V

PHOTOGRAPHERS ON PHOTOGRAPHY
PHOTOGRAPHERS ON PHOTOGRAPHY
A CRITICAL A N T H O L O G Y EDITED BY N A T H A N L Y O N S

P R E N T I C E - H A L L , INC., ENGLEWOOD CLIFFS, N E W J E R S E Y IN COLLABORATION W I T H

T H E GEORGE E A S T M A N H O U S E , R O C H E S T E R , N E W Y O R K
©1966 by P R E N T I C E - H A L L , I N C . , Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey. All rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reproduced in
any form, by mimeograph or any other means,
without permission in writing from the
publisher.
Designed by Nathan Lyons
Library of Congress Catalog Card No.: 66-22343
Printed in the United States of America—C
P-66475, C-66476
Current Printing (Last Digit):
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3

PRENTICE-HALL INTERNATIONAL, INC., London

P R E N T I C E - H A L L OF A U S T R A L I A , P T Y . L T D . , Sydney
P R E N T I C E - H A L L OF C A N A D A , L T D . , Toronto
P R E N T I C E - H A L L OF I N D I A ( P R I V A T E ) L T D . , New Delhi
P R E N T I C E - H A L L OF J A P A N , I N C . , Tokyo
 T h i s a n t h o l o g y has been p r e p a r e d to afford a closer study of critical
source m a t e r i a l by p h o t o g r a p h e r s f r o m the t u r n of t h e century to the
present. Surveying a p p r o x i m a t e l y one h u n d r e d years of the l i t e r a t u r e
of p h o t o g r a p h y , it presents points of view which have c o n t r i b u t e d to
t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of c o n t e m p o r a r y p h o t o g r a p h i c expression.

T h e book is a r r a n g e d a l p h a b e t i c a l l y by p h o t o g r a p h e r . T h e r e a d e r
may, by consulting the T a b l e of C o n t e n t s , follow a chronological
d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e m a t e r i a l presented. Each p h o t o g r a p h e r is intro-
d u c e d by a brief q u o t a t i o n w h i c h is central to his concern; beyond
this i n t r o d u c t o r y s t a t e m e n t all articles are q u o t e d in full. An index
of b i o g r a p h i c a l notes a n d a selected b i b l i o g r a p h y have been p r e p a r e d
o n each c o n t r i b u t o r for a d d i t i o n a l reference. A short entry form has
b e e n a d o p t e d in citing t h e b i b l i o g r a p h i e s (unless otherwise stated,
place of p u b l i c a t i o n is N e w York City).

I wish to e x t e n d my a p p r e c i a t i o n to t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s represented
for permission to r e p r o d u c e copyrighted m a t e r i a l ; w i t h o u t their
c o o p e r a t i o n this a n t h o l o g y w o u l d n o t h a v e been possible. A n d to
R o s a l i n d e Fuller f o r consent to p u b l i s h m a t e r i a l by Francis Bru-
guiere; Georgia O ' K e e f f e a n d Doris Bry for permission to publish
articles by A l f r e d Stieglitz; D o r o t h y N o r m a n for release of " F o u r
H a p p e n i n g s , " by A l f r e d Stieglitz, originally p u b l i s h e d in Twice-a-
Year; Sybil Moholy-Nagy for articles by Moholy-Nagy; Cole W e s t o n
f o r release of m a t e r i a l by E d w a r d W e s t o n ; P a u l T a y l o r f o r release of
m a t e r i a l by D o r o t h e a L a n g e .

T o t h e George E a s t m a n H o u s e a n d its Director, B e a u m o n t New-

hall, I wish to express my g r a t i t u d e for a n e n v i r o n m e n t which en-
couraged a n d enabled m e to c o m p l e t e t h e necessary research for this
anthology. For t h e i r i n v a l u a b l e assistance, I wish to t h a n k Alice
A n d r e w s a n d T h o m a s B a r r o w of t h e George E a s t m a n H o u s e Staff
a n d R o b e r t Bretz, Elizabeth K i m b r o u g h , a n d M a u r e e n Sweeney for
their aid in proofing the b i b l i o g r a p h i c entries.
PREFACE 5

INTRODUCTION 11

BERENICE ABBOTT
1951 IT HAS TO WALK ALONE 15
1951 PHOTOGRAPHY AT THE CROSSROADS 17

ANSEL ADAMS
1940 WHAT IS GOOD PHOTOGRAPHY? 22
1944 A PERSONAL CREDO 25
1945 INTRODUCTION TO PORTFOLIO ONE 31

FRANCIS B R U G U I E R E

1935 CREATIVE PHOTOGRAPHY 32

WYNN BULLOCK

1962 SPACE AND TIME 37

HARRY CALLAHAN

1946 AN ADVENTURE IN PHOTOGRAPHY 40

ALVIN LANGDON COBURN

H E N R I CARTIER-BRESSON
1911
1952 THE RELATION OF
INTRODUCTION TO TIME TO ART MOMENT
THE DECISIVE 52
41
1916 THE FUTURE OF PICTORIAL PHOTOGRAPHY
R O B E R T DEMACHY

1907 ON THE STRAIGHT PRINT 55

P E T E R H. E M E R S O N

1899 SCIENCE AND ART 60

R O B E R T FRANK

1958 A STATEMENT 66

D O R O T H E A LANGE
LASZLO MOHOLY-NAGY
1940 DOCUMENTARY PHOTOGRAPHY 67
1923 LIGHT-A MEDIUM OF PLASTIC EXPRESSION 72
1952 PHOTOGRAPHING THE FAMILIAR 68
1936 FROM PIGMENT TO LIGHT 73

MAN RAY

1934 THE AGE OF LIGHT 80

H E N R Y P. ROBINSON

1892 PARADOXES OF ART, SCIENCE, AND PHOTOGRAPHY 82

A R T H U R SIEGEL
1951 FIFTY YEARS OF DOCUMENTARY 88
AARON SISKIND
1945 THE DRAMA OF OBJECTS 96
1956 CREDO 98
H E N R Y H O L M E S S M I T H

1961 PHOTOGRAPHY IN OUR TIME 99

W. E U G E N E S M I T H

1948 PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNALISM 103

1954 EUGENE SMITH PHOTOGRAPHY 105
1958 THE WORLD'S 10 GREATEST PHOTOGRAPHERS 106

E D W A R D STEICHEN

1960 ON PHOTOGRAPHY 106

ALFRED S T I E G L I T Z

1897 THE HAND CAMERA-ITS PRESENT IMPORTANCE 108

1923 HOW I CAME TO PHOTOGRAPH CLOUDS 110
1942 ALFRED STIEGLITZ: FOUR HAPPENINGS 112

PAUL S T R A N D

1917 PHOTOGRAPHY 136

1922 PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE NEW GOD 138
1923 THE ART MOTIVE IN PHOTOGRAPHY 144

E D W A R D W E S T O N

1930 PHOTOGRAPHY-NOT PICTORIAL 154

1932 A CONTEMPORARY MEANS TO CREATIVE EXPRESSION 158
1943 SEEING PHOTOGRAPHICALLY 159

M I N O R W H I T E

1952 THE CAMERA MIND AND EYE 163

1963 EQUIVALENCE: THE PERENNIAL TREND 168

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES & SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHIES 177

 For centuries m a n has striven to re-create a n d e x t e n d his concept of
the world t h r o u g h pictures. P r i o r to t h e i n v e n t i o n of p h o t o g r a p h y ,
mechanical a n d optical devices, (camera obscura, camera lucida, pan-
t o g r a p h , etc.) were q u i t e o f t e n e m p l o y e d to h e i g h t e n the illusion a n d
reality of events portrayed on the picture plane. T h e development
of a stable m e t h o d for r e c o r d i n g a n d m a k i n g p e r m a n e n t a n image of
e x t e r n a l objects by m e a n s of a lens or o t h e r i m a g e - f o r m i n g devices
developed as a n a t u r a l extension of this concern for r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ,
w h i c h of necessity w o u l d p r o d u c e t h e i n v e n t i o n of p h o t o g r a p h y . O u t
of a physio-chemical order, a n implosion of scientific i n q u i r y in t h e
n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y created its own b i o g r a p h e r w i t h a n u n p r e c e d e n t e d
facility for m a k i n g pictures. T h r e e factors a p p e a r to c o n d i t i o n the
early d e v e l o p m e n t of this new p i c t u r e m a k i n g m e d i u m . T h e first
is its ability to r e n d e r a p i c t u r e w i t h exceptional d e l i n e a t i o n , a n d the
second, t h e a u t h o r i t y t h a t this k i n d of p i c t u r e suggested to those w h o
viewed it. N a t u r a l t r u t h a n d p h o t o g r a p h y b e c a m e synonymous; a
q u a l i t y of t r u t h t h a t w o u l d have m a d e t h e w a r t of Boswell's a t t e n t i o n
envious.

W e e n t e r i n t o t h e t w e n t i e t h century m i n i m i z i n g only slightly a n

earlier stigma of p h o t o g r a p h y as an i n d i s c r i m i n a t e all-seeing eye, the
myopic salvation of a m a c h i n e age t r a n s f o r m i n g itself into a m a c h i n e
art. It is h e r e t h a t we can begin to trace t h e t h i r d m a j o r d e v e l o p m e n t
in p h o t o g r a p h i c p i c t u r e m a k i n g . I n Technics and Civilization (1934),
Lewis M u m f o r d observed that, " T h e history of the camera, a n d of its
p r o d u c t , t h e p h o t o g r a p h , illustrates t h e typical d i l e m m a s t h a t have
arisen in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of the m a c h i n e process a n d its a p p l i c a t i o n
to objects of esthetic value. Both the special feats of t h e m a c h i n e a n d
its possible perversions are equally m a n i f e s t . " T h e chief perversion to
be cited was t h a t of a n almost total a d o p t i o n of a n art-consciously con-
ceived p i c t u r e s t a t e m e n t t h a t e m u l a t e d t h e classical c o n c e p t i o n of
n i n e t e e n t h century painters.

