 |
Fuck i need a cord for my flash!!
Great to finally see Gilden at work, thanks for the link!
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Thats it, from now on im just gunna get out there and shoot. This guy is an inspiration. Don't hold back and get the shot. No regrets.
Thanks for posting this Mr K.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I got nervous just watching that.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Funny. I just told toong bo that I wished to see him in action. Now I think I have my answer.
It's interesting to see Gilden work. He asserts that people walk like zombies, expressionless, and then it upsets him that people smile because it ruins the photos. It's seem odd to me since most of the expressions in those photographs were in reaction to him. Not that I'm against that but then why get upset about the smiles? It's just one of any number of reactions. It's natural. It makes me think about junk science when people cherry pick for the results one wants to show. Of course, this is not science, at least I don't think that is his purpose. But then why make this assertion about how people are when they walk down the street?
edit: Oh I know.... cuz he's from Brooklyn and he likes to complain. :-)
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
WAXY. (a group admin) edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
yea, quite intimidating... tho I think I'm gonna have to watch it with the sound on to see hear some of what he says/how he says it?
Its always nice to see them in action tho... I really wish those sort of vids came accompanied with a scan of the contact sheets from the day tho!
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
yeah good one joni.
"what is he...not here? i'm taking a picture. i didn't know you owned the street. not here, he's telling me."
-Bruce Gilden
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I like that quote too local, especially with the accent.
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
WAXY. (a group admin) edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
yeah the accent seals the deal.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Yeah.. something tells me it wouldn't come off quite the same for me with my midwestern twang....
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
that was pretty refreshing to see. a few people tell me i'm trying to copy or emulate him but the reality is i'm not.. i've tried to avoid looking at his work/portfolios until i feel i've really found my way.. it's cool to see i generally shoot in a very different style than him.. he's low,vertical, and keeps the flash close to the lens whereas i'm up high(tiptoe), horizontal, and the flash is way out there.. another thing he does that i don't is walk - i'll usually lurk at the same spot and try to use the sun as a second light source.. i like the energy though that he's getting in the pictures by always being on the move.. that's going to actually infulence me now so i kind of wish i didn't watch this but hey, my shit will maybe get better from it..
i'm not trying to talk about myself too much here but the b.gilden thing is always going on inside my head.. very strange relationship i have with this guy..
le purf left a b.gilden comment on one of my photos before that actually looked crazy similar.. i promise though, i never saw his version before i shot mine..
master
grasshopper
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
flat5 (a group admin) edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
" I really wish those sort of vids came accompanied with a scan of the contact sheets from the day tho! "
i was actually hyped on this one because they showed a picture for everything he shot... similar videos usually show only one or two actual images..
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Thanks for posting. Coincidentally, I just bought his book, "A Beautiful Catastrophe" at lunchtime. I saw him as part of a Magnum panel during Toronto's Contact Photography Festival, a week ago Thursday. In an answer to a question from someone who had been hesitant to take a picture because she thought a woman didn't want her picture taken "in that condition," he replied: "If she didn't want her picture taken, she shouldn't have been in public."
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
That was awesome. The part that I really noticed here that I hadn't fully realized when viewing his images, is his hunching down to shoot up at people. He doesn't just stand there and snap them at eye level.
Those of you who are very short, count your blessings.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I was surprised he said in the video that he has been photographing Manhattan since 1981. What was he doing before that? Was he only photographing Brooklyn before that? Coney Island in the 70s?
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
"Those of you who are very short, count your blessings."
i don't know but if i need to get shorter i can bend but for a short person to get taller they better be 12 years old.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Flat5. It is uncanny. Actually, I think of your photography in colour. Call me crazy, but I even see your example has having some yellow and orange hazard colour. Go figure. Anyway.... Gilden sees the world in b/w as he says. Coincidences aside, I view your work separately from Gilden, in a good way, and it is the same with Toong's. It's just different.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
there you go Sikost.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
"I got nervous just watching that. "
yeah, makes me nervous just looking at my own camera, looks like the street version of a shank.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Shank
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
It is funny watching Gilden work, i kind of move around a lot as well, i really do need a cord for the flash for more control!
I really like Gilden work and try to use the flash differently, and like Flat5 , never saw him work before... that was very inspiring! Anyone saw "The life and death of Bruce Gilden"?!?
BrianF: not sure how to interpret what you say here!
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Thanks for posting Mr Karanka. Briggate.com told me all about the Gilden movie after he saw some of it at a Magnum workshop last year... and i've been searching for clips for months! Great to see the man in action after so long... and it doesn't disappoint.
