Do you know who ansel adams is?

Have you heard of Ansel adams

  • Yes

    Votes: 216 92.7%

  • No

    Votes: 17 7.3%
  • Total voters
    233
Status
Not open for further replies.
ernesto said:
I think a few people could do with watching the Bailey docudrama "We'll take Manhattan" which may help their ignorance and aid the discussion.

And whether people like Bailey or not I find it very surprising that people on a photography forum seriously don't know who he is but I suppose it all depends how old you are.
Click to expand...

It's pretty unfair to label others ignorant because they don't know who the guy is tbh. Not knowing who he is simply means just that, you've not come across him before. Not everyone into photography feels the need to look up other/past photographers. And they really don't have to. It's probably much more refreshing not to, as you'll follow your own creativity, too many out there trying to emulate other people's work.


It's like saying you would find it hard to believe a modern painter never heard of Dali ...
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
It's probably much more refreshing not to, as you'll follow your own creativity, too many out there trying to emulate other people's work.
Click to expand...

I'm of this train of thought too, would rather concentrate on my own creativity than to try an emulate others

I have heard of David Bailey, but i couldn't tell you anything about him (dead or alive, what he photographed) and i certainly wouldn't be able to pick out any of his photos if you showed me

I suppose it's like Gordon Bennett, most people will have heard of him, but very few will know who he was or what he did :LOL:
 
There have been thousands of famous photographers and I have probably seen the work of most of them up to the 70's, since then few new ones have lasted in the publics mind for very long.
Ansel Adams was as famous for his writing as for his photographs. By todays standard his mountain views are fairly ordinary, but while he was still working they were at the pinnacle of what could be achieved.

Any visual worker should have seen the works of artists in every field. At college in the 50's we were encouraged to visit every art gallery in London. These included Graphic art, fine art, sculpture,Pottery, screen printing, and furniture and decorative furnishing. As well as having an appreciation of Fashion and fabric and industrial design. A photographer needs to learn to see, and appreciate what he is seeing.

The mechanical side of photography can be learnt in a few weeks. The seeing and lighting side, takes for ever.
 
Last edited:
Must confess to being flabbergasted at the number of people who seem happy to dismiss some of the great names in photography, and who take a delight in being ignorant of them and their works - I was never a great lover of Ansel Adams' work, but there was no doubt they were technically superb, and the Zone System can still be applied nowadays (although I found that over-complicated and a touch "nerdy") - despite those facts, I think my knowledge of photography would be lacking having not seen his work and theories.
I'm a great fan of people like Cartier-Bresson, and Leni Riefenstahl, but by the same token have been grateful for the likes of William Mortensen, and even John Everard...... people who were passionate about their photography, and were influential (or controversial) in their times - we can learn from all of them
 
And i'm flabbergasted at being labelled ignorant for knowing as much as some people about the history of photography

Surely there must have been a time when all of you didn't know the name Ansel Adams :shrug:
 
Organnyx said:
Must confess to being flabbergasted at the number of people who seem happy to dismiss some of the great names in photography, and who take a delight in being ignorant of them and their works
Click to expand...

Your gast is easily flabbered then, there are far more important things in life than knowing a photographer!
 
There's nothing wrong with not knowing about (being ignorant of) something, but I'm stuffed if I can find an attitude of "I'm fine, I don't need to look at the great photographers' work" to be particularly sensible or positive - it flies in the face of all sensible advice on the subject - if only to show that there are many techniques for taking photos

This IS a photography forum, not knowing about Ansel Adams is a bit like a music student saying they don't know about Beethoven and Mozart, and can do jolly well without them.......
 
Last edited:
Just not being familiar with any one photographer doesn't mean that you are flying in the face of sensible advice, there are many ways of learning.
 
Gramps - That's not what I said, I bemoaned an attitude of "wilful ignorance" on the part of some people who seem to be quite happy to actually go out of their way to avoid taking an interest in other photographer's work - noone can be blamed for not having heard of someone, but I would have though that that anyone hailed as one of the masters of photography is at the very least worthy of a quick squint when you do hear of them.....
As I said, Adams' work doesn't particularly float my boat (I'm a "people" photographer), but there's no denying he has a worthy place in the history of phortography - the sensible advice is to look at ALL forms of pictorial art if you want to be a great photographer (as any good art or photography teacher will tell you)
 
I don't feel the need to look at the work of Ansel Adams just because someone else thinks he is God's gift to photographers - I know what I like and tend toward a variety of different photographers who I feel can offer me a way of improving on my style.
I have no wish to take on someone else's style ... it leads to everything being the same and why here we so often hear remarks condemning a particular style of process or see landscapes/seascapes (for example) that are so predictably like the ones going before them ... perceived as 'the only way to do it'.
 
