Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> << True, but think of how many Weegee photos were set up - where little > things were changed to add to the drama and impact of the scene. Which, > of course, could bring us back to things like Eugene Smith sandwiching > negatives...but I digress...:-) >> > > If that's the case, then they were wrong. They should establish > no precedent > for us in their field. In the heyday of Life etc, many many photographs were "set-up", in the sense that people were directed or posed (as they still are in much TV journalism) or negatives worked on by skilled re-touchers to improve the image (outside the "journalistic" area even Strand retouched some of his most famous pictures extensively, and some of Kertesz's most famous "street" images were of friends co-operating). The idea of the "pure" unposed un-retouched photojournalistic image is a fairly recent one (and also something of a fallacy and false god in itself). Weegee and Smith were totally in line with their times. Smith especially was concerned about the truth of what he photographed, no how closely it came with the reality of the situation. As I recall, the famous shot of the country doctor crossing the field under darkening sky involved him crossing the field several times that morning so Smith could get it just right - which does nothing at all to detract from the power of his essay on the country doctor. tim - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html