photograph of Mary Ellen Mark by Michael "Nick" Nichols
she was always a "star"….in high school she was the head cheerleader for the football team and super student….in college she received a Fulbright Fellowship in photography and went off to Turkey to first make her "mark" as a pre-eminent photographer…i cannot think of any photographer who has consistently produced for an entire lifetime in quite the way as has Mary Ellen Mark…at times with a coy and "girlish" personality, and other times as hard as nails , Mary Ellen has always had her "eyes on the prize", knows what she wants, and goes and gets it…
using the now extinct 20×24 inch Polaroid camera to make spectacular, literally "one of a kind", black & white prints, Mary Ellen has been photographing high school prom night since 2006….she has three more proms to photograph this year and then that will be it…over for her project…over for the the super big Polaroid…end of an era…please read a story on MEM prom work by Francine Prose in the summer 2007 issue of Aperture magazine…last weekend Mary Ellen came to Virginia (seen above) to shoot a high school prom and will have prints in her retrospective "legend" exhibition from this local event….MEM only had 15 assistants with her… i ended up grilling steaks for all of them, at a dinner hosted by Look3 producer Jessica Nagle, therefore becoming number 16!!
Mary Ellen joins Joel-Peter Witkin and James Nachtwey as the "legends" to be exhibited and on hand at this 2nd annual Look3, Festival of the Photograph, from June 12-14 in Charlottesville, Virginia…please check the link to see all that will be presented by festival maestro Michael Nichols …last year he put this photo fest on the "international map" and this year promises us even more….see this YouTube video…
added this year will be one week shooting workshops (June 7-12) being taught by Eugene Richards, William Albert Allard, and , yes, your own DAH…i think we have a few spaces left, so click the link if interested in a challenge…these workshops will segue right into the festival…
i believe you already know that many of you will have work from our forum here (entries from Emerging Photog Fund) presented in a half hour slide show as a special feature for the festival…this could become an annual feature, this will become at least one outlet for you here….as you know, i am trying for more….the good news for me is the workshop will be over by the time the festival starts, therefore giving me some "hang time" with those of you who show up, and some shooting time also with some local families…
ok, the logical, and perhaps soul searching question for all of you…..do you have dreams of being recognized as a "one of a kind" photographer?
Hum, now that I see that people drop the names of photographers around. Two of my favourites are Tom Wood and Igor Moukhin. Like on top of the list. I don’t know if Tom Wood is any good at promoting his stuff, but he seriously is a reference for most (many?) Britain based photographers.
PANOS, BRO :))
DAVID ADDED:
“…as a dad with a 14 yr old, im pretty flexible..sexuality is alive and part of life, at any age, the question is this: are the pics cheesy (seems probably) or exploitive…but, it’s also a bit disingenuous on cyrus’ family: i mean it’s all MARKETING, so what’s wrong with Annie’s pics?…i’ll have to see them first, …my instinct is to side with Annie’s judgment…more about that later…”
THAT WOULD BE ME, NOT DAVID ;)))..I think David’s kids are older ;)))))))))
HERVE:
YEA, TOTALLY AGREE :))
“What the medium wins in potency (emotional impact), it may loose in accuracy of remembrance…”(herve)…THAT’S A BRILLIANT STATEMENT and i agree…I’D love to chat about that too someday here!!! :)))
ok y’all,
gotta go, gotta go
hugs
b
oh… i almost forgot..
Lewis Carroll
Charles Lutwidge Dodgson
Born 27 January 1832
Daresbury, Cheshire, England
Died 14 January 1898 (aged 65)
Guildford, Surrey, England
Pen name Lewis Carroll
Occupation Author, Mathematician, Anglican Clergyman, Photographer, Logician
Nationality British
January 1832 – 14 January 1898), better known by the pen name Lewis Carroll (/ˈkærəl/), was an English author, mathematician, logician, Anglican clergyman and photographer.
…The photographer
…In 1856, Dodgson took up the new art form of photography, first under the influence of his uncle Skeffington Lutwidge, and later his Oxford friend Reginald Southey.
He soon excelled at the art and became a well-known gentleman-photographer, and he seems even to have toyed with the idea of making a living out of it in his very early years .
