matt_l.1

RE: Robert Frank as a non-cropper ... I had a History of Photography teacher relay an

anecdote about one of his photography instructors who idolized Frank's work, and

assuming Frank did not crop, the photog, for better or worse, did not crop his own images

and became quite proficient at getting what he wanted in-camera. But my teacher related

that they have both found out post facto that Frank DID crop ... just along the same 2:3

proportion. <p>

I can't verify or provide evidence, but this was an anecdote I was told ;)

(I will admit I am guilty of the same vanity in relation to both Frank and HCB ... and have

come to the conclusion of 'allowing myself' to crop on the same proportion, as I very much

enjoy and visualize in the 2:3).

Extremely good photography - in question to 'how'd he do the drug series', i recommend a

look at this book: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00005BBW6/

qid=1087357096/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-8099863-9045730?

v=glance&s=books&n=507846 . <br><p>I'm reading this right now (got out of a bargain

bin)

and there are a number of scenes in the first part of the book that deal with this

photographer's work with addicts and other 'dangerous' people she wants to photograph.

Not all the way through the book so I cannot give an unconditional recommendation ... but

so far (half-way) it is quite fascinating and illuminating.

Heyo -- thank you all for the kind words! Stephen, these two were both done with the

50mm hexanon. I agree that the first is better than the second.. but i just wanted to

post the two workable shots i took with my leica. Unfortunately (!) my paper's machine

processer for BW film has a nasty tendency to leave uglyugly developing marks all

over the film.... this is usually ok for publication of quick shots, but is quite

depressing for more artistic feature shots like these. Also, i post this second shot in

comparison to photo #1 in my p.net folder -- both are performance shots with the

piano's innards :) I suppose we prefer the non-leica one? (as heretical as it is ;))

Is it cheating if I say both are helpful? ;)

<br>

In my personal field of photojournalism I find it essential to learn from the best: hear

their critics of my work, get their advice and try to please their expert eye. But it is

also essential to run my work and ideas by non-photographers to gauge reaction to a

photo ... I need to remember that in the end, my audience is the un-(photo)educated

public. I find it much less worthwhile to run my news and sports photos by

photographers who don't practice these specialized trades -- they usually cannot add

anything to what a non-photog could say about the overall mood and aesthetic.

<br>

So, i practice both --- but i really think that opinion of the experts in my field, my

idols and heroes, is most helpful, trusted, and wanted.

-Matt Lutton (mattlutton.com)

I would first like to thank Stephen W publically for helping a student get his hands on

a Leica -- his help and service were impecable, i really cannot say enough. My M3 is

simply the most beautiful tool i've ever had the pleasure of working with.

<p>

Secondly, I wanted to post a shot or two from my first roll with this camera. Craig

Sheppard,

a world-renowned pianist, is a senior artist-in-resident at the University of

Washington (UW). I shot him on assignment for The Daily, the wholly student paper of

the UW -- and had but 20min with him while he gave a lesson to a graduate student

preparing for his final exams. Feel free to visit <a HREF="http://www.mattlutton.com/

piano.html">http://www.mattlutton.com/piano.html</a> or <a HREF="http://

www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=368621">http://www.photo.net/photodb/

folder?folder_id=368621</a> for more images and further information.

<p>

So, Thanks Again Stephen -- and thanks to all for providing a very informative place

for me to learn about these beautiful cameras. If anyone has any comments about

these or any other shots of mine -- i'm very welcome to take them. <br>

Cheers, Matt Lutton (mattlutton.com)<div></div>

I shoot with a D1 and D1H at my paper, and have never seen anything approaching

this sharpness with my work. Sure, i'm not in a studio and never have good lighting ..

but i shoot all sorts of 'nice' glass and these images tell me that my camera's are of

more worth than I gave them. Beautiful shots --- btw, when do you put the leica-

phone into production?

Make that a third -- has been in my bag for many months now, i don't carry anything

else to clean with and this works perfectly well

When I see Salgado's work, I am struck by the profound dichotomy between the

beauty of his photography and the (often) horror and pain depicted. This complexity,

I think, is what draws me to his work. My personal take is that a combination of

photographic aesthetics and a truthful capture of a (important) moment is what

creates the great shots and distinguishes the greatest photographers from the rest.

<br>

Of course, there are exceptions... However i think in the end... pure truth can still

create a successful documentary or photojournalistic shot whereas pure aesthetics

will fail.

<br>

To answer the question of which is more powerful: I think for most photographers the

first glance will reveal the technical aesthetics (as we're trained, i suppose), followed

by the scene at hand. For me, the combination of the two elements is what elicits my

reaction, powerful or not. For the general population, not thereby concerned with the

business or technical sides of what went into the picture, it is the truth, the scene and

situation, presented that provides for the reaction. But sure, often times, pleasing

aesthetics can make the scene clearer to the average viewer.

<br>

Personally, I strive to create those complex reactions that I so admire in Salgado's

work. But, often times in the end, I would rather concentrate on capturing the scene/

the truth rather than missing or clouding it with "pretty" aesthetics. Feel free to go

here: <a HREF="http://www.mattlutton.com/bio.html">http://www.mattlutton.com/

bio.html</a> to read my artist's statement, that may or may not clarify what I just

rambled out ;)

Spectacular work -- something i'll look to for inspriation as i follow my own path of

college photography. Much congrats to you and your son!

One man's opinion <p>

As has been said, this book was made to appeal to the mass market - and i think

(unfortunately) it is quite sucessful in that regard. What it all boils down to for me is

the notion of 'manufacturing consent' - paint the rosy picture of america, spread it

everywhere to further the ideal (among Americans) that we, and america, are so great.

In essence, give them something to fight for. Yes, i'm calling this a sort of

propaganda. This oozes patriotism - when patriotism is being used a rallying call for

an administration and their agenda. I'll put it this way: it does what it is designed to

do quite well, but i loathe it for what it aims to be.

<p>

And, on the photography note - there are few pictures that really stand out for me.

The 'stock photography' feel of it is quite apparant, though there is some good

photojournalism shots in there --- ithink they're more deserving of a picture story

with captions, though.

First off, much thanks for responding to my question on photo.net

<p>

I want to start by clarifying my comment regarding the use of B&W film for my work -

i mention that i think it is stunningly beautiful, but it is because it conveys the

emotion and depth of a situation so much more to me than simply a color photo,

especially digital. It is in the sense that grainy black and white shows something that

the eye doesn't exactly see - like my editor told me, go get the picture that an

amateur can't grab with their point and shoot; get the shot that you wouldn't see just

by looking at the scene.

<p>

I love bw film because, for me, it is so much more personal -- i connect with the

subject both as a photographer and viewer, perhaps this is me but i love it so much

more than the stuff i get digitally. I suppose this is part of my inner artistry coming

out..

<p>

And as to doing documentary work in my own hometown -- I do this as much as i

can, its simply that it doesn't/won't get published in our paper, a campus daily. Look

at my folders 'beth's cafe' and 'peace rallies' ... i think these qualify as documentaries?

(remember, peace rallies was shot in my senior year of highschool and is my first

such experience shooting something a subject that i hold Very dear over a period of

time. i'm quite proud of what i ended up with - it is currently being shown at a local

bookstore to some notable acclaim).

<p>

I love documenting things, and i do try and do it to the best of my abilities to grow as

an artist/photographer/photojournalist. I posted this question as i don't feel my

current situation shooting at my paper gets me where i want to go as a photographer

--- surely i can still shoot and work on my documentaries, but it is entirely on my

own time (i.e. teaching myself). I'm wanting to find out if there is a place where i can

go to better learn this style in a more academic and technical setting -- i.e. a

photoschool like brooks (who has a visual journalism program, and i would be able to

specialize in documentary work).

<p>

This is what i'm getting at - perhaps i wasn't too clear. Again, THANK YOU VERY

MUCH for your time, and i'd Love to hear if the info contained herein ads anything

more to your understanding of me, my desires and how i should go about them.

I want to thank you all for some very, very thoughtful advice --

<p>

i've got much to think about. A note on my 'domestic assignments' -- for my paper,

especially as a freshman shooting on an older staff, i'm continuely being sent to

shoot lectures, student groups and environmental portraits. With the low light

limiting shots and most people not willing to give more than 5min to a portrait, i'm

just not pleased with the prospects of growing as a well rounded photographer. The

assignments, in my view, are monotonous and boring, and especially unprofound. I

would Love to do picture stories - i think, even in doing one in my community, i

would learn a great deal, create good images and have an enjoyable time. But, with

my paper, i hardly have the opportunity to do so -- thats why i ask if going away to

actually study photojournalism is better than 'student on-the-job training' ... but

where to go?

<p>

Also, what is your opinion of Brooks? I heard a couple people underhandedly dismiss

it - i'd like to know why you think so. It seems so far in my research a great place to

study... but you might not think so. Why's this? I'd love to avoid going somewhere

wrong ;)

<p>

Again, Much thanks to Everyone thats helping me out!

Hello there -

Please excuse me if this is considered too off topic - i post here as i like this group, i

think you all are probably best to respond and as i think the topic does relate

abstractly..

<p>

I want to be a documentary photojournalist - like Sabastiao Salgado, Mary Ellen Mark

etc etc.. I just love BW film, the grain, the available light shooting (traditional Leica

style, perhaps). I realize that this genre of shooting is getting more into the realm of

art than photojournalism ... much more so in the new digital age. But, there is still

journalism involved.

<p>

I am currently going to the University of Washington, and am shooting for the campus

newspaper ... but i find this 'domestic' shooting quite boring. I want to do

international shooting that has purpose and impact ..

I'm looking at Brooks Institute of Photography, their visual journalism program. From

what i understand they've gone completely digital (to my chagrin), but i still think that

i can learn a bunch about real shooting there, but i do wonder if it does drift away

from what i really want to do as for a career / as an artist.

<p>

My question (finally) is how you would recommend me going about this goal - of

shooting international in some form resembling Salgado. I have an intense drive for

photography - it is what i do. Are there other schools to look at? Does this program

get me to where i want to go? Or do i go on my own and teach myself?

I'm really kind of lost on my journey right now, I want to improve in All aspects of my

work .. and i really don't feel like i am or can in my current situation.

Thank you all for my ideas - feel free to add my current portfolio into the context of

your response.

Kelly - if those pictures are from the roll you described , the roll is not ten years old.

The cars pictured are from more recent years (at least '96, if i'm not mistaken)

My office this summer ... shame i'm not still working: but the mariners are the

mariners so of course i'm done....<div></div>

I'll just add... i have spent much time with pro photojournalists and i am fact am a

working pj at my schools paper (a large daily -- third largest daily circulation in

Seattle). So i'm getting the feel for daily assignments and the deadline work (look

through my PN portfolio)-- what i

am more interested in IS the most time consuming, in-depth 'documentary

photojournalism' work of Salgado or perhaps national geographic shooters. I'm sure

this is a lofty goal, but i'm willing to work Hard for it.