In the realm of photography I mean.

I just watched a doco on Frank Hurley, a photographer, of both stills and movies, who covered from an Antarctic expedition trapped in ice, to both world wars and beyond. He mainpulated and combined many of his shots to the ire of some. 

The doco made me realise I know nothing of people with photographic reknown.

Which photographer to you hope to emulate, or gain inspiration from??

hello Jedink,

here they are (for of course) : Elliott Erwitt, Robert Doisneau, Dorothea Lange, Raymond Depardon and Julius Shulman. (certainly many others too lol)

Hope this help ;o)
Olivier

Cheers mate. I'm just interested in having a look at the work of ppl who are considered "The greats" of photography. I've heard the names of great painters, musicians, writers etcetc, but not photographers.

Cheers again.

Peter Lik

I saw this guys gallery when I went to Vegas 2 years ago

http://www.peterlik.com/home.html

*"The greats" of photography. !!!

*Too many to recall - you could start by looking up :

Jacques-Henri Lartigue

Robert Capa

Man Ray

Henri Catier-Bresson

If they are all a bit historical for you try looking up

Gregory Crewsdon for modern landscapes.

There are many many more let me know if you want some more names to look up ;)

Attached Link: BBC4 The Genius of Photography

Ansel Adams - I'm sorry that man was a genuis!

Diane Arbus - Tragically tormented which makes for a damn good artist, sad ending...

Attached Link: http://www.pbase.com/pnd1

His internet site is really full of interesting galleries !

Attached Link: Jerry Uelsmann

I never (or very rarely) look at other people's works...
In art school, I saw so many would-be artists trying to emulate or even imitate the popular artists... or trying to outclass the collegues in the number of exhibitions they visited. And I always thought art was about the ultimate individual expression...
To cut a long story short: as a reaction, I refused to go to exhibitions, and I forbid myself to look at other people's works... and I kept that attitude all the way until today.
As a result, I am not really aware of what the artists already mentioned here are doing. I've heard some names of course, but I have no idea who Ansel Adams is (or was) or what he does (or did)...
(sorry Vera, I don't know him :o))  (and I don't intend to either)

To the initial questions:
"Who do you idolise or which photographer do you hope to emulate?"
the answer is: Positively None.

I think that's a shame really, that you don't view other works.

What is the point of taking photos or making art then?

We (I) don't go to copy other people's styles or works. I view for interest, appreciation and inspiration.

Going to the Shell Wildlife Photographer of the year again was amazing. It seems to get better every year. It's so amazing and inspiring. I wish I had the 'balls' to get up at 2am in the Arctic Circle to go and get in the water to shoot Leopard Seals catching penguins... Brave!!!

I think you need o view art to view your expressions. Yes taking photos or creating art should be one expression and not a mere copy of someone elses, I agree.

But at the same time what is the point when everyone could just decide not to look? I think viewing art/photos is one of the most rewarding things next to making it. You can dismiss it as terrible or totally fall in love with it and be inspired or simply thinking of the piece later can make you smile.

I also find that when I view someones work I feel like they are sharing a bit of their personality with me. It's as if I'm starting to know them.

Ansel Adams - To my mind the greatest B&W landscape photographer ever. He managed to turn white into silver in print. Just amazing work and after his death year after year new calenders and books are still published every year.

I really hope you change your views from childhood and do taking in some books or exhibitions.

@PeeWeeo5...very well said!
I also agree with you about Ansel Adams...whenever I see his works, the images just captivate me!  I urge anyone who loves photography and who has not seen any of his images to do a google search.

Perhaps the original posters question should not be who do you "idolize"?...but rather whose photographic work "inspires" you?

Diane Arbus' work and profile was on "The Genius of Photography"
Last night. I was quite amazing at the timing as I had just watched "FUR" a movie based on her biography.

Ansel Adams really is the bomb

Diane Arbus

Diane Arbus Images

Ansel Adams

Ansel Adams Images

Ansel Adams is super and if you read his book "The Print" you know how great this man was.

And I watch the doc. channel on tv and saw some war photographers and what they go though. sometimes dieing too to get the shots they wish. it harder for them now for the news people is not allow to take what they wish now for all is polites to it. some wish to show the horrors of war so it may stop people from fighting and others wish to show the horrors so the bad people will get what comeing to them. In any case it do not work out for anyone war goes on and no one is judged. Some photos was used in the trails to get some people jailed but not many.
I know I can not do what they did

I agree Jocko, the photographic journalists who go into war scenes really are amazing, such bravery!