A recent study by Roger Taylor and Edward Wakeling exhaustively lists every surviving print, and Taylor calculates that…
… just over fifty percent of his surviving work depicts young girls…
He would later use many of his photographs of children in conjunction with his writings to add illustration to his work. Alexandra Kitchin, known as “Xie” (pronounced “Ecksy”), was his favourite photographic subject. From 1869 until he gave up photography in 1880, Dodgson photographed her at least fifty times, ending just before her sixteenth birthday. Less than a third of his original portfolio has survived[25], however; Dodgson also made many studies of men, women, male children and landscapes; his subjects also include skeletons, dolls, dogs, statues and paintings, trees, scholars, scientists, old men and little girls. His studies of nude children were long presumed lost, but six have since surfaced, four of which have been published.
IF YOU WANNA TALK “CONTROVERSY”.. THEN TALK
LEWIS CARROLL…
PEOPLE , PUT YOUR FUCKING BIBLE ON THE SIDE FOR A SECOND…
AND READ A BOOK …ANY BOOK…
READ A COOK BOOK, READ WIKIPEDIA… READ
some OSCAR WILDE… READ PLATO…
BOB… i’m gonna miss you…
time for me to shut up… and die…
peace… if possible
BOB I’M REALLY SORRY…
BUT SOMETIMES I SEE YOU AS “BIG”
AND AS “GREAT”
AS DAVID.. THAT’S ALL
BOB,
I’ve watched the pictures now and they’re beautiful, but some are on the edge. Guess that’s personal too..
But as photographers I think we’re sometimes blind to what we see. We have a more complex vision and might see things that others might not..
Photographers do wrongs too, but in some circles everything seems to be OK as long as it “artsy” and this or that..
Well, I dunno, but I try too see it in other peoples points of view too..
Complicated, complicated, complicated, but where’s the line?
Cheers
Hola, James (Chance), wonderful work with light, need to visit and revisit your gallery, but for now: That “Heil H.” shot, now damned if that is not one of a kind shots! This one is yours and your only. Not much use for her campaign, but if you catch her at a relaxed moment, she might appreciate the humour.
To all who wonder, #10 of the single gallery:
http://www.jameschance.com
BOB SAID:
“…Rafal: :)))…it’s wonderful stuff and gutsy and looser (even with all the brilliant geometry of the series)…and Im happy for you: it’s wonderful to see a series and a photographer be excited and exciting :))…
running
hugs
b
Posted by: bobblack | April 30, 2008 at 08:11 PM…”
Nothing to add here…
Bob , sums it up…
Rafal, congtatulations…
peace
James Chance;
Wonderful website! I’ve just been having a wee peruse and I have to agree with Herve: really magical light. You’ve captured some really amazing and inspiring moments.
For what it’s worth, nos. 4 & 15 of the singles gallery … oh to live on the Costa Brava…
Cheers,
PaulB
hi all
going back to Davids assesment of Petes work, just wondering how one puts more of ones self into their photography. what does that actually mean? are you taking about understanding the material or something about they way you are working with the camera.
schools of thought, look at MEM, 15 assistants, all she does is squeeze the cable release. We know her work is beautiful and perceptive. although I have never seen her working, I really have no Idea what she works like, but on paper, 3 people handling the film etc, choosing subjects from digital snapshot, I mean you could perceve MEM to be removed.
look at Stephen Shore, Thomas Ruff, Thomas Struth, Bechers, they strongly believe in the subjects being portraid as as clearly and as closely representative of the reality of the subject, to the point that the subject takes a greater sense of impotance in the photograph than the sense of the prescence of the photographer. look at the recognition they have recieved. Revolutionised photography as art. I like that work but it does well as an example to contrast against the idea of putting more of yourself into your work.
anyway, just thoughts.
Pierre- that is indeed the full, complete version on MEM’s book online!
Wrobertangel,
Is it about the act of photographing (being right in the action) or about the concept?
For example how do you compare Picasso who put all of himself into his work, or van Gogh and then a guy like Warhol who wouldnt even make much of what we consider his? Often Warhol would have his assistants make his work and simply sign off on it. its a Warhol not because its made by him but because its his concept. or what about old reneisaance masters who would have armies of assistants actually doing much of the painting for them?
Yep, rafal, that sure puts the craft back in the art, doesn’t it? And I guess MEM’s (she is far from the only one) validate my constant coupling of these 2 words when talking about photography.
Also, it has been suggested before (guess who?) but never taken up as a discussion that many great photographers may have had a golden Age period, with subsequent work leaving something to desire, or dare I say, akin to what the icy tail is to the comet it is following.
