NY Times Article on Gary Stochl

Today's Times has an article on recently "discovered" Chicago street

shooter Gary Stochl (free registration required):

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/19/arts/design/19stoc.html

<a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/19/arts/design/19stoc.html>Christopher's link</a>. Soon, a story like this one will be told about one (or more) of the photo.net regulars. I can sense it. (I'm certainly *not* thinking about myself !) Thanks, Christopher.

Here is the 2005 audio piece on him from Chicago Public Radio :<br>

<a href="http://www.wbez.org/DWP_XML/848/2005_04/848_20050422_0835_4795/

segment_204666.ram">http://www.wbez.org/DWP_XML/

848/2005_04/848_20050422_0835_4795/segment_204666.ram</a>

Good for Gary! Very few people are as dedicated as he is so I'm happy he found success. Wish I could find more photos of his though. And I agree with Michael, one day it might be one of us.

Great article, and the one shot they did publish was fantastic. Sad that one

person mentioned reduced his work to the same as Robert Frank's and

thereby categorized him. Tolstoy once said, "Critics are outside of the

contagion of art."

I impressed with his dedication. I don't know what my parents would say if I told them I was moving in with them so I could pursue my art and avoid a full time job for 40 years.

jeez, waste 40 years of one's life and then being classified as an

outsider artist.

<a href="http://www.americanplaces.org/CAPgallery/gary/garyintro.html">

http://www.americanplaces.org/CAPgallery/gary/garyintro.html</a>

<a

href="http://www.americanplaces.org/CAPgallery/gary/garyindex.html">http://www.americanplaces.org/CAPgallery/gary/garyindex.html</a>

I'm new to this forum so typically maybe ingnorent on street photography at present. I notice that the pictures shown from Gary are all over say 15-20 years old. To me the viewing of a past time makes the pictures more intriguing but is this generally the case with street photography? Has it taken this long for Gary to be recognised partly for a (this) reason?

Actually, I prefer to remain anonymous... don't feel like going to live with my parents (who don't need care) to take more pictures... feels sad.

 

Thanks for that link, good article, will look at the pictures as well!

Yep, really nice ones...

Nice story, but the photos are not all that great IMO (at least as far as I can tell from the supplied links above). I can think of a handful of contributors to this forum who consistently produce pix that are more interesting, visually and emotionally. I think the fact that the pix are from "back in the day" (photographs age well IMO) carry them more than the actual merits of the pix themselves.

Very interesting story. About the way he was discovered. Typical overnight success. BTW I do like his photos.

Andrew,

 

I like his photos but I don't disagree with the premise that street photography seems to be valued more with age. Perhaps the historical context of photos 20 or 30+ years old seem to carry more weight in a curator's eyes. Or maybe not enough modern street photogs are pushing their work.

Well, his pictures are interesting, but, there are others on Photo.net who produce images as good or better. And I am surprised tolearn that he has chosen to have never worked!!!! I know ofanother Photo.net regular and I, boith working through the time when we were both undergoing chemo for cancer. I wish I had 40 years to nothave to work, so that I could spend my time doing street photography, and become a famous outsider artist!! I dont know whether to congratulate him for his images, or get angry about his never working a job ever.