Just watched the netflix doc on this reclusive nanny that from the look of it everyone thought was a cunt. Is Vivan Maier's work as good as everyone makes it out to be?
>>2790995
nope
>>2790995
I have a book of her images. She had a demonstrably good eye for interesting images.
>>2790995
She's as good as every other famous street photographer from the 60s, she shot thousands of rolls though so out of 150,000+ shots it isn't that wild that she'll have a few hundred amazing ones
>>2790995
Actually we don't really know how good she is, since the people who are developing and scanning her work are amateurs and really really slow. I doubt they are even halfway through. What makes thing worse is that they are bad editors and have no clue which of these photos are good and go well together.
I am pretty sure Vivian Maier is high up there, but the books are lackluster. While it is great that the random guy found these photos by chance, I think this has to be handled by a museum.
>>2791042
I think the guy in the doco claims that museums want nothing to do with her ?
>>2791038
So by that metric why aren't you a famous street photographer? Digital doesn't have a limitation on the number of shots you can take so nothing holding you back right?
Oh right its' more than just the volume of shots that guarantees success...
saw her color stuff in a gallery, pretty cool shit. she had the eye. also lots of tenacity. well she was a feminist weirdo loner after all, this has her life.
>>2791038
>she shot thousands of rolls though so out of 150,000+ shots it isn't that wild that she'll have a few hundred amazing ones
the paedo creeper from brisbane has most likely a 200.000+ shutter count. and hes still shit. shutter count doesnt get you good magically. keep wishing, tho.
>>2791141
define good
>>2791131
>So by that metric why aren't you a famous street photographer?
A large portion of her fame comes from her story. Her pictures are pretty average if you look at them in a vacuum, maybe good, certainly not great.
It's kind of sad that she never had the control most artists do in editing and curating their own work.
>>2791220
>Her pictures are pretty average if you look at them in a vacuum
How could you possibly know that?
>>2791038
>she shot thousands of rolls though so out of 150,000+ shots it isn't that wild that she'll have a few hundred amazing ones
This is how most photographers work. Do you really think the best of the best produce nothing but greatness every time they hit the shutter button? You've probably bought into that whole idea that film photographers are so much better at taking their time and getting high quality hits, in reality it's more like you become more attached to an image you've spent more time making, and so you think that amounts to it being a better shot (it doesn't)
>>2791220
Oh please, just concede shes' a good photographer. Story alone wouldn't get her recognition, either.
I think she's pretty great, she's not as good as hcb and stuff on a technical standpoint (her framing and composition weren't as good) but she seems to have captured everything really well, her photos really show what life was like in that time period and place, also considering the fact that she probably took 10 times as much photographs than most people at the time so she's bound to have good photographs
Honestly my favorite thing about her is how her photos just seem natural and casual while her self portraits really show some sort of eccentricity within her that really show her as some sort of artist
>>2791220
>she never had the control most artists do in editing and curating their own work.
Yes she did, she chose to publish nothing.
It was only after she lost that control in death that rich and greedy white males appropriated her body of work for monetization.
>>2790995
Eh. I don't really see her as much of a photographer because she cut off so much of the process. I see the development (digital would be post processing) and printing aspects as vital to the artistic being of a photographer...without them it's like an author leaving around a ton of rough drafts and story ideas, but never completing them, or a painter leaving just sketches and half finished works.
>>2792003
>I don't really see her as much of a photographer
>took photographs
>isn't a photographer
U wot.
>>2792012
I'm speaking from the artist sense, but you can also point out that she never made a living from it. She undeniably took pictures, but if your definition of photographer is merely someone who takes photographs, practically every single first worlder is a photographer. I'm actually somewhat curious how many people are alive today in first world nations who have never taken a single photograph.
>>2791990
>rich and greedy white males
Is tumblr leaking?
>>2792015
she knew how to develop and in fact did all that early. then she stopped developing them. she knew they were good.
>>2792041
Knowing how to develop isn't the same as knowing how to do darkroom work, nor is it the same as printing.
You've never bothered trying to learn darkroom technique, have you?
>>2792044
i meant the whole process. she knew how to. she then decided not to. theres your stupid "criteria" met.
>>2792046
Nope, still doesn't meet it even if she did know, which I sincerely doubt she did to any depth.