Can we find that most photographers rarely sustain interest beyond some fine choice works of theirs, and inversely how many are a glorious works in progress from beginning to last?
Yeah Rafal,
brings up another thread, which was touched on in a roundabout sort of way, authorship. David asked if we aspire to be a one of a kind photog, but say in MEMs case, could she produce the images with out the crew. it seems like her crew is a vital component. She makes the calls etc, but with out them she is busted. Crewdson, Lachapelle, all the big production photogs rely on their crew in order to accomplish the end result.
people get paid, name goes on the product. etc etc etc
But isnt the concept the thing? Ofcourse they couldnt do it without the crew but does that mean there is less authorship? I dont thing the crew is at all an important consideration here. Take Crewdson, who needs the crew because to shoot a photo is such a big operation with him. While not a Crewdson fan, I apprecite the fact that he is more about the concept than anything else. Only if his concepts were coming from the crew would I agree with you, but as far as I know his concepts are his concepts. This logic to me naturally extends to cinema. Would you say that a director has less authorship because he needs a crew to put his movie onto film and then onto screens?
Right, thats what I was thinking about, movies, but they have ownership, rights, trademarks, shit all over them, credits etc.
But for the banquet size Prom Polaroids I bet the only one who collects accolade, $, awards, is MEMs. not sure though.
all I am trying say though is, is it possible to be one of a kind, (assuming that everyone else is the same, which is tough to swallow), when there are so many factors outside of oneself that must be given consideration in order to produce something.
Also I dont see how you can say Crewdson isnt one of a kind. I mean who else is doing what he is doing? It seems to me that perhaps he is more one-of-a-kind than most guys who work alone without a crew. Why? Part of it may be that its more difficult to do what Crewdson does, even if its just the logistics of it that makes it more difficult.
Here’s a look back at the Festival of the Photograph 2007. I’m really disappointed I missed getting sound bites from Sally Mann and DAH, but overall this is what the festival feels like. Enjoy.
http://www.humanfiles.com/slideshows/look3_07/publish_to_web/look3_07.htm
Quite true, Rafal. Also, I forgot what was the context of Mem’s shoot, but if it’s commercial work, or a command, she may set it up differently than other more very personal work.
Perhaps we can also ask ourselves, must she absolutely be there for the “click” David speaks of, and if MEM does not show up, and an assistant makes the decisive moment call to take the picture:
1) is it a Mem picture anyway?
2) can it be as good a shot as if she was there? or
3) could you tell the difference?
last: 4) does it matter?
one of a “certain” kind (of photographer), or a certain kind of image. but “one of a kind”, well I think that must be some kind of heavenly being. something not from this planet, possibly God? (whatever that is).
nice one Herve, I pick #4
Does it matter? Well, does it matter that many of the great paintings may have been painted mostly by assistants rather than the “master”? Are we sure how much of the Sistine Chapen Michaelangelo painted by himself? Does it matter? I dont know. For example Warhol as I said would simply sign off on prints made by others and those would be Warhol works anyway. Still they are one of a kind because its not the craft that matters but the concept. Anyone could print but only Warhol could come up with the idea. Same for photography. In photography anyone can click the shutter but as we all know its not the shooting but the process of getting that IDEA that is difficult.
woah! fellas, Davids “good idea”, its up for all to see.
Well, Rafal, for Warhol, the concept was not about creation, but repetition, and a voluntary lackadaisical approach to what constitutes Art. Basically, supply answering demand, but with affect.
PETE…
ok, now i understand you….it takes awhile to have a conversation here sometimes….easy to misinterpret…..in that context of meaning, i agree with you 100%..
i do hope we can meet in person at some point,because would love to edit your work with you…and i think that with just a little “tweak” your work will become more personal and stylistic without losing one iota of good journalism…
thanks for writing back…
cheers, david
David:
I will see you at the Look3 workshop. Looking forward to your edit and comments as well as the workshop itself. Thanks for looking and taking the time to comment.
Best, Pete
BOB!
Thanks man! appreciate your kind comments! Have always enjoyed your posts here and on Lightstalkers too! Look forward to introducing the latest project to the community.
All the best brother!
James
HERVE, PAUL B:
Sorry, I missed you comments earlier… just wanted to say thanks!!
James
Herve,
that was an interesting point that got over looked, “the icy trails of a comet”
sorry about that. nicely put though.
Happy Birthday David!!!!! Love ya’ Have a great day!