26 books every photographer must own

http://www.popphoto.com/Features/26-Books-Every-Photographer-Should-Own

(Apropos of nothing, I decided not to enroll in another photography course. I regret this immensely but with two kids I only have so much time and energy)

You could quibble about the specific photographers and specific monographs they chose, but honestly I wouldn't mind owning any of them. I'd add Stephen Shore's Uncommon Places, because he's my favorite.

Beaumont Newhall's History of Photography is wonderful. Accessible to newcomers (i.e. not intimidatingly technical) but genuinely eye-opening.

Robert Adams' Beauty in Photography: Essays in Defense of Traditional Values should be on the list.

btw, what photography courses have you taken?

See, that's the problem. I have only had one intro course which was far too amateuristic. The teacher had never taught photographty before. He wasn't bad, nor was the course bad per se; but it was clearly for people who want to take nice snapshots.
I have looked into more serious courses but those mainly seem to take place several times a week which is far too time consuming for me.

Just watched Genius of Photography (first ep) and it was fantastic. David Byrne and Luc Sante appeard in it (amongst many others). I already knew quite a bit but it was still very "illuminating." First time I heard of Latirgue. His pics are awesome!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/photography/genius/gallery/images/lartigue.jpg

Genius of Photography is a British series, correct?

i love that photo above, btw

Correct. BBC. xpost

woo yay, thank you for bittorrent.

photography classes are such a crapshoot, the separation between the competent snapshooters and the photography as an art crowd is so vast, you never know which you'll get.

the photo classes I've taken: the intro was basic to the point of idiocy, but it got me shooting. had another class with a great, knowledgeable, ambitious prof but we spent literally HALF THE CLASS doing HDR, which is miserable, tedious, and gimmicky and I burned out majorly and haven't done too much shooting since.

For theory/criticism, I 'll take Sonntag & the Barthes essay & for home viewing, I'll stick by my well-worn Eugene Smith & Diane Arbus editions. I've always meant to check out more 19th century criticism, Stieglitz & such, but I have not yet gotten around to it. For a kick, check out Baudelaire's essay condemning photography as degenerate art.

http://www.adorama.com/images/Product/BKP7.jpg

^^ The London & Upton Photography editions were the go to bibles for students back in the 90s. Too sad, they probably went the way of the darkroom, tho.

lots of good stuff on that list; surprised there isn't a Szarkowski book on there?

also, would somebody please explain to me the appeal of Sebastiao Salgado?

Szarkowski discovered Latirgue actually! His pics, I mean of course. I have put some of his books in my Amazon basket. Y'know at the end of the day I'm more of a Looker (as with music, where I'm a listener) and I especially adore the whole dissection of the art form. (My friend HATES HATES HATES photography btw, SPITS on it.) Anyway S seems to have lost some of his appeal apparently.

I've already read Sontag (half was classic, the other part was a bit lacklustre) and Barthes (my fave writer). I want to move on. I especially like the first period of photography: the looking for a direction is so interesting.

yeah Latirgue is fabulous - I wonder if Szarkowski has written anything on depth on him. I just finished his essay on Winogrand in his Winogrand retrospective, and his book on Atget is great too. Looking at Photographs is a great introduction to photography for anyone. I've been hunting down a copy of The Photographer's Eye but it always seems to be borrowed.

you're OTM about the dissection of the art form - if anything, it just makes you want to punch whoever says photography isn't art.

Yes, this is why I should stop talking/defending photography to my friend. Every single fucking time she starts shitting on photography. I have told her again how passionate I am when it comes to photography. I want to show her "people about to be shot" and scream at her: "TELL ME, DOES THIS NOT TOUCH YOU? If not, then you can fuck right off" But y'know whatevs, she can hate whatever she wants. :-)

Books I really like not listed or mentioned:
Photography's Antiquarian Avant-Garde (alt-process photographers)
Andre Kertesz: The Early Years (tiny book, about 5x5, of his earliest photographs contact printed)
all of Robert Frank's monographs, esp The Americans obv
Eugene Richards - all of his monographs, esp Americans We. The Fat Baby is enormous and amazing, but I'm not sure its still in print (and cost $100 to start with)

I've read Berger/Szarkowski/Adams, but I got more out of reading about art history in general than photography in particular. My first and best professor was making installations and incorporating photographs, so a lot of the intro and intermediate classes I took were split between 20th century greats and modern art history and practice.

also, would somebody please explain to me the appeal of Sebastiao Salgado?

― tony dayo (dyao), Friday, August 28, 2009 11:30 PM (2 years ago) Bookmark

i only just heard of him the other day (he came up when some ppl were discussing gibson's developing technique...they both are really into tri-x and rodinal apparently). the stuff of his i've seen online seems very....sentimental? also, p much every photo i looked at basically yelled "I HAVE BEEN THOUGHTFULLY COMPOSED DO YOU SEE?" not sure i have the vocabulary for it, but there's something very obvious about his images. i like quite a few of them, but boy if he doesn't just come on strong as hell. which, i'm guessing, is the appeal: you don't have to be ~into~ photography to look at one of his images and say "hmm yeah something is going on there, i can appreciate that someone thought about this" like, his photos are what i would imagine my non-photographer friends would imagine in their heads if you told them to think of "good photography": old wrinkly hands holding things, moody landscapes, noble poverty, etc.

i think both kodak and leica have used him as a spokesperson, which kinda sums everything up right there

Of late, I've been getting Selgado shoved in my face because I'm still on the DxO Labs mailing list and he's now a spokesperson for their Tri-X film pack plugin. Which I guess is a bit like being a life-long proponent/active user of vacuum tube pre-amps and outboard gear who then becomes the figurehead for a ProTools plugin which simulates valve warmth. A bit odd.

yeah there's a part of sontag's on photography where she talks about how all photography beautifies, even when the subject matter is horrible or gut-wrenching. with selgado, and in a similar fashion nachtwey, there is so much cooking going on in the post-processing and printing process that it's all a bit much. they are doing God's work obviously and raising these issues to a much wider audience than pretty much any other photographer working out there but there's something about the intentional beautification of tragedy that puts me off.

the intentional beautification of tragedy

yeah, this. sometimes his subjects seem almost secondary to the formal considerations (and boy are there a lot of them), which, given his whole schtick, is a little ironic. also his work seems completely, utterly, leadenly humorless. makes sense, obv, but i like a bit of a smirk every now and then