He's a bit bossy isn't he.. "Stop smiling! Walk, walk!!!" haha.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Cool to watch.
Its interesting to hear him say everyone looks the same now (not his exact words). I wonder if thats true or if he is just stuck in his ways and doesn't venture off the streets of Manhattan.
When I look at older photographs the temptation is always to think 'wow it used to be so much more interesting in the 20's / 30's / [insert decade here]' but I had always assumed thats just lazy thinking and that people are just as interesting as they ever were its just that some of the interesting does show itself until the pictures are a little older.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
.................................................. [deleted] says:
Very inspirational to someone like me. Great stuff.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
"Those of you who are very short, count your blessings."
Yeah, they fit in airline seats, don't have to hunch to wash dishes, and eye level shots aren't always facing the ground.
"Not that I'm against that but then why get upset about the smiles?" Something tells he's not really so annoyed that they're smiling (though that doesn't fit into his work) but that his banter is just the way he involves himself with people on the street. Me, I smile at people if eye contact occurs. I'll chat with people if they want. I think everyone probably develops their own rapport with the streets. His just seems a little antagonistic. And that's great.
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
thechrisproject edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
Awesome. I've wanted to see video of Gilden working for some time now.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Wow, that is really confrontational. I wonder how many times he gets thumped for doing that - or because he mostly seems to pick on older people and women, does he get away with it?
I really don't get it - but then his pictures leave me cold too...
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
pH [浪人] [deleted] says:
ohi- is he nasty.
love love unconditional love
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
That is great, i wish you could download off you-tube to watch again and again! Thank you for posting!
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
man the guy is a pain in the ass, I wonder how many times he got hit or spit at by people.... :)
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
willemmas edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
Holy crap, I would hit someone who frightened me like that. great to watch though. Hmm, I'm going to look into his work further before forming any real opinion.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
This man is fucking crazy...
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
andyhewittlock [deleted] says:
Balls. Of. Steel.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Bruce Gilden in conversation with Christine Redmond
from Issue 10 of Source magazine [1997]
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Sciortino said: "Thats it, from now on im just gunna get out there and shoot. This guy is an inspiration. Don't hold back and get the shot. No regrets."
Yeah, well said. His photos are interesting (I think grotesque would apply and I tend to like grotesque in art) but not something I'd aspire to. Still, seeing him in action points out to me that I'm a wuss and should just bloody stop it.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
It's fucking insanity, try this in Britain and you will get beaten up.
Genius
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
What I found slightly depressing is how repetitive it is. I mean, after a day or two (ok, weeks maybe), shooting the exact same way all the time, I would get absolutely bored. The photos are great, sure, and it's impressive to see how he gets literally in the face of his subjects, but how do you move on ?
The part where he criticizes photojournalists for having huge egos while saying NYC streets are "a war zone" I found also pretty ridiculous and unnecessary.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
@Stoke: word is he uses photo assistants as body guards! :-)
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Hugo. I agree. In fairness, I'm not that familiar with Gilden's work but it does seem repetitive. I know academics often change research areas every decade or so.... to keep things interesting and just because their work and the world evolve. I'll look more into Gilden later but does anyone have an idea if he does this?
As far as the war zone comment, I think it just makes him hardcore. ;-)
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
waxy - yeah, i definitely think i'm a color shooter too and i don't see in b&w or even truly understand when people say that.. for one, i shoot digital and haven't shot a roll of bw since a photography class in high school.. all these old timey shooters though only saw their pictures in bw so i guess that's where the seeing in bw comes from..
the only time i'm even thinking b&w these days is in dim light/iso~400+.. anything you see of mine that's converted to b+w and isn't in low light is because i made a mistake and can sort of salvage the image via converting..
DaveSinclair- he's speaking the truth.. manhattan is homogenized and the characters he's after are like hidden gems amongst a wave of tourists.. in the past, there was more flavor - local flavor.. times square is like disney world these days.. thank giuliani for that.. i think he feeds off the general stress/anxiety feeling in the city and/or a constant random flow of people that midtown produces.. go outside of certain areas and things might calm down too much for him..?
hugo - the guy has other bodies of work besides his nyc street shots.. he could be defined as a photojournalist but he definitely brings his own style and roots to the table.. also, i think you might have misinterpreted his war zone comment..
the way i heard it was -- yeah, you can get killed in a war zone but people generally don't care what you shoot there... you have to have balls to go into a war zone but once you're in, the individual shots come fairly easy... getting his shots in nyc requires him to man up every time he trips the shutter..
boring as it may seem, he appears to have a strong desire to make great pictures and says the ones he's after are few and far between.. he probably gets a bunch of good ones but maybe 3 per year that are truly what he's aiming for..i think that's what drives him to continue to shoot in this manner..