T h e presence of pictorial considerations in p h o t o g r a p h y can be

traced f r o m 1844. W i l l i a m H e n r y Fox T a l b o t in The Pencil of Nature
suggested t h e " b e g i n n i n g s of a new a r t " w h e n h e i n c l u d e d in this
discussion of t h e practical a p p l i c a t i o n s of p h o t o g r a p h y t h e photo-
g r a p h e n t i t l e d " T h e O p e n D o o r / ' p r e s e n t e d solely for its "pictur-
e s q u e " q u a l i t y . In 1845, J. J. E. Mayall illustrated, in a series of ten
daguerreotypes, t h e L o r d ' s Prayer. L a t e r he composed a series of six
d a g u e r r e o t y p e s in t h e m a n n e r of C a m p b e l l ' s "Soldier's D r e a m . " T h i s
allegorical t r a d i t i o n develops i n t o t h e mid-1860's w h e r e a n estab-
lished pictorial t r a d i t i o n is generally evident a n d c h a m p i o n e d by
O . G. R e j l a n d e r a n d H e n r y Peach R o b i n s o n . M u c h of t h e work, how-
ever, was contrived, a n d sought for its justification t h e a u t h o r i t y of a
seeing developed f r o m B u r n e t ' s A Treatise on Painting, originally a
p o p u l a r i n s t r u c t i o n a l work w r i t t e n for painters, b u t in later editions
a d a p t e d for use by p h o t o g r a p h e r s . T h e s e classical considerations of
t h e m a t i c content, g e o m e t r i c perspective, a n d composition were to be
a t t a c k e d o p e n l y a n d r e p e a t e d l y by P. H . Emerson, the leader of t h e
N a t u r a l i s t i c School of P h o t o g r a p h y . C o n c e r n i n g M r . B u r n e t ' s treatise,
E m e r s o n c o n c l u d e d that, " I n short, t h e whole work is illogical, un-
scientific, a n d inartistic, a n d has n o t a leg to s t a n d on. It is very
specious to say that all compositions are m a d e a c c o r d i n g to geome-
trical forms, n o t h i n g can be easier t h a n to take a r b i t r a r y p o i n t s in a
p i c t u r e a n d d r a w geometrical figures a d j o i n i n g t h e m . "

E m e r s o n felt t h a t pictorial w o r k s h o u l d become m o r e n a t u r a l i s t i c

a n d t h a t the allegorical a n d d o c t r i n a l d i d not, ". . . lie w i t h i n t h e
scope of a r t . " N a t u r a l i s t i c p h o t o g r a p h y , to E m e r s o n was ". . . a n
impersonal m e t h o d of expression, a m o r e or less correct reflection of
n a t u r e , w h e r e i n (1) t r u t h of s e n t i m e n t , (2) illusion of t r u t h of appear-
ance (so far as is possible), a n d (3) d e c o r a t i o n are of first a n d s u p r e m e
importance."

A basic c o n t r a d i c t i o n a p p e a r s to exist in Emerson's thesis. W h i l e

he felt t h a t t h e p h o t o g r a p h was a "mechanically recorded reflection of
N a t u r e " a n d t h e r e f o r e it could not be a work of art, he also stated
t h a t ". . . there is no absolute t r u t h to N a t u r e f r o m the visual stand-
p o i n t , for as each m a n ' s sight is different, t h e only absolute t r u t h to
Nature for each m a n is his own view of her (though certain broad
features r e m a i n t r u e to all)." T h i s a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t of a personal
p o i n t of view a n d yet the l i m i t a t i o n of its significance because it was
expressed by w h a t a p p e a r e d to be an " i m p e r s o n a l m e t h o d " m i g h t
indicate that g r o u n d was giving way to a psychological s t a n d p o i n t
based o n vision, b u t in general p h o t o g r a p h y ' s significance was n o t yet
clearly u n d e r s t o o d .

O n e aspect began to be acknowledged; the i m p o r t a n c e of the en-

v i r o n m e n t of pictures p r o d u c e d by p h o t o g r a p h y was n o t e d by the
critic, Sadakichi H a r t m a n n , in 1910, " T h e results of p h o t o g r a p h y
p e r m e a t e all intellectual phases of o u r life. T h r o u g h the illustra-
tions of newspapers, books, magazines, business circulars, advertise-
ments, objects t h a t previous to D a g u e r r e ' s i n v e n t i o n were n o t repre-
sented pictorially have become c o m m o n p r o p e r t y . "

T o overcome the u n f o r t u n a t e c o n f u s i o n of its early beginnings, the

p h o t o g r a p h i c p i c t u r e m a k e r at t h e t u r n of the c e n t u r y was to find
himself in a position which necessitated t h e rediscovery of his own
m e d i u m . In a t t e m p t i n g this the t o n e at times has been exceedingly
defensive, b u t is generally underscored by a concern for this m u c h
needed clarification of identity. . . as the l a n g u a g e or vocabulary of
p h o t o g r a p h y has b e e n e x t e n d e d , the emphasis of m e a n i n g has s h i f t e d
—shifted f r o m w h a t t h e world looks like to w h a t we feel a b o u t the
world a n d w h a t we w a n t t h e world to m e a n . " T h i s s t a t e m e n t by A a r o n
Siskind in 1958 suggests a critical distinction which s h o u l d resolve
Emerson's d i l e m m a by p l a c i n g the a u t h o r s h i p of picture on t h e pho-
t o g r a p h e r a n d n o t the m a c h i n e .

T h e anthology traces this d e v e l o p m e n t of concern f r o m 1889 to

t h e present. T h e articles, m a n y of which have been relatively inac-
cessible, have been selected to best represent each p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s
i n d i v i d u a l philosophy a n d c o n t r i b u t i o n to the d e v e l o p m e n t of con-
t e m p o r a r y p h o t o g r a p h i c expression.

N. L., 1966, Curator of Photography, The George Eastman House

BERENICE ABBOTT (1898-) The photographer's punctilio is his recognition
of the now—to see it so clearly that he looks through it to the past and senses
the future. This is a big order and demands wisdom as well as understanding
of one9s time. Thus the photographer is the contemporary being par excel-
lence; through his eyes the now becomes past. T H E W O R L D O F ATGET, New
York, Horizon Press, 1964, p. xxvi.

IT HAS TO WALK ALONE 1951

Infinity, Vol. 7, No. 11, pp. 6-7, 14.

T h e greatest influence o b s c u r i n g t h e e n t i r e field of p h o t o g r a p h y