>decided not to
I guess I'm a novelist because I know how to write a novel but decided not to.
>>2792050
sure buddy.
lol. get help.
she really did shoot at everything. even garbage. she also hoarded newspapers. pretty interesting person.
>>2791131
everything becomes interesting after about 30 years, especially the mundane, things that regularly go unscrutinized.
http://mashable.com/2014/12/02/80s-shopping-malls/#5E7SU616gkq6
>>2791709
>Story alone wouldn't get her recognition,
the story is 100% of her recognition, how they were found undeveloped, her reclusiveness, and so called feminism.
Maier has 3 things going for her as far as recognition goes:
1) time, old photos become interesting because they are from a foreign time, and show a window into another world.
2) story, the random discovery of the negs, and the "lost masterpiece" is irresistible to people.
3) she is a woman in a male dominant activity at a time few females were working in that practice. Feminists and woman studies students will jump on this and write countless undergrad papers, penned in menstrual blood for decades about how heroic she was for being such a trail blazer.
>>2792558
spoken like a true sperglord. oblivious to good photography by personal feelings. what about her triggers you so much, anon?
Her photos are good indeed. But, if you got the whole picture, people are using in the wrong way.
I have to agree that her story is more than her photos, and this whole feminist thing is just made up to contemporaneous thoughts.
It's all about safe space if you don't get why she made the news this way. Her photos should be given to a gallery and exposed side by side with others male and females photographers from the time. Something different would be just the PC outburst talking loud and trying to be the new true.
>>2790995
How could she have afforded all that film and processing?
>>2792015
>I'm speaking from the artist sense
There you go. Not all photography is art, nor should it have to be.
>>2792625
no kids. all her money went to cameras, developing and beautiful film.
her wiki bio says she went to a fuckload countries in a given year (egypt, france, even asiatic countries).
>socialist
>french
>reclusive but goes to like 9 countries in a single year
was she a spy?
>>2792632
>french
She wasn't though. She had some family from France but was born in the USA. she spoke with a fake french accent.
>>2792625
No living expenses. And film was big back then, unlike today it was probably easier to find a friend of a friend who would let you develop at their place.
She had money though. The guy who found her photos also found thousands of dollars in uncashed tax return checks.
>>2792714
>fake french accent.
>thousands of dollars in uncashed tax return checks.
S P Y
P
Y
>>2791288
Interesting perspective.
>>2792015
>speaking from an artists sense
>claims shes not a photographer because she didnt get paid for her work
youre not speaking from an artists sense, youre speaking from a businessmans sense
if you were really speaking from an "artist sense" you would say that this makes her even more of a photographer and artist, taking photos with no other intention other than taking good photos, compared to photographers like wedding photographers who take generic photos so that they can make money
>>2792988
>but you can also
I wasn't making that argument, just saying it can easily be an argument for why she's not a photographer.
I said then and still maintain she's not a photographer or artist because she didn't finish the works. She just took an asston of pictures. Alrighty, and?
Let's not cherrypick points. You're not a novelist if you don't get past the paper napkin stage.
great self-portraits
I guess she has pornography?
>>2792995
she developed some of her photos too, the only reason she hadnt developed a majority of the photos is because she took so much and spent more time taking photos rather than developing them, she didnt print them but she knew she was good so obviously she had seen them.
i mean youre right to say that she definitely was not a professional photographer but youre wrong if you were to say she wasnt a photographer at all, all it takes to be a photographer is a camera with the intention of making art (even if you suck (eric kim))
i mean unless your defenition of a photographer is someone who takes photos, develops them (or post processes) and gets paid for it, but thats just a professional
>>2791990
>Yes she did, she chose to publish nothing.
Not true, she had sent letters inquiring about printing to a camera store in her local town in France.
>>2793187
Printing isn't publishing.
>>2791038
Psh, she's not special. She only took good photographs because spent a ludicrous amount of time practicing and perfecting her craft.
>>2793281
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 548 Image Height 780 Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2791111
nope. don't post stuff you don't know about
>>2791105
Actually the copyright of the photos is currently in dispute, which is why the museums don't want to get involved as the eventual holder of the copyright could sue them. Read all about it here http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/06/arts/design/a-legal-battle-over-vivian-maiers-work.html?_r=0
>>2793281
>picasso only painted good pictures because he spent a lot of time practising
>>2793281
Actually, I'd say she's not special because she simply has a fuckton of pictures. Pretty much anyone who takes that many will have a solid selection of pretty awesome images by mere chance alone.
