
> Saturday, August 11, 2001, 2:22:28 PM, you wrote:
> 
> > Bob Walkden wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Greg,
> >>
> > I really don't
> >> think Berger knew what to say about the photographs.
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >>  Bob
> 
> > Hey, Bob - What can you say about the photographs, as a photographer or
> > a concerned human being, other than....OH.....MY......GOD.......;-)
> 
> > And, in line with my stupid "talk amongst your selves" 'better, best'
> > posting of last week some time...
> 
> > After watching the show, pouring through my Salgado books, pouring
> > through my HCB books....Guys, I know this is a big like saying to a
> > believing Christian that JC isn't the son of God....But I have come to
> > believe that Salgado is without question a better photographer than
> > HCB...Yes, HCB was there first...and, yes, without HCB it is doubtful
> > there would be a Salgado...but in terms of what Salgado can do with a 35
> > mm camera and film, both technically and "artistically" - I don't see
> > any comparison...
> 
> > And now I'll get back to scanning last weekend's wedding photos...;-)
> 
> > B. D.