has, in my o p i n i o n , been pictorialism. B u t first let me define it: pic-
torialism m e a n s chiefly t h e m a k i n g of pleasant, pretty, artificial pic-
tures in the superficial spirit of certain m i n o r painters. W h a t is m o r e ,
t h e imitators of these superficial qualities are n o t a w a r e of t h e t r u e
values for w h i c h p a i n t i n g strives. P h o t o g r a p h y can never grow u p if
it imitates some o t h e r m e d i u m . It has to walk alone; it has to be itself.
If a m e d i u m is r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l by n a t u r e of t h e realistic image
f o r m e d by a lens, I see no reason why we s h o u l d stand o n o u r heads
to distort t h a t f u n c t i o n . O n the contrary, we s h o u l d take h o l d of t h a t
very quality, m a k e use of it, a n d e x p l o r e it to t h e fullest. It is possible
t h a t t h e subject m a t t e r best suited to t h a t characteristic q u a l i t y be
t h e one d i c t a t e d by it.
A f t e r t h e early p i o n e e r days of p h o t o g r a p h y , w h i c h were very crea-
tive a n d healthy, a wave of r a n k pictorialism set in a n d flourished.
T h i s type of work was usually very s e n t i m e n t a l . Its settings were
staged; a n d t h e system was to flatter everything. T h e s e l i m i t a t i o n s of
p a i n t i n g , c a t e r i n g to t h e worst Victorian standards, are f a m i l i a r to
most of us. T h e m a n most responsible for t h e whole m o v e m e n t was
H e n r y Peach R o b i n s o n , an E n g l i s h m a n w h o was very successful
financially a n d w h o e x p o r t e d t h e m a n i a to this c o u n t r y where it was
g o b b l e d u p by Americans. T h e w o r d " s a l o n " descended f r o m R o b i n -
son, a n d the " s a l o n " p r i n t is still r a m p a n t in A m e r i c a n clubs.
B u t t h e r e a r e always two sides to the q u e s t i o n , a n d p e r h a p s there
always will be. I n those days there was, f o r t u n a t e l y , a n o t h e r side of
the p i c t u r e . M e n like M a t h e w Brady, W i l l i a m H . Jackson, Sullivan,
G a r d n e r , a n d others, were m a k i n g magnificent realistic pictures of
their world a n d of their time.
At the b e g i n n i n g of t h e c e n t u r y serious p h o t o g r a p h e r s were right-
fully d i s d a i n f u l of R o b i n s o n a n d his followers. T h e y g r a d u a t e d to a
m o r e refined or elevated g r a d e ; they b e c a m e t h e fellow travelers of
t h e m o r e m o d e r n painters. T h e y were interested in p r o v i n g that
p h o t o g r a p h y was a r t w i t h a capital " A , " a n d they were q u i t e touchy
a b o u t it. T h e i r work was spiked w i t h mystical a n d subjective over-
tones. T e r m s like " e q u i v a l e n t s , " " h a n d of G o d , " etc., were used to
bewilder t h e layman. A r t was by t h e few, for t h e few, a n d c u l t u r a l
America was r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e back e n d of a horse to people w h o
d i d n o t k n o w t h a t they were b e i n g insulted.
 T h e s e p h o t o g r a p h e r s raised the craft, as such, to a h i g h e r technical
level w i t h t h e i r reverence for glorified t e c h n i q u e . T h e U n i t e d States
was w e d d e d to technology a n d was favorably inclined toward a tech-
nological art. I n the case of Stieglitz, w h o was an i n s t i t u t i o n w i t h i n
himself, a n d w h o was G o d to many, a n d to m a n y others n o t at all,
he d i d m a k e , w h e n he v e n t u r e d outside himself, a few great pictures.
In Stieglitz' time w h a t was u n q u e s t i o n a b l y a n advance in pictorial-
ism, is n o t a n a d v a n c e in 1950.
T h e s e latter-day pictorialists d i d n o t know t h a t they were pictori-
alists. T h e y were w h a t I can only call, for lack of a better w o r d , the
a d v a n c e d or super-pictorial school. T h e i n d i v i d u a l picture, like a
p a i n t i n g , was the thing. Above all, t h e perfect p r i n t . Subjectivity
predominated.
A b o u t this same p e r i o d a n o t h e r m a n was w o r k i n g quietly un-
k n o w n , u n a p p r e c i a t e d , b u t w i t h a p r o f o u n d love of life. W i t h con-
c e n t r a t e d energy a n d m a t u r e d i s c e r n m e n t , this m a n c a m e to pho-
t o g r a p h y in t h e second half of his life. H i s n a m e was E u g e n e Atget.
H e gave t h e w o r l d h u n d r e d s of great p h o t o g r a p h s . H e was very busy
a n d excited in discovering p h o t o g r a p h y a n d w h a t it m e a n t . H e d i d n ' t
talk m u c h ; his time was spent p e n e t r a t i n g a n d r e c o r d i n g his immedi-
ate a n d w o n d e r f u l w o r l d . H i s work is purely a n d entirely photo-
g r a p h i c , a n d it is still c o m p a r a t i v e l y little k n o w n today.
W h i l e n o t of the same s t a t u r e or range, a n o t h e r p h o t o g r a p h e r on
this side of t h e ocean showed r e m a r k a b l e p h o t o g r a p h i c a c u m e n in the
early half of this c e n t u r y . I believe t h e t r u e p h o t o g r a p h e r is a curi-
ously o d d type of species, n o t easy to define, b u t his p h o t o g r a p h i c
g i f t is a highly charged a n d t r a i n e d vision. T h i s vision is focused, by
t h e n a t u r e of the m e d i u m , o n t h e here a n d now. Realist par excel-
lence, inescapably c o n t e m p o r a r y , Lewis H i n e h a d this p h o t o g r a p h i c
gift. H e r e s p o n d e d to t h e w o r l d a r o u n d him, a r m e d w i t h a camera
a n d his p e n e t r a t i n g eagle-like, agile, b u t disciplined eye. Stieglitz a n d
his disciples looked d o w n t h e i r noses at Lewis H i n e a n d fell in line
w i t h the coterie of K a t h e r i n e Dreier's gallery. It was a b o u t t h a t time
(1918) t h a t the abstractions of cracked p a i n t began.
At the risk of over-simplification I propose t h a t t h e r e is a t h i r d
fling of pictorialism—the abstract school—the imitators of abstract
p a i n t i n g , t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s of t h e p u r e design, the cracked w i n d o w
pane, or t h e cracked p a i n t . I t h i n k this represents t h e end.
N o w they w o u l d be like t h e great p a i n t e r M o n d r i a n . Recently I
have even seen would-be Jackson Pollocks. But instead of s p a t t e r i n g
p a i n t at a canvas, in d e s p e r a t i o n they m i g h t yet resort to r i p p i n g the
e m u l s i o n off the p a p e r or s p a t t e r i n g a p r i n t w i t h hypo. A n y t h i n g goes.
W h y d o I concern myself w i t h these problems? Because it affects
me, a n d o t h e r p h o t o g r a p h e r s , if, d u e to a p r e p o n d e r a n t a m o u n t of
this type of work, it h o l d s back sorely needed i m p r o v e m e n t s of t h e
i n s t r u m e n t s we need to work with. T h i s is why I m u s t take issue w i t h
t h e pictorialists. T h e y are the ones w h o choose the subjects w h i c h are
so easily expressed w i t h i n the p r i m i t i v e l i m i t a t i o n s of present-day,
backward equipment.
T h i s brings m e to t h e vast a m a t e u r field, a n d finally to t h e serious
p h o t o g r a p h e r . O n t h e positive side, t h e a m a t e u r m a r k e t presents the
possibility for the d e v e l o p m e n t of a great d e m o c r a t i c m e d i u m -
p h o t o g r a p h y by t h e m a n y a n d f o r t h e m a n y . It is also a p o t e n t i a l
source for t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of professional p h o t o g r a p h e r s . T h i s vast
p o t e n t i a l is rich, u n c u l t i v a t e d soil, b u t it can e r o d e away if it is
flooded by pictorialism. T h e a m a t e u r s i m i t a t e t h e pictorialists be-
cause this is t h e line of least resistance, a n d they d e l i g h t the m a n u -
facturers w i t h t h e i r p r o d i g a l use of film, p a p e r , a n d c h e a p cameras.
T h e result is a mass p r o d u c t i o n type of p h o t o g r a p h y , l i m i t e d in sub-
ject material, hackneyed in a p p r o a c h .
B u t t h e serious p h o t o g r a p h e r is a f o r g o t t e n m a n . H e is sorely in
need of far r e a c h i n g i m p r o v e m e n t s i n all directions a n d over t h e
e n t i r e field. H e is living in a d y n a m i c time a n d place, w o r k i n g w i t h
M o d e l T cameras a n d o u t m o d e d sensitive materials. P h o t o g r a p h y
does n o t stand by itself in a v a c u u m ; it is l i n k e d o n the o n e side to
m a n u f a c t u r e r s of materials a n d o n the o t h e r side to t h e d i s t r i b u t o r s
of the p r o d u c t , t h a t is, to publishers, editors, business leaders, m u s e u m
directors, a n d to t h e p u b l i c . Unless they d o their share of g r o w i n g u p
to their responsibilities the p h o t o g r a p h e r can l a n g u i s h or take u p
k n i t t i n g . W h a t we need of e q u i p m e n t is this: let it possess as good a
s t r u c t u r e as t h e real-life c o n t e n t t h a t s u r r o u n d s us. W e need m o r e
simplifications to free us for seeing. A n d we need editors a n d p u b -
lishers w h o will try to u n d e r s t a n d p h o t o g r a p h y a n d w h o will live u p
to their responsibility to raise t h e general c u l t u r a l level of o u r coun-
try w h i c h we, w h o love A m e r i c a , believe in for its great p o t e n t i a l .
W e need a creative a t t i t u d e o n t h e p a r t of t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r , t h e
d i s t r i b u t o r , a n d t h e consumer.
I s h o u l d like to give a q u o t a t i o n f r o m G o e t h e w h o was discussing
a poet. Said G o e t h e : " H e was a decided talent, w i t h o u t d o u b t , b u t
he has t h e general sickness of the p r e s e n t day—subjectivity—and of
t h a t I w o u l d fain heal h i m . " Does n o t t h e very w o r d "creative" m e a n
to b u i l d , to initiate, to give out, to act—rather t h a n to be acted u p o n ,
to be subjective? L i v i n g p h o t o g r a p h y b u i l d s u p , does n o t tear d o w n .
It proclaims t h e dignity of m a n . L i v i n g p h o t o g r a p h y is positive in
its a p p r o a c h ; it sings a song of life—not d e a t h .

PHOTOGRAPHY AT THE CROSSROADS 1951

Universal Photo Almanac, pp. 42-47.