The interest and elevation of her is purely feminist agenda based and by the story of her picture's discovery. From a documentary point of view, her work is useful, but I don't see much artistic merit that's sufficiently different from anything else we've seen from the era to merit this kind of attention.
>>2793596
>Pretty much anyone who takes that many will have a solid selection of pretty awesome images by mere chance alone.
No.
If you're a bad photographer the odds are very low. Good skill can drastically increase the odds and raise the overall quality of the photographs.
>>2793604
>the odds are very low
If you can at least competently operate the camera (literally just can set exposure to not entirely destroy an exposure), this isn't true and you know it.
Also, do you have any clue just how many pictures of hers were found? Even a hit rate of 1% would be an enviable portfolio.
>>2793596
The point is, taking lots of pictures is HOW you get good.
>>2793621
Nope. This is a mistake that a fuckton of people make in a fuckton of fields.
Just going around hitting a shutter button doesn't teach you shit and can actually build bad habits. You have to actually analyze the actions taken and the results and figure out how to refine what you're doing for practice to matter.
Taking one picture where you plan out what you want, attempt to make that a reality, then figure out what went wrong/what can be done better is the kind of practice that makes one better.
on one hand, we have this very thread where faggots claim that to get good in street photo you should just "take lots of pictures".
on the other hand, we have a different thread where the same faggots shit their pants at the sole idea of shooting people in the street.
i am literally laughing on the floor at all your autism, people.
>>2793635
yeah, really.
So very /p/
>>2793630
It's both.
Your concept and disdain for what you seem to assume is just machinegunning is naive.
People who apply hatred and sanctimoniousness are one trick ponies. If a subject is fleeting or moving you probably don't even see it happen, much less ever even attempt to capture it.
Sure, there is skill in planning and execution.
But there is equal if not more skill in observing, predicting and being unfiltered and speedy enough to capture those things.
Being capable of both is ideal.
Presuming superiority of one without the other is ridiculous...and arrogant-photonoob-lolpro 101, and is usually associated with chronic gearfag snobbery.
>>2793888
Fuck off pedo.
Just hitting the shutter release with no consideration before, during, or after the fact is not practice. It's just hitting the shutter button. I suppose you think one can learn to write a novel by just hitting keys on a keyboard because if you're arguing against my point that's literally what you're saying. The entire point of my post was that just doing something is not the same thing as practicing it and is not how skills are built. At no point did I say or imply that consideration must be a long, drawn out process complete with schematics and art boards. That you assumed such is your malfunction. I'm merely stating that consideration must be there.
>sanctimoniousness
That's fucking rich coming from you of all people. That describes your every post on this board.
Well, is she good?
>>2792003
cartier bresson never developped or printed, hate that shit....
>>2794007
>lol, always this mad
>>2794478
Only in the delusional world of a clearly psychotic internet tough person.
>>2794845
Found your problem.
It's the same problem you have always had.
You assume I'm interested in fucking children, when in fact I just enjoy photographing everyone, and kids are a big component of that BECAUSE THEY LOVE BEING PHOTOGRAPHED.
The part where you are so self-righteous about something you made up in your damaged head is the delusional part.
Given your constantly homicidal threats it's very possible we will have a court psychologist making professional observations on exactly that, eventually.
TL;DR; you don't know shit.
http://oh-hi.info - for anyone wondering wtf that cunt is talking about.
>>2794927
>http://oh-hi.info
Why don't you share that .onion with everyone?
>>2794927
>BECAUSE THEY LOVE BEING PHOTOGRAPHED.
I seem to remember an incident where a bunch of people who so loved being photographed by you they tried to organize a protest and did start doing a bunch of web hate stuff.
Just because you don't hide how you're a smug creep doesn't mean you aren't a smug creep.
>>2794927
>http://oh-hi.info
ive always found that url to be shady as fuck.
>>2794938
>Why don't you share that .onion with everyone
kekkonnen
>>2794933
>great friends
Great no. But acquaintances I speak to and shoot on a regular basis, Yep.
