Which photographers have made history and why?

In the history of photography, who do you think has set unprecedented artistic and technical standards and why? Please share your

knowledge.

This is a wide-ranging question, Antonio. <br>Whilst I have some personal sentiments about <a

href="http://www.view.com.au/dombrovskis/1-0.htm"> one particular entrant </a> in <a

href="http://www.iphf.org/Hall_Of_Fame/Inductees.html"> this comprehensive listing.</a><br>I'm sure that there

are many others who can think of photographers who ought to be included amongst the distinguished artists in the

second link above...

Julia Margaret Cameron, also on that list, because in the early days of photography, she looked for beauty and emotion, rather than precision and accuracy.

"Unprecedented technical standards" ? Louis Daguerre, maybe Ansel Adams for formalizing the zone system.<p>

"Unprecedented artistic standards" ? I am not aware of any artistic "standards". That notion of "standards generally goes against the underlying concept of "art".

I would personally add Paul Caponigro to this list.....

Martin Munkcasi, Henri Cartier-Bresson, NASA's astronauts, Dr. Erich Salomon, Robert Capa, Jay Maisel, Elliot Porter, Pete Turner, Richard Avedon, Diane Arbus, Garry Winogrand, Irving Penn, Julia Cameron, Ansel Adams, The guys who invented Kodachrome, Paul Caponigro, James Nachtwey, Gjon Mili, Dr. Harold Edgerton, Edward Curtis, this list might go on for awhile, Annie Leibowitz,...

 

The whys would fill volumes.

<B>Keith</B>, thank you<BR><B>Ellis</B>, I am trying to get into a deeper conversation to actually learn from you guys'

knowledge and try to understand photography a little better. There are many great photographers to think of from but I

would like you guys to choose the one or two that you believe being the most outstanding for what they have done and

briefly describe the reasons behind the greatness of their work. This way the conversation is going somewhere, otherwise if

I wanted a list of famous photographers I would just look them up on the internet..

There's a problem here, the title has nothing to do with the question, so it's very confusing what you are really asking. Nick Ut made more history than many much more techically/artistically successful photographers.

 

And maybe that's the fundamental issue. There are things that appeal to photographers and things that matter in the bigger world. Decide what you really want to know.

Ansel Adams for demystifying the science of applied densitometry and making it a teaching tool via the "Zone System".

 

Henri Cartier-Bresson for fusing modern art ideas about composition and framing and documentary /photo-journalism's sense of the significance of the moment and adding his own sense of humanity and visual story telling.

 

Elliot Erwitt for adding his sense of humor to what Cartier-Bresson was doing.

 

Eugene Richards and James Nachtwey for not flinching.

Photographers like Lewis Hine, Robert Capa, and W Eugene Smith, who brought a social consciousness to photography, especially if the title of the posting is observed. These were photographers who brought attention to social injustice and thus helped to make history rather than just taking pretty pictures.

Were all these photographers' contributions really <b><u>unprecedented</u></b>?

MacGruder.

Location. 1963

Who was the first Playboy photographer?

Are you considering artistic and technical as being separate?

 

For example, William Henry Fox Talbot invented the negative / positive process; but, artistically his photographs were not very influential on other photographers. His contribution is unprecedented as up to the time he invented it - there was not a negative / positive process. However, it could not be considered a complete process without the help of Sir John Frederick William Hershel (an acquaintance of Fox Talbot's). He suggested that Fox Talbot might want to try hyposulfite of soda (sodium thiosulphite) to fix his images permanently - thus, making the complete process.

 

Going a bit further on technical only, Herschel also popularized the word "photography" to describe the process in paper published by the Royal Society. This paper gave the new process a legitimate, formal name as Hershel was a highly respected scientist. He also defined other photographic nomenclature. Although not a photographer, Herschel's contributions cannot be ignored. Does this meet the requirement for unprecedented? You'll have to decide that for yourself.

Ruth Harriet Louise

"Who was the first Playboy photographer?"

