I'm trying to figure out why nobody responded to this...

[see_r]

I mean this guy is like 93 or 94 years old...a pretty good piece of history

here from a photography perspective. I mean here was a guy who was actually

focused on the human aspect of photography vs. just a bunch of gearhead

philosophical eggheadism.

 

..........

 

 

I had the pleasure of spending yesterday morning with Joe Schwartz. His home

is filled with his work, which is not only an important documentation of

history but also clear evidence of one who has mastered composition and has

loved his subjects.

 

A link for more information --> http://www.joeschwartzphoto.com/

[petemillis]

Chip, I was waiting for you to say more about your visit. Like what did you talk about and so on.

[markus maurer]

I would have loved to see a bit more of his photos on his website.

But thanks for the interesting link Chip. greetings, Markus

[jennifer_durand]

It wasn't a question.

[lee_shively]

I didn't see the original post but I'm glad I now have seen some of Swartz's work. I love jazz from that period of time--up through the early 1960's, really.

[jgalyon]

although i suppose the forum is set up for "questions"...it IS the casual conversation forum...not the question and answer forum. we don't have to ask questions to evoke conversation.

 

just saw the post and will respond when i have a bit more time...

definitely worthy of conversation!

[jennifer_durand]

John "we don't have to ask questions to evoke conversation."

Some of us read the message and the link and don't comment on either. Its not that we

don't appreciate the link or the artist, in this case, we are all under pressure on some

occasions when we pop onto the forum.

 

I believe many more people have appreciated this link than messages posted to it.

Posters and photographers wanting critiques need to be patient, non of us do what we do

here as full time job. We are all photographers who contribute when and where we can.

 

Perhaps it may be an idea to have a counter on each thread to see how many people stop

by and read. That would give a better indication of what was of interest to the forum

members. This would need to be requested by someone - perhaps Chip who has concerns.

[._._z]

<small><i><blockquote>

 

I'm trying to figure out why nobody responded to this...

 

</blockquote> </i> </small><p>

 

...Because I didn't want to argue the arguable proposition that Schwartz was "obviously" a master of composition, a lover of his subjects, and a documentarian to boot. His site a little more revealing as it acknowledges the 'sense of nostalgia' in his photos -- quite unavoidable given the age of the photos.

[see_r]

Pete, Thanks for your comment--you imply a correct point, which is that I should have elaborated initially. Actually, I didn't feel qualified to elaborate on the details of his work because I felt it was beyond me (I mostly only know about landscape). But perhaps the following would illustrate the quality in Joe I discovered in what education refers to as an 'ah hah' experience:

 

After several hours of looking at Joe's work, which was all over his house, my wife wanted a picture of Joe with my friend and his 2 year old child who live 2 doors down from Joe. I stood in the background next to my wife and we both tried to invoke a smile from the child. We could not. Then Joe chimed in and invoked the desired response. Now originally I wasn't going to comment on this because it is not my image to provide the illustration for support or for others here on PN to interpret. My wife would have to post the before and after, since they are her images. But what I discovered from that is that Joe has a great ability to interact with his subjects to get the expressions he aimed to catch on film. That is what I meant by loving his subjects. In sociology, it is called "participant observation."