Tuesday, February 15, 2011

AN ATTEMPT TO HELP JOURNALISM FIGURE OUT ITS FUTURE IN AN INTERNET AGE

We just recently discovered a great website about "new" journalism: The Nieman Journalism Lab.
About the Lab: "The Neiman Journalism Lab  is an attempt to help journalism figure out its future in an Internet age."

To that end: Eight trends for journalism in 2011: A Nieman Lab talk in Toronto
© Joshua BentonFeb. 14  /  11 a.m.



"Whereas I think a lot of news organizations this year are going to start seeing that if they want to be the one source of news for their customers, or the primary source of news for their customers, they’re going to need to present more of the world and more of the online world, and that aggregation of pulling things together will be something they will buy into more."

"... So when all is said and done, the new world is not going to look anything like the old world. And there will still be things that we used to get from the journalism industry that we’re not going to get anymore. But in the end, I think it’s going to be counterbalanced by all the enormous wealth of new information, including a lot of really great journalism, that’s going to be produced by this new ecosystem. And in the end, I think it’s going to end up doing a better job of serving the information needs of readers and viewers and listeners."


Full article here.

Monday, February 14, 2011

NEW YORK: A PHOTOGRAPHER'S CITY





Washington Square, 2009
Stephen Wilkes: Washington Square Park, Day Into Night, 2009


The New York Times
Bookshelf
By Sam Roberts

Sunday, February 13, 2011

New York: A Photographer’s City,” edited by Marla Hamburg Kennedy (Rizzoli, $45). This lush collection, which includes works by Berenice Abbott and Stephen Wilkes, offers fresh perspective on the “physical uniqueness” of the city’s familiar venues, mostly captured in color. Though identifying less familiar haunts would have been a welcome addition, the images here do succeed in going beyond the concrete to capture what Elisabeth Sussman describes in her foreword as the image of the city, both permanent and transitory, that “haunts past and present photography of New York.”

More: NYC like you have never seen her before. This stunning book showcases an unparalleled compilation of mostly unpublished photographs of New York City and its boroughs taken by established and emerging artists. "New York: A Photographer’s City is a world-class collection, featuring artists from all over the
globe, offering views, cityscapes, and vignettes that are fresh and beautifully illustrate the city’s 5 ever-changing boroughs.

The 350 images capture the avant-garde spirit of New York and the city’s appearance in the twentyfirst century. While we immediately associate black and white imagery with NYC, this new look brings out the color in the big apple and reveals the magic that continues to inspire New Yorkers and visitors



Related: The City of New York

Saturday, February 12, 2011

HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY 2011




Kirk Douglas and Jane Simmons, Spartacus 1959
Richard C. Miller: Kirk Douglas and Jane Simmons' Double, Spartacus 1959



The Kiss, Grand Central Station, NYC
Ernst Haas: The Kiss, Grand Central Station, NY, 1958


Berlin Kiss, Berlin, 1996
Harry Benson: Berlin Kiss, 1996




Mick Rock: Lou Reed and David Bowie, Cafe Royal, London, 1973




Jean Harlow kissing Robert Taylor,
Ted Allen: Jean Harlow kissing Robert Taylor, 1937



Every February 14, across the United States and in other places around the world, candy, flowers and gifts are exchanged between loved ones, all in the name of St. Valentine. But who is this mysterious saint, and where did these traditions come from? Find out about the history of this centuries-old holiday, from ancient Roman rituals to the customs of Victorian England. (History.com)




Friday, February 11, 2011

RICHARD C. MILLER EXHIBITION OPENS

Laurence Olivier, Tony Curtis, Peter Ustinov,  Spartacus 1959
Richard C. Miller:  Laurence Olivier, Tony Curtis, Peter Ustinov, Spartacus 1959


Pasatiempo
The Santa Fe New Mexican's Weekly Magazine of Arts, Entertainment, & Culture
February 11 - 17, 2011

In his long and varied photographic career, Richard C. Miller covered the entertainment industry and did publicity work for 72 films - including portraits of James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, and Steve McQueen. He documented work on the building of the Los Angeles freeway and took many photos of Edward Weston and his son Brett Weston. A retrospective of Miller's work opens at Monroe Gallery of Photography (112 Don Gaspar Ave., 505-992-0800) with a reception at 5 p.m. today, Friday, Feb.