T h e world today has been c o n d i t i o n e d , overwhelmingly, to visu-

alize. T h e picture has almost replaced the word as a m e a n s of com-
m u n i c a t i o n . T a b l o i d s , e d u c a t i o n a l a n d d o c u m e n t a r y films, p o p u l a r
movies, magazines, a n d television s u r r o u n d us. It almost seems t h a t
t h e existence of t h e w o r d is t h r e a t e n e d . T h e p i c t u r e is o n e of t h e
p r i n c i p a l m e d i u m s of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a n d its i m p o r t a n c e is t h u s
g r o w i n g ever vaster.
T o d a y t h e challenge to p h o t o g r a p h e r s is great because we are living
in a m o m e n t o u s p e r i o d . History is p u s h i n g us to the b r i n k of a realistic
age as never b e f o r e . I believe there is n o m o r e creative m e d i u m t h a n
p h o t o g r a p h y to recreate t h e living world of o u r time.
P h o t o g r a p h y gladly accepts the challenge because it is at h o m e a n d
i n its e l e m e n t : namely, realism—real life—the now. In fact, t h e photo-
g r a p h i c m e d i u m is s t a n d i n g at its o w n crossroads of history, possibly
at t h e e n d of its first m a j o r cycle. A decision as to w h i c h direction it
shall take is necessary, a n d a new c h a p t e r in p h o t o g r a p h y is b e i n g
made—as i n d e e d m a n y new c h a p t e r s a r e now t a k i n g t h e place of
m a n y older ones.
T h e t i m e comes w h e n we progress, m u s t go f o r w a r d , m u s t grow.
Else we w i t h e r , decay, die. T h i s is as t r u e for p h o t o g r a p h y as for every
o t h e r h u m a n activity in this a t o m age. It is m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n
ever to assess a n d value p h o t o g r a p h y in t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y w o r l d . T o
u n d e r s t a n d t h e now w i t h which p h o t o g r a p h y is essentially concerned,
it is necessary to look at its roots, to m e a s u r e its past achievements,
to learn t h e lessons of its t r a d i t i o n . Let us briefly s p a n its b e g i n n i n g s
—they were truly spectacular.
T h e p e o p l e w h o were interested in p h o t o g r a p h y a n d w h o contrib-
u t e d to its c h i l d h o o d success were most serious a n d capable. I n t h e
early years of t h e n i n e t e e n t h century, a t r e m e n d o u s a m o u n t of crea-
tiveness a n d intelligence was invested in the n e w i n v e n t i o n . Enthusi-
asm a m o n g artists, scientists, intellectuals of all kinds, a n d t h e lay
public, was at a high p i t c h . Because of t h e interest in a n d d e m a n d for
a new p i c t u r e - m a k i n g m e d i u m , technical d e v e l o p m e n t was astonish-
ingly r a p i d .
T h e aesthetic c o u n t e r p a r t of such r a p i d g r o w t h is to be seen i n pho-
t o g r a p h e r s like Brady, Jackson, O ' S u l l i v a n , N a d a r , a n d their con-
temporaries. T h e r e was such a b o o m in technical progress, as has not
been surpassed even today. T h e recently p u b l i s h e d History of Pho-
tography by J . M. Eder, translated by E d w a r d Epstean, d o c u m e n t s
this acceleration in detail.
A m e r i c a played a healthy a n d vital p a r t in the rise of p h o t o g r a p h y .
A m e r i c a n genius took to t h e new m e d i u m like t h e p r o v e r b i a l d u c k
to water. A n extremely interesting study of p h o t o g r a p h y in t h e U n i t e d
States—an i m p o r t a n t book for everyone—is R o b e r t T a f t ' s Photog-
raphy and the American Scene. H e r e t h e m a t e r i a l a n d significant
g r o w t h of the m e d i u m is i n t e g r a t e d w i t h t h e social a n d economic
g r o w t h of o u r country.
I n p h o t o g r a p h y , A m e r i c a n e i t h e r lagged n o r slavishly imitated,
a n d we can boast of a s o u n d A m e r i c a n t r a d i t i o n . P o r t r a i t s flourished
as in n o o t h e r country. T h e Civil W a r created a d e m a n d for millions
of "likenesses" of t h e y o u n g m e n m a r c h i n g off to the f r o n t . T h e new-
ness of o u r c o u n t r y was of course a n o t h e r stimulus to growth, w i t h
m a n y p e o p l e s e n d i n g pictures of themselves to relatives left b e h i n d
in t h e westward m o v e m e n t , or to prospective brides a n d h u s b a n d s in
t h e " O l d C o u n t r y . " T h e migratory, restless p o p u l a t i o n of the U n i t e d
States flowed west, over the Alleghenies f r o m Pennsylvania i n t o O h i o
a n d o t h e r states of t h e W e s t e r n Reserve, past the Mississippi a n d i n t o
t h e west; a n d wherever they went, they left little hoards, little treas-
ures of old p h o t o g r a p h s — i n v a l u a b l e archives f o r t h e h i s t o r i a n today.
I n t h e w i n n i n g of t h e f r o n t i e r , p h o t o g r a p h e r s also played their p a r t ,
going w i t h U . S. Geologic Survey e x p e d i t i o n s a f t e r t h e Civil W a r .
A m o n g these, W i l l i a m H . Jackson stands as a s h i n i n g e x a m p l e .
T h i s o r g a n i c use for p h o t o g r a p h y p r o d u c e d t h o u s a n d s of straight-
f o r w a r d , c o m p e t e n t operators, whereas in E n g l a n d there were com-
paratively few; a p p a r e n t l y because a m o n o p o l y of all p a t e n t s tied
u p t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c process a n d p r e v e n t e d t h e spread of interest in
a n d use of t h e n e w i n v e n t i o n . H e r e in the U n i t e d States, it was
virtually impossible to m a k e such a m o n o p o l y stick.
T h i s f e r m e n t a n d e n t h u s i a s m p r o d u c e d fine results. O u r daguer-
reotypes were s u p e r b . T h e y were acclaimed all over E u r o p e a n d
systematically w o n all the first prizes at t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l exhibitions.
P e o p l e were wild w i t h e n t h u s i a s m for these realistic " s p e a k i n g like-
nesses," a n d everybody was d o i n g it. I n fact, a n y o n e could afford t h e
p h o t o g r a p h , whereas before only the wealthy could pay the price to
have their p o r t r a i t s p a i n t e d . As a result, t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c business
flourished.
A f t e r a whole-hearted start w i t h Yankee ingenuity, money got i n t o
p h o t o g r a p h y a l o n g w i t h pseudo-artists; commercialism developed
w i t h a bang. A n d as w i t h any business which, as it grows, serves the
greatest c o m m o n d e n o m i n a t o r , so w i t h p h o t o g r a p h y . Cash took over.
Instead of t h e honest, realistic likeness, artificial p r o p s w i t h p h o n y
settings b e g a n to be used. A p e r i o d of i m i t a t i n g t h e u n r e a l set in.
Supply houses s p r a n g u p , w i t h e l a b o r a t e Grecian u r n s a n d c o l u m n s
a n d fancy backdrops—all f o r t h e greatest possible show a n d ostenta-
tion. R e t o u c h i n g a n d b r u s h w o r k also set in. W h a t was t h o u g h t to be
i m i t a t i o n or e m u l a t i o n of p a i n t i n g b e c a m e r a m p a n t .
It need n o t be a d d e d t h a t t h e i m i t a t i o n was of b a d p a i n t i n g , because
it h a d to be b a d , d e a l i n g largely or wholly w i t h t h e s e n t i m e n t a l , t h e
trite a n d pretty, t h e picturesque. T h u s p h o t o g r a p h y was torn f r o m
its moorings, t h e whole essence of w h i c h is realism.
M u c h of this was d u e to a terrible plague, i m p o r t e d f r o m E n g l a n d
in t h e f o r m of H e n r y Peach R o b i n s o n . H e became t h e s h i n i n g light
of p h o t o g r a p h y , charged large prices, took r i b b o n a f t e r r i b b o n . H e
lifted composition bodily f r o m p a i n t i n g , b u t t h e ones he chose were
p r o b a b l y some of the worst e x a m p l e s in history. Greatest disaster of
all, he wrote a book in 1869 e n t i t l e d Pictorial Photography. H i s system
was to flatter everything. H e sought to correct w h a t t h e camera saw.
T h e i n h e r e n t genius a n d dignity of t h e h u m a n subject was d e n i e d .
T y p i c a l of his s e n t i m e n t a l pictures were his titles, a n d titles of
o t h e r p h o t o g r a p h e r s of t h e p e r i o d : " P o o r J o e , " " H a r d T i m e s , " "Fad-
i n g Away," " H e r e Comes F a t h e r , " " I n t i m a t e F r i e n d s , " " R o m a n t i c