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
flat5 (a group admin) edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
I'm going to assume that he is referring to the notion that journalists are making a difference and the point that flat5five made above. And I gotta kind of agree with him that journalists generally have huge egos.
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
curdiogenes edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
" I'll look more into Gilden later but does anyone have an idea if he does this?"
I don't get this question? Do you mean does he do other stuff? other stuff like what? Do you mean other types of photography? like genres?
Anyway his bio is on Magnum:
www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx?VP=XSpecific_MAG.Biog...
I bet though, that he loves shooting NYC more then any of the other things he has shot. He has the passion.
What is repetitive for some is not for others.
Also there is still a lot, a lot of characters in NYC. yeah back in the 70s - the early 90s the city had more graffiti, drug addicts and homeless, but there has always been characters in NYC and still to this day. Being a drug addict, homeless does not make one a character.
And even though I love Brooklyn and all the intricacies of the different neighborhoods, with the different immigrants and groupings still when I go into manhattan there is more of a wild cast of characters in a different way and in a smaller area, then the boroughs. It is still there, maybe you guys are getting numb towards it, but I see it, just as much as I used to. Sure there is less graffiti and garbage at the moment then in the 70s - the early 90s, but don't count your blessings or count your blessings, there may be a return of that sooner then you think.
Oh yeah and remember in the video Bruce Gilden says that when his friend comes with him he says that only with you (Bruce) do I see all these characters. Some people see things that others seem to ignore.
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
shveckle edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
@flat5: all these old timey shooters though only saw their pictures in bw so i guess that's where the seeing in bw comes from..
If only I had the strength, I'd hit you with my walker, or run you over with my motorized wheelchair. Things being as they are, though, I'll have to bore you to death with long, rambling stories of my life during the Depression – and I'm taking out my dentures first, so it will all sound mushy and confusing. Anyway, there I was coming off the ferry, wearing an onion in my belt, which was the style at the time...
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
shveckle. Sorry. I meant sub-genres within Street Photography. I was out the door quickly and just wanted to post that. I've had a chance to go through Gilden's portfolio on Magnum, which I should have done before making my point above, and needless to say I'm thoroughly impressed.
My question, as poorly stated as it was, was asking if Gilden changed his style over the years. After looking at his work I can definitively say yes, he has. The video posted above is wonderful but it is misleading in a sense, at least it was for me, because it only shows a fraction of what he was about..... which is nothing short of A-M-A-Z-I-N-G.
Link to Gilden's portfolio on Magnum:
www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx?VP=XSpecific_MAG.Phot...
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
WAXY. (a group admin) edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
he is my favorite one on Magnum if I had to pick a fav.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
You're just sayin that cuz he's from Brooklyn! ;-)
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
"If only I had the strength, I'd hit you with my walker..
haha..
i have this horrible habit(lazy?) of typing fragments of thought and hoping everyone will understand what i'm saying.. i was blending two groups of people into one.. photographers that had no choice other than shoot bw and those that still choose to today... definitely wasn't trying to imply that i have anything against bw shooters because 50%(wild guess) of my favorite photos are bw.. either way, i still don't truly understand what it means to see in black and white..
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
shveckle " when I go into manhattan there is more of a wild cast of characters in a different way and ..."
fwiw - manhattan is my favorite place to shoot and i'd guess 80% of my shooting time is spent there.. i can get there in 10mins (although it took me an hour yesterday.. got stung by the G).. lots of unique light.. but mainly the people.. i know i called it homogenized but that's not fair.. it's easily the most diverse place in america if not the world..
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
flat5 (a group admin) edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
Its funny to see him shoot. personally Gilden does nothing for me. Would love to see D'Agata shooting though LOL
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I think that when people say that they see in black and white, they mean that they have through experience attuned themselves to the aspects of a subject or scene that have translated into b&w well in their prior work.
They learn how to detect characters, movement, shapes, to pick up on patterns and textures, and so on. It's not that they don't see color (obviously), but that they don't pay attention to it in subject selection.
I look for characters too. Some people just have a more street-y vibe to them.
