vic_. Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 http://tinyurl.com/2mgmwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
35mmdelux Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Groovy. Never saw Ansel as a PJ. I thought Life and Look had more impact on PJ than Fortune? If one considers the demographics, Life and Look would have had more impact because of its wider readership. tks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Thanks, Vic! Lovely collection there! Take a look at #13 (Cooke's photo) and move the page up and down. The Moire pattern from the threads in the shot give the illusion of spinning wheels when the page/photo is moved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtdnyc Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Thanks for the link, Vic. I suspect we are going to see some interesting developments in business photojournalism, now that Conde Nast has published the first issue of Portfolio, its new business title. Fortune probably has quite an archive to draw on, given the stable of TimeLife staff photographers. Forbes less so, since it relies primarily on freelances. Can't say that I would recognize any images from Business Week. The Journal obviously doesn't have much of a photographic history to draw on. It'll be interesting to see what Conde Nast has Annie Liebovitz do for Portfolio, and how the other competing titles respond to business eye candy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Fortune has long championed great photography and hired great photographers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_lee2 Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 I love that Margaret Bourke-White photograph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Fortune was once considered somewhat "progressive." I have a copy from January 1935 that's packed with photojournalism...labor riots, foreign wars, the business of fashion..."Below you see some of Chiang's strong arm methods-an execution in Tiensin with the executioner inspecting his sword. Batches of 200 are decapitated..." Lovely ad for a company called International Business Machines, touting their punchcard "tabulating" system. Exciting ad for Kodak about the excitement of night time photography with their Six-16 camera and a few photoflood lamps... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Kratochvil's pic of Ballmer is so out of place, but totally cool. Also love the Smith pic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Wonder why photos got "less interesting" after 1950? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsr Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 The only time I ever encountered a copy of Fortune magazine was in the office of my wife's gynecologist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 Photos became less interesting after people got television. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbcooper Posted April 27, 2007 Share Posted April 27, 2007 Is it CNN or Fortune that doesn't know the difference between a gondola and a boxcar? 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