jorn ake Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 I just spent the day looking through the Diane Arbus exhibit at theMet, and I think that the inclusion of all her notes and some of herequipment is one of the best things I have seen in a posthumousretrospective. I saw a show of Lartigue's work in Paris - work whichwas all about what camera he had at what point in his life - and therewasn't a single camera to be found. Quite an ommission I think,especially for a photographer. Granted formalist art critics (whichPeter Schejldahl of the New Yorker seems to be) feel that one shouldonly look at the work and not at the artist or the process, I thinkthat if you are trying to improve as photographer, seeing how an imagegot made is key. Equipment is part of that. For example: Arbus seems to have first worked with a meterless Nikon F, but lookingat the contact sheets provided, she shot nearly entire rolls withevery shot in portrait orientation. Landscape is pretty well thedefault orientation, so I can only guess from the number of portraitorientation shots and prints that Arbus "saw" somethingcompositionally that led her to make that choice - something I amguessing that had something to do with shooting people (who tend to bevertical unless sleeping), but might (might) have also had to do withisolating the subject to control the image's psychological impact. She next worked with a Rolleiflex, which she writes took her a year toswitch to after using the Nikon. What's most interesting to me thoughis that she used a Rollei Wide, not the standard Rollei. That may bewhy many of her photos have strangely proportioned people - I mean wasthe head on that photo, Boy with Toy Hand Grenade, really that big orwas it the wide angle lens working its magic? Looks like the latter.It also explains perhaps how/why she got so close to some of hersubjects, shots that look much too close (to me) for a standard Rolleilens. Later still she starts using a Mamiya C33 with a 55mm, 80mm and 135mmlens. Again, this helps (me) make sense of some of her shots, givenwhat the subjects look like in their surroundings, where she must havebeen standing in relation to them, how much depth of field is in thephotograph and the changes in some of the portraiture (which begins tofeel less intimate, less sweaty, perhaps merely because she did nothave to stand so close, given the 135mm lens instead of the RolleiWide's lens.) And finally she borrows a new Pentax 6x7, which she admits in writingto "lust after." We all know that language here. Further, she saysthat she feels using the 6x7 with its eye-level finder and largenegative size will be the best of both worlds - a medium format Nikon- allowing her to "make pictures more narrative and temporal, lessfixed and single and complete and isolated." What a greatadvertizement for a 6x7! This statement leads me to guess that perhapsthe whole square thing (almost an Arbus trademark) was incidental toimage quality - using a TLR in order to use medium format film and geta larger negative, the square only being a secondary result as anaesthetic tool (perhaps a duh-moment for me, but sometimes I am slow.) In a sense, it sounds to me from reading her notes that she was awareher photographs might have been over-taken by a Diane Arbus "Look"rather than progressing in a way that might challenge the facility shehad developed in creating that look over the course of her career. Who knows? She killed herself. I have never accepted the cult thingmyself. All I know is that I like her photography and see it as acontinuation of the sort of work that August Sander did with hisPeople of the Twentieth Century. Sure she posed and collaborated with her subjects, but so did Sander.Sure she took a lot of photographs of freaks, but looking through thephotographs in this show, the people who are typically freaks in oursociety are no more (and perhaps are less) freakish that the Waspysocialites and hat ladies she shot in between. Just like Sander, I think Arbus' photographs show a sense that theabsurdities of society create a nut house the same size as the world,and that some people got lost while others live on, and none of thismakes a whole lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gene m Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Very well said Jorn. I'm a fan of Arbus' work and have read all the baloney about her photos being "easy" to take due to the subject matter. Your last sentence sums up her work (and the way many people look at the world) perfectly. Bravo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_m Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 I'm not comparing myself to Diane Arbus but I also take probably 90% of my photos in portrait orientation. I've always found 35mm cameras a nuisance in that they all are landscape oriented. One of the cameras I particularly like is my Kiev 645 since it is vertical format. Its also real nice to get 16 shots on a roll instead of 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelging Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 I saw the Arbus exibit which is still at the Scottdale (Arizona) Art museum. I think many of her photos are great, but the boy with the toy grenade is my favorite, Its hard to tell if he is suffering from excitement,frustration ,or just nuts. It's a very good exibit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack_lo_..._t_o Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 I came away from one of her shows feeling that she liked and appreciated her subjects, perhaps even identified with them. Among the funniest and freakiest looking pair were Susan Sonntag and her son, who I believe were friends of hers. What year did the Pentax 6x7 come out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugh_crawford1 Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 The contact sheet of the boy with the grenade makes it clear that he was being silly for the camera in that one shot. I believe that the contact sheet for that is in the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aizan_sasayama Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 see, diane arbus couldn't have been a great photographer if she lusted after a camera. ;) the pentax came out in 1969. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfophotos Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Wow. I have a Pentax 6x7...the idea of carrying around for street photography would mean that I would have to go to the gym and start working out...that is more than a big Nikon F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorn ake Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 Thanks Gene. I am actually working on this essay writing thing, trying to make something of myself. A table lamp. I think I would make a nice table lamp. Yeah, Arbus certainly wasn't a wimp when it came to carrying cameras around. There is a photo of her working in Washington Square Park with the Mamiya around her neck with a strobe bolted on, plus a gi-normous (bigger that giant and enormous) camera bag. What's more - she is standing on tiptoe to get the composition she wants. She was not a large person. So get thee to thy Pentax 6x7 and streetwards goeth thou without complaint! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connealy Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Thanks to a heads-up from Michael Ging I was able to visit the show in Scottsdale this week featuring many photos by Arbus. There were works by many of the giants of XX-Century photography including Robert Frank, August Sander and Wegee. I thought Frank's pictures were the most conventionally beautiful in terms of contast and tonalities, but Arbus's images were the most substantial and arresting in the show by far.<br> It was never necessary to read the captions to recognize the Arbus style even though the pictures are cropped tightly around the subjects and the lighting is often rather flat. Each of the images seems to penetrate to the core elements of the subject's personality and life experience. It is also remarkable, as I think was alluded to in the accompanying text, that Arbus was able to meaningfully examine the essential characteristics of our society through portrayals of society's outliers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorn ake Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 Yeah exactly - alienation as the universal human emotion. That Scottsdale museum is one of the best small museums in the country. They have that great James Turrell skyspace that is in a little courtyard just off the main entrance. Strange enough, one of the other really good small museums is over at ASU - the ASU Art Museum in its great Antoine Predock building that puts the museum mainly underground. I lived in Phoenix 3 years ago and just was there for a conference last weekend. Nice flowers in the desert, eh? Man oh man I love that desert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrypittman Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 Jorn, Thanks for the great review... Unfortunately I cannot see the show but I do love Arbus. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff bishop Posted March 18, 2005 Share Posted March 18, 2005 "Boy with Hand Grenade" is one of my favorite photos. Strange and yet perfectly appropiate at the same time. I don't doubt that there's a little bit of her in that boys expression. Wonderful work, a true artist. Thank you for sharing this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebecca_hartley Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 <p>When you say she used a wide rollei lens, would she have bought this seperate to the Rolleiflex and where could I get one?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
q.g._de_bakker Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Yes. A "Rollei Wide" is a separate TLR camera, with a fixed wide angle lens.<br>Best place to look for one is eBay. Expect to have to pay a lot of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now