Have been reading quite a bit lately, and have noted that many of today's photographer's - and I would guess some that visit this site, are a product of some the better programs, such as RISD and MassArt. Many it seems were fortunate to study under the like's of Minor White, Harry Callahan, Araon Siskin as well as others. These photographers are the opposite in many ways of the West Coast group - Adams, Weston, etc and there work is of a more social nature, IMO.
As this group ages (like the rest of us) I wonder what will become of this style of photography - will it survive in this new age of photography, should it? Is the documentary style of these photographers out of step with today's world? Or are we going to see the next step in this work, much as their work was a step away from the FSA/WPA documentary.
Who is the champion of photography today? One of the first names I think of is Keith Carter. What programs are really strong - producing the next crop of outstanding photographers?
There are no right or wrong answers here, more likely some navel gazing but interested to hear what others thoughts are. Who you think may be the next photographer/teacher - because in my mind without those teaching we could see photography change and not for the good.
Should note that these are the influences I am aware of here in the states and feel certain that each of you will include those that influence from other parts of the planet.
Michael, Michael! Let's get you out of the house and under the darkcloth! Must go shoot pictures! Soon. There's very little time before this condition causes permanent "changes" ...
__________________ David Brown In Nomine Papierus, Filmio, et Spiritu Argentine, AMEN
Hmmm....interesting question. I wonder about someone like John Paul Caponigro. He is, of course, the son of Paul Caponigro so he has a very strong legacy of traditional influences, but he's been the go to guru of Photoshop digital work for years now. His own style relies heavily on photoshopped combination images and uniquely exposed (HDR) photographs and is all in color. And yet, he's not being shown in the major NYC galleries where large color prints that challenge my gag reflexes seem to rule. (Quite frankly, such work is often very large, and in-your-face-see-what-you-can-make-of-this ironic banality.....IMHO, of course.). But he is influential in current 'art' photography nonetheless.
So, does the influence come from the darlings of the 'high art' gallerists, the vanguard digigraphers of the technology industry ranks, the traditional or digital Kennabe's (of which there seem to be legions at the moment), or what? Perhaps, like searching for the definitive, great American novel, there are just too many really good creative folks making worthwhile photographs for there to be only one or two champions.
We need less 'champions' and more nurturers in the trenches.
Excellent answer. Only one teacher, of photography, told this to me some 30 years ago in college. How many times have you heard someone say, "Wow that's great, looks just like an Ansel Adams"?
Students should be encouraged, or nurtured, to find there own style or voice and less on making their work like an established "master" of the medium. Then it might be possible for many new styles to emerge that we couldn't even imagine today.
In looking over my own work of over three decades I can see that it's true; there is no easy road to any place worth going. Although I admire the work of many photographers, I don't want to be a copy of them. It's not easy when the beginning photographer is starting out, they are introduced the work of many extremely fine photographers and the influences are great. It takes a bold teacher to say this is what they did, you do your own thing and follow your own voice.
Well, my greatest influence is Dr. Jabob Bigelow because he's repsonsible for the creation of the subject I most enjoy photographing. Running a close second is my own father who first put a camera in my hands.
So, really, it doesn't need to be a photorapher at all.
I've never thought my work to be of any real and lasting consequence so the question of which photograher(s) provide my artistic influence is one that is happily and easily kept at arm's length.
It may be the cynical side of me rearing its ugly head, but I think many who cite a particular influence are simply trying to curry favor or attention from certain quarters. Is this really a question that benefits from an answer?
It's the same in the music industry; you cite a band as an influence to get attention...and from that exposure and money.
__________________
Digital Photography is just "why-tech" not "high tech"..
I don't think we'll see the end of ginormous colour prints of staged situations that are highly allusive regarding the history of art.
The White/Weston/Adams/Strand/etc approach is totally bankrupt if you're trying to get into museums. On the other hand, if you're trying to make a living as an artist, you might stand a chance.
__________________ Using film since before it was hip.
The reason John Paul isn't in the major New York galleries is because he didn't go to Yale. Almost everyone showing in major galleries there are products of the photo department at Yale. Not because they are any good, but because they are safe. Every professor at Yale went to Yale, and all of their work is alike. Galleries know exactly what they are going to produce without having to even see it. And that makes them a safe bet. Major galleries aren't going to take a risk on an unknown, that's bad for business. Since Yale is cookie-cutter art, they are little risk.
I think that the White/Weston/Adams/Callahan/Siskind influence really isn't particularly strong anymore. In fine art circles, I would say that the Bechers and their Dusseldorf group have had far more influence over the past two decades. The Bechers were the teacher/photographers to which you refer, but their students include the enormously influential Struth, Gursky, Hofer and Ruff.
I'm not familiar with too many photographers as teachers, which seems to be what the original post was getting at. The Yale School of Art does have a fantastic faculty, including Crewdson, Papageorge and Richard Benson, none of whom I would call "cookie cutter," but YMMV. But in any event, a teacher can only teach a certain number of students, even in a long life in academia. A photographer's images can influence a lot of people. So I am expanding the notion of teacher, to recognize the free flow of information and images, and the truth that art often develops outside the academy. After all, how many people find their mature styles while in art school?
Off the top of my head, in addition to the Dusseldorf group, I would list the following as four currently influential photographers. The late Richard Avedon. Jeff Wall was a great suggestion. Cindy Sherman. In a different way: Michael Kenna. All different photographers, with different styles, but all of whom resonate with the market and with other photographers. Two traditional photographers, and two with more of an art world following.
How many times have you heard someone say, "Wow that's great, looks just like an Ansel Adams"?
On several occasions, but truth be told it has always reflected more on the lack of insight on the one that made that observation, rather than on the photographer whose piece of work is receiving the comment. It merely reflects, to me, that a lot of people have heard so much about AA, that they somehow, in their own mind, make a connection that actually does not exits and has no merit, merely because they see a black and white photograph. I'm a big fan of AA for several reasons, least of which are some of his most well known photographs, and probably most for teaching me how to practice photography, efficiently, simply, and with my own eye to the viewfinder or GG.
So, I think that teachers that are long dead are still managing to teach. IMO, we should encourage the continual self study by diving into the ways of the "old masters", and perhaps it will be, that through such form of learning, many will find their own eye, so to speak.
Good day.
Chuck
__________________
"Photography is an illusion. It is amazing that human beings consider a photograph to be a representation of reality."
---John Sexton
Photographic Influence - Who are they today? 
Linear Mode