I know Ansel Adams' work. But I do understand Geert. ( I recognised Kloos in your quote ;) )

If you really want to find out what you are doing, how you are interpreting things, then it's best to steer clear from influences.
Humans have always been taught "the rules to abide, and accept it all bravely with God on their side" and, due to an increased study and knowledge of psychology, this influence is at the same time more subtle and more imposing than ever.

Most people are followers. No insult: Picasso was one (he never invented something but brought the ideas of others to full bloom).
Amongst those you have the angry-oppositionists. The ones who try to be different. But trying to be different makes them as influenced as the ones they consider to be "sheep" or "the herd".
To be yourself as an artist means not caring about what has been done or what should (or should not) be done.
And once you really!!! realise how you are led by publicity and rule- and fashion makers and the search for approval by "mother-society", you can try and stay conscious of this influence and try to minimalise it.
Or you can, as Geert, refuse all influences just to find out what you can, what you do and how you interpret.

I understand the need to have your own artistic voice and vision and to try and avoid "contamination" of that, but to not look at others work, espcially those with their own amazing artistic vision and talent, seems a bit self defeating. Why should we post art at all then? Surely we can't expect others to want to view our work knowing we hold those viewpoints. As I said, I understand the concept. But once you have found your voice, why not see what else is out there and has been out there? Perhaps it will push your own work in a positive direction you never before considered.

Tanchelyn ...    was there not a art movement of what you talking about in the 1900's?  Not looking at other people art and make your own? I think it was a failler was it not? i could be wrong.
forgot the movement name too lol but I did read about it one time and forgot about it too intill now

OK guys,
It wasn't my intention to impose my views or to imply that my way is the right way... I agree that it would be a shame if everyone else did the same ;o)
Just wanted to answer the initial questions honestly, knowing that it's a bit of an objectionable viewpoint... but it's just one individual viewpoint.
And Kort, who says that I have found my own voice..? Still ever searching, experimenting and trying, hopping from one thing to another... but isn't that a fantastic journey..?
Approval, popularity and succes are nice, but they're not the whole story... and as you stated, I can't expect others to want to view my work, but that's their decision. If that decision depends on the before-mentioned viewpoint, it's only human and understandable, but a feeble excuse nonetheless. A good and acceptable excuse would be that they're simply not interested in the work. Luckily there are enough fantastic works by others in the Gallery to keep everyone satisfied...

Right Geert, and I am not trying to be argumentative. As an outsider, I would say that your work is quite distinctive. It has variety, but there is a a certain something about your images that makes them yours. The journey is a great one that never has to stop. But how can one know if they are interested in others work if they don't look in the first place. They could be missing out on a lot. :)

Quote:
" But how can one know if they are interested in others work if they don't look in the first place. They could be missing out on a lot. :) "

Considering this rationally, I could even admit that you're right about that.. ;o)

Quote: "Considering this rationally, I could even admit that you're right about that.. ;o)" Gasp! :m_shocked: :m_grin: :m_handshake: :m_wink:

Quote - I  Why should we post art at all then? Surely we can't expect others to want to view our work knowing we hold those viewpoints.

Quote - OK guys,
It wasn't my intention to impose my views or to imply that my way is the right way... I agree that it would be a shame if everyone else did the same ;o)
Just wanted to answer the initial questions honestly, knowing that it's a bit of an objectionable viewpoint... but it's just one individual viewpoint.

WOW - this is really a great discussion. I'm really enjoying it.

I agree with Kort - if no one is looking why produce at all, what a dull world it would be if we didn't have creators and viewers. I have to ask if one doesn't view but makes why then show your work?

G - I really liked your answer to the inital question, look it sparked this conversation. Which I'm really enjoying as it's intelectual and full of views. Thank you for being honest and I suppose having that view point. I honestly never ever thought that no one would have a mentor or someone as inspiration to produce their work. I'm not talking about influence at all but purely seeing a beautiful, stunning work of art and being inspired to produce your own piece. I've got to admit that I love viewing other peoples work and being inspired. For me the inspiration is normally to go out and start at that project that I've been planning or to sit and edit some images that are long over due for it (not in the way that I've previously seen but to do something new and creative).

I really hope you can go and view even a few of the really old pioneers of photography, just to see what they used and the fashions that the ages went through is amazing!

To add some spice to the rational argument, some quotes:

We learn from history that we learn nothing from history.
(George Bernard Shaw
**
** Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them.
(Albert Einstein.)

