An Henri Cartier-Bresson...

  • Thread starter Thread starter SimonH
  • Start date Start date
HoppyUK said:
If you're told a lie often enough, it becomes truth. It's called marketing :D
Click to expand...
haha! Indeed! :D

HoppyUK said:
I wouldn't call that shot epic, and the technical quality is very poor. Focus is out, horizon wonky, and very poor darkroom technique.
Click to expand...

So.. yes, then? Knowing the truth, now the faults in the image DO matter? ;)

Nobody (that I know of) ever bothered to mention the issues you (rightly, IMO) identify, when they thought it was the work of Cartier-Bresson. It just was accepted, and seemingly the ethereal "qualities" of the image were simply inferred.
 
SimonH said:
haha! Indeed! :D



So.. yes, then? Knowing the truth, now the faults in the image DO matter? ;)

Nobody (that I know of) ever bothered to mention the issues you (rightly, IMO) identify, when they thought it was the work of Cartier-Bresson. It just was accepted, and seemingly the ethereal "qualities" of the image were simply inferred.
Click to expand...

LOL I know what you mean, but authorship does make a huge difference. There's not a lot of logic in it, but it just does. Witness those old paintings that come to light now and then and are attributed to famous painters. Suddenly that very average daub in the loft that you wouldn't give house room is worth millions. Forgers make fortunes at it, and who knows how many of the great paintings hung in galleries are not actually legit?

But that pic attributed to HCB, not sure how that one got through. It's in the HCB style for sure, but the clues that it is quite contempory are obvious and the technical flaws rudimentary. HCB would never have shot it like that and certainly wouldn't have let it out with such poor darkroom work.
 
HoppyUK said:
I wouldn't call that shot epic, and the technical quality is very poor. Focus is out, horizon wonky, and very poor darkroom technique.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking. Hardly 'epic'. I would give the same opinion whoever took it.
 
Hmm.. I don't think this image is technically THAT far south of a lot of HCB's actual work. There are plenty of wonky horizons in there.
 
Well, I probably wouldn't like any of those either.

And it is not just authorship, it obviously happens in branding too which is why people want products with certain names on them, even if no named products are equal.
 
Never seen it before and it's not really an impressive shot. Looks staged too. Not contrasty enough either - why would people think it was an HCB shot in the first place?
 
I agree, not a patch on Cartier-Bresson and to my mind not in the least like his work........
 
I'm confused by that "news" piece. I mean was "the entire internet" really fooled? :thinking: I've never seen the image before and have done a fair bit of searching for Cartier Bresson's work over the months.

And "The photo was taken three years before Instagram was invented. No filters were used; it's just a good camera, and a lot of skill." Really? :thinking:
 
Last edited:
I think the technical flaws would be overlooked when thought to be the work of HCB, partly because of the halo effect and partly because it would have been assumed to have been taken 50 or so years earlier.
 
The more you look at the "imposter" photo, the more you realise it couldn't possibly be by Cartier Bresson, not least the truly atrocious "quality" - 50 years ago there were good sharp lenses, and the ability to process and enlarge properly (as there were in Victorian times) - HCB used a Leica, which was very capable camera, and he really knew how to use it - the false one owes more to the (inaccurate) "Instagram and Lomography" view of what photographs were like in the last century.......

It also doesn't have HCB's "magic touch" - the elusive quality of genius - the framing is bad, the quality is dreadful
 
Last edited:
Sorry I wasn't being clear - I meant the assumption that older photos would be poor quality, rather than the reality. Some of my sharpest images in recent times have come from a 50 year old Agfa.
 
ernesto said:
Exactly what I was thinking. Hardly 'epic'. I would give the same opinion whoever took it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. There is nothing of interest and no sense of Cartier-Bresson's decisive moment.

POAH said:
why would people think it was an HCB shot in the first place?
Click to expand...

Probably because someone said it was.


Steve.
 
Last edited:
Entire internet credits snapper for taking great pic while actually dead
Click to expand...

What a load of bull....seems it's just one or two blogs who posted it....hardly the entire internet.

And as some have said already, I too have never seen it before, and certainly wouldn't have attributed it to HCB.
 
Not really too impressed or fussed about it TBH. I've just had a look at some of HCB's photos and they didn't do an awful lot for me either TBH. Just my opinion of course, but I'm just not that interested in the subject matter for it to hold my attention. I'm sure there would be some excellent photos that he's done but a quick search on Google didn't 'move me'.
 
viewfromthenorth said:
Never seen it before. Can't even begin to think why it's been attributed to HCB, surely there's enough of his books of photos out there for people to realise it's not featured in any?
Click to expand...

Well half the story is obviously about how easy it is for t'internet to conceal/change/corrupt history. If you're new to HCB, and rely on the web for your information, you might never know the truth. So many times the work is referenced online, it's been floated to the top of peoples' top list of HCB work, it's all clearly a lesson in urban mythology and the false authority of the Google/Internet hive mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top