Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/05/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Staged photos
From: jls at runbox.com (Jeffery Smith)
Date: Wed May 12 07:39:52 2004
References: <a0610050bbcc7daa5711e@[192.168.0.181]> <6.0.1.1.2.20040512085525.01bafec0@pop.runbox.com> <a0610050cbcc7e1850d97@[192.168.0.181]>

It seemed to be depicting a mood rather than a story about the kiss. I 
tried taking a picture of a lady dressed like a nurse soliciting donations 
for a charitable organization. Every time I lifted my camera, she would 
smile and wave to me. I finally asked her to just look normal and go about 
her businesses. She didn't, so I gave up. Had she complied, it would have 
been sort of staged, but I would not have felt guilty about it.

I'm not convinced that Capa's picture is faked. If it was, it is not a 
convincing shot as a fake. I always felt that it looked too goofy to be 
fakes, but if you look at motion pictures of that era, dying surely did 
have a lot more drama in it than in real life (grabbing your heart, looking 
up to heaven, muttering a final statement, and collapsing with your eyes 
closed).

Jeffery

At 09:26 AM 5/12/2004, you wrote:
>So am I right in assuming that you don't have a problem with the Doisneau 
>pic? It was, after all, commissioned by Life and used in the magazine as a 
>piece of photojournalism. Setting shots up was common practice at the 
>time, I gather, to every "insider's" knowledge.
>
>So why the controversy over the Capa pic? Is it because it's a war situation?
>
>There's a lot of debate in the UK at the moment over some pictures 
>published by a tabloid newspaper purporting to show British soldiers 
>abusing an Iraqi detainee, but which everyone (apart from the paper's 
>editor) now seem to believe were set up much later. This is a different 
>matter, as these pictures are being touted as proof of abuse. The Capa pic 
>isn't supposed to be proof of anything - we all know that soldiers get 
>shot in combat. It's power is symbolic.
>
>This is why it doesn't matter. The symbolism is still powerful.
>
>In fact I believe Capa himself said he didn't remember particularly taking 
>the shot, which I can quite believe. He certainly didn't see it until 
>after it was published. To his agency it was just a good shot, and no 
>agency is going to be in the business of tracking down a photographer in a 
>war zone to interrogate him about one pic before they sell it.
>
>P.
>
>At 8:57 am -0500, 12/5/04, Jeffery Smith wrote:
> >It if were faked photojournalism, then I have a problem. Other than 
> that, I think he has some artistic freedom, much like an artist painting 
> something that doesn't exist or a novelist writing about something that 
> doesn't exist. I didn't always feel this way (it seemed like cheating).
> >
> >Jeffery
> >
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from ericm at pobox.com (Eric) ([Leica] Re: Staged photos)
Reply from george at imagist.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Staged photos)
In reply to: Message from paul at paulhardycarter.com (Paul Hardy Carter) ([Leica] Staged photos)
Message from jls at runbox.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Staged photos)
Message from paul at paulhardycarter.com (Paul Hardy Carter) ([Leica] Staged photos)