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Mark_H edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
jinju - i don't see why you waste your time typing... you could just leave an asterisk or something because anybody that follows this group already knows what you're going to say.. personally, it does nothing for me..
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
So Gilden does nothing for me, geezus, is that some kind of crime now?
Also, when I say it doesn nothing for me Im not saying its crap. But I do like what Hugo asked: How do you move on from that? I
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
!Jinju edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
no, it's not a crime.. it's fine albeit predictable that you were going to say that..
it's like me going to a macro flower group every other day and telling the members that shots of flowers are lame and boring... don't you think me doing that would be just as lame and boring?
and obviously, gilden hasn't moved on from it so there's definitely some reason why he keeps doing it.. maybe he doesn't want to move on? why does it even matter?
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
It doesnt matter
the thing with the macro analogy isnt good because I dont have anything against street photography and I also dont come here and every day slam street. There were 2 or 3 threads and discussions where I voiced my opinion and feelings but you dont see me doing it often. And anyway, one of those big ass discussions involved someone here, a MOD for chissakes taking a private comment I made to somebody under their photo and posting it up as a discussion starter and then me having to come in and clarify what i meant. Anyway, be that as it may, while Gilden doesnt do much for me I do love Klein and I do like other practitioners of street as well. Geez, I still have 40 or so shots in the pool way way way way back there somewhere. Surprised they werent all pulled after I pissed off some mods though before. No macros of flowers though.
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
!Jinju edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
seriously, i'm not trying to battle you... thing is, if Mr.K asked me to predict what would happen in this thread prior to him posting it, i would have said ralph is going to say he doesn't like gilden.. it's become that predictable and that's what i meant with the asterisk remark...
keep doing it, i don't really give a shit..
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I didnt say I dont like Gilden I said he doesnt do anything for me. Im NEUTRAL on Gilden. I dont hate him or dislike him, nor do I fall on my knees infront of his altar. Im just neutral on him.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Well, his Magnum portfolio is la lot more interesting than the pictures shown in the video - so I guess it's that particular "flash in people's faces" style that I don't like. They just don't say anything, apart from that if you fire a flashgun in someone's face, they look startled and try to escape.
Plus, I think "don't annoy people" is a good maxim...
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Ben Cooper edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
BG: "I have no ethics".
Translation: "I am a sociopath".
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
"How do you move on from that?"
What does this mean? move on from what? move to where?
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
if this group were all of us in a room instead of online, i think my stab at you(jinju) would have went over better..
jinju: gilden does nothing for me
me: why waste your breath
jinju: yeah? fuck you too..
done..
i delete around 25% of my comments prior to hitting the post now button because i know it won't translate well in written form.. this one slipped through.. sorry for blowing the thread..
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
hohoho, flat5five, don't worry, it just gives you a new edge
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
the way this man photographs people borders on assault. He is my new favorite photographer.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I'm with hugo here.. though I should probably see his magnum profile first... but anyway, that's a question I asked myself quite often after looking at streams with 500 photos in the very same style.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
@Hugo: I don't think you have to move on. You have to have faith that the world will continue to provide you with interesting characters to shoot, if that's you style of photography. It's no more repetitive than treating the teeming masses as stones in a photographic game of wei qi, no more repetitive than all the forms of street photography that fall between these two extremes. All street photography is a exercise of faith, faith that the world will continue to provide us with little crumbs of visual clarity, dribbled from the festering cheeseburger of life, harvested with the mindless faith of a pigeon.
What impresses me about Gilden is that he gets anything interesting. Going all Weegee on your subjects, even in broad daylight, is not exactly an obvious path to great photography. But Gilden has kept at it. There's a lesson in there, somewhere.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
When he says he has no ethics, I take him to mean simply that he doesn't restrict himself to the expectations others might have in public that have no legal basis. What he's doing is legal, so he's okay doing it. They might not like it, but that's not binding on him as a photographer.
This video and the ones for Winogrand and Mermelstein all have that as a common element - they use public spaces courageously.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Spot on, Mark.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
See and I see him taking another stab at photojournalists...
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Anyone new to Gilden or still not won over should seek out work from his book "Go" (if you have the cash, buy a used copy), a collection of photos of the "darker side" of Japan done in a similar fashion. I'm surprised he survived the experience, although he does claim to have never been attacked.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I think when he says he has no ethics, he means he has no ethics.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
at last I understand whato do you mean by street photography ,)
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I'm glad there is no prerequisite in having to like a photographer in order to appreciate or be inspired by their work.
