Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Good photographer verses Famous photograher
Nov 16, 2011 21:54:06   #
photosbyhenry Loc: Apple Valley MN
 
I went to the site buzzle.com and there was a list of "good" photographers and "famous" photographers.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/famous-photographers/
Ansel Adams was listed as a famous photographer and not as a good photographer. Does one become good and then famous?
There is an explination as to how they came up with the list. On the list of famous photographers are some very good ones.

Reply
Nov 16, 2011 22:22:48   #
Danilo Loc: Las Vegas
 
Great topic! I went to the site and sure enough, my favorite photographer, Ralph Gibson, was not there, and he has more than a handful of great books published.
Back to your point: I think we can say that all famous photographers are good photographers, but not all good photographers are famous. Just as some of the greatest politicians have never been, nor ever will be president.
It takes more than being proficient at what one does to become famous. One must promote oneself and be promoted by others.
Particularly in the arts, some of the best are very poor promoters and have no interest in being promoted by others.
Hopefully some of the other folks on this site will join in this discussion and add other insights. Thanks!

Reply
Nov 16, 2011 22:27:40   #
ShakyShutter Loc: Arizona
 
I did look this over. These lists are totally subjective. Not sure how important the actual list is in reality.

If you notice the top ten "famous" photogs were basically in the right place at the right time. This is not to diminish their skill or professionalism in any way. However, the individual photos mentioned did indeed make the individuals famous and the skill came in knowing when to fire the shutter but would they have become famous without that one shot that got them noticed? Of course most were already noticed. The body of work of each is impressive for sure but it takes some research to dig into the careers of each to discover their brilliance.

You've got to be good to be famous for sure unless you are very lucky.

Reply
 
 
Nov 16, 2011 22:29:06   #
cgchief Loc: Jarrettsville
 
None of my favorites made the list.

Reply
Nov 16, 2011 22:51:57   #
twindad Loc: SW Michigan, frolicking in the snow.
 
Would have been nice, too, if they'd listed their LAST names alphabetically, instead of their first.

Reply
Nov 16, 2011 22:58:45   #
WxGuesser Loc: Portland OR
 
Danilo wrote:
Great topic! I went to the site and sure enough, my favorite photographer, Ralph Gibson, was not there, and he has more than a handful of great books published.
Back to your point: I think we can say that all famous photographers are good photographers, but not all good photographers are famous. Just as some of the greatest politicians have never been, nor ever will be president.
It takes more than being proficient at what one does to become famous. One must promote oneself and be promoted by others.
Particularly in the arts, some of the best are very poor promoters and have no interest in being promoted by others.
Hopefully some of the other folks on this site will join in this discussion and add other insights. Thanks!
Great topic! I went to the site and sure enough, ... (show quote)


I think that hits it right on the head!

Reply
Nov 17, 2011 09:50:30   #
blue64 Loc: Washington, Pa. USA
 
A good photographer and a famous photographer are almost the same.. A famous photographer has more of his or her work published, or they have risked their lives to take that great photograph, that is viewed around the world. There are many great or would be famous photographers who never step out of their studios to take that one shot!
Good photographer's tells us stories through their eyes and captured it through their lens!

Reply
 
 
Nov 17, 2011 13:56:47   #
koolbreez Loc: Bangkok, Thailand
 
Something that many fail to take into consideration, and Ansel is a good example when dealing with famous as opposed to good at photography.

Ansel was a master in the darkroom, as others are in photoshop. His most famous pictures were the result of more time in the darkroom than behind the camera, and shows with different versions of the same shot. He was a master at creating contrast masks, and then in dodging, and burning to get the look he wanted under an enlarger. Others do it now in Photoshop.

You can take mediocre pictures, but turn them into masterpieces if you are skilled at editing, or you can take good pictures that become masterpieces because of what you put in the frame, and how you achieved it in-camera.

Reply
Nov 17, 2011 15:06:40   #
JudyL Loc: Indiana
 
Well, I like that.....my name was not on either list!!

Reply
Nov 17, 2011 23:49:12   #
larrycumba
 
In which category would you put Abraham Zapruder?

Reply
Nov 18, 2011 00:00:26   #
Dryart38 Loc: Carlsbad, NM
 
A good photographer is one who can make a photograph that tells a story or in some way, makes a viewer happy or brings an emotion to the surface.
A famous photographer is one who does all of this in a gallery, online, or on the printed page, and is publicised for doing it, or becomes known for repetition in the media.
Then again, a photographer who is famous in one area, or even a certain country, may not be famous anywhere else.

Reply
 
 
Nov 18, 2011 06:53:50   #
twindad Loc: SW Michigan, frolicking in the snow.
 
Lucky

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.