 

John, Technically, that would have been John Kelley, who is no relation to you. I know one of the early Playboy photographers, 54 thru 56 - Charles Bacon, because I was his assistant in the early 70s. Since he had established commercial clients; Lever Bros, General Mills, Kelloggs, etc; he worked under a pseudonym.

Atget, the pioneer, because of his direct and indirect influence to many great photographers that came after him. If I absolutely had to

choose a photographer that stands there al alone above all the others, it would be Eugene Atget.

Glenn... you abandoned a great job!

O. Winston Link's steam locomotive/train photographs using multiple flash bulb units might qualify as making history. He caught moving trains at night with self designed lighting hardware that used #25 bulbs and large format cameras.

I don't think famous still photographers have ever had as much historic impact as unknown still photographers in local newspapers: eg. http://www.al.com/unseen/unseen.pdf

 

Further, I don't think any still photographer has ever had anywhere near as much historic impact as have film news cameramen and editors. Why? Because news cameramen have had television.

 

America's civil rights movement was aided tremendously by the first Mitchell 16mm news cameras, operated by unknown camerament, who filmed Bull Connor's firehos, club, and dog attacks on his own peaceful, heroic citizen demonstrators...mostly his own neighbors.

 

The stills of those years were powerful, but not widely distributed (except perhaps by Life Magazine), and not timely due to publication lag.

W. Eugene Smith is credited by a large number of Magnum photographers as their inspiration.

John Kelly, are you still beating that "motion beats still" drum? I know I should just let it ride, but you're

yanking my chain again.

 

I think historically Hines, Capa, and Smith --to mention only a few -- had far more impact than the newsreels,

which in their time and place were a fleeting impression, on screen for only a few moments and then gone.

 

Life, Look, and many other magazines had vast circulation and cannot historically be dismissed as "not widely

distributed (except perhaps by Life Magazine)". Earlier, that picture of the little mill girl (literally, a

little girl) by Hines, to mention only one, was one of those important documents in bringing home to people what

was going on in a way that Henry Mayhew and others could not communicate. Later, even in Viet Nam, the napalmed

girl or the Tet Viet Cong fighter with the pistol to his head were powerful influences, although I certainly

acknowledge that by that time the video (read, TV) had come to be important in informing public opinion. If a

still photographer manages to catch a "decisive moment" it freezes that moment in time and in the mind in a way

that neither real life nor video can do. Capa's 'militia man falling to his death', regardless of its

circumstances, is far more compelling than a motion picture shot of the same event would have been. The latter

would have had the impact of someone getting shot down in a John Wayne movie of the time.

Industrial photography or industrial heritage:

The famous couple Bernd and Hilly Becher photographed industrial sites - warehouses, water towers, storage silos in Germany. Their work was more conceptual (thus being the pioneers of Conceptual art) and emphasizing the typology of industrial buildings which were often placed in a grids. They humanized the declining industry of the prewar times.

 

http://www.signandsight.com/features/338.html

JDM, are you still beating that "still beats film" drum? :-)

 

How many decision makers saw Lewis Hines' photos?

 

We're taught that Hines was influential: not true: the organization of the people themselves was the engine of change, not 19th century photographs.

 

The Civil Rights movement and opposition to our invasion of Vietnam was almost entirely a matter of face-to-face organization by young people, not geezers with Life Magazine subscriptions.

 

Capa's importance was almost entirely in WWII, and nobody knew it when he was blown up in Vietnam, covering the French.

 

The magazines piled up around your recliner, along with the cat food cans, died for lack of readership. Americans were glued to the tube by the late 50s.

 

America's opposition to continuing destruction in Vietnam had nothing to do with the Ut photo. TV's 1970 coverage of the My Lai trial ( while Vietnamese and Americans were still being slaughtered) was more important in creating debate among those Americans who were still somehow spaced out.

 

Haeberle's My Lai photos (eg http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/trial08.jpg) were more powerful than the burning girl, but we prefer to think about her because we have been trained to think she was an anomaly:

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/mylai.htm

 

"I certainly acknowledge that by that time the video (read, TV) had come to be important in informing public opinion" Oh?

Weegee (and other news photographers) because he made the man in the street look at pictures. All the others would be forgotten if photography was ignored by the general public.