L a n d s c a p e , " "By t h e S t r e a m , " " E n d of a W i n t e r ' s Day," "Kiss of
D e w , " "Fingers of M o r n i n g . " If some of the subject m a t t e r a n d titles
are n o t too f a r r e m o v e d f r o m some of today's c r o p of pictorialists,
t h e n obviously t h e coincidence of similar t h i n k i n g has t h e same senti-
m e n t a l unrealistic f u n d a t i o n in c o m m o n . T h i s R o b i n s o n i a n school
h a d a n influence second to none—it stuck, simply, because it m a d e
t h e practice a n d theory of p h o t o g r a p h y easy. I n o t h e r words, flattery
pays off. T h u s today there are still m a n y p h o t o g r a p h e r s of t h e Pic-
torial School w h o c o n t i n u e to e m u l a t e the " m a s t e r " of 1869.
As a p o p u l a r art f o r m , p h o t o g r a p h y has e x p a n d e d a n d intensified
its activity in recent years. T h e most noticeable t r e n d has been the
w i d e s p r e a d p u b l i c a t i o n of articles a n d books o n Hoxv-To-Do-It. Yet
w h a t is m o r e i m p o r t a n t now is What-To-Do-With-It. T h a t very wide-
spread d i s t r i b u t i o n w h i c h gives p h o t o g r a p h y m u c h of its s t r e n g t h
a n d power, d e m a n d s t h a t t h e r e be a greater sense of awareness o n t h e
p a r t of p h o t o g r a p h e r s a n d editors alike.
U n f o r t u n a t e l y , a l o n g w i t h g r o w t h a n d the s t r e n g t h it signifies, goes
t h e possibility of a decline in o u r p h o t o g r a p h i c sensibilities a n d
o u t p u t . Actually, the progress of p h o t o g r a p h y is f r e q u e n t l y delayed
by i n a d e q u a t e e q u i p m e n t , w h i c h needs f u n d a m e n t a l , far-reaching
i m p r o v e m e n t . T h i s is n o t to c o n d e m n t h e industry as a whole, b u t
r a t h e r certain segments of it, for t h e i r stationary o u t l o o k a n d lack of
p r o p e r perspective. P h o t o g r a p h y gains m u c h of its s t r e n g t h f r o m t h e
vast p a r t i c i p a t i o n of t h e a m a t e u r , a n d of course this is the m a r k e t
where mass p r o d u c t i o n thrives.
But—it is h i g h time industry p a i d a t t e n t i o n to the serious a n d
e x p e r t o p i n i o n of e x p e r i e n c e d p h o t o g r a p h e r s , a n d to the needs of
the professional worker as well. T h i s is i m p o r t a n t because a good
p h o t o g r a p h e r c a n n o t fulfill t h e p o t e n t i a l of c o n t e m p o r a r y photog-
r a p h y if h e is h a n d i c a p p e d w i t h e q u i p m e n t a n d m a t e r i a l s m a d e for
a m a t e u r s only, or simply for a q u i c k t u r n o v e r . T h e camera, t h e
t r i p o d , a n d o t h e r p i c t u r e - t a k i n g necessities, too o f t e n designed by
d r a f t s m e n w h o never took a serious p i c t u r e in their lives, m u s t be
vastly better m a c h i n e s if they a r e to free the p h o t o g r a p h e r creatively,
instead of d o m i n a t i n g his t h i n k i n g .
M a n y p h o t o g r a p h e r s s p e n d too m u c h time in the d a r k r o o m , w i t h
the result t h a t creative camera work is seriously i n t e r f e r e d with.
T h e stale vogue of d r o w n i n g in t e c h n i q u e a n d i g n o r i n g c o n t e n t adds
to the pestilence a n d has become, f o r m a n y , p a r t of today's g e n e r a l
hysteria. . . and craftsmanship I set up as a pedestal for art; Became
the merest craftsman; to my fingers I lent a docile, cold agility, And
sureness to my ear. I stifled sounds, And then dissected music like a
corpse, Checked harmony by algebraic rules."
A p a r t f r o m the f o r e g o i n g gripes, w h a t t h e n makes a p i c t u r e a crea-
tive piece of work? W e k n o w it c a n n o t be just t e c h n i q u e . Is it c o n t e n t
—and if so, w h a t is content? T h e s e are basic questions t h a t enlight-
ened p h o t o g r a p h e r s m u s t answer f o r themselves.
Let us first say w h a t p h o t o g r a p h y is not. A p h o t o g r a p h is n o t a
p a i n t i n g , a p o e m , a symphony, a dance. It is n o t just a pretty picture,
n o t a n exercise in c o n t o r t i o n i s t t e c h n i q u e s a n d sheer p r i n t q u a l i t y .
It is or s h o u l d be a significant d o c u m e n t , a p e n e t r a t i n g s t a t e m e n t ,
which can be described in a very simple term—selectivity.
T o define selection, one m a y say t h a t it s h o u l d be focused o n t h e
k i n d of subject m a t t e r w h i c h hits you h a r d w i t h its i m p a c t a n d excites
your i m a g i n a t i o n to t h e e x t e n t t h a t you are forced to take it. Pictures
are wasted unless t h e motive p o w e r which i m p e l l e d you to action is
strong a n d stirring. T h e motives or points of view are b o u n d to differ
w i t h each p h o t o g r a p h e r , a n d h e r e i n lies t h e i m p o r t a n t difference
which separates one a p p r o a c h f r o m a n o t h e r . Selection of p r o p e r
p i c t u r e c o n t e n t comes f r o m a fine u n i o n of t r a i n e d eye a n d imagina-
tive m i n d .
T o c h a r t a course, o n e m u s t h a v e a direction. I n reality, the eye is
no better t h a n t h e p h i l o s o p h y b e h i n d it. T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r creates,
evolves a better, m o r e selective, m o r e acute seeing eye by looking ever
m o r e sharply at w h a t is g o i n g o n in t h e w o r l d . Like every o t h e r
m e a n s of expression, p h o t o g r a p h y , if it is to be utterly honest a n d
direct, s h o u l d be related to t h e life of the times—the pulse of today.
T h e p h o t o g r a p h may be p r e s e n t e d as finely a n d artistically as you
will; b u t to merit serious consideration, m u s t be directly c o n n e c t e d
with t h e w o r l d we live in.
W h a t we n e e d is a r e t u r n , o n a m o u n t i n g spiral of historic u n d e r -
standing, to the great t r a d i t i o n of realism. Since u l t i m a t e l y the pho-
t o g r a p h is a statement, a d o c u m e n t of the now, a greater responsibility,
is p u t o n us. T o d a y , we are c o n f r o n t e d w i t h reality o n t h e vastest
scale m a n k i n d has k n o w n . Some p e o p l e are still u n a w a r e t h a t reality
contains u n p a r a l l e l e d beauties. T h e f a n t a s t i c a n d u n e x p e c t e d , t h e
ever-changing a n d r e n e w i n g is n o w h e r e so exemplified as in real life
itself. O n c e we u n d e r s t a n d this, it exercises a d y n a m i c c o m p u l s i o n
o n us, a n d a p h o t o - d o c u m e n t is b o r n .
T h e term " d o c u m e n t a r y " is sometimes a p p l i e d in a r a t h e r deroga-
tory sense to t h e type of p h o t o g r a p h y which to me seems logical. T o
connect t h e t e r m " d o c u m e n t a r y " w i t h only t h e "ash-can school" is so
m u c h sheer nonsense, a n d p r o b a b l y stems f r o m the b a d h a b i t of
pigeon-holing a n d labelling e v e r y t h i n g like the well-known 57 varie-
ties. Actually, d o c u m e n t a r y pictures i n c l u d e every subject in t h e
world—good, b a d , i n d i f f e r e n t . I h a v e yet to see a fine p h o t o g r a p h
which is n o t a good d o c u m e n t . T h o s e t h a t survive f r o m t h e past
invariably are, a n d can be recognized in t h e work of Brady, Jackson,
N a d a r , Atget, a n d m a n y others. G r e a t p h o t o g r a p h s h a v e "magic"—
a revealing w o r d t h a t comes f r o m Steichen. I believe t h e " m a g i c "
p h o t o g r a p h e r s are d o c u m e n t a r i a n s only in t h e broadest sense of t h e
word.
A c c o r d i n g to Webster, a n y t h i n g " d o c u m e n t a r y " is: " t h a t w h i c h is
t a u g h t , evidence, t r u t h , conveying i n f o r m a t i o n , a u t h e n t i c j u d g m e n t . "
A d d to t h a t a dash of i m a g i n a t i o n , take f o r g r a n t e d a d e q u a t e tech-
n i q u e to realize t h e i n t e n t i o n , a n d a p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s grasp will
eventually e q u a l his reach—as h e t u r n s in t h e r i g h t direction at t h e
crossroads.
ANSEL ADAMS (1902-) Photography is but one phase of the potential of
human expression; all art is the expression of one and the same thing—the
relation of the spirit of man to the spirit of other men and to the world.
DANGER S I G N A L S , PSA Journal, Vol. 14, November 1948; p. 575.

WHAT IS GOOD PHOTOGRAPHY? 1940

Camera Craft, Vol. 47, pp. 43-44.
D e a r Sirs:
T h e t r a n q u i l A u t u m n air of t h e m o u n t a i n s is a good counter-
i r r i t a n t to t h e s t e a m i n g m o o d of t h e section of C o r r e s p o n d e n c e of
t h e D e c e m b e r Camera Craft. N o b o d y seems to be accomplishing
a n y t h i n g , b u t t h e i n c u b a t i o n of h a r d feelings—and n o b o d y seems to
h a v e m a d e any a t t e m p t to get d o w n to u n e m o t i o n a l facts in his
protestations. Far be it for m e to pose as a n a r b i t r a t o r , or a n oracle,
or a catalyst—but I c a n n o t evade a d d i n g a few words w i t h the h o p e -
however forlorn—that they will serve as oil u p o n the f o a m i n g waves.
In t h e first place, n o less a n a u t h o r i t y in a r t t h a n A r t h u r P o p e
o n c e said to me, " t h e artist s h o u l d never write a b o u t his art"—and h e
is entirely r i g h t . T h e artist speaks in t e r m s of his m e d i u m ; transcrip-
t i o n of his ideas in words are almost always i n a d e q u a t e a n d mislead-
ing in t h e most precise sense. W e all write too m u c h , speak too m u c h ,
p r e a c h too m u c h . It w o u l d be better if we just said w h a t we h a v e to
say in p h o t o g r a p h y . A f t e r all, we a r e p h o t o g r a p h e r s ; if o u r work has
" w h a t it takes" it will n o t n e e d t h e e m b a l m i n g of words to p e r p e t u a t e
it. Let t h e critics—the professional critics—fuss w i t h t h e w i n d i n g
sheets.
All of us, perhaps, k n o w this, b u t we will k e e p r i g h t o n w r i t i n g
a n d lecturing, a n d giving o u r colleagues soul-shattering B r o n x cheers
via t h e "letters" c o l u m n .
W h a t I am really g e t t i n g a t is this: W e s t o n writes s o m e t h i n g , Par-
tridge writes s o m e t h i n g , I write s o m e t h i n g . So what? W e can all
m a k e better p h o t o g r a p h s t h a n we can write a b o u t t h e m . If we c a n ' t
express o u r p r i n c i p l e s of p h o t o g r a p h y in o u r p h o t o g r a p h s , we cer-
tainly c a n n o t express t h e m in o u r writings o n p h o t o g r a p h y . I believe
t h a t we d o n o t need any-justification in type for o u r a d v e n t u r e s in
silver. P r e s u m a b l y we are all a f r a i d of s o m e t h i n g . I a m p r o b a b l y
a f r a i d t h a t some spectator will n o t u n d e r s t a n d my photography—
t h e r e f o r e I proceed to m a k e it really less u n d e r s t a n d a b l e by w r i t i n g
defensibly a b o u t it. All I can d o in my writings is to s t i m u l a t e a
certain a m o u n t of t h o u g h t , clarify some technical facts a n d " d a t e "
my work. B u t w h e n I p r e a c h "sharpness," "brilliancy," "scale," etc.,
I am just m o u t h i n g words, because no w o r d s can really describe
those terms a n d qualities—it takes t h e actual p r i n t to say, " h e r e it is."
If I w a n t to get i n t o a n a r g u m e n t w i t h M r . M o r t e n s e n , a n d vice versa,
we can d o it best by j o u s t i n g w i t h o u r p h o t o g r a p h y , r a t h e r t h a n w i t h
o u r pens. I a m sure M r . M o r t e n s e n w o u l d agree w i t h m e in this. B u t
we b o t h d o a lot of writing!!
W e s t o n is one of my closest friends, b u t I m u s t say in all frankness
t h a t one of his p h o t o g r a p h s says m o r e a b o u t h i m a n d his p h o t o g r a p h y
t h a n fifty pages of text he m i g h t p r o d u c e . W h a t he writes a b o u t pho-
tography in t h e Encyclopedia Britannica—an objective treatise o n the
art—is s o m e t h i n g else.
I refer to w r i t i n g a b o u t one's own work, or j o u s t i n g for one's own
"school." P a r t r i d g e is a n excellent artist—a s u p e r b etcher, a n d exceed-
ingly well versed in the principles of all t h e arts. H e has taken u p
p h o t o g r a p h y a p p a r e n t l y to say s o m e t h i n g he was u n a b l e to say in t h e
o t h e r m e d i a . H e has d o n e some very good things. H e w o u l d be t h e
last o n e to call himself a great p h o t o g r a p h e r , a n d t h e r e is n o t h i n g
a b o u t his writings to indicate conceit. H e is enthusiastic a b o u t the
art, a n d h e is giving us a n e x p e r t o p i n i o n . I d o n o t agree w i t h all he
says, b u t I certainly a d m i r e his discussion-provoking statements. But,
you see, his w r i t i n g serves to m a k e some p e o p l e t h i n k P a r t r i d g e is
posing as a n u l t i m a t e authority—which is n o t so.
I h a v e certainly laid myself wide o p e n m a n y times, in speech a n d
writing, to all sorts of tomatoes, orchids a n d good solid bricks. Prob-
ably I deserved all of them—especially t h e last. I gave a little talk
before a camera g r o u p the o t h e r evening, a n d t h e s u m total of my
a c c o m p l i s h m e n t seems to m e to h a v e been: 1.1 i n a d e q u a t e l y re-stated
w h a t I h a v e already said in my pictures. 2. I d i d n o t give any real
constructive technical ideas. 3. I irritated a lot of people, a n d a d d e d
one m o r e degree of c o n f u s i o n to a n already hopelessly involved sub-
ject. I feel t h a t there s h o u l d be a Society for t h e P e r p e t u a t i o n of P l a i n
Simple Facts—and let it go at t h a t . B u t I will p r o b a b l y c o n t i n u e to
give talks a n d p r o d u c e pages of text; t h e itch to preach exists as a n
all-consuming fire in practically everyone.
T h e n a m e " F 6 4 " has certainly been m i s i n t e r p r e t e d , m a l i g n e d ,
glorified, abused, a n d most generally m i s u n d e r s t o o d . T h e " G r o u p
F64" was loosely f o r m e d of several photographers—mostly profes-
sionals—to act together towards t h e s t r e n g t h e n i n g of clean photo-
g r a p h i c t h o u g h t a n d p r o d u c t i o n . " F 6 4 " was never i n t e n d e d as a strict
literal descriptive t e r m . H o w m a n y p e o p l e w h o write a n d talk a b o u t
" F 6 4 " really k n o w a b o u t it—what t h e G r o u p was—who were t h e art-
ists c o m p r i s i n g it—what they actually did? Believe me, a d i a m o n d -
s h a r p glossy p r i n t does N O T r e p r e s e n t " F 6 4 " unless t h e r e is t h a t
most-important-something-else in it—the q u a l i t y of a r t in p e r c e p t i o n
a n d execution. T h i s s t a t e m e n t is totally w i t h o u t m e a n i n g to those
w h o d o n o t know w h a t " t h e q u a l i t y of A r t in p e r c e p t i o n a n d execu-
t i o n " is. A n d they never will know, in spite of Mr. W e s t o n , Mr.
P a r t r i d g e , a n d Mr. A d a m s , a n d all their writings, unless they truly
want to know—to v e n t u r e f o r t h f r o m t h e safe ritualistic shelter of t h e
c o m m o n p l a c e a n d look for themselves.
If " F 6 4 " m e a n s a pedagogic inflexible system of t h o u g h t a n d action,
t h e n I a m t h r o u g h w i t h it completely. B u t if it signifies a n attitude
towards a clean, s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d a p p r o a c h to p h o t o g r a p h y , I am all
for it. T h e latter is w h a t it was s u p p o s e d to be; b u t a lot of p e o p l e
are trying to b r e a k it d o w n i n t o a m e r e technical aspect-habit.
T h e b e a u t y of a p h o t o g r a p h by W e s t o n does n o t lie in t h e assort-
m e n t of facts a b o u t negative, m a t e r i a l , papers, developers—it lies in
t h e realization of his vision. A n d I believe his vision is in perfect
relation to t h e m e d i u m of straight p h o t o g r a p h y .
W h a t we h a v e to say is infinitely m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n o u r mechani-
cal m e a n s of saying it. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , if we c l o u d o u r message
w i t h p o o r techniques, shallow taste, a n d inflexible m e t h o d we are
n o t g o i n g to get very far. W e h a v e to i n q u i r e w i t h i n ourselves a n d
forget taboos a l o n g w i t h ivory towers.
Mr. Douglas is w r o n g in saying t h a t t h e " G r o u p F64" school is
related to the "1890 school." It bears a m u c h closer r e l a t i o n s h i p to
t h e 1860's a n d t h e 1870's a n d w h a t those decades p r o d u c e d in straight-
f o r w a r d p h o t o g r a p h y . H e forgets o n e terribly i m p o r t a n t thing—the
style of t h e early days is one thing, a n d t h e aesthetic i n t e n t i o n s (or
lack of them) of t h e early p h o t o g r a p h e r s , a n o t h e r thing.
I h u m b l y refer you all to A l f r e d Stieglitz. M r . Stieglitz' s p e c t r u m
of a c c o m p l i s h m e n t is greater t h a n t h a t of all of us p u t together. Stieg-
litz w o u l d never say t h a t certain objects of t h e w o r l d were m o r e or less
b e a u t i f u l t h a n others—telegraph poles, for instance, c o m p a r e d w i t h
oak-trees. H e w o u l d accept t h e m for w h a t they are, a n d use t h e most
a p p r o p r i a t e object to express his t h o u g h t s a n d convey his vision.
I t h i n k M r . L o e b e r is r i g h t in his d e n o u n c e m e n t of " e x a l t e d r u b b i s h . "
B u t he does not state t h a t it is only " e x a l t e d r u b b i s h " w h e n t h e pho-
t o g r a p h e r considers it so. F a c t u a l r u b b i s h is considered vile because
of c o n n o t a t i o n s a n d c o n v e n t i o n . It is very d a n g e r o u s to start off w i t h
hazy definitions. N o p h o t o g r a p h of Stieglitz' is ugly—every subject
e m p l o y e d is t r a n s m u t e d i n t o a n expression of beauty—but t r u e b e a u t y
does not m e a n m e r e prettiness.
Mr. P a r t r i d g e ' s p r o p h e c y of t h e f u t u r e of p h o t o g r a p h y f r a n k l y
irritates me, simply because no one can possibly tell w h i c h way h u m a n
expression is going—except to be reasonably sure t h a t the p e n d u l u m
will c o n t i n u e to swing. B u t I believe m a n y people, M r . L o e b e r in-
eluded, m i s i n t e r p r e t discussion as final dictum. I k n o w Mr. P a r t r i d g e
has n o i n t e n t i o n of H i t l e r i z i n g p h o t o g r a p h y ; b u t I a m n o t so sure
t h a t some of t h e " O l d G u a r d " w o u l d n o t " l i q u i d a t e " a lot of con-
t e m p o r a r y work if it h a d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to d o so. Even photog-
r a p h e r s a r e protected by t h e Bill of R i g h t s !
Believe me, t h e P u r i s t ( a w f u l term) is really trying to get photog-
r a p h y o u t of pigeon-holes, r a t h e r t h a n i n t h e m , as M r . Forrester
believes they are t r y i n g to do. W e l l , "Ye w h o are w i t h o u t sin . . . ."