Imagine trying to buy him a present?
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
61 photos from the book "GO" can be viewed here on the Magnum website. Gilden's work on Haiti is also worth exploring.
@Kylejones and Shveckle: on "how do you move on ?". What I meant is that I basically don't believe in doing the same thing over and over, no matter how good you can be at doing it. To me, it sounds like saying that (after a while) you can be the same person for ever, never changing. Of course, changing all the time isn't a solution either, because it's too often an excuse for not facing who you are, and what are your limitations. You do need persistence and work and commitment over time. But at some point, questioning what you've become, what you've done, and exploring new ways seems more fruitful and rewarding IMHO. Regarding an artist (photographer, painter, musician, etc.), I find it more interesting to see how they evolve, how they build on what they've learned. Of course, it's not "necessary", you can stick to what you do best, but somehow, it strikes me as maybe a lack of curiosity, creativity, not taking any chances anymore. For example, the diversity of Koudelka's work, or the interrogations and experiments of Delahaye, or McCullin turning to landscapes impress me more as personal accomplishments (even though I may not be as enthusiastic towards all their works). But at least they have that drive, that complexity. I think someone mentioned faith: that maybe the point, faith is monolithic, you either believe or you don't (the "leap" of faith). I'm more a "searcher" than a "believer", so I guess I have more affinity with those who doubt than those who don't ;-)
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Hughes Léglise-Bataille edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
I think Gilden should start taking pics of protests, that would be a nice move.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I just like good photography, I don't care who is shooting it. So if a photographer changes his style and I don't like it, then I just don't look anymore until I like it. I don't care whether they change, grow, evolve, whatever that stuff means. I just like good work and I also like what I like and so since I do not like beautiful landscape photography that much, if Gilden started shooting that I just wouldn't be interested, I don't care about the psychology behind his motivations. And I would still like his other photography while not being interested in his current phase of beautiful landscape photography, if that is the route he goes.
I like Gilden now and I liked him before and if he changes so be it, or if he doesn't who cares. If he stops photographing all together starting today, good for him. Then I would just say I really liked Gilden's stuff. I do not have expectations that I put on to other people and I do not value the older stuff against other stuff I "think" they should be doing. I also do not like to compare people to myself by thinking my point of view should be someone's else's point of view and I also do not like to compare people to other people, meaning, this photographer was a great street photographer and then he moved on and became a great suburban landscape photographer and then he became a great conceptual photographer. Great for that photog, and so I still like Gilden's photos.
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
shveckle edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
gilden did a radio show today on WNYC (round about relation to this thread)
also on the show is Eileen Clancy of picture new york + some nypd guy..
amongst other things, bruce discusses a recent run in with a cop, his no ethics comment, focal lengths, + 3 of the flickr pictures in that contest..
here -> (6.7MB mp3)
audio.wnyc.org/bl/bl052308fpod.mp3
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
flat5 (a group admin) edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
|
I must now retract my comment. It seems he does adhere to a some professional ethics. Unfortunately we're left to wonder what they might be. I'm intrigued.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Shuttertrip [deleted] says:
Shveckle.. respect to you for cutting through the academia style babble.
Great clip of Gilden.. you have to admire the balls.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Shveckle said: So if a photographer changes his style and I don't like it, then I just don't look anymore until I like it.
Sure, but doesn't it make you wonder when a photographer you like deliberately starts doing something you don't like ? Doesn't it force you to question your own "taste" ? Doing (or liking) the same kind of photography over and over again is like cooking (or eating) the same food all the time. Or never venturing out of your home because you like it. Or never meeting new people. Etc, etc. Without experimenting, questioning, confronting yourself to different ideas / people / places, you'd end up living in a bubble, a small personal universe ruled by the "I like it" criteria as the only truth (which is why I spoke of "faith"), shared only with people who agree with you (the "believers"). A perfect closed world, never changing. Personally, if a photographer I like changes his style and I don't like it, I don't look away: I look more.
Posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
"ure, but doesn't it make you wonder when a photographer you like deliberately starts doing something you don't like ? Doesn't it force you to question your own "taste" ?"
Nope not always, it depends on what. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. At this point I trust myself as much as the artist in question. There are a lot of people who can't keep up with their own genius and need to change because they just can't do it anymore. It happens all the time to writers, musicians and artists, so their change in style is not always for the better. And yet I think their older work is still just as genius even if they can't put out anymore (happens all the time)
Originally posted 20 months ago.
