Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Garry Winogrand said:  (Read 5685 times)
Gulag
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 216


« Reply #20 on: May 12, 2014, 11:42:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Here is one my favorite quotes.

Logged

“For art to be art it has to cure.”  - Alejandro Jodorowsky
iluvmycam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 352


WWW
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2014, 01:28:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Most of what Winogrands shot was garbage. He had a few nice shots. The same handful of pix that is always brought out when his name is discussed. (Ladies talking on a bench, feeding the elephant, acrobat in a parade, etc.) He was just a terrible photog. He was great at making lots of junk shots, he should get an award for that.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Garry-WINOGRAND-Women-Are-Beautiful-c-1970-Printed-1981-Silver-Print-SIGNED-/320947133342?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item4ab9f09b9e

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Garry-WINOGRAND-Women-Are-Beautiful-c-1970-Printed-1981-Silver-Print-SIGNED-/321141031135?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item4ac57f40df

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Garry-WINOGRAND-Women-Are-Beautiful-LOS-ANGELES-1961-Silver-Print-SIGNED-/321236085770?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item4acb29ac0a

If you ever get a chance to see his rodeo book you can feast your eyes on page after page of absolute crap.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Garry-Winogrand-Stock-Photographs-Fort-Worth-Show-and-Rodeo-Texas-HC-DJ-1st-ED-/151282526318?pt=Antiquarian_Collectible&hash=item233924286e
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 868



« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2014, 03:48:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Most of what Winogrand shot was garbage.

Most of what everyone shoots is garbage. Even me. Even you. The best Winogrands are among my favorites by anyone.

 Wink

-Dave-
Logged
Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 782



WWW
« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2014, 10:36:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually this can be said about most famous photographers.  I've notice that whenever I check, it's always the same pictures they are more famously identified with and which draw the highest prices.  It's usually a dozen maybe two dozen pictures.  That's it.  The upside of that is we only need that many too to become famous like them.  The downside is that we have to shoot as many bad pictures as they did as well to get there. 
Logged
petermfiore
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 580



WWW
« Reply #24 on: October 05, 2014, 02:16:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Actually this can be said about most famous photographers.  I've notice that whenever I check, it's always the same pictures they are more famously identified with and which draw the highest prices.  It's usually a dozen maybe two dozen pictures.  That's it.  The upside of that is we only need that many too to become famous like them.  The downside is that we have to shoot as many bad pictures as they did as well to get there. 

Alan,
The same goes for painters.....only they 3-5 paintings that speak to the ages!

Peter
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6424



WWW
« Reply #25 on: October 05, 2014, 11:57:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Peter's right, Alan. And the other thing to note is that, relative to painting, photography is a very young art. History's great paintings have been culled by time and public interest to a very few. Consider that at the time the Impressionists were being spurned by the art powers in France, the painters whose work those same powers were pushing are now pretty much known only to art historians. The culling process is still going on for photographs. I think we're just about there for Atget's work, but we haven't finished the job for people like Cartier-Bresson or Ansel Adams, and certainly not for their successors.

(We're also haven't yet culled Jackson Pollock's drippings.)
Logged

pluton
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 74


« Reply #26 on: October 06, 2014, 03:10:07 AM »
ReplyReply

I love the story about the time he was lecturing to a group of museum curators. He had, I think, this photograph projected on the screen: http://adequatebird.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Garry-Winogrand-imgSrv_020.jpg. With his nose in the air, one curator who didn't really think of photography as art asked, "Mr. Winogrand, how long did it take you to produce this 'work of art?'" Garry turned around and looked at the picture for a minute and then said, "I think it was 1/100th of a second."

I thought, as I read this paragraph, that his answer was going to be something to the effect of: "My whole lifetime, up until now"
Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2894


« Reply #27 on: October 06, 2014, 09:57:41 AM »
ReplyReply

That's the apocryphal Picasso napkin sketch anecdote.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2014, 10:08:45 AM by Isaac » Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2894


« Reply #28 on: October 06, 2014, 10:04:39 AM »
ReplyReply

…it's always the same pictures…

We, the audience, have limited memory and limited interest - so we only remember a few of the great pictures.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad