> ANdrew Fildes wrote --
(About Doisneau's Kiss picture & the controversy
surrounding it being set up)
> >Is it not still a good photograph for you?
Luis:
> It is, just as thousands of other set-up photos are. Not the same as
before the revelation, however.
> >Does the knowledge or even the procedure change anything?
> It does. The knowledge and the controversy become a conceptual caption
to the image, altering how we perceive it.
Photography's credibility has always been held in question, but 'street
photography' is often presented as a medium which transcends deliberate
viewer manipulation.
so too, 'news' photography often professed the same tenets.. even though
THAT representation falls flat on it's face time and time again and now many
people have come to view news photographers as being as manipulative as any
other photographer (even the great Mr E. Smith was caught out!)
Bresson as a street photographer had no darkroom experience so his 'crop in
the camera' mantra was formed basically out of ignorance, his 'decisive
moment' technique was garnered from shooting staged scenes until he had
enough frames on his lightbox to find the one which best represented the
'moment' he wanted.
So what the hell IS street photography? (it's taken years, but I can dare
to ask the question now ;-)
karl