(
permalink
)
shveckle edited this topic 20 months ago.
|
 |
"It happens all the time to writers, musicians and artists, so their change in style is not always for the better..."
Its all about perspective. Id hazard a guess that more times than not, the artist prefers their "new stuff' to the stuff that made them popular or interesting in the first place. I dont think it is about their inability to deliver "better" work.
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
popular is not the important part, because a lot of the times it is what a lot of people call "sell out" stuff that artists do later, of course not always.
And sure it is about perspective, that doesn't mean the artist is in the right head to have a good perspective. A lot of times they are too close for comfort to have a level head about their own work. Just because an artist "prefers" their later work doesn't mean I have to "prefer" it, and doesn't mean it should be "prefered"
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
shveckle edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
 |
Whether that is exactly how Gilden shoots is a question. The guy knew he was being filmed and he has a reputation to enhance. It's true that there is safety in a thick crowd, in shooting non-dangerous types, and in being in the "nothing surprises me" atmosphere of New York City. If he tried that approach a few times on some able-bodied souls in my town, he'd be lucky if all he lost was his camera.
Also, intrusiveness has its drawbacks. A lot of his people just look startled, ticked, evasive or what have you. That might be one aspect of the predictability someone mentioned. Even more predictable is Gilden's unerring attraction to grotesques. You would have thought that Helen Levitt had produced enough New York City grotesques to last any viewer a lifetime. But they are so easy. Find an odd looking person and you think you've found originality or the Great Human Drama. No, you've just taken a short cut to the fun house and relied on the most worn-down cliché in street photography. Of course you can still shoot such people, but they're now the hardest to capture with any originality.
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Shotbox edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
 |
Eh.....don't really care for his style.
I also agree with Shotbox, this might not be how he really shoots as that he was being filmed.
But he does or did create some great shots.
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Great shots? Hmm? Not so sure on that myself.
I think Gilden's shooting style is too confrontational to produce images that reveal much except peoples reactions to a Leica and flash unexpectedly in their face.
I sort of admire his 'balls' for his technique, and will look out more of his work to understand it. But personally, I prefer Joel Meyerowitz's observational "all of it" approach, or Trent Parke's eye for the light.
Maybe I'm just a reserved Brit?
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
ajh400 edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
|
Shuttertrip [deleted] says:
I think that is how he does shoot, at least in that sort of environment .. you just have to look at his work.
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
"If he tried that approach a few times on some able-bodied souls in my town, he'd be lucky if all he lost was his camera."
"I wonder how many times he gets thumped for doing that"
If Bruce Gilden did that to me, I'd knock him out/kick him in the groin/put him in a choke hold/pull on his hair/etc.
These responses seem to arise wherever this clip is discussed. They represent what people expect to happen when they photograph that close, but these notions are merely symptomatic of it being taboo to do so. The anxiety they illustrate is what keeps etiquette in place, but while these sentiments describe this psychology very well, they do not describe how people really act.
If you do what Gilden does and handle yourself in the right way, most people are ultimately going to do absolutely nothing. For those who think Gilden's success owes to his choice of subjects (despite his having photographed Yakuza the same way) or his location (despite his having photographed Haiti the same way), or his accent/age/hat & vest/etc., look at 1:29 on the video and watch the men's reactions. You can hear one man say "hey!" in a plainly irritated tone, and you can see the irritation momentarily on his face (difficult because the camera is bouncing around, but you can make it out), until Gilden talks to him. The man's expression instantly shifts to something more like bemusement. In the end, Gilden has to ask both men not to smile.
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I think that once you shoot with such a strong style like Gilden's, it's hard at first glance to see what makes the difference between his shots. He has homed in into such a small nitche of images that the compositions might be monotonous at first glance (I was looking at his book on Ireland, and wondering how fine-tuned some of the compos were, mostly in the spacing between very close-by standing figures and darkened backgrounds). As toong_bo says, usually people don't do anything when you shoot like that. Or they think you're a weirdo and probably remember the incident for a day or two. Matt Stuart told me that Gilden kept on shooting the same way in very dodgy areas of London and was close to getting into a few fights, but at the end nothing happened. Also, on his style, if you look at his books you can see they were shot that way (usually from below to get the sky, from the side opposite ot the road of the street shot towards the other side, and from *very close* by).
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Also, you don't need to be up in someone's face to get thumped. Ask BryanF....