"It is always luck" - Henri Cartier-Bresson on achieving that special photograph

:LOL::LOL:
 
Organnyx said:
Gramps - That's not what I said, I bemoaned an attitude of "wilful ignorance" on the part of some people who seem to be quite happy to actually go out of their way to avoid taking an interest in other photographer's work - noone can be blamed for not having heard of someone, but I would have though that that anyone hailed as one of the masters of photography is at the very least worthy of a quick squint when you do hear of them.....
As I said, Adams' work doesn't particularly float my boat (I'm a "people" photographer), but there's no denying he has a worthy place in the history of phortography - the sensible advice is to look at ALL forms of pictorial art if you want to be a great photographer (as any good art or photography teacher will tell you)
Click to expand...

I agree. I don't get the attitude of denial either. It's possible to appreciate good art without being particularly fond of it, and appreciating it does not mean it will take over/dominate your own approach or "style" (if only it did!).
 
Last edited:
So if I decide not to look into some photographer's work I'm in "denial" ... come on, get a grip :D
 
Is this Ansel fella a relation of Grizzly?
 
gramps said:
So if I decide not to look into some photographer's work I'm in "denial" ... come on, get a grip :D
Click to expand...

If it's because you're intimidated by his reputation and popularity then yes, I would call it denial.
 
ZoneV said:
If it's because you're intimidated by his reputation and popularity then yes, I would call it denial.
Click to expand...

"intimidated" ... by a photographer? :thinking:
 
"wilful ignorance" , aye that's me to a T !
 
Photography is an art, open to interpretation by all, what some see as "quality work" others may view as 'rubbish' ... not that I'm saying that of Adam's work as I am not familiar with it :)
 
Some people are proud of their lack of Knowledge, Education, appreciation of art or past greats in their field.

It is hard to find a word better than ignorant to describe that attitude.

But it is their life and their choice....
 
gramps said:
Photography is an art, open to interpretation by all, what some see as "quality work" others may view as 'rubbish' ... not that I'm saying that of Adam's work as I am not familiar with it :)
Click to expand...

That's fine. I was referring to the "don't know, don't want to know, why should I?" brigade. That's the attitude I called denialist and find interesting and difficult to understand.
 
Last edited:
... and some people have a misguided opinion of their own importance and values in life. :shrug:
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Some people are proud of their lack of Knowledge, Education, appreciation of art or past greats in their field.

It is hard to find a word better than ignorant to describe that attitude.

But it is their life and their choice....
Click to expand...

Well thanks for you calcification of ignorant, My love of photography comes from the picture not the history, I like to experiment and learn by trying and often failing but learning from that, I thing that you're ignorant of that fact that people have different mental processes some of us don't learn by looking to the past....
 
ZoneV said:
That's fine. I was referring to the "don't know, don't want to know, why should I?" brigade.
Click to expand...

why should they - I've got no interest is past famous photographers unless their work is of interest. the fact that they are famous or dead has no bearing on wither I take note.
 
ajax_andy said:
I think people should look but they don't have to like.

Looking and liking are different things and most people will have at least looked at an Ansel Adams or David Bailey pic at some point but it didn't do anything for them so they looked elsewhere
Click to expand...

And there's a difference between not liking and dismissing. I've been looking at some stuff today that I didn't particularly like, but it made me think.

Cagey75 said:
It's probably much more refreshing not to, as you'll follow your own creativity, too many out there trying to emulate other people's work.
Click to expand...

You don't have to emulate someone just because you look at their pictures. Their work can inform yours without it becoming a pastiche.

Anyway. enough of this old fart Ansel. Who has/hasn't heard of Robert Adams? :LOL:
 
essexash said:
but would these people be as famous if not for being in the right place at the right time. Having Yosemetie on your doorstep will improve the odds no end of generating amazing landscapes compared to if you lived in Luton.

Same point with Bailey, if i had access to the model rosta of Vogue im pretty sure i could knock out some decent fashion shots. Someone would of come along at some point and stuck a model in front of a white wall if it wasnt him first.

