Women and Large Format

[Tintype Bob]

I had been reading some old threads and saw one that was asking why the didn't see many women using Large Format. Then I got to thinking about a wonderful woman I just got the chance to meet An-My Le - she works only in Large format and has even used her 5x7 on the rolling deck of a Coast Guard Cutter in the North Pacific. You should look at some of her work and her new book "small wars"

I would like to here about other female Photographers using Large format

[aphexafx]

Sandy Skoglund - http://www.sandyskoglund.com/

http://www.agallery.com/pages/photographers/skoglund.html

http://www.iit.edu/~villjac/radioactive-xl.jpg

[vinny]

Here's two that I know, both members here.
www.torinelson.com
www.trishherremans.com

[Toyon]

Honestly, what relevance does gender have to photography? There might be something sinister if there were no women in large format photography, but that is simply not the case.

[Tintype Bob]

Toyon - sorry I offended you and you are but sometimes the gender of a person has an impact on the way we see things and how we record them, I was not trying to imply anything sinister.

And WOW the work in the above links is beautiful "EVEN THE ONES BY A MAN"

[Oren Grad]

Tina Barney.

And going back a ways...

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=3978 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=3978&highlight=women+large+format)

[mikerz]

Sandy Skoglund - http://www.sandyskoglund.com/

http://www.agallery.com/pages/photographers/skoglund.html

http://www.iit.edu/~villjac/radioactive-xl.jpg

I met the woman, found her devoid of a genuine creativity and full of herself -- not to mention that I think her work is half-assed.

[Henry Suryo]

I assume we're talking about living and active women photographers. Here are five more: Sally Mann, Nancy Marshall, Lois Conner, Paula Chamlee, Hilla Becher (Bernd, her husband passed away a couple of years ago).

[cobalt]

I met the woman, found her devoid of a genuine creativity and full of herself -- not to mention that I think her work is half-assed.

Is all that really necessary? This forum already has more than its fair share of negativity.

[cobalt]

Honestly, what relevance does gender have to photography? There might be something sinister if there were no women in large format photography, but that is simply not the case.

That is beside the point. I once started a thread that was deleted because I dared ask if there were any Black LF photographers. I think that race and gender are such taboo topics (in the States, where it seems most forum members reside) that it makes many here uneasy to discuss these issues.

I for one, find it an interesting question, especially since I have only met one woman who apparently used a large format camera as her main camera. There is no harm in wondering why this is so.

[Henry Suryo]

Probably not exclusively LF, the two Lindas: Linda Butler and Linda Elvira Piedra.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Are there any black female large format photographers....? :D

[BrianShaw]

Are there any black female large format photographers....? :D

Actually... one that I know of.

[jnantz]

from the mid 1930s until the 1990s
providence ri had 2 women who were
shooting large format formal portraits.
they both shot 5x7 sheets. they had to be
twice as good as their competition, and they
still didn't really get the respect or compensation
that they deserved. neither of them are around today ...

[Henry Suryo]

Almost forgot Elsa Dorfman. She does commercial portraits on 20x24 Polaroid.

[Merg Ross]

Probably not exclusively LF, the two Lindas: Linda Butler and Linda Elvira Piedra.

Wonderful choices for the Linda list; I have an addition.

http://www.edelmangallery.com/connor.htm

[Gem Singer]

Meridel Rubenstein is a well known female LF photog.

She's my cousin (my mother's sister's daughter). Google her name. She has recently published a book of her latest work.

[Bill_1856]

Three of the four people I know who are LF/ULF photographers are women. I think they tend to photograph more and talk about it less.

[Bob Salomon]

Mary Ellen Mark

[Bruce Barlow]

Richard and I love having women students in our workshops, and we don't get as many as we'd like. As a species, they seem to get past "gadget-itis" much faster to pay attention to where they're aiming the lens.

Much more in touch with their emotions than all us tough guys (me included), their work tends to get more personal faster than many male students. Not all males, but many.

So, experience would tend to have me thinking that there are gender differences, and viva les differences!

[Tintype Bob]

Being married to a woman who was a news paper photographer (in the old days but dont tell her i said that ) I have noticed a lot of differences in the way we both look at the same subject, I have also noticed that she is not into the latest gadjet, she uses the same camera as she did when she was working for the news paper and gets great shots. As for me I have a room full of cameras, all the toys and seem to work harder at getting the same shot as her.

I think it is also part of her training where you had to get the shot FAST, get back to the Paper FAST, process the film FAST and go on to the next assignment.

Now she is the Curator of and art museum and we both go out shooting together, me with a trunk full of cameras, film, filters, meters etc. and her with her 35mm and one lens. " one of us is crazy!!!!!"

[kv nguyen]

bob, i like your story. I lean some thing today.