A PERSONAL CREDO 1944

American Annual of Photography, Vol. 58, pp. 7-16.
It is difficult to e v a l u a t e t h e status of c o n t e m p o r a r y p h o t o g r a p h y
a p a r t f r o m t h e fields of war activity. T h e war, of course, utilizes prac-
tically all available materials, l e a v i n g little for t h e a m a t e u r or pro-
fessional—to say n o t h i n g of t h e most i m p o r t a n t ingredients, time a n d
i n c l i n a t i o n . Yet, w i t h i n t h e war effort, a p a r t f r o m t h e e n o r m o u s
a m o u n t of p u r e l y technical a p p l i c a t i o n , t h e r e exists a vast o p p o r -
t u n i t y for i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t a t i o n , a n d f o r p r o p a g a n d a , reportage,
a n d t h e p u r e l y expressive aspects of t h e art. T h e sheer practical
urgency of t h e times will p r o b a b l y i n h i b i t m u c h of t h e personal f o r m s
of p h o t o g r a p h y , b u t it will be a m a t t e r of lasting regret if t h e greatest
m o m e n t s of the t r e m e n d o u s h u m a n u p h e a v a l a r e n o t r e c o r d e d as only
t h e camera is c a p a b l e of doing. As a n organized a p p r o a c h to this inclu-
sive d o c u m e n t a t i o n is p r o b a b l y impossible now, it will be necessary
to rely o n h i g h editorial ability to selectively collate t h e myriads of
p h o t o g r a p h s w h i c h will be p r o d u c e d by t h e a r m e d forces, by industry,
a n d by the social service organizations.
T h e w o r l d of commercial p h o t o g r a p h y m u s t carry o n as best it can.
I n t h e advertising fields there seems to be less e m p h a s i s o n i m m e d i a t e
selling a n d m o r e o n i n s t i t u t i o n a l good-will, t h e latter b e a r i n g a s h a r p
eye o n t h e post-war world. I feel t h e r e will be, however, a decided
difference b e t w e e n t h e pre-war a n d t h e post-war world, a n d those
w h o a r e p a t i e n t l y a w a i t i n g a r e s u m p t i o n of t h e o l d ways will be
r u d e l y disillusioned. I k n o w t h a t professional p h o t o g r a p h y will sur-
vive a n d t r e m e n d o u s l y e x p a n d , b u t m a n y of its present aspects will
change.
T h e salons will carry on, too. I n this, a n d o t h e r fields as well, t h e
restrictions will p r o b a b l y be healthy, as r e d u c e d o u t p u t seems com-
p l e m e n t a r y to intense expression. As for " t h e i n d e p e n d e n t s " — t h e i r
situation is u n p r e d i c t a b l e , b u t I a m confident t h a t any m a n h a v i n g
s o m e t h i n g to say will find a way to say it.
D o c u m e n t a t i o n — i n t h e p r e s e n t social i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e t e r m -
will b u r s t i n t o f u l l flower at t h e m o m e n t of peace. H e r e i n lies t h e
magnificent o p p o r t u n i t y of all p h o t o g r a p h i c history. H e r e is w h e r e
t h e camera can be related to a vast constructive f u n c t i o n : t h e revela-
tion of a n e w world as it is b o r n a n d grows i n t o m a t u r i t y . I believe
t h a t t h e highest f u n c t i o n of post-war p h o t o g r a p h y will be to relate
the world of n a t u r e to t h e world of m a n , a n d m a n to m e n in t h e fullest
m e a n i n g of t h e terms.
I t is easy to rest u p o n t h e vague security of words; the terms
" b e a u t y , " " d i g n i t y , " " s p i r i t u a l i t y , " a n d " f u n c t i o n " are b u t symbols
of qualities, a n d a r e v u l n e r a b l e to c o n n o t a t i o n s . Let us h o p e t h a t
categories will be less rigid in t h e f u t u r e ; t h e r e has b e e n too m u c h of
p l a c i n g p h o t o g r a p h y in little niches—commercial, pictorial, docu-
m e n t a r y , a n d creative (a d i s m a l term). Definitions of this k i n d are
inessential a n d s t u p i d ; good p h o t o g r a p h y r e m a i n s good p h o t o g r a p h y
n o m a t t e r w h a t we n a m e it. I w o u l d like to t h i n k of just "photog-
r a p h y " ; of each a n d every p h o t o g r a p h c o n t a i n i n g t h e best q u a l i t i e s
in p r o p e r degree to achieve its p u r p o s e . W e h a v e b e e n slaves to cate-
gories, a n d each has served as a k i n d of c o n c e n t r a t i o n c a m p for t h e
spirit. T h e f u n c t i o n of a p h o t o g r a p h may be of the simplest practical
n a t u r e , or it may relate to a most personal a n d abstract e m o t i o n ; t h e
sincerity of i n t e n t i o n a n d t h e honesty of spirit of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r
can m a k e any expression, no m a t t e r how " p r a c t i c a l , " valid a n d beau-
t i f u l . W h a t is r e q u i r e d is a n u n d e r l y i n g ethic a n d sensitivity to t h e
i m p o r t a n t a n d t r u e qualities of t h e w o r l d in w h i c h we live. N o m a n
has t h e r i g h t to dictate w h a t o t h e r m e n s h o u l d perceive, create or
p r o d u c e , b u t all s h o u l d be e n c o u r a g e d to reveal themselves, t h e i r per-
ceptions a n d emotions, a n d to b u i l d confidence i n t h e creative spirit.
T h e f r a n t i c c o n c e n t r a t i o n o n v o l u m e a n d o n t h e spectacular in t h e
m o d e r n commercial world has most certainly i n h i b i t e d s i m p l e a n d
direct personal expression. T h e forces of d e m a n d are p o w e r f u l , a n d
it is seldom t h a t t h e creative person has t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to con-
t r i b u t e his own q u a l i t i e s of p e r c e p t i o n a n d e m o t i o n in the face of
accepted p a t t e r n s of t h o u g h t a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . T h e advertising
p h o t o g r a p h e r " a d j u s t s " himself to his client; t h e c o m p e t i t i v e salon
p h o t o g r a p h e r o f t e n thinks m o r e of acceptances a n d a w a r d s t h a n of
his o w n i n n e r creative convictions; p e o p l e a r e given w h a t they w a n t
(which may m e a n t h a t they c o n t i n u e to get only w h a t they already
have). I believe t h e p e o p l e w a n t , a n d can appreciate, far m o r e t h a n
they have been given. T h e style of t h e p o p u l a r p u b l i c a t i o n s is a p p a r -
ently profitable—hence it m u s t be " r i g h t . " I d i s p u t e this—not in fact,
b u t in principle. I h a v e f a i t h in p e o p l e a n d believe it is o u r f a u l t if
we h a v e n o t t o u c h e d t h e m w i t h t h e best we h a v e to give. T h e agents
w h o presume, a n d t h e readers w h o accept will be influenced to t h e
greatest e x t e n t by consistently s u p e r i o r w o r k o n o u r p a r t . If all pho-
t o g r a p h e r s could b u t realize t h e u l t i m a t e i m p o r t a n c e of a h i g h ethic
a n d w o u l d j o i n in a collective d e t e r m i n a t i o n to m a i n t a i n clean stand-
ards, a vast c h a n g e f o r the b e t t e r w o u l d o b t a i n . U n f o r t u n a t e l y some
w h o have achieved l e a d e r s h i p in t h e profession o f t e n dictate f r o m
a c o n f u s e d t h r o n e of success—a success w h i c h may be m o r e financial
t h a n otherwise.
 W i t h a few exceptions, p u b l i c a t i o n s of the p h o t o g r a p h i c world are
f o u n d e d o n t h e desire to s t i m u l a t e t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c trade; materials,
e q u i p m e n t , gadgets h a v e b e e n in h i g h flood of p r o d u c t i o n a n d sales
a n d the advertising of these countless items have b e e n t h e b a c k b o n e
of this p u b l i s h i n g . T h e d a n g e r o u s suggestion t h a t you can h i r e some-
one to do t h e d r u d g e r y , plus t h e e n c o u r a g e m e n t of superficial t h o u g h t
a n d m e t h o d s , has r o b b e d p h o t o g r a p h y of m u c h dignity, clarity a n d
effectiveness. If p h o t o g r a p h y were to become a difficult mechanical
m e d i u m , a n d if it were possible to e x p l a i n t h e actual lack of need
for most m a t e r i a l s a n d gadgets, m a n y p u b l i c a t i o n s w o u l d have n o
reason to exist, a n d I believe pictures, o n t h e whole, w o u l d be better.
P h o t o g r a p h e r s have b e e n led to m a k e a fetish of e q u i p m e n t , a n d a r e
falsely e n c o u r a g e d in superficial concepts a n d m e t h o d s , r e s u l t i n g in
u n f o r t u n a t e misconceptions of t h e basic p o t e n t i a l i t i e s of photog-
r a p h y . I believe t h e ideal p h o t o g r a p h i c j o u r n a l s h o u l d be simple a n d
r a t h e r dignified—but n o t austere—and c o n t a i n good r e p r o d u c t i o n s of
good p h o t o g r a p h s of every description, a n d accurate, definitive texts.
It s h o u l d also c o n t a i n legitimate advertising of proven equipment
and materials. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , most of the p h o t o g r a p h i c magazines
are conspicuous f o r t h e i r lack of policy, b e i n g m e r e t r a d e - j o u r n a l s
in t h e e x p a n d e d m e a n i n g of t h e t e r m .
T h e r e is a n u n f o r t u n a t e b l i n d spot in t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r - c o n s u m e r
relationship. T h e f o r m e r is obligated to exact p r o c e d u r e s of research
a n d m a n u f a c t u r e , a n d consistent s t a n d a r d s of p r o d u c t i o n . T h e latter,
except in a few specialist fields, is limited to a precise m e t h o d of use
of e q u i p m e n t a n d materials; t h e r e is no reason why h e s h o u l d be
versed in t h e complexities of research a n d m a n u f a c t u r e any m o r e
t h a n a n architect w o u l d n e e d to k n o w the complexities of steel m a n u -
facture—knowledge of w h a t steel will do a n d confidence t h a t it will
do it, is all he requires. It is my observation t h a t t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r s
lean towards defining p h o t o g r a p h y i n terms of e q u i p m e n t a n d ma-
terials, w h e n they s h o u l d really define their p r o d u c t s in terms of
photography. T h e m a n u f a c t u r e r s h o u l d n o t dictate t h e progress of
a p p l i e d p h o t o g r a p h y ; h e s h o u l d a n t i c i p a t e a n d follow it. O n t h e
o t h e r h a n d , t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s s h o u l d be in close contact w i t h t h e
m a n u f a c t u r e r s in o t h e r t h a n commercial dealings; they s h o u l d
m u t u a l l y work towards c o n t i n u e d i m p r o v e m e n t of t h e craft, a n d t h e
perfection of e q u i p m e n t a n d materials. I d o n o t k n o w of a creative
p h o t o g r a p h e r w h o w o u l d n o t welcome such a n association a n d gladly
co-operate in every possible way. T h r o u g h practical knowledge a n d
experience, e m p i r i c a l as it may be, t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s k n o w m o r e
a b o u t t h e a r t a n d craft of t h e i r m e d i u m t h a n d o the m a n u f a c t u r e r s .
It is r i d i c u l o u s for t h e m to p r e s u m e a d e q u a t e k n o w l e d g e of t h e
advanced chemical a n d physical m e t h o d s of the research technician,
or t h e involved a n d exquisite controls of p r o d u c t i o n , b u t they are
r i g h t f u l l y t h e p l a n n e r s a n d a r b i t e r s of their own craft.
 U n d e r l y i n g t h e w h o l e f a b r i c of a r t a n d creative work is t h e con-
t e m p o r a r y world-ethic. T h e conflict of a few w h o a r e i n t e n t u p o n
p u r s u i t of t h e ideal, a n d t h e m a n y w h o e x p l o i t b r a i n s a n d imagina-
tion, is age-old; b u t in o u r time a sinister d e v e l o p m e n t of this condi-
t i o n is all too a p p a r e n t . T h e m o m e n t u m d e r i v e d f r o m m e c h a n i c a l
facility carries truly u n w o r t h y work far b e y o n d its n a t u r a l height.
I n m a n y phases of t h e professional p h o t o g r a p h i c fields t h e r e is a
m a r k e d i n a d e q u a c y of taste a n d t e c h n i q u e , a n d , above all, a lack of
respect a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g in r e g a r d to t h e possibilities a n d limita-
tions of t h e m e d i u m . T h e r e are m e n w o r k i n g for b i g m o n e y i n t h e
profession w h o a r e b u t c h a r l a t a n s of t h e most flagrant type; they
possess a n a d e q u a t e m e c h a n i c a l ability w h i c h only serves to accent
their p r e s u m p t u o u s lack of taste a n d sensitivity. Yet even these de-
serve t o l e r a n t a p p r a i s a l ; they a r e e n c o u r a g e d in t h e i r a p p r o a c h by
the vast c o m m e r c i a l clientele, w h i c h is b u t p a r t i a l l y a w a r e of its
destructive influence. People are b e i n g t r a i n e d in t h o r o u g h l y super-
ficial ways for w h a t s h o u l d be serious a n d p r o f o u n d professions. O u r
civilization protects o u r h e a l t h , o u r safety, a n d o u r pocketbooks, by
c o n t r o l l e d professional s t a n d a r d s a n d legal supervision. B u t n o t h i n g
m u c h is d o n e for o u r spirit, w h i c h is of m u c h g r e a t e r i m p o r t a n c e .
W e a r e defenseless against gross impositions o n o u r emotions, o u r
aesthetic sense, a n d o u r ethics. H e n c e , I believe in the a b s o l u t e neces-
sity of a s t r o n g a n d severe licensing control of professional photog-
r a p h y , a n d of a firm g u i l d o r g a n i z a t i o n a m o n g t h e creative artists a n d
professionals. Medicine, t h e law, a r c h i t e c t u r e , engineering, a n d o t h e r
professions, are s t r e n g t h e n e d by such p r o c e d u r e s of control, a n d I see
n o reason why p h o t o g r a p h y s h o u l d n o t be a m o n g t h e m . A s s u m i n g
t h a t it r e q u i r e s five to eight years of serious t r a i n i n g to be proficient
i n the m a j o r professions, why s h o u l d p h o t o g r a p h e r s be t u r n e d loose
o n t h e w o r l d w i t h only a superficial k n o w l e d g e of their craft, a n d
little or n o e x p e r i e n c e in a p p l i c a t i o n ?

