On 7/25/05, Bob W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I may have mentioned already that I am reading the newly-published biography > of HCB. While reading it I have also been looking at the book "The Man, the > Image & the World" as a reference for his photos. > > During the recent discussion about snapshots I also checked the book > "Examples - the Making of 40 Photographs" by Ansel Adams. > > Strange is it may seem, they both photographed Saint Francis Church in Taos > from almost exactly the same spot, at a very similar time of day, with > roughly the same angle of view. It's very interesting to compare the > different treatments: > > http://tinyurl.com/b8lxq Hansel > > http://tinyurl.com/9dafj Gretel > > Of course, it is easier if you have decent (book) prints in front of you. > > Adams was there first, in 1929. HCB photographed it in 1947, I think. I'm > sure HCB was well aware of the Adams photo. My guess is that he had it in > mind when he photographed it himself. Perhaps he was thinking of the famous > question "Gee, Ansel. Aren't there any people in New Mexico?" (was it W E > Smith who asked that?). > > I think the comparison may be an interesting way to separate the sheep from > the goats, photographically. I don't know which is which, by the way. > > I prefer the HCB version, as you might expect, although I don't think it's a > great photo. It is doom-laden and heavy. You can feel the weight and the > scale of the building; it's massive like a pyramid. I don't get that from > the Adams photo. Instead, next to the HCB, it feels rather trivial and > lightweight - almost an academic exercise in tonality and printing rather > than an attempt to show something about the building. > > It will be interesting to hear what others think about this unusual > comparison. Especially the people who've been there. > > -- >
I've never been there. I don't know that I have a preference; they're such different photos, it's as if they're taken of a different place altogether. HCB's is certainly the more dramatic of the two, with the deep sky and cloud, with the dark shadow of the building that shows almost no detail in it, with the person walking by, with the tighter crop and different perspective that emphasizes the mass of the building. I guess that St. Ansel does seem an excercise in tonality and printing, but isn't that what he was about? I have to confess that I'm not sure I "got" Adams generally, beyond his technical exposure/printing brilliance (as heretical as it might be to say that). Next to HCB's, his sky seems a bit washed out. It's as Adams is telling us about the building, but HCB is telling us about "the place". Does that make sense? I fear not... Interesting the way two great photographers can photograph the same place, and can end up with two images that are so different. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