Related: Richard C. Miller: A Retrospective

Thursday, February 10, 2011

RICHARD C. MILLER EXHIBITION PREVIEW ON GALLERY NEWS

Watching TV Fights, Nicholson's, Sunset Boulevard, 1949
Richard C. Miller: Watching TV Fights, Nicholson's, Sunset Boulevard, 1949



Gallery News is heard every Thursday and Friday at 8:55am on KHFM-Classical 95.9 FM and 102.9 FM. It is also available as a podcast at the iTunes Store.

Mid-February is fast approaching and that means Valentineʼs Day for galleries in  Santa Fe and Albuquerque. This is Gallery News for Thursday, February 10.

Monroe Gallery of Photography presents a retrospective exhibition of photographs by Richard C. Miller, who recently passed away at age 98. For decades, Millerʼs photos graced the covers of Americaʼs leading magazines. The opening reception takes place tomorrow Friday, from 5 - 7 PM. Monroe of Photography is located at 112 Don Gaspar in downtown Santa Fe.

Thanks for listening. Iʼll be back tomorrow with more Gallery News. For the Collectorʼs Guide, Iʼm Kevin Paul.
 
Related: Richard C. Miller: A Retrospective

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

FILM vs DIGITAL: A Conversation Continues



zodiac_1.jpg
Zodiac - © John Neel



Via Pixiq

Before I get too many people adding prejudiced comments about the pros and cons of digital imaging verses film, I want to emphasize that I am not putting digital down. Nor am I trying to make a point for film. I am a digital photographer as well as a film photographer. This is not a pro or con discussion about film vs. digital.


Rather, I am asking if there is a difference between the kinds of images that used to be taken with film in comparison to what we are seeing with digital from a spiritual point of view. I am not alone in asking the question.

In looking at the offerings of new technology photography, I am finding very few images that have a specific quality that dominates the works of the great film photographers of film technology. Most of what I see today seems sterile, vapid and trite, by comparison. There seems to be something significant that is missing.

Somehow there is a difference that many of my contemporaries as well as myself feel is missing from the current process. I want to find out what that something is.

When we look at the works of great photographers such as Robert Frank, Mary Ellen Mark, André Kertész, Henri Cartier-Bresson, Lee Friedlander, Gary Winogrand, Ansel Adams, Atget or any of hundreds of photographers who have given us amazing images produced with film, there seems to be a magical or mystical presence that is missing from most of what I would call rather trite and unimaginative images being produced by digital means today.

When a photographer really connects with his subject, there is a transformation beyond the obvious, beyond the likeness of the subject. There is a sense of something else, which is somehow conveyed in a surprising or magical manner. A metamorphosis takes place that we as a viewer can see, feel and understand because the subject has been transformed into something bigger and more profound. The subject becomes a metaphor or symbol for deeper consideration. For me this is a necessary step in the creation or capture of a powerful image. It is photography at its finest. There is much more to the image than appearance. A deeper message is formed. Communication and learning takes place. We become bigger and smarter because the image speaks to us in a deeply articulate way.

Yet, I find this quality scarce in the digital images that I have seen of late.

Is this because there is an - difference between the two technologies, which allows the magic to be captured more easily with one medium over the other? Here again, I am not discussing the differences in technique as much as I am in the ability of the photographer to capture the essence of the subject through either process.

Surely, digital allows a more economical workflow in terms of time and effort. But is there a difference in how a moment is captured. Does film allow the capture to be more transcendent? Is there a higher possible spiritual attainment with a film camera than with a digital camera? Does one technology provide a better capability to transport us to a higher level of understanding beyond the mere representation of a subject?

Personally, I believe that there is a major difference and worth an investigation. For many photographers, film seems more genuine as a medium because to them, it has the ability in the right hands to capture something we could refer to as soul. To me, soul is an essential part of a higher form of image making. It makes the difference between a simple rendition of a subject and one that rises beyond the subject. To capture soul means capturing something deeper and much more meaningful.

It may be possible that with digital, we have not yet made the leap to a spiritual connection with our subjects. If so, could it be because we are still in the early phases of digital imaging and that "thing" will become more evident to us as we become better digital photographers? Is the task of digital imaging too easy or possibly too difficult or distracting that we fail to connect with the subject? Do we pay more attention to the camera and the technology of digital rather than the subject itself? Is it possible that we are better able to become “one” with our subjects with a less complicated medium such as film?

I believe that it is a combination of these and perhaps other circumstances that results in a failure to touch the soul of the subject. And I should say here that film alone does not produce the magic. But, there may be a valid reason that the magic is more prevalent with film.

Personally I think that it is a matter of connecting with your subject in a meditative manner. Awareness and anticipation as well as having genuine concern for the subject matter allows for a better opportunity of becoming one with your subject. I believe that this can happen with either media. It just seems to be less prevalent and more difficult to achieve with digital.

I sense a difference.

© John Neel

Is any of this important to you? If not, why not?
How do we get soul into an image? This will be a topic for another post.

RICHARD C. MILLER: A RETROSPECTIVE



James Dean takes a break from filming

James Dean taking a break from "Giant", 1956


Monroe Gallery of Photography is pleased to present a retrospective exhibition of photographs by Richard C. Miller, who passed away at age 98 on October 15, 2010. The exhibition opens on Friday, February 11, with a public reception with members of the Miller family from 5 - 7 PM. The exhibition continues through April 24.

Born in 1912, Richard C. Miller's interest in photography grew from toying with his father's 3 1/4" x 4 1/4" folding roll-film camera. In 1935, Miller showed his photographs to Edward Steichen who praised and encouraged him to work in photography. Beginning in the arly 1940's, he would shoot celebrities for the Saturday Evening Post, Family Circle, Parents, American Weekly, Colliers, Life and Time.




In 1941, Miller made a carbro print of his daughter, Linda, sitting at a table set for a Thanksgiving Day’s meal. He sent the picture to The Saturday Evening Post and it was selected to be on the cover of the November 22, 1941 issue. Miller’s picture was the first photographic cover used by the Post that captures the type of scene from everyday American life made famous by the painter and illustrator, Norman Rockwell. Miller began by photographing his daughter sitting at a table set with only a plate and spoon. He photographed the other elements such as the turkey, the dish of cranberry sauce, the glass of milk, and the candlestick separately. He printed them, cut them down, and then added them into the original composition. This ‘cut and paste’ method allowed him to construct the picture one element at a time, carefully balancing form and colour.




Laurence Olivier, Tony Curtis, Peter Ustinov,  Spartacus 1959

Laurence Olivier, Tony Curtis, Peter Ustinov, Spartacus 1959


From 1955 to 1962, Miller was on retainer at Globe Photos, covering the entertainment industry and more than seventy films. After this stint he returned to freelance and became friends with celebrities such as James Dean. Never one for self-promotion, Miller rarely exhibited his work; the work, he figured, should speak for itself. In the spring of 2009, Richard C. Miller's photographic career was given long overdue recognition with an exhibition at the Getty Museum.


Betty McWilliams, c. 1940s

 Betty McWilliams, c. 1940s

In addition to his Hollywood photographs, the exhibition includes a trove of vintage pictures from the 1930s-50s of Los Angeles. When Miller documented the construction of the four-level freeway interchange in mid-20th century downtown Los Angeles, he was overwhelmed by its man-made beauty.


Freeway Construction, 4 Level, 1949

Freeway Construction, 4 Level, 1949

"I saw it and just went out of my mind," he later wrote. "I thought, 'My God, this is how people must have felt when they first saw the cathedrals in Europe."


In 1946, Dick photographed a model: Norma Jeane Dougherty. He would later photograph her as Marilyn Monroe on the set of "Some Like It Hot".



The exhibit also includes a selection of striking portraits including some of his best friends Edward Weston and Brett Weston.


Brett and Edward Weston, Garapata, California, August 3, 1953
Brett and Edward Weston, Garapata, California, August 3, 1953


Although he was shy, Miller was known for his warmth and eagerness to share his knowledge. A younger generation of photographers have worked to bring Miller recognition. "He was like 007 with a gun over his shoulder," family friend Michael Andrews told The Los Angeles Times in 2010. "The camera went everywhere."
 
 
Nude, 1949 #3
Nude #3, 1949

PORTFOLIOS





The Westons portfolio contains 19 16x20 signed prints, 6 of which are digital color and 13 are Silver Gelatin Black & Whites.


There are 8 16x20 pages of text, including introduction and notes, a centerfold of 39 images, plus 2 images on the title and colophon pages.
There are 4 15x20 pages of reproductions of original letters, printed on mouldmade rag, comprised of 4 separate letter sets.
There are 19 Interleaves which contain reproductions of 46 groups of letters, postcards, envelopes and notes from Brett Weston, Neil Weston, Merle Armitage, Erica Weston and Richard C. Miller’s notes.






The Norma Jeane portfolio contains 12 17x22 signed prints.

There are 8 17x22 pages of text, including introduction and notes, a centerfold of 35 images, plus 2 images on the title and colophon pages.
There are 12 Interleaves utilizing 17 Richard C. Miller photographic images, plus 4 model releases.

"I had no idea when I was taking these pictures that she would become famous and that the pictures would become valuable. She was just a nice, sweet, attractive girl with outrageous ambitions known at the time as "Nonny".  I just had no idea." In the years that followed, Dick occasionally took picturesof Norma Jeane as she evolved into Marilyn Monroe. Later, when Dick was employed as a freelancer for Globe Photos, he was assigned to shoot photographs on Some Like It Hot. He recalls walking onto the set his first day when Marilyn Monroe was an established movie star, and all of Nonny's dreams had become reality. When she passed him and said, "Hi Dick," he merely stared at her, dumbfounded that she even recalled who he was. He said nothing in return, not knowing which of her names he should use. By then Marilyn Monroe was no longer Nonny or Norma Jeane, the subject of this portfolio. Fame and success had changed her.



Related: Exhibition Preview in The Santa Fean Magazine

                             James Dean Would Be 80 On February 8, 2011

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Paris exhibit honors Henri Huet, AP Vietnam War photographer



Christian Simonpietri, Nick Ut

Associated Press photographer Nick Ut, right, speaks as photographer Christian Simonpietri, left, looks on during a news conference at the Grand Palais CAPE, on the eve of the opening of an exhibition of Vietnam war photographs by Henri Huet, Paris, Monday, Feb. 7, 2011
(AP Photo/Francois Mori) 

By JAMEY KEATEN, © Associated Press 


PARIS – A U.S. Army medic peers through dirty bandages on his own head while caring for a wounded comrade. A helicopter winches up the lifeless body of an American soldier, silhouetted against a bare white sky.

Such images from the Vietnam War feature in a new museum exhibit in Paris focusing on Associated Press photographer Henri Huet, who was killed 40 years ago when a helicopter he was riding in was shot down over Laos.

Co-curated by the AP, "Henri Huet: Vietnam" focuses on about 70 photos that he took during the war. The show starts Tuesday and runs through April 3 at the Maison Europeenne de la Photographie in Paris' Marais district.

Huet, who was half-French and half-Vietnamese, and three foreign photographers died Feb. 10, 1971 when the South Vietnamese helicopter they were on was shot down while they covered a cross-border invasion.

Huet, Larry Burrows of Life magazine, Kent Potter of United Press International, and Keizaburo Shimamoto of Newsweek were on board with U.S.-backed Vietnamese forces, killed in the flash of an anti-aircraft gun. Huet was 43.

The exhibit aims to bring to light the impact of Huet on the public's understanding of Vietnam and as a reference for today's generation of photojournalists — in terms of style, shot selection and emotional impact.

Huet captured the pain, fatigue, frustration, grittiness and a gamut of emotions with his black and white photos that made newspaper and magazine covers worldwide throughout the conflict.

He had "a sense of artistry, because he was a painter, he showed his sense of feeling for the Vietnamese," said former AP reporter Richard Pyle, who served as Saigon bureau chief during the war.

"People in Vietnam won prizes, and won accolades, for their work as photographers and the irony of this was that Henri — who was probably the finest combat photographer of his time, maybe in any war ... never got the attention nor the credit that he deserved," Pyle said.


In days long before satellite transmission, the Internet, digital photos and laptop computers, Huet would trek off for days with the U.S. military, and return with a trove of photos shipped to AP headquarters in New York.

Sometimes, a single picture captured the essence of the war.

"You had one Henri Huet picture on the front page of the New York Times, and that was it — that was the battle of Vietnam," said Horst Faas, a Pulitzer Prize-winning AP photographer who worked with Huet in Vietnam.

"There was mud in there, there was frustration in there, a bit of loneliness in there — all these things that a soldier went through in the circumstances, or a civilian, or anyone else," Faas said.

Faas, Pyle and other colleagues have come to Paris for the exhibit, and remembered Huet's compassion, respect for both Vietnamese civilians and U.S. soldiers, and tendency to stay to himself once the work day was done.

"If I had to pick the three finest people that I ever met in my life ... Henri Huet would be one of those three, maybe even No. 1," said Pyle at a news conference Monday.

via The Associated Press

Monday, February 7, 2011

Iconic Monday: The Story Behind Hansel Mieth's Cranky Monkey


©I Like To Watch
The Blog of Writer and Editor David Schonauer




Mieth called the picture "The monkey on my back."


Last week I focused on the iconic photos of the first chimp in space. This Monday I thought I'd stay with man's ancestors and look at one of my favorite iconic Life magazine pictures—Hansel Mieth's portrait of a runaway rhesus monkey in Puerto Rico.

The image became a Life favorite after it's original publication in 1938. Over the years it's been reprinted in books countless times and sold as a poster. Mieth took many fine pictures for Life, but this is the one she became known for—which is she called the photo "the monkey on my back."

The explanation for its lasting impact? Probably the monkey's expression, which has been variously described as heartbreaking, sullen, and just plain P-Oed. I would go with P-Oed, but for all I know this may be the default expression of rhesus monkeys in repose. Let's agree that the face has left generations of viewers a bit...uneasy.

According to Mieth, a Life writer took one look at the image and said, "That's Henry Luce!" When a mean-looking monkey reminds you of your boss, you know it's trouble. Maybe when we look at Mieth's monkey we all simply see a face we're familiar with.


Mieth at work for Life, 1938


The story behind the picture is interesting, but not nearly as interesting as Mieth herself, and that's really why I wanted to write about her monkey today. Her life's story has been told in documentary called Hansel Mieth: Vagabond Photographer, which aired on PBS in 2003. As the title suggests, she was something of an iconoclast, and she never fit easily into the world of middle-class values embraced, extolled, and (in her case) enforced by Life magazine's editors. But as John Loengard, the legendary former director of photography (and foremost historian) of Life has written, the tale of Mieth's life and career was also a love.

She was born Johanna Mieth in Oppelsbohm, Bermany in 1909, but her father nicknamed her Hansel. At age 15 she left home with her teenage lover, Otto Hagel, began rambling through Europe on a romantic jaunt that wold last nearly 60 years.