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Indeed, I've got into more trouble with the camera out and not shooting than when shooting. And more often with the people that I'm not shooting than the ones I'm shooting! (Yesterday night I was shooting something, don't remember what, and some random girl came from the side shouting at me, I looked at her mouth open -wtf expression- and her boyfriend just giggled and shook his head.)
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Interestingly enough I think his confrontational manner is the element that causes the reaction he's is actually "working" for, (hands up across the face blocking the flash etc), the subjugated look. (mark 0:35) It's at this point where I begin to question his own thoughts on his photography.... "I use flash a lot, cause flash helps me visualize my feelings of the city. The energy, the stress, the anxiety, you know.... that you find here." To me the reaction of the subjects in his street photographs are synonymous with his camera and his confrontational action and not the city in as much as Bruce Gilden is the director and conductor of the visualizations in his own street photographs. If he is provoking reaction with his camera, how is that a candid incident? More to the point, how does that replicate and validate the feeling of the city?
Interesting to notice that he actually weighs his options up before the moment the image is taken. Much like a predator, but he does it in a way that is seemingly not obvious to the subject/s or “victim/s” perhaps? (mark 0:51-0:56) " a lot of people walking in the city are like lost in thought, they're not paying attention...." In other cases his full-frontal camera assault leaves nothing to be contested as he is in-and-out quicker than his victims have the chance to react.
All-in-all I think these are habitual working photographer attributes and lessons that time has afforded Bruce that uses to his advantage. His directness in terms of camera contact, his bellowing almost obnoxious voice (when needed), his gait and his street smart-speed coupled with the nerve to do what he does gives him an almost indestructible nonchalance, that borders egotistical, when viewed in a documentary clip like the above.
"The viewer will *always* feel like he's a participant because I work so close". "The viewer gets the feeling that he's in the middle of the action"
There are instances in which Bruce cordially reaffirms to us, his right (and ours) to do what he does with some rather simplistic comments. Though the way he vebalises those comments could be construed as being arrogant. I think he is arrogant but with a purpose.
Lets make no bones about it, to get to the (accomplished) heights of where Bruce Gilden is, requires that as a person you are innovative, offer something different and are perhaps somewhat eccentric and arrogant. In many instances Bruce Gilden epitomises those qualities for me in this clip.
"If you can smell the street by looking at the photo, it's a street photograph"
I think for the most part some of us are missing the point. It's not about Bruce, it's about what he produces for us to see. I am not implying or suggesting anyone is, but I would mention.... Allow ourselves not to be swayed by the mannerisms or idiosyncrasies of any photographer, but rather the photographs they create.
I was reading INFERNO by James Nachtwey yesterday and thinking of the comparatives between Both Bruce Gilden and James Nachtwey, their approach to photographing is in some cases very similar if not the same, though the result in impression, is completely different.
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
ispeakphoto (out of commission) edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
|
toong. Nice posts as always....
I remember someone telling me recently that if I did street shooting in Ireland I would be thumped. Clearly Ireland is not closed off to photography! I told him that while I've never been to Ireland, I knew of a street shooter (Jeanette) who recently did, and as far as I know... came back in one piece and had a great time.
I've been doing candid's of people now for almost two years and I've yet to get thumped, clubbed, or otherwise threatened with bodily harm (*knocks on wood*). What I've learned is that people are generally not interested in fighting or conflict, and in fact, most simply apologize for getting in the way of my picture. This would be my expectation for most Canadians but it has been true wherever I've traveled, including Thailand, Mexico and Iran. Oh wait... I just remember that I was called a fag and lightly threatened in rural Florida for carrying a camera.....
I do think there are times and places where a beating is more likely, as with Matt Stuarts story about Gilden in dodgy areas of London, but generally "getting away" with Street shots is a matter of how photographers carries themselves, handle the situations, and their street smarts. I know this isn't always the case, but the risk goes way way down if you've got your game on....
Anyway, toong, your ultra-close-up portraits are a great example showing that people generally are not wanting to get into a tussle.
Most people have no fucking idea what you're up to....
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
WAXY. (a group admin) edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
|
i had a bunch of stuff typed up about this but decided to delete it..
toong_bo is right.. realize though that he said 'most people are going to ultimately do nothing'..
every so often someone will seriously get pissed off so if you want to try this type of shooting, don't carry some romantic view around with you.. carry you smarts with you and be prepared for the worst.. if you know your street smarts aren't up to par, don't try it at all..
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
flat5 (a group admin) edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
|
Good points all. Let's hope that in Minneapolis he'd be invited home to dinner.