The duty of a psychologist is to help men of genius to keep their neuroses.
(Carl Gustav Jung)

If you can see your path laid out in front of you step by step, you know it's not your path.
Your own path you make with every step you take. That's why it's your path. (Joseph Campbell)

Truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever. (Jiddu Krishnamurti)

Good quotes, and good discussion.

My art school (St. Lukas, Brussels) asked me to make some illustrations for a small selection of poems to give away as the school's yearly New Year relation present, together with the design of their New Year card. By the way, at that time, I was drawing and painting all the time (I got a master degree in fine arts).
So I started reading the poems. I read them over and over again for days; they were difficult, hard to grasp... deep and mysterious. It took a long time to get through to find the essence and true meaning, especially knowing that you have to make the illustrations fit.
There was one poem that I liked very much, about someone arriving, silent and lonesome, at the Western gate. By the time that I thought to have understood the poem, I started drawing the preliminary sketches for my illustration, concentrating on two elements: a man and a gate. I knew how to draw them, that was not the problem. Or so I thought...
I soon discovered that 'knowing how to draw them' was exactly my biggest problem. The poem was dark, unclear, mysterious, blurry, elusive... my drawings were clear, elaborate, sharp and detailed. They didn't match.
So I started stripping down my sketches, simplifying the composition, omitting more and more details with every new sketch. Looking back on it, it was a process of throwing away everything that I had ever learnt, piece by piece. Until, after several days, only the essence remained: a hint of a small, vaguely human presence facing a flood of light coming through an opening in the darkness.
That inner process was reflected in the changing choice of materials: I started with fine crayons and pens, and ended up with soft charcoal, a cloth and my bare fingers as the ultimate shaping tools.

Taking it back to the inspiration theme: there and then I learned that the purest and ultimate inspiration doesn't come from what you know or from what you think to know, from what you have seen and learned, nor from how you have always thought it should be... but it comes from sensitivity and understanding, from bareness and receptivity, from the willingness to allow emptiness and un-awareness in your mind and openness in your spirit.
This may sound like a whole lot of crap...
Ah well, maybe it is ;o))

No, it is a great story, thanks for sharing Geert. It also illustrates that the more you know, the more you have to work with, even if that means dumping most of it in the trash bin to fit the mood you are trying to get across. I personally feel it is better to come from a vantage of experience than one of ignorance as I doubt someone who was just beginning their journey could create a poignat image such as yours. Of course, my kids prove me wrong on that point every day... ;']

Ah, kids... amazing what you can find in their drawings. I had the pleasure of studying the psychology in children's drawings at different ages... thàt was inspirational..!
At present I'm working in an institution for mentally disabled and brain-damaged people. The works of art these people are making are so amazing... We had an exhibition, 'Insiders - Outsiders' with works from 'normal' and some of our mentally disabled people mixed together... an inspiring confrontation...;o)

See that's what I'm talking about - Inspiration not immitation :)

some professor [teacher] at the local collage have some of my work and show them to his class to see what they think . he into this psychology  class stuff there. I ask him if I was crazy and he would not say . I think he got my bone people images done in bryce; he may have some photos too. I told him he could use them for he did see them on line here and he did ask me first.. Make me wonder???

Attached Link: Saul Leiter

Some I might idolize if I did that with anyone would be those who have proven they can do it..yet, are able to teach it to others.  A book I have is packed away until we redo this home but the author is a fine photographer and the book is an excellent teaching tool.

He is not teaching art or direction but primarily exposure and how to use it most effectively in the first shot.   So, technique is valuable.

What I do with technique is from my eye,not that of someone else.  I can look at fine work and be educated in that seeing.  No, not to copy or try to copy but I will see elements which make it work so well and can possibly pick up on that, maybe hidden in thoughts to come into play later when in the creative direction.

Ultimately, being out of a commercial box and being able to do that with freedom of creative spirit is so valuable to me.  While some of my shots look commonplace, some are not. Yet, all are either a technical exercise or a creative expression or both, one requiring the other for fulfilment in fine work rendered.  That is my 1/10 cent worth.

I realize if on a wall in a gallery, there will always be those comments, "Humm..interesting", "so whimsical", "different"...comments saying essentially nothing and heard at most any art museum.  The public view is just that, public: Often not understanding, often unkind...but once in a while correct..maybe that is a piece of junk in the museum, differnt an so poorly executed you wonder about the museum jurors.

The famous greats of photography will always get raves.  First, that is what is supposed to be done and secondly because the imagry deserves it.

Nice thoughts there Tom. Happy New Year.