[Toyon]

The only thing a thread like this accomplishes is to establish new stereotypes in place of old ones, such as: women are "much more in touch with their emotions, " "Less likely to get gadgetitis", "photograph more... talk less". In reality, the difference and range amongst women photographers is vastly greater than the alleged differences between women and male photographers as groups. I have always thought that photography benefited greatly from having less gender and race exclusion from its start than other art media. From Julia Margaret Cameron through Helen Levitt, Roy De Carava, Alvarez Bravo and Carrie May Weems, photography has proved to be an enormously creative field with amazing latitudes of expression and styles. It demeans each artist to assert that their style is due to something as generic as race or gender. Perhaps something about gender or race does informs an individual's work, but it is downright obnoxious for anyone other than the artist him/her self to assert that. Far from being "Taboo", the subject of "gender and race differences" is less and less discussed among intelligent people, because under close scrutiny the terms themselves tend to dissolve. Real gender differences only hold up at a biological level, while so-called "race" has no scientific validity whatsoever.

[Tintype Bob]

WOW Toyon you must be having a bad day

[Bruce Watson]

I had been reading some old threads and saw one that was asking why the didn't see many women using Large Format. ...

I would like to here about other female Photographers using Large format

I can't believe that no one has mentioned two of the great old masters: Imogen Cunningham and Margaret Bourke-White are two of the most respected and well known LFers, male or female. Either can easily be displayed on the same wall as Weston, Adams, Stieglitz, Strand, Porter, Steichen, etc.... and often are.

[Barry Trabitz]

Our own Darr Almeda!

[Nathan Potter]

Bruce Barlow is right on about women photographers. In general their work reflects a less detached sense of their subjects than men. There seems to be more of their own and their subjects human emotion captured in the images. Certainly Diane Arbus is one of the exemplars of this. Her subjects cannot be easily differentiated from her own view of the same. Earlier Berenice Abbott who spent time with Atget in Paris was an example. A host of lesser known workers should be studied to get a feel for what Bruce and myself, I think, are trying to convey. Look at the work of Nan Golden, Lisette Model, Tina Mondotti, Germaine Krull, Inga Morath, Dorothea Lange, and Sarah Moon and look for similarities in perception. Not all working in LF, but I think you will perceive a certain treatment of subject material that eshews a common thread of emotional involvement. I suspect that fewer of the female photographers make use of large format simply because personal involvement with the material is easier with a portable camera.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Merg Ross]

I can't believe that no one has mentioned two of the great old masters: Imogen Cunningham and Margaret Bourke-White are two of the most respected and well known LFers, male or female. Either can easily be displayed on the same wall as Weston, Adams, Stieglitz, Strand, Porter, Steichen, etc.... and often are.

True. And, if the list were to include other names from the past, mention of Imogen Cunningham should include the other three women associated with Group f:64. One who gets little mention is Alma Lavenson, who produced some very fine images for many years. Large format, of course.

[Gem Singer]

Forgot to mention Laura Gilpin.

[Toyon]

Bruce Barlow is right on about women photographers. In general their work reflects a less detached sense of their subjects than men. There seems to be more of their own and their subjects human emotion captured in the images. Certainly Diane Arbus is one of the exemplars of this. Her subjects cannot be easily differentiated from her own view of the same. Earlier Berenice Abbott who spent time with Atget in Paris was an example. A host of lesser known workers should be studied to get a feel for what Bruce and myself, I think, are trying to convey. Look at the work of Nan Golden, Lisette Model, Tina Mondotti, Germaine Krull, Inga Morath, Dorothea Lange, and Sarah Moon and look for similarities in perception. Not all working in LF, but I think you will perceive a certain treatment of subject material that eshews a common thread of emotional involvement. I suspect that fewer of the female photographers make use of large format simply because personal involvement with the material is easier with a portable camera.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

Anyone can make a broad statement and support it with hand-picked examples. Of course, the weakness is that exactly the opposite can be similarly "proved". Margaret Bourke-White, Annie Leibovitz, Lisette Modelle and Imogen Cunningham are all masters of photography who I wouldn't characterize as having "a common thread of emotional involvement" in their subjects. While the male photographers: De Carava, Nadar, Callahan and Emmet Gowin seem to share this presumptively "female" trait. Look at the attached photo and decide for yourself whether it was taken by a male or female.

[Vaughn]

Elaine Ling -- an incredible (living) photographer using a 4x5

http://www.elaineling.com/home.html

I find that there are a great amount of LF photographers...male, female white, black, straight, non-straight, et al,...that are not on this forum. I don't believe this forum is an accurate cross-section of the LF community...not too narrow, but definitely not all-encompassing.

Vaughn

[dwross]

I usually steer clear of this topic, but it seems time for a female to weigh in.