>>2794938
>>2794968
>.onion
>shady as fuck
That's just because you are paranoid, and probably shady as fuck.
>>2794954
>a bunch of people
"Whiney douchebags" is the term you are looking for.
The instigators are just a bunch of dramawhore kids.
Ironically - mostly cosplayers.
Probably stalking me as we speak between lurking furry porn and futa.
Yeah they got some signatures based on the face value of what it says, about a dozen of whom I have since had friendly conversation with after they suddenly realised that what the petition says is upside down and backwards wrong. And basically just written by douchebags being butthurt.
One signer has come to me specifically to apologise.
When the petition was still running I had people come up to me almost every weekend just to say how they thought it was ridiculous, they loved my photos and whoever wrote it doesn't know shit.
They are right.
I'm thinking the 1100+ people who i've' met and subsequently added me on both my fb accounts (i don't add anyone, and there's only a handful I haven't met ) are worth several times what <500 petition signers "think". Many signers aren't in my state, or even country. They just like to complain and judge.
I'm sure some of the people I've shot still feel it's valid, but their irrelevant insecurities and favourite internet horror story based neuroses aren't something I give validity to.
It's still difficult to believe that petition isnt just a huge ruse, but I know who started it, and most of the clique that pushed it, so I know they are actually srs. Despite how distorted their perceptions are and how tedious their sense of entitlement is.
Kids these days - some of them are shit.
>smug creep.
Protip: when you come at someone with a bullshit attitude, you are going to get the worst they can give you. Just like a mirror.
>>2795007
Lovely how you throw around the term delusional, then write a wall of text detailing your self-delusions.
>Protip: when you come at someone with a bullshit attitude, you are going to get the worst they can give you. Just like a mirror.
You opened your cockhole first, high-handedly, and incorrectly...isn't it kinda neat how apt your words are?
Yes, it's going to be glorious when you get raided.
Fun fact: they now train dogs to sniff out the glues used in things like storage drives and memory cards. Your hidden stash isn't safe.
>>2791215
not you
>>2792564
her vag
>>2795012
Shh. You just get more and more retarded the more you rant your outrageous bullshit.
>>2791038
>>2792964
>>2793596
Martin Parr said he takes more than 100,000 photo's a year and is happy if ten are keepers. He's one of the best documentary photographers of all time.
If you think any great photographer is getting keepers even 5% of the time, or not taking hundreds of thousands of frames, you have no idea how photography works or you actually believe that generic instagram portraits of pretty girls are good photography.
To think that if you take enough photo's you will eventually get this good is asinine, and you're only doing it to convince yourself that "hey if I shot that much I'd be that good too." You wouldn't.
>>2795475
Pretty sure I'm not the one who is claiming that they sexually exploit youth because they all love it, then when reminded of the fact that many do not in fact "love it" in the literal hundreds (probably more), then starts calling them drama whores.
>>2791038
There is literally nothing wrong with having taken hundreds of thousands of photographs in your lifetime.
The problem people on /p/ seem to have is that they don't know the difference between having an archive, and editing that archive.
They also have a problem understanding the concept that your work is more valuable not because you photograph less, but because you show less.
The rookiest mistake you can make in photography is to believe anyone who's successful at it isn't going through a rigorous editing and selection process, likely from a pool of hundreds or more photos.
Unlike try hard like Sally Mann and Trent Parke, Vivian was a point and shoot photographer. She had one camera with no accessories. Yet she captures how exotic our world is. Her pictures tell stories. She reminds me of Kubricks early work with Look Magazine. That she died without making an effort to publish anything makes her the purist photographer in recorded history.
> drops the mic
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1100 Image Height 1100 Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2790995
I watched the documentary today, it was a good doc, and it was really cool to see and hear the stories from the kids, and the tapes she recorded of herself, etc, it's a cool look into her past.
I think one of the reasons why her work stands out so much is a) the sheer volume of it, and b) she mastered the rolleiflex, which allowed her work to have the benefits of medium format, unlike other street photographers of the time who used 35mm.
Her photos are pretty amazing though, it's such a cool window into the places and eras they come from.
>inb4 rolleiflex prices have skyrocketed since her work went mainstream
>>2795556
You're quickly becoming the dumbest trip on /p/ in my mind.
Stop posting.
