Thomas Roma - why is his work highly regarded?

I just received a copy of Roma's Found in Brooklyn. I'd like to know

why critics and fellow photographers mark out his work in the street

photography genre for distinction. I'm not asking because I don't

like his work, but rather because a discussion of this question might

help me understand it better. Of course, if someone doesn't like his

work, the reasons would also be interesting. Thanks.

Thomas who?

 

I do like his stuff. I think his black church stuff is stunning. I am not the best critique in town - always hate to have to name what I like and what I don't. Sure someone else can do a much better job and chime in.

 

The reason I see his stuff so highly regarded is called "right moment at right place" which is always true for artists. For many others, you just keep shooting until one day someone sees you as a jewel. But until then, enjoy yourself.

Hard to describe in words without being treacly or over-the-top, but I like his stuff a lot so I'll put myself out there and try. I think his work (Sicilian Passage, Higher Ground; I don't have Found in Brooklyn or anything else) is quietly masterful. It reminds me a lot of Bruce Davidson's East 100th St project. He photographs things plainly, as they are, as he sees things, and yet his photographs are poetic---not necessarily visually poetic, because he doesn't rely on clever compositional puns and gimmicks like, say, Elliott Erwitt or Cartier-Bresson---but poetic in an earthy, human sense. He approaches his subjects respectfully and empathically; they are never the unwitting butt of some visual joke. I wish I had a larger literary point of reference so I could make that type of analogy; I'm sure there must be hundreds of examples that would work.

He was mentioned at the end of "Bystander", and has a photo "Sunset Park" in it (Bystander) which I really admire. Andrew Lee's description above certainly could be about that photo - I'd be interested in seeing more of his stuff.