I don't believe that our personalities or our photographic style are determined by gender, race, sexual orientation, or any fundamental biological trait (or, at least, not to a significant degree.) I do believe we are influenced by our culture, and that influence is profound. In the past, I have taken the 'let's pretend it doesn't exist' approach, but I've recently come to realize that it's counterproductive to ignore the very real problems of stereotyping.

One could write an essay on all the reasons we tribalize. I suspect it's part intellectual laziness and part turf protection. We welcome the individuals who fit in and shun those who don't. To some extent, at some point in our lives, we've all done it. We learn very early that if we want to belong somewhere, it will be where we 'fit'. It takes an enormous amount of energy (and no small amount of courage) to fight the stereotypes, be it math class if you're a woman or child development if you're a man.

One of my favorite photography sites to lurk about is Mike Johnston's The Online Photographer. He's one of the better photography philosophers and reviewers writing today. He also is an exemplar of photographic stereotyping. If he has featured a female photographer who isn't doing fashion, or family portraits, or narcissism, I've missed it.

Woman see this, of course, and so many gravitate into areas of photography where their work will be acknowledged. This results in a certain marginalization of the areas that are considered 'women's photography', and so they get less notice in history. A prime example is the value put of LF, in part because men, in general, can simply carry larger cameras than women. As if this weren't enough, we seem unable to break the social habits we learned in high school. Men are reluctant to risk the male bonding experience by including women as equals in a technical conversation, and women are afraid of alienating other women by appearing to favor male groups to female. The vicious circle just goes 'round and 'round.

I don't know how and when the circle will break open to allow all of us to freely follow our hearts and minds, but open conversation can't be a bad place to start.

Denise Ross
www.dwrphotos.com
www.thelightfarm,com

[Vaughn]

It definitely works both ways, as you mentioned, Denise.

I spent some time on a parenting forum, and was even a moderator for a while. I had women questioning my motives for being there because I was a male...and one who accused me of being on some kind of weird power trip to active on such a site.

I was a stay-at-home dad to triplet baby boys. While the term "Mr. Mom" does not really bother me, it certainly sheds light of the stereotyping that occurs when "traditional" gender roles are not followed.

Vaughn

PS...Who one is (race, gender, class, etc) does influences one's photography, and broad generalizations can be made based on statistics of any particular class of individuals (ask any PR/advertising firm). The mistake is to assume those generalizations apply to any individual photographer.

[Toyon]

Sally Mann

[Bruce Watson]

One of my favorite photography sites to lurk about is Mike Johnston's The Online Photographer. He's one of the better photography philosophers and reviewers writing today. He also is an exemplar of photographic stereotyping. If he has featured a female photographer who isn't doing fashion, or family portraits, or narcissism, I've missed it.

I just generally question the boy's honesty. He took my money as a pre-order for a book he supposedly published, then never sent the book and after a few email exchanges where he made excuses for not sending the book he just quit responding. I never got either the book or a refund, which in my mind makes him a common thief. So I'm not a bit surprised at this perceived lack of integrity. Fits with what I've learned.

My rule is: "you don't have to put up with jerks." So, why do you bother with him? I don't.


Woman see this, of course, and so many gravitate into areas of photography where their work will be acknowledged.

What happens to women in photography pales in comparison to what happens to them in engineering. During my 25 years in engineering women were either elevated into management so quickly that they never actually got to practice engineering (and it was fairly explicitly done to meet quotas and show "diversity" for contracts), or they got crushed. Of course, a fair number of men were pulled into management or crushed too. But the largest number got to practice their profession, something that was sadly nearly impossible for the women.

The few women who could survive all the crap were in my experience brilliant, dedicated, and driven. They made excellent engineers IMHO. I was always happy to have them on my team. And I almost always got them because the other fools couldn't see past their prejudices. And then they always wondered why my teams consistently outperformed theirs. :D

Back to the topic at hand, the photographer who's work I've learned the most from is Bourke-White. She had an amazing eye for visual patterns and rhythms (http://www.posters.com/pv-458435_Garment-District-New-York-City-1930.html). She could make the most of really awkward available light too. Her work in the 1930's of industry and of New York outshines Lewis Hine. Her work for Life during the depression created one of the iconic images of the time. (http://masters-of-photography.com/B/bourke-white/b-w_living_full.html) One that I hope does not become too relevant again. And who can forget the cover photograph (http://www.metmuseum.org/TOAH/HD/phev/ho_1987.1100.25.htm) for the very first issue of Life Magazine?

