Photographers in the Doghouse, William Mortensen, et. al.

[Brian C. Miller]

Reading a bit about William Mortensen, AA called him "the Devil" and "the Antichrist." Mortensen had a Metal-Krome process to produce color prints, and 73 years later a print still looks good.

Now, what other photographers are out there, languishing in obscurity, especially those who have been reviled by the establishment?

[Mark Sampson]

If you dig a little deeper into that bit of history you'll probably find that Mortensen was of the 'establishment' in his time, commercially very successful and well-respected. And that the f/64 people were radicals from the artistic backwater of northern California, very much outside what 'establishment' there was in the 1930s. You might say that Mortensen was much like the well-respected and successful painters of the 19th-century French Academy, who were eventually overturned by the reviled Impressionists. Times and styles change.

[Kirk Gittings]

Yes, in his day Mortensen was perhaps the most famous photographer in the country? this made him the target of the radical up and coming modernists.

[Brian C. Miller]

Yes, I did read about Mortensen's earlier vs later years. What I didn't know about it was that Adams was so absolutely set against him. Did the f/64 group revile George Hurrell? Stuff like this is like turning over a rock and finding all sorts of neat things on the underside!

What I'm looking for are other photographers who were reviled, staked through the chest, buried alive, and were producing good work.

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Alfred Cheney Johnston, another 'disappeared' photographer.

High end nudes for trust-fund babies, trophy wives, actresses, ect. Was charging upwards of $12,000 per session in the 1920's and was booked solid thru the years.

Hunt him down on the net, has been re-discovered.

[John Kasaian]

I don't know about being reviled, but John Garo of Boston certainly dropped off the face of the photography world although he was highly lauded in his time

[Jim Jones]

At least John Garo is immortal for helping Yousuf Karsh get started. As for Mortensen, he published books that have information often valid today, but illustrated by photography that was sometimes awkward and even grotesque. Oh, what he could have done with Photoshop!

[jmooney]

If you dig a little deeper into that bit of history you'll probably find that Mortensen was of the 'establishment' in his time, commercially very successful and well-respected. And that the f/64 people were radicals from the artistic backwater of northern California, very much outside what 'establishment' there was in the 1930s. You might say that Mortensen was much like the well-respected and successful painters of the 19th-century French Academy, who were eventually overturned by the reviled Impressionists. Times and styles change.

Vive Meissonier!

[neil poulsen]

I have and value some of Mortensen's books.

It's interesting that Mortensen was one of the first to coin the phrase, "expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights." For example, it's included as part of Mortensen's book on the negative.

Of course, this is the fundamental principle on which Ansel Adam's zone system is based.

[Merg Ross]

If you dig a little deeper into that bit of history you'll probably find that Mortensen was of the 'establishment' in his time, commercially very successful and well-respected. And that the f/64 people were radicals from the artistic backwater of northern California, very much outside what 'establishment' there was in the 1930s. You might say that Mortensen was much like the well-respected and successful painters of the 19th-century French Academy, who were eventually overturned by the reviled Impressionists. Times and styles change.

It was from Arthur Kales, who grew up here in the "artistic backwater of northern California", (Oakland) that William Mortensen learned photography in the 1920's. Kales was a very successful Pictorial photographer in the Bay Area before going to southern California.

Yes, in his day Mortensen was perhaps the most famous photographer in the country? this made him the target of the radical up and coming modernists.

Steichen was much better known during this time, (and better paid) as a result of his Vanity Fair and advertising work.

The mention of the Newhall's in the original post is interesting. I must disagree with A.D. Coleman's thoughts on their role at MOMA in destroying Mortensen's place in the history of photography. I would suggest that it was Steichen who played down the significance of Mortensen at MOMA, after he stole the curatorship from Beaumont Newhall at the end of WWII. That is an interesting story, and worthy of research by members of this forum who have an interest in the politics of photography at the museum level.