Talent or environemnt? which served them the most?
Click to expand...

I take it that was said with some perverse sense of humour?
 
"I've got no interest is past famous photographers unless their work is of interest" - how do you know unless you look?:LOL:
 
Organnyx said:
"I've got no interest is past famous photographers unless their work is of interest" - how do you know unless you look?:LOL:
Click to expand...


depends on what genre you like or wither you want to see old photographs.

I have no interest in street photography or B&W images of yosemity
 
POAH said:
why should they - I've got no interest is past famous photographers unless their work is of interest.
Click to expand...

Isn't that a given?

Of course I agree, but that's not the same as dismissing something before seeing it, which is what I was referring to (i.e. "don't know, don't want to know, why should I?"). Additionally, it's possible to appreciate an artist and their work without liking it.

And I agree on the last point - whether an artist is currently on or off the mortal coil makes no difference to how I see their work. Why should it?
 
Last edited:
I'm afraid I also fall into the camp of diminishing respect for the inverted snobbery of 'happy to be ignorant'. Surely the joy of life includes the collection of knowledge. Anyone who happily wallows in ignorance is automatically suspicious in my book. There's nothing wrong with not knowing something - but pride in ignorance is bizarre in my not very humble opinion.

I'm not a fan of AA's but he's one of only two photographers I'd expect anyone to be familiar with. The other being HCB, again I'm not particularly a fan of his either, but they are to photography what Elvis and The Beatles are to pop culture.
 
Phil V said:
Surely the joy of life includes the collection of knowledge.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but not everyone has the desire or inclination to cover every spectrum of available knowledge, most people have varied interests which will mean that some things are explored by them whilst others are ignored ... does that amount to ignorance or "inverted snobbery"?
I think not ... however for someone to insist that everyone must pursue their particular field of interest seems quite odd to me.
 
gramps said:
... and some people have a misguided opinion of their own importance and values in life. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you've lost me there Gramps. You'll have to explain that one more clearly.
 
ZoneV said:
Isn't that a given?

Of course I agree, but that's not the same as dismissing something before seeing it, which is what I was referring to (i.e. "don't know, don't want to know, why should I?"). Additionally, it's possible to appreciate an artist and their work without liking it.

And I agree on the last point - whether an artist is currently on or off the mortal coil makes no difference to how I see their work. Why should it?
Click to expand...

I can quite easily dissmiss something before I've seen it - you do it from when you are kid.
 
Phil V said:
I'm afraid I also fall into the camp of diminishing respect for the inverted snobbery of 'happy to be ignorant'. Surely the joy of life includes the collection of knowledge. Anyone who happily wallows in ignorance is automatically suspicious in my book. There's nothing wrong with not knowing something - but pride in ignorance is bizarre in my not very humble opinion.

..............
Click to expand...

I happily wallow in the ignorance of any past great photographers, so what?

How on earth is that inverted snobbery?

Bizarre indeed is your "automatically suspicious" comment!
 
Phil V said:
Surely the joy of life includes the collection of knowledge. Anyone who happily wallows in ignorance is automatically suspicious in my book. There's nothing wrong with not knowing something - but pride in ignorance is bizarre in my not very humble opinion.
Click to expand...


being in blissful ignorance is a great thing to have.

would you like to know the bus is coming or would you prefer look out for the bus, what bus, splat lol

"I know that I know nothing"
 
POAH said:
I can quite easily dissmiss something before I've seen it - you do it from when you are kid.
Click to expand...

You might have........

Been following the thread with interest, taking on board all views expressed, but this comment has, I'm sorry to say, completely baffled me.

But if it's part of your natural make up then fine, I certainly won't criticise but it's pretty much the opposite of my view of things.
 
Organnyx said:
I'm amazed there's been no mention of "the zone system" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_System, which is one of the things he was best known for......... it kept the nerdy ones busy back in the days of film
Click to expand...

Careful....:nono: to some of us this is still the days of film. :D

Any landscape photographer would do well to have a look at AA's images and read a bit about him. He was a really interesting man, and as was said up there a bit, modest and quiet. But he changed the way landscape photography was viewed and was taken, showing people the wildness of the landscape and this encouraged many to go out and have a look for themselves.

I think generally speaking there is nothing wrong in taking inspiration from other photographers, famous or not, so long as it helps you to develop your own style/feel/look call it what you will. However it is definitely not essential.

Andy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top