[Chuck Pere]

I think Joan Myers uses some large format. http://www.joanmyers.com/

[Nathan Potter]

Anyone can make a broad statement and support it with hand-picked examples. Of course, the weakness is that exactly the opposite can be similarly "proved". Margaret Bourke-White, Annie Leibovitz, Lisette Modelle and Imogen Cunningham are all masters of photography who I wouldn't characterize as having "a common thread of emotional involvement" in their subjects. While the male photographers: De Carava, Nadar, Callahan and Emmet Gowin seem to share this presumptively "female" trait. Look at the attached photo and decide for yourself whether it was taken by a male or female.

The photo could be easily taken by either gender!

Toyon, of course you are right. There is certainly enough diversity among both male and female photographers that one can "hand pick" examples to fit any thesis. But if I recall the whole body of work by female photographers of note I find a distinctive theme of personal involvement and sensitivity that comes through in the images and subjects that is hard for me to define precisely. I don't have the wordsmithing skills. The distinction between male and female vision seems clearly to me to have a genetic origin - and thank goodness it does. Of course there are dramatic exceptions. Danny Lyons work in the seventies, in content, style and sensitivity reminds me of Mary Ellen Mark and could have been done by her. I'll stick generally to my opinion, but I certainly get your point.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Nathan Potter]

Toyon, nice picture of Sally Mann with a massive LF. Is that a bandage on her arm? No doubt from hefting that large camera.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Lenny Eiger]

Forgot to mention Laura Gilpin.

Thanks for mentioning her. I was going to if someone hadn't. I had the pleasure of meeting her... back in 78 or so. What a great spirt!

She took me and my family to a Native American Sacred ceremony - a Corn Dance at a village near her. We were the only non-Native people allowed in - and she was treated as a respected elder (and by association we were welcomed warmly). It was a tremendous honor. I'll never forget it...

She was in a wheelchair, having worn out her hip from carrying her 8x10 on the same shoulder all the time. She was really something... what a person, accessible, real, genuine. I can't say enough.

Lenny

[Diane Maher]

I read through the majority of this thread earlier today. I wish I could find the sensitivity and emotion that you guys seem to see in women's photography. Is it something that the photographer may not always see? I haven't been able to see it in my own work. I am a research chemist by trade; maybe I've been in the lab too many years.

[dwross]

Diane,

I know just what you mean. I feel the same way about my photography. Your work is beautiful - and yes, sensitive - but I wouldn't be able to look at it and see the hidden label 'made by a woman'. The same is true for the gorgeous photography of Tori Nelson and Trish Herremans.

Not so for Sally Mann. And, she may be one of the few female photographers whose name would be recognizable by the general public. Her work is excellent and she should be recognized, but so also, should Paula Chamlee.

For me, it always comes back to photography - plain and simple. All good photography puts the sensitivity and emotion of its maker on display for a viewer. In all honesty, the photography that has most often caused my breath to catch or has brought tears to my eyes has been made by a man. You really gotta love photography.

And Bruce, my husband agrees completely with your assessment of engineering. He is a software engineer who works with engineers. I've heard from his female co-workers how much they appreciate his attitude and support. I'm sure the same is true for the women you worked with. (And, Bourke-White had a tremendous influence on me, too. I blush a bit now, but my first 'real' camera was a Speed Graphic that I got from a retired Chicago news photographer. It was hard not to picture B-W in my mind's eye while I was learning to use the camera.)

Denise

[Kuzano]

this excerpt from the OPB web site (Oregon Public Broadcasting):


"Sarah Hall Ladd and Lily White

In the early 1900s Sarah Hall Ladd (1857-1927) and Lily White (1866-1944) lived together aboard a large houseboat in the Columbia River Gorge. Lily White was from a prosperous pioneer family. Sarah Ladd had married into the wealthy Ladd family. Both excelled at photography and became internationally known for their pictorialist-style landscapes of the Gorge filled with soft light, clouds and atmosphere. Many of their photographs illustrated travel brochures and magazines helping draw tourism to the area. Lily White also took portraits of Native Americans."

Link to the profile page:

http://www.opb.org/programs/oregonexperience/programs/16-The-River-They-Saw/slideshows/2

According to the show (available on video) the Houseboat they lived on was complete with a processing lab. As I recall the houseboat was provided by Sarah Hall Ladd and equipped explicitly for the two of them to photograph and create images of the Columbia River Gorge. They were living on the Columbia River during roughly the same time as Carleton Watkins and the Kiser brothers were photographing the gorge.

[Kirk Gittings]

Did anyone mention Linda Conner? She was big time when I got involved in photography in the late 60's. I loved those 8x10 contact prints of hers.

[Merg Ross]

Did anyone mention Linda Conner? She was big time when I got involved in photography in the late 60's. I loved those 8x10 contact prints of hers.


Wonderful choices for the Linda list; I have an addition.

http://www.edelmangallery.com/connor.htm

[pkphotog]

Virginia Beahan and Laura McPhee.