"We lived with a goup of teenagers under a bridge over the Danube river," she once told Loengard, who interviewed her for his book Life Photograpers: What They Saw. "I had a guitar, and Otto had a violin. In the 1920s you could get along that way in Austria." Once they stayed in a monastery in Yugoslavia for six weeks, Mieth dressed as a boy in short leather pants. They eventually started making a little money taking pictures and writing short articles for newspapers. When Hilter rose to power, Hagel went to America on a boat carrying canaries. She followed later. Eventually they found themselves in Depression-era California, continuing their photographic work by documenting amigrant farm laborers. Mieth started working for the Works Progress Administration.

"We were idealistic liberals," she told Loengard. "And what happens to liberals? Nothing. They lose their shirt."

In 1936, David Hulburd, the head of the Time Inc. office in San Francisco, asked Mieth if she wanted to work for Henry Luce, who was not an idealistic liberal, as a Life stringer. She shot a story on a sheep farm in Red Bluff, California, and one of her pictures made the magazine's cover. In 1937 they offered her a staff job. "I must have been a little hungry or something, because I said OK," she told Loengard. She bcame the magazine's second female staff photographer, the first being Margaret Bourke-White, whom Mieth befriended when she moved (with Hagel) to New York. "Once she admired a black velvet dress with red heart buttons that I was wearing," she recalled. "She came back a little later and handed me a package and said we should be friends together. When I unwrapped it, I found a nice red compact in a heart shape made of good leather, just like the buttons I had on my dress."


Otto Hagel and Hansel Mieth (undated)

Hagel became a well known photographer in his own right. He and Mieth were, as she put it later, happily "living in sin" when Life editors, who felt they needed to protect the magazine's image, started looking at them with expressions somewhat like that of her rhesus monkey. To appease the editors, Mieth and Hagel applied for a marriage license. While they were waiting for it, Robert Capa appeared at the magazine's office saying his visa had been cancelled. He had to leave the country...or marry an American citizen. He had a girl willing to do him the favor, and they all got married at the same time in a quickie ceremony.

In 1941, said Mieth, "life in New York was a little too—if not hectic, at least it didn't make a great deal of sense." Mieth and Hagel moved back to California. It was Mieth's idea, and Hagel said, "Where you go, I go." She continued working for Life, while he shot for other magazines. FDR was an admirer of Hagel's documentary work. Once, when Hagel was in Cuba on assignment, Mieth's phone rang. "It was Steve Early, Roosevelt's press secretary. He said the president wants to speak to Otto. I said Otto is not here....Five minutes later, the phone rang again, and it was Roosevelt himself, and he said, 'I want to speak to my boy.'"

"Your boy's not here," Mieth told the president.

In the 1950s, Mieth and Hagel refused to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee; that helped bring an end to Mieth's prickly relationship with Life. They had a ranch in Santa Rosa, California, where they raised livestock. Hagel died in 1973. Mieth died in 1998.

It was back in 1938 that she went to Puerto Rico to shoot a Life story on a Harvard Medical School project to study freed rhesus monkeys. One day, a boy came running up to her and said that a monkey had gotten away and was in the water nearby. Mieth pursued the animal. "I came down, and that monkey was really going hell-bent for something," Mieth recalled. "I said, 'I better go in and get him,' [and] I threw my Rolleiflex on my back and swam out." The monkey, standing on a corral reef, looked at her. "I don't think he liked me, but he sat on that corral reef there, and I took about a dozen shots," she told Loengard.

Mieth took plenty of pictures on the assignment, but the magazine ran only the one that looked like Henry Luce. Loengard asked Mieth if she thought the monkey looked like Luce, and she replied thoughtfully, "I didn't see Luce that much. He had lots of other things to do rather than talk with photographers. The photographers were a low group of animals then. But I suppose it does in a way. It all depends on what kind of mood you are in. To me it looks like the monkey's depicting the state of the world at the time."

--David Schonauer


Related: Women Who Shot The 20th Century