It's a strange thing to be drawn to the details when looking at photographs. It's ultimately analysis of the incidental. I've found that when looking at Recollections by Sexton, the compositions being somewhat conventional in what they reveal, details do indeed provide the real interest - being heightened above all else by the craft. For me, there has to be something uncanny amidst all that visual information, a specter that isn't fully explained despite the clarity of its photographic description. That's when photographs have their subconscious impact - you see it in everything from Bresson, to Arbus, to Gursky even. It's not just a matter of leading lines and thirds, in the photographs that affect me most, I find the real interest lies in that which is slightly out of context, described but not explained.
Originally Posted by Allen Friday