[Ed O'Grady]

Lilian DeCock, Sonia Noskowiak(sp), Maria Consindas, Tina Modotti, Christine B Fletcher, Judy Dater, Lynne Cohen

[colker]

Are there any black female large format photographers....? :D

black lesbian female.. make it jewsih also.;)

[Turner Reich]

It depends on the Woman, they are not all alike if you hadn't guessed.

[QT Luong]

more women doing contemporary LF work:
Rineke Dijkstra
Candida Hofer
Catherine Opie
Taryn Simon

[johnschlicher]

I don't think it matter's, when you look at a photograph you either like it, or you don't. Does any one really look at at a photograph, and say hum? wonder if a woman, or a black man took that?? I would shoot with either of them, I'm stuck in Wichita, Ks and there's not anyone to shoot with, let alone a camera store who supplies L.F gear

[Dennis]

If you go back in time far enough every photographer used LF.

I didn't see the original posted question as looking for sexist answers. I thought it was just an observation. I notice in these forums and user groups that I get involved with the women participants are pretty rare. I don't jump to the conclusion that their hands are sore from washing dishes or that their breasts get in the way or their brains are too simple to use computers.
Dennis
Oh in photo school the star student and user of LF was a woman named Martha Casanave. Though the Casanave part of her name came later.

[Steve M Hostetter]

wasn't it a woman that gave birth to the very first photographer :D

When Abraham Lincoln lived on 8th street in Springfield Ill he had a photographer that live on the same street.. Many of the photos taken of Lincoln while he lived in Springfield were taken by this neighbor , photographer , and a woman..

that was my impression of the rest of the story by the great Paul Harvey still kickin at age 90:D

[caleb]

Victoria Sambunaris, Laura Letinsky, Alison Davies, Malerie Marder, Sharon Core, Lisa Roy, Angela West, Andrea Modica

[G Benaim]

Lois Conner hasn't been mentioned, and her travels w a 7x17 through China and SE Asia. Definitely worth a look.

[nathanm]

Large format photographers aren't sexist, but a lot of them are racist. They are prejudiced against photographs of color! I admit I'm one of them. I am thinking of starting my own hate group.

[Steve M Hostetter]

wasn't it a woman that gave birth to the very first photographer :D

When Abraham Lincoln lived on 8th street in Springfield Ill he had a photographer that live on the same street.. Many of the photos taken of Lincoln while he lived in Springfield were taken by this neighbor , photographer , and a woman..

that was my impression of the rest of the story by the great Paul Harvey still kickin at age 90:D

I'm sorry to say that I just noticed that Paul Harvey died today,,, I just posted that 8 days ago :(

[BrianShaw]

That is very sad. I have not heard this news.

[cobalt]

(I hope this doesn't surpass the "politics" threshold.)


What's even sadder is the number of posts ridiculing the original question, which speaks to the fact that many here are made uncomfortable with the prospect of dealing with the subject in a mature, straightforward way.
The fact is, the gender, race, religion and socio-economic background of an artist has everything to do with how his/her perception of the world is crafted, and thus, to a great extent, how his/her (in this case) visual voice is developed, as well as to the selection of issues to which it speaks. We are not all the same; in terms of culture, gender, ethnicity, political affiliation, sexual orientation and philosophy, there is a great deal of diversity in the pool of individuals who creat images as art, even in the arena of photography. There is clearly a reluctance on the part of the some of the establishment to accept all voices as legitimate. Or is there some other reason why the vast majority of photographic work, especially when it comes to large format, that is referenced here and in the mainstream media just happens to be produced by white men?

Ridiculing the question belies an all inclusive approach to the acceptance of diversity in the makeup of the artist as well as his/her work. For example, it's sort of like claiming that some of one's best friends are Jewish (or Black, or homosexual); if it were truly ther case, why is it so important to announce it to the world at the mere mention of Judaism (or Blacks or homosexuals), regardless of the context? It's not a very convincing camouflage to a thinking person... so why not either contribute to the discussion in a meaningful, direct way, or leave it alone?

[Paul Fitzgerald]

"The fact is, the gender, race, religion and socio-economic background of an artist has everything to do with how his/her perception of the world is crafted, and thus, to a great extent, how his/her (in this case) visual voice is developed, as well as to the selection of issues to which it speaks."

Actually, men and women physically 'see' differently, 90% of men are measurably color-blind to some degree, >3% of women are measurably color-blind to any degree. I guess it goes back to the hunter-gatherer phase.

"Or is there some other reason why the vast majority of photographic work, especially when it comes to large format, that is referenced here and in the mainstream media just happens to be produced by white men?"

Budget, plain and simple. Photography has always been "a rich man's hobby and a poor man's job". That and LF equipment is rather heavy to lug around.

"Ridiculing the question belies an all inclusive approach to the acceptance of diversity in the makeup of the artist as well as his/her work."

