« Disorganized Thought | Main | Quiz »

Friday, 01 March 2013

Comments

I only recognised the first name, but did recognise the 3rd photo.

Steve

Yes, exactly the same images. I wonder if these three photographers are satisfied with the fact that they are always remembered by these images instead of some of their more recent photos?

I knew the first (and its photographer. I had seen the third photo (and promptly forgotten it). The second I hadn't seen (and won't be remembering).

For the second and third, I am glad I've never seen them before or heard of photographers ;-)

Two out of three, Mike.

Yup - only Steve McCurry but that was obvious.

Yes, bingo. Three out of three.

McCurry - of course, and boy does that picture get annoying, remind me of the Keanes .
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m884reZBcp1raoccoo1_500.jpg
I like a lot of his stuff but his work is usually only as strong as the story and consequentially the war and other disaster photos are the strongest.

Rineke Dijkstra I think of this

and Alec Soth , any of his photos of a bed.

I don't know any of those people and none of them are smiling so those pics are pretty bad.

The one on top is definitely wearing those fake eye color contacts lenses. Why would anyone do that? Was she an Oscar presenter?

The second one looks like she could play some basketball but she needs to load up on some burgers from Wendy's.

The third one, the guy, needs to probably take a long, detailed bath...i KNOW this.

Let me know if I won anything. I'd take one of those planes the guy is holding as long as he washed it before handing it off.

I got em all right just in the wrong order

I jest.

Rineke Dijkstra used just one Lumedyne
flash for those beach portraits.

"In the beginning I always used really complicated lighting set-ups
because I thought: The more lights the better the picture.
Now I work with as few as few lights as possible"
(take that strobists)

I really love Sleeping By The Mississippi
and that picture of Charles.
I was very disappointed though to find out that Soth was a bit of a spray and prey merchant

"When I was doing the Mississippi work, I didn't have a lot of money, I was very stingy. If something was very good I'd shoot two negatives just to be "
Safe."

Two? Who could even find the time to edit two pictures? Where would you store them?

Havent gone through Looking East for a while.
I admire McCurrys drive more than his actual pictures.
He's a great photographer but his pictures don't prick me,
they're eye candy. It's my issue I'm sure, maybe Im just not bringing enough to them.

Now how about Robert Adams, Diane Arbus
& Cindy Sherman.

Cheers

Sean

Yup. One, two, three. Bibbidi-bobbidi-boo.

So far as I recall, I haven't seen the second two photos. The first, yes, that one I remember.

I know they are real and all but those Afghan girl's eyes always looked faked to me, like how the photographers on PNet or Model Mayhem brighten the whites with Crest toothpaste and erase any sign of blood vessels or actual humanity. Excellent back story though.

Dijkstra had to be the original Strobist, hackneyed lighting and all. Sorry but I can't get past the really bad annual report lighting attempts. Just gratingly awful.

And Soth. Do you mean Sloth? Sorry I don't care how hard it was to carry an 8x10 camera. I've done it. It's not really.

Humbug, these are iconic mediocrity, not great photos in spite of whatever the art world says.

Wow, exactly, except I was thinking of another image of Dijkstra's from the beach series. The thin boy in a red bathing suit. Thanks I really enjoyed this post.

To me one just simply does not belong and is way outclassed by the others.

I didn't know this was a competition… Anyway, Steve McCurry is known for one amazing shot (and a bunch of others that are 'merely' outstanding) so it's no surprise that this one has such good recognition. Rineke Dijkstra's work I don't know at all well and as for Soth, well, some of his motel images came to mind - chiefly the towels on a bed arranged in the shape of two swans. However, I should have guessed this one as you've shown it here before. :0)

You prove your point with McCurry. For Dijkstra I'm less sure: you could have chosen another one from that series and it would be recognized as 'must be Dijkstra'.
The Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam has 7 from that series on show. I recently saw how a group of girls from that age group reacte to them: "WE are not gawky, WE are self-assured". That was worth a photo in itself

With the exception of the Steve Mc Curry I can't help thinking if you showed these images to a non photo enthusiast they'd go " And.............."

Steve McCurry, who can forget that image? I had the original National Geographic magazine in which it was published and I still remember the impact it had on me.

Rineke Dijkstra and Alec Soth, these two images at least do nothing for me. I see images like these and I just wonder why they are considered good photographs and not just snapshots.

The McCurry was a too easy. I've seen it everywhere. Even if I try to avoid seeing it, I am sure I will. Perhaps that proves your point.

I missed the Soth because I like some of his photos and I guess I never thought this really stood out as an iconic photo. There are other Soths I like as well or better.

Got me on the second, though.

I knew Rene Dijkstra was famous for her portraits of adolescents on the beach but I didn't know which one constituted her most famous. I got McCurry and Soth though.

There sure are a lot of grumblers in the comments. I think your next exercise should be Helmut Newton, Robert Mapplethorpe, and Jock Sturges... if only to punish those who Google these names at work.

I agree that many famous photographers are known for just one photo. It's similar to the music business. Big name acts usually found success with a just a handful of hits. Van Halen will never perform another concert without "Jump" somewhere in the set list. I think the key to ongoing success is having a large and interesting back catalog. That way, when you hook the general public with a hit there is a wealth of material for the new fan base to dig into. You'll be known by many for that one famous photo, but you'll have a chance to develop a fan base.

For Steve McCurry, how could it be any other photograph? I didn't recognize the second photographer's name, but I did recognize the photograph, so maybe you have a point. But Alec Soth, I thought of 3 and your pick wasn't any of them (but would be if I had picked a few more).

I like photographers who work in books or series rather than single images. If I list photographers in my head, none of them pop up because of a single image. Robert Frank, well The Americans of course, but the book, not any of the individual images. The same for Sally Mann's Immediate Family. Michael Kenna or Keith Carter, too hard to pick one, even a single book. William Eggleston has a few hits, but only really succeeds in the context of his huge body of work. I think Steven Shore intentionally tries not to have any hits, but he is certainly well known. Nicholas Nixon's hit is obviously The Brown Sisters but only because it isn't a single photograph.

Give me a book over a single photograph any day!

Yes, Yes, and Yes. Weren't each of them a book cover, just to further drive home their Greatest Hits status.

But on the other side of the street, look at Lee Friedlander. I think I can usually spot a Friedlander pretty quickly (especially since they tend to come in flurries), but I can't think of a hit. Maybe a set of 12 pictures that together span his five or six different themes.

scott

I recognized the Steve McCurry shot. I've heard of #2, and never heard of #3. I wonder what this says about me? (I really don't want to know. ;<) )

With best regards.

Stephen

The comments to this entry are closed.