It's been said that there is nothing new under the Sun and I guess that's true, but I marvel that he pursued his line of artistic exploration as early as he did, and as pointedly as he did.
Many of his photos are even stronger than the ones I have shown - by that I mean more subtle, lyrical, powerful, mysterious, dazzling, etc. - but it's impossible to convey their impact with the reduced size and resolution of a computer monitor. I recommend the book Aaron Siskind 100 very highly: the images are large and the reproductions are very good. (I was able to borrow it through an inter-library loan.)
I should also point out that it's very hard to choose a small number of photos from someone's entire opus. For example, with Merg Ross, I had to show 3, because his style is so varied - and even then I didn't really scratch the surface. With Sandy King, again I had to choose something that shows well in reduced size: much of his work is vision on a grand scale with fine details.
In the final analysis, photographers don't really have a style per se: just a collection of masterpieces.
Last edited by Ken Lee; 27-Mar-2012 at 23:21.
FINALLY thought to e-mail subscribe to this thread (although when I forget it catching up is extra fun =).
I think maybe Ken doesn't like photographs any more...
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
I've been concentrating on other projects. I guess it's time to resume. Stay tuned
June 30 Stephen Shore: Craig Nettles, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, March 1, 1978
OK I can see him placing two baseballs on the ground in front of the batter. That was easy. And seeing the echo of the smokestacks with the poles and mirroring the clouds with the fabric of the netting... But rolling in a turquoise house trailer to match the poles and positioning the end of a cylindrical vehicle (tanker?) in the background to echo the baseballs... That's taking staging too far!
I mean that as a backhanded compliment to someone who does more than I can imagine.