But more importantly, I was trying to explain why I don't find myself going back to many of his street photographs for a second look; why they seem to exhaust themselves in one viewing. Their sameness might come partly from his particular and repetitive type of drama, which indeed he himself does introduce. His people project back some of the aggressive energy that he puts in their face.
It reminds me of watching the late Steve Irwin deal with alligators and other animals. The animals were always riled up by him and his crew to make good footage. We saw startled, defensive, evasive, and aggressive behavior in animals, over and over, and this kind of edge appealed to viewers watching from the safety of their homes.
This was one slice of animal behavior, and you could say that artists often zero in on one slice of human behavior. It becomes a matter of taste. To me, his particular slice can seem narrow, forced, and predictable. Others will disagree. But I certainly respect him as an artist. One characteristic of art is the ability to make yourself come alive in other things. Gilden does that.
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Yup. I was just chatting with Joni about that. He was mentioning how GIlden would hound a subject. He sometimes makes numerous fakies but only releases the shutter on the fourth or fifth attempt. In other words, the subject is reacting to Gilden, and Gilden to his subject, in a bit of Street tango.
You can make the dichotomy in Street where the subject is aware or unaware of the act of taking a picture. The results is very different, but both have their place and both are interesting, and if done well, both can tell you something about the behavior of the person pictured AND the invisible photographer.
The rest of this might only be interesting if you like science but I can't help but make the comparison as a former scientist with background in quantum mechanics (spectroscopy).
Gilden's approach reminds me of the Stern-Gerlach experiments of 1922. The scientists demonstrated how a measurement (in our case taking a picture) affects the outcome of system (or the subject) being measured. They looked at electrons at the quantum mechanical level and we look at people at the classical level but the conclusion is the same. As Shotbox says:
"One characteristic of art is the ability to make yourself come alive in other things. Gilden does that."
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
WAXY. (a group admin) edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
 |
I find it amusing how everyone draws parallels from their other interests into photography. Amusing, and interesting. Lots of people looking at the same thing in different ways. One person looking at completely different things in exactly the same way.
I guess that's 'making yourself come alive in other things' too...
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Jules... edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
|
Human constructs, man....
Is anything so different that there are no parallels? To compare and contrast is how we make sense of the world, sometimes to our detriment, and sometimes not.
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
WAXY. (a group admin) edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
|
That shot of the living dead guy at 2:16 is haunting me. I can't get it out of my head.
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
flat5, no doubt there will be occasions when someone gets upset, but I think you have to be prepared for this in any type of candid photography, working at any range. I took up-close flash pictures in NYC but the only two angry responses I got, over my entire two-week visit, were from:
1) a guy across the street in Staten Island, in broad daylight, when I hadn't even taken a picture, and
2) a girl in the next car on the subway, who saw me take a picture of someone else (with no flash) and then took the trouble to walk up to the glass panes separating the cars to pantomime "I'm watching you."
Waxy:
generally "getting away" with Street shots is a matter of how photographers carries themselves, handle the situations, and their street smarts
I completely agree. It's interesting to look at Gilden's body language and manner in the encounter at 1:29. Eye contact, hands down, right hand like an open palm (but he's got to grip the camera, obviously), chest open to the other person. He's complimentary and playful ("it was perfect; I wanted to shoot...but don't smile"). Everything about his demeanor shows that he's comfortable with what he's doing and that they should be comfortable, too. And ultimately they should. He's just taking a picture, after all. It can be startling to remind yourself of this.
thechrisproject, it's the one at 1:17 that's stuck with me....
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
"flat5, no doubt there will be occasions when someone gets upset, but I think you have to be prepared for this in any type of candid photography,"
yeah, this is true.. the only reason i actually said something about it anyway was because this one was fresh on my mind.. things got very heated after that shot and it took longer than usual to diffuse the situation.. for a minute, i seriously thought it was going to go down..
Originally posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
flat5 (a group admin) edited this topic 19 months ago.
|
 |
anyway... gilden is old. if i met old people, with his freakin style, taking my photograph, i'll just think he's a crazy old people. but if i have a teen or maybe 20 something man took my picture the way gilden's shot. ...i'll be really pissed.....
it's unethical. u passing your line there. everybody has their invisible privacy space. and it's not polite to break into somebody's space like that.
i do love his works....
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
in reality no one has hardly any "invisble private space"
Posted 19 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
Hardcore Street Photography (HCSP) /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to Hardcore Street Photography (HCSP) discussion threads
|
Deutsch
|
English
|
Español
|
Français
|