"so why not either contribute to the discussion in a meaningful, direct way, or leave it alone?"

"I would like to here about other female Photographers using Large format"

I'm confused, there was no original question, just a request for information.

[mrpengun]

"The fact is, the gender, race, religion and socio-economic background of an artist has everything to do with how his/her perception of the world is crafted, and thus, to a great extent, how his/her (in this case) visual voice is developed, as well as to the selection of issues to which it speaks."

Actually, men and women physically 'see' differently, 90% of men are measurably color-blind to some degree, >3% of women are measurably color-blind to any degree. I guess it goes back to the hunter-gatherer phase.


To the first point:
Yes, people of different gender, race, etc have different visions of the world... so do people of the same gender, race and background. I always felt that to claim that one group, for ANY reason, has an inherently difference ultimately propagates the idea of difference, which is the basis for prejudice.
Second point:
The genes that cause colour-blindness are on the X chromosome. So women need two broken genes, men only need one ;-)

There certainly are lots of women large-format photographers. However, the fact remains that there are simply more men enshrine into photographic history than men. Tina Modotti has yet to be mentioned, for example (and she is frequently linked to her time with Weston, not for her own work).
The fact is, our world is sexist and prejudice. So why are there more men who do XYZ than women? because there are likely more men doing damn near everything than women. It isn't because they are better, but rather that most of our galleries are run by men, with largely male governing boards, many of whom probably even grew up during periods where such prejudices were overt. Society encourages men more, and men frequently have more opportunities.
Case in point: I can think of four big photographers in contemporary art who all studied in Dusseldorf under Bernt and Hilla Becher: three men (Thomas Struth, Ruff, Andreas Gursky) and one woman (Candita Hofer). Now, given the programme was taught by a man and a woman, we can assume that they are not openly sexist, and so the fact that 75% of their "most prominent" students are men, we should thereby assume that more men are able to become prominent--through the myriad of galleries who represent them, agents who promote them, museums, biannual competitions, book publishers, critics, competition judges and everybody else who, directly or indirectly, goes to promoting a photographer in some way, shape or form. All of those organizations are likely just as male-centric as the rest of society.
Ending Racism, Sexism and all other forms of prejudice takes more than just lawmakers to sign a bill--it takes a generation of citizens to enact those truths, to actually see that all people are equal, and take those ideals with us as we become the decision makers.

P.S. An-My Le is really awesome; I wrote a chapter on my dissertation about her "trilogy" Viet-Nam, Small Wars and 29 Palms. I absolutely adore her work and all of its facets (particularly the self-portraits in 'Small Wars')

[BrianShaw]

You make it sound like a conspiracy, mrpenguin.

Some of my best friends are women, including black, hispanic, and jewish women (that was for you, cobalt) but if they are "doing the job" I barely notice their race, religion or gender. And they barely notice mine. As far as I'm concerned that's how it is supposed to be... but we get gender, race, etc (as long as it isn't white and male, unless one hangs around with skin-head supremicists) thrown in our faces on a regular basis. Personally speaking I'm very happy that women and minorities are excelling in areas in which they have historically been under-represented (whatever that means) but I don't think their gender, race, etc makes them any mroe exceptional... unless their work products demonstrate exceptionality. The whole topic is so very boring to me.

[mrpengun]

yeah, it did sound a bit conspiracy driven :-)
I more so meant to highlight how hard it is "make it big" as it were, and so long as someone along the line has racial/gender preferences (which includes the morass known as "the art market"), there will always be a group "underrepresented" further down the line. Racism and Sexism are certainly problems, but I would venture to say that the majority (or at least a sizable chunk) of people are not overtly prejudice. but it doesn't take a majority to promote their opinions.

The biggest problem is in the histories of photography; the "old" books usually don't get re-written, just new histories and narratives added to them. Gernsheim's "first" history of photography was ultimately limited by what he had seen and collected (not to mention ignore Lady Eastlake's "history of photography" circa 1860), and happened to be lacking in women. His books and his research are still very influential and important despite their limitations, which can further askew a the opinions of an upcoming student of the medium.

[cobalt]

Conspiracy, you say? How dare you??

Let me have a look at your file....

[BrianShaw]

but it doesn't take a majority to promote their opinions.

That is an complete understatement. The "vocal minority" more often than not overshadows the majority opinion!

[EdWorkman]

Shoot , all this political, er, correctness.
I wish Frank Petronio would jump in here with pictures of Large Women

[jackies]

Well, we are around. You just have to look and see us.

We are probably too busy working, taking care of the home, kids, etc and trying to do some decent LF that we don't speak too loud or too often. We are probably tired!!

Jackie :)

[Steve M Hostetter]

I forgot to mention Miss Colleen and Miss Jackie :)

[jackies]

Thanks for the acknowledgement, Steve.

