Humbling Experiences

[Bill_1856]

...I... photographed the Easton, PA/Phillipsburg, NJ bridge that Walker Evans shot in 1935 from roughly the same vantage point.

Henry, I been right there in those same tripod holes. In a sense you were lucky because you didn't have WE's image in your mind to pre-condition your viewpoint and expectations, while I did.
Nonetheless, both of those images are far better than any of the dozen or so that I shot (and never even bothered to print).
Yours, incidentally, is excellent IMO. But you're right -- it ain't Walker Evans!

[Merg Ross]

I am not sure the role humility may have played in my experience, but it does have to do with architectural photography!

Years ago, about forty, I was asked by a very successful architectural firm in San Francisco to re-photograph one of their buildings. They had originally hired Morley Baer, and were not happy with the results. Morley, at the time, was the number one architectural photographer in the Bay Area. His day rate was $600, which then was a hefty fee. Awkwardly for me, Morley was my mentor and friend.

Before committing to a re-shoot, I scouted the building and saw pretty much what Morley saw, an apartment building cascading down a hillside. It was rather uninteresting from ground level. The only way I could conceive to improve on what Morley had done was to photograph the building from the air.

I rented a plane (and a pilot) and took some aerial shots which were complemented with Morely's work and my ground shots. The project later won an AIA award.

[paulr]

I think opportunities like this are more educational than humbling. It's a direct challenge to see something the way you see it, rather than filtered through someone else's vision.

Part of this is letting go of the idea that it's a contest. Yeah, Weston was a genius, and his vision was forcefull enough to influence ideas about bell peppers for more than one generation.

But it should still be possible to see a bell pepper in the context of your own world and your own life and your own feelings about things. And this should show up in any picture you make. The result may not be a timeless icon, but it will be yours.

The commercial context adds a couple of twists. For one thing, it means you didn't choose the challenge ... it got handed to you. And for another, you need to get clarity about why you're being asked to do the shoot. Who is the audience? Will they be aware of the Great Master's earlier pictures? If not, you might end up concluding, uncomfortably, that the best approach is a really unoriginal one ...

[Gordon Moat]

In 2007 I was contacting about exhibiting some of my Polaroid manipulations as part of a touring exhibit. At first it seemed a little dubious about the conditions, and whether the organizers could pull it off at all. After much back and forth messages, some waiting, and then sending images, the touring Expo Polaroid happened at the beginning of 2008. More surprising was that I was one of only 34 Polaroid artists world wide to be part of this exhibit. Then another surprise as the companion book for the exhibit ended up in the permanent collection of the Niepce Museum.

In all it was a very humbling experience. On top of that, one of my images from that was selected for another book, and ended up being printed full page size. So a little sideline art endeavor not connected to my commercial work ended up surprising me on so many levels.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

[rvhalejr]

My opinion is no more relevant than a bunch of koala_bears.,.

That being said, "Famous" architectural photography can be very boring if not suffocating, and when the lines are not kept straight I start to feel dizzy.

Your well trained eye undoubtedly sees more than we do in famous works. However, IMHO if anyone ought to be humble it is they, perhaps even more so.

Your work left a favorable impression on the wife who rarely compliments any type of photography (I tend to not be able to walk past a big AA poster, she justs blows right on by) much less thumb trough Architectural Digest.

Simply put, your work is photographically interesting (in a broader sense) and scary good w.r.t. architecture.

[John Hennessy]

This observation is more along the lines of great(?) minds thinking alike. Many times making landscapes I have set up my camera on a worthy scene and then noticed trampled vegetation all around clearly indicating that I was not the first one to notice what thought was so subtle and original. Of course I never get to see the work of the preceding photographers, so its hard to discern sometimes whether I am actually about recreate a cliche or if this something worthwhile in front of after all.

[Kirk Gittings]

Humbling? Humbling?? I couldn't care less if I take pictures of a place that a famous(?) "somebody who" took before me. I take pictures of what I see, he took pictures of what he saw. I find your "humbling experience" genuinely phony.

Frankly, I find your response a little overwrought and odd. Have you never worked under an art director or from a shot list? Do you think every art director sends you out to just "do your thing"? I have to fulfill my clients documentation needs and try and do something creative, original and stunning every time I go out, even if it is crappy architecture. This is no easy task (and frankly I am not always up to the challenge) especially when you are following on the heals of another very competent photographer.

Great story and creative solution, Merg.

[Allen in Montreal]

........

Years ago, about forty, I was asked by a very successful architectural firm in San Francisco to re-photograph one of their buildings. They had originally hired Morley Baer, and were not happy with the results. Morley, at the time, was the number one architectural photographer in the Bay Area. His day rate was $600, which then was a hefty fee. Awkwardly for me, Morley was my mentor and friend.........

I rented a plane (and a pilot) and took some aerial shots which were complemented with Morely's work and my ground shots. The project later won an AIA award.

What a great approach, brilliant.

[Lenny Eiger]

This observation is more along the lines of great(?) minds thinking alike. Many times making landscapes I have set up my camera on a worthy scene -

Before I moved out to CA from NY, in '84, I purchased a few vintage photos from a dealer friend in NYC. There were two William Henry Jacksons -

A few years later I was in Yellowstone and I climbed over the edge of the fence trying to keep people from dropping a thousand feet or so. I thought it was cool - that I was going to take a photo that others wouldn't. I got the shot lined up on the ground glass and as I looked at it I thought it was kind of familiar. With a start I realized not only did I know this image but I had it on my wall at home!

Needless to say, I packed up my gear and moved on.

Lenny

[GPS]

IME there is nothing quite as humbling as having to photograph the exact same subject as a famous photographer. Well after I was established as an architectural photographer I had couple of very humbling experiences. Twice I have had to photograph the same building as Nick Merrick of Hedrich Blessing.
...

...
I have to fulfill my clients documentation needs and try and do something creative, original and stunning every time I go out, even if it is crappy architecture. This is no easy task (and frankly I am not always up to the challenge) especially when you are following on the heals of another very competent photographer.

...

Kirk, decide for yourself what is that humbling experience for you - if it is the fact that you take a picture of a subject already photographed by a famous photographer or just the fact that you're "not always up to the challenge" of your profession.
Then ask your question.