Actually I have had the same question myself re this forum - where are all the women?

Jackie:)

[Valerie]

"We are probably too busy working, taking care of the home, kids, etc and trying to do some decent LF that we don't speak too loud or too often. We are probably tired!!"

:-)

[Jim Jones]

How about the late great Ruth Bernhard? That tiny woman wrestled with an 8x10 for about 20 years.

[Steve M Hostetter]

Hello,,

I forgot to mention Gene Stratton Porter which lived in Genevea Indiana,,, she was one of the first nature photographer's and very accomplished auther ... She was best known for the novel Freckles, and girl of the limberlost... I can't find any info on her camera of choice but considering she lived in late 1800's I'm gonna guess it wasn't a Leica,, :D

I am currently exporing the area where Gene lived which is mostly swamp converted to farmland.. They started to restore the swamp and since 1997 have accumulated more then 1300 acres and it has been restored..

This area regularly floods from the Wabash river ... The area the Limberlost swamp used to accupy was 13,000 acres and 4 counties.. There are only a few pockets remaining ... Very scenic area though

[scott_6029]

Several, very talented large format photographers who happen to be women, can be found in our large format group - www.imageworks.org

[George Kara]

I met the woman, found her devoid of a genuine creativity and full of herself -- not to mention that I think her work is half-assed.

I have never seen the womans work before and no have no axe to grind one way or the other. The strong words you use indicate she must have personally insulted you or rubbed you the wrong way.

Re: creativity, well I looked at her work and see no justification for your comments about lack of creativity. What do you base your judgements on?

I think her work is thought provoking.

[keith english]

I know this is an old thread, but speaking of Nancy Marshall, I saw her exhibit of Andalusia (the farm where author Flannery O'Conner lived in Ga.) She shot 8x10 in Georgia's 100 degree summer heat. I put my 4x5 away in the summer.

[darr]

I know this is an old thread, but speaking of Nancy Marshall, I saw her exhibit of Andalusia (the farm where author Flannery O'Conner lived in Ga.) She shot 8x10 in Georgia's 100 degree summer heat. I put my 4x5 away in the summer.

Flannery wrote her story, "A Good Man is Hard to Find," at Andalusia -- what a piece of work! Thanks for the info Keith!

Best, Darr

[Diane Maher]

"We are probably too busy working, taking care of the home, kids, etc and trying to do some decent LF that we don't speak too loud or too often. We are probably tired!!"

:-)


I know I've been busy at work.

[darr]

"We are probably too busy working, taking care of the home, kids, etc and trying to do some decent LF that we don't speak too loud or too often. We are probably tired!!"

:-)

It gets better girls -- my son (college student) just called to say "lets go somewhere and shoot some pics." Mind you, he is not a photog, but he said I'm the photographer and I would know a nice place to go spend the day together. We are off to Alligator Point and/or Sopchoppy for the day with my Fotoman 617 + b&w. Great kid, thinking of his mom in terms like this. :)

Darr

[venchka]

At the rate he is going, he may turn out to be a keeper! Enjoy! Share a few 6x17 photos with those of us who only have 6x17 envy.

[JWebb]

Didn't see anyone mention Judy Dater

[Steve M Hostetter]

Hello,,

I forgot to mention Gene Stratton Porter which lived in Genevea Indiana,,, she was one of the first nature photographer's and very accomplished auther ... She was best known for the novel Freckles, and girl of the limberlost... I can't find any info on her camera of choice but considering she lived in late 1800's I'm gonna guess it wasn't a Leica,, :D

I am currently exporing the area where Gene lived which is mostly swamp converted to farmland.. They started to restore the swamp and since 1997 have accumulated more then 1300 acres and it has been restored..

This area regularly floods from the Wabash river ... The area the Limberlost swamp used to accupy was 13,000 acres and 4 counties.. There are only a few pockets remaining ... Very scenic area though

Gene moved to California and became a movie producer.. 8 of her novels were made into movies

By the way ,,, I also enjoy all the photography here on this web site made by women! I can learn a lot from them

To all the mother's,, Happy Mother's Day !

[sgelb]

Large format photographers aren't sexist, but a lot of them are racist. They are prejudiced against photographs of color! I admit I'm one of them. I am thinking of starting my own hate group.

you hippies are always so damn angry.. i love e6 and c41 and black and white equally.

(although I am very partial to ASA 25).

[William McEwen]

Adding two to the list:

Judith Joy Ross
http://pictureyear.blogspot.com/2008/09/judith-joy-ross.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/02/arts/design/02fine.html


Andrea Modica
http://www.edelmangallery.com/modicashow06.htm

[shuber1]

Hello All,
I am a woman Lf photographer and I was wondering how many of us are really working with those beautiful cameras... and I am a very nice person. Can some photographers contact me? I think maybe we can make a nice group? Susan- www.susanhuber.com

[Shen45]

Congrats Susan very nice work.

[Diane Maher]

Susan,
Weren't you in the Contact Printer's Guild for a while?

Diane

[al olson]

I have just read all of this thread and I have not seen any mention of Lisa Kristine. Her work features indigenous people from over 60 countries. Much of this work is created with a 4x5. The planning and logisitics necessary to make these remarkable photos is impressive. Ms. Kristine owns three galleries: Santa Fe, Sausolito, and Sonoma.

http://www.lisakristine.com/home.html

[D. Bryant]

Hello All,
I am a woman Lf photographer and I was wondering how many of us are really working with those beautiful cameras... and I am a very nice person. Can some photographers contact me? I think maybe we can make a nice group? Susan- www.susanhuber.com

Hi Susan,

It's me again!

Don

[Jim Ewins]

Paula Chamlee uses 8x10 and ULF.

[Andre Noble]

My male intuition tells me that on average a female's LF work will be more unique than the average LF male's work. Also, the women in my photo school's work seemed more creative to me, slightly.

[imagedowser]

Zoe Zimmerman.

[Brian Ellis]

Like someone said a year or so ago in this thread, if a woman was a photographer before roughly 1930 she was necessarily a LF photographer. And there were plenty of female photographers back then. In fact in times when the only two occupations generally open to educated women were nursing and teaching, photography was relatively open to women.

In the 19th century there was a raging argument over the question of whether men and women played the piano differently, to a point where one could distinguish the piano playing of a man and a woman. Many critics said they could - until somebody set up blind tests of a man and woman playing the piano behind a curtain while the critics listened. Which reminds me of a lot of the stuff in this thread about women being more sensvitive, "artistic," etc. If that's the case then it should be an easy matter to assemble a collection of photographs and identify which were made by a woman and which by a man. But I'd bet a lot of money that nobody could do significantly better than the laws of statistical probablites would indicate if that was done. Just for starters, look at Berenice Abbott's MIT photographs. How many people would say that those were made by a woman if they didn't already know? And of the few people that would, how many would continue to say that if you told them that when the photographer needed equipment with which to make some of those photographs and found that it didn't exist, s/he invented and built the necessary equipment?

[Dirk Rösler]

If that's the case then it should be an easy matter to assemble a collection of photographs and identify which were made by a woman and which by a man.

That doesn't quite make sense. You cannot deduce from the end result how it was made and by whom. It's like the "is this an LF shot or not" or "tell me what lens was used to take this" kind of test. However, you could look at the process and see which properties of the creator or the process allowed a quality result to be reached more effectively. In that case, certain tools or persons with certain personality traits may have an edge if applied at the right time. But that is still meaningless in this discussion.

What is being talked about here are generalizations, i.e. that every person of a homogeneous group has a common trait. These generalizations are usually wrong.

Personally I don't really care whether there are female LF photographers out there as long as there are female photographers working at all and taking great photos. The same goes for all other "groups" of people, if you care to divide them.

[Brian Ellis]

That doesn't quite make sense. You cannot deduce from the end result how it was made and by whom. It's like the "is this an LF shot or not" or "tell me what lens was used to take this" kind of test. However, you could look at the process and see which properties of the creator or the process allowed a quality result to be reached more effectively. In that case, certain tools or persons with certain personality traits may have an edge if applied at the right time. But that is still meaningless in this discussion.

What is being talked about here are generalizations, i.e. that every person of a homogeneous group has a common trait. These generalizations are usually wrong.

Personally I don't really care whether there are female LF photographers out there as long as there are female photographers working at all and taking great photos. The same goes for all other "groups" of people, if you care to divide them.

Did you stop reading at the sentence of mine that you quoted? In the very next sentence I said "[b]ut I'd bet a lot of money that nobody could do significantly better than the laws of statistical probablites would indicate if that was done." IOWs, I agree with you, I don't think you can deduce from the end result by whom (male or female) a photograph was made.

[Dirk Rösler]

Yes, I agree, sorry if I was not clear on that. Men are so confrontational ;)

[Akki14]

I'm a woman and I shoot 4x5 mostly(and some polaroids occasionally).

I don't like being put in the Women Photographers box and actively avoid going to Women Meet-ups because I find it silly and don't really like chatting with women just because they're women. I want people to like my work for being interesting, not because I'm interesting or because I'm a woman.

And I'm sure it's true that women just don't like hanging out on online forums much or at least these ones... Or maybe we just watch you guys fight it out for fun!

[Tintype Bob]

Susan - Love your work - would like to see more

[Wil_Bloodworth]

For some reason, my brain transposed the title to "large format women". Now that's a thread!

- Wil