However, t h e p i c t u r e is n o t entirely d a r k ; t h e r e are m a n y u n k n o w n s

w h o are w o r k i n g daily miracles in r o u t i n e p h o t o g r a p h y . A n d t h e r e
a r e increasing n u m b e r s of m e n a n d w o m e n in m a n y fields w h o are
a d v a n c i n g p h o t o g r a p h y t h r o u g h the sheer q u a l i t y a n d sincerity of
their work a n d of their belief in w h a t t h e m e d i u m can accomplish.
M a n y of these are a m a t e u r s in t h e best sense of the term. I n t h e f u t u r e
o u r age will be r e m e m b e r e d (as all o t h e r ages are r e m e m b e r e d ) by
t h e p r o d u c t i o n s of o u r creative people; p h o t o g r a p h y is secure in such
n a m e s as Stieglitz, W e s t o n , Lange, a n d m a n y others—not in the names
of successful o p p o r t u n i s t s w h o may h a p p e n to h o l d c o n t e m p o r a r y
p o p u l a r i t y . Millions of m e n h a v e lived to fight, b u i l d palaces a n d
b o u n d a r i e s , s h a p e destinies a n d societies; b u t t h e c o m p e l l i n g force of
all times has been t h e force of originality a n d c r e a t i o n p r o f o u n d l y
affecting t h e roots of t h e h u m a n spirit.
I h a v e o f t e n t h o u g h t t h a t if p h o t o g r a p h y were difficult in t h e t r u e
sense of t h e term—meaning t h a t t h e c r e a t i o n of a simple p h o t o g r a p h
w o u l d e n t a i l as m u c h time a n d effort as t h e p r o d u c t i o n of a good
watercolor or etching—there w o u l d be a vast i m p r o v e m e n t in total
o u t p u t . T h e sheer ease w i t h w h i c h we can p r o d u c e a superficial image
o f t e n leads to creative disaster. W e m u s t r e m e m b e r t h a t a p h o t o g r a p h
can h o l d just as m u c h as we p u t i n t o it, a n d n o o n e has ever ap-
p r o a c h e d t h e full possibilities of t h e m e d i u m . W i t h o u t desire for self-
flagellation, I o f t e n wish we were l i m i t e d to processes as difficult as
the old wet-plate a n d s u n - p r i n t methods. W e w o u l d t h e n be efficient,
a n d w o u l d n o t h a v e time or energy to m a k e p h o t o g r a p h s of casual
quality or content. T h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of care a n d precision w o u l d
result inevitably in a s u p e r i o r a n d m o r e intense expression. I have
seen m a n y of t h e o l d p h o t o g r a p h s of H i l l , C a m e r o n , Brady, O'Sulli-
van, Emerson, Atget, a n d others of earlier days, a n d I always marvel
at their intensity, economy, a n d basic e m o t i o n a l q u a l i t y . I am aware
of the fact t h a t most of these early p h o t o g r a p h s were m a d e for factual
purposes; t h e r e is little evidence of self-conscious a r t i n t e n t i o n . I
believe a great s t a t e m e n t in any m e d i u m r e m a i n s a great s t a t e m e n t
for all time; a n d , w h i l e I d o n o t favor t h e i m i t a t i o n of o t h e r m e n or
of o t h e r times, I feel we s h o u l d recognize t h e spirit of t h e earlier
p h o t o g r a p h e r s , t h r o u g h the best e x a m p l e s of t h e i r work, a n d strength-
en o u r o w n thereby. For m o r e t h a n one h u n d r e d years p h o t o g r a p h y ,
t h r o u g h t h e work of relatively few m e n , has m a i n t a i n e d a magnificent
spiritual resonance, as m o v i n g a n d p r o f o u n d as g r e a t music. Of
course, great p h o t o g r a p h s a r e b e i n g m a d e today, a n d it is o u r h o p e
t h a t t h e creative work of the f u t u r e will achieve heights u n d r e a m e d
of h e r e t o f o r e . It is u p to us—the p h o t o g r a p h e r s of today—to m a k e
this h o p e a reality.
I h a v e been asked m a n y times, " W h a t is a great p h o t o g r a p h ? "
I can answer best by showing a great p h o t o g r a p h , n o t by t a l k i n g or
w r i t i n g a b o u t one. However, as w o r d definitions are r e q u i r e d m o r e
o f t e n t h a n not, I w o u l d say this: A g r e a t p h o t o g r a p h is a full ex-
pression of w h a t o n e feels a b o u t w h a t is b e i n g p h o t o g r a p h e d in the
deepest sense, a n d is, thereby, a t r u e expression of w h a t o n e feels
a b o u t life in its entirety. A n d t h e expression of w h a t o n e feels s h o u l d
be set f o r t h in terms of s i m p l e d e v o t i o n to t h e medium—a s t a t e m e n t
of t h e u t m o s t clarity a n d p e r f e c t i o n possible u n d e r t h e c o n d i t i o n s of
creation a n d p r o d u c t i o n . T h a t will e x p l a i n why I have n o p a t i e n c e
w i t h unnecessary complications of t e c h n i q u e or p r e s e n t a t i o n . I prefer
a fine lens because it gives m e t h e best possible optical image, a fine
camera because it c o m p l e m e n t s t h e f u n c t i o n of the lens, fine m a t e r i a l s
because they convey the q u a l i t i e s of t h e image to the highest degree.
I use s m o o t h p a p e r s because I k n o w they reveal the u t m o s t of image
clarity a n d brilliance, a n d I m o u n t m y p r i n t s o n simple cards because
I believe a n y "fussiness" only distracts f r o m a n d weakens t h e print.
I d o n o t r e t o u c h or m a n i p u l a t e my p r i n t s because I believe in the
i m p o r t a n c e of t h e direct optical a n d chemical image. I use t h e legiti-
m a t e controls of t h e m e d i u m only to a u g m e n t t h e photographic effect.
Purism, in t h e sense of rigid a b s t e n t i o n f r o m any control, is ridicu-
lous; t h e logical controls of exposure, d e v e l o p m e n t a n d p r i n t i n g are
essential i n t h e r e v e l a t i o n of p h o t o g r a p h i c qualities. T h e correction
of t o n a l deficiencies by dodging, a n d the e l i m i n a t i o n of obvious de-
fects by spotting, a r e perfectly legitimate e l e m e n t s of t h e craft. As
l o n g as t h e final result of t h e p r o c e d u r e is photographic, it is entirely
justified. B u t w h e n a p h o t o g r a p h has t h e " f e e l " of a n e t c h i n g or a
l i t h o g r a p h , or a n y o t h e r g r a p h i c m e d i u m , it is questionable—just as
q u e s t i o n a b l e as a p a i n t i n g t h a t is p h o t o g r a p h i c in character. T h e
incredibly b e a u t i f u l r e v e l a t i o n of t h e lens is w o r t h y of t h e most
s y m p a t h i c t r e a t m e n t in every respect.
Simplicity is a p r i m e requisite. T h e e q u i p m e n t of A l f r e d Stieglitz
o r E d w a r d W e s t o n represents less in cost a n d variety t h a n m a n y an
a m a t e u r "can barely get a l o n g w i t h . " T h e i r m a g n i f i c e n t photo-
g r a p h s were m a d e w i t h intelligence a n d sympathy—not w i t h merely
t h e machines. M a n y fields of p h o t o g r a p h y d e m a n d specific equip-
m e n t of a h i g h o r d e r of complexity a n d precision; yet economy a n d
simplicity a r e relative, a n d the m o r e c o m p l e x a m a n ' s work becomes,
t h e m o r e efficient his e q u i p m e n t a n d m e t h o d s m u s t be.
Precision a n d patience, a n d d e v o t i o n to t h e capacities of the craft,
are of s u p r e m e i m p o r t a n c e . T h e sheer p e r f e c t i o n of the lens-image
implies a n a t t i t u d e of p e r f e c t i o n in every phase of t h e process a n d
every aspect of t h e result. T h e relative i m p o r t a n c e of the c r a f t a n d
its expressive aspects m u s t be clarified; we w o u l d n o t go to a concert
to h e a r scales performed—even w i t h c o n s u m m a t e skill—nor w o u l d
we e n j o y t h e sloppy r e n d i t i o n of great music. I n p h o t o g r a p h y , tech-
n i q u e is f r e q u e n t l y e x a l t e d f o r its o w n sake; t h e u n f o r t u n a t e com-
p l e m e n t of this is w h e n a serious a n d p o t e n t i a l l y i m p o r t a n t s t a t e m e n t
is r e n d e r e d i m p o t e n t by i n f e r i o r m e c h a n i c s of p r o d u c t i o n . Of course,
"seeing," or visualization, is t h e f u n d a m e n t a l l y i m p o r t a n t e l e m e n t .
A p h o t o g r a p h is n o t an accident—it is a concept. It exists at, or before,
t h e m o m e n t of e x p o s u r e of the negative. F r o m t h a t m o m e n t o n to t h e
final p r i n t , the process is chiefly one of craft; t h e pre-visualized pho-
t o g r a p h is r e n d e r e d in terms of t h e final p r i n t by a series of processes
peculiar to t h e m e d i u m . T r u e , changes a n d a u g m e n t a t i o n s can be
effected d u r i n g these processes, b u t t h e f u n d a m e n t a l t h i n g w h i c h was
" s e e n " is n o t altered in basic concept.
T h e " m a c h i n e - g u n " a p p r o a c h to photography—by w h i c h m a n y
negatives are m a d e w i t h t h e h o p e t h a t one will be good—is fatal to
serious results. However, it s h o u l d be realized t h a t t h e e l e m e n t of
"seeing" is n o t l i m i t e d to t h e classic stand-camera t e c h n i q u e . T h e
phases of p h o t o g r a p h y w h i c h are concerned w i t h i m m e d i a t e a n d
r a p i d p e r c e p t i o n of the world—news, reportage, f o r m s of d o c u m e n t a r y
work (which may n o t a d m i t c o n t e m p l a t i o n of each p i c t u r e m a d e )
are, nevertheless, d e p e n d e n t u p o n a basic a t t i t u d e a n d experience.
T h e i n s t a n t awareness of w h a t is significant in a r a p i d l y c h a n g i n g
elusive subject presupposes a n a d e q u a t e visualization m o r e general
in type t h a n t h a t r e q u i r e d for carefully considered static subjects such
as landscape a n d architecture. T h e accidental contact w i t h t h e sub-
ject a n d t h e r e q u i r e d i m m e d i a c y of e x p o s u r e in no way r e f u t e s the
principles of the basic p h o t o g r a p h i c concept. T r u l y " a c c i d e n t a l "
p h o t o g r a p h y is practically non-existent; w i t h p r e c o n d i t i o n e d atti-
tudes we recognize a n d are arrested by t h e significant m o m e n t . T h e
awareness of t h e right moment is as vital as t h e p e r c e p t i o n of values,
form, a n d o t h e r qualities. T h e r e is n o f u n d a m e n t a l difference in
t h e great landscapes a n d q u i e t portraits of E d w a r d W e s t o n a n d the
p r o f o u n d l y revealing pictures of c h i l d r e n by H e l e n Levitt. B o t h
are p h o t o g r a p h i c perceptions of the highest order, expressed t h r o u g h
different, b u t entirely a p p r o p r i a t e , techniques.
N o t only does the m a k i n g of a p h o t o g r a p h imply an acute percep-
tion of detail in t h e subject, b u t a fine p r i n t deserves far m o r e t h a n
superficial scrutiny. A p h o t o g r a p h is usually looked at—seldom
looked into. T h e experience of a truly fine p r i n t may be related to
t h e experience of a symphony—appreciation of t h e b r o a d melodic
line, w h i l e i m p o r t a n t , is by n o m e a n s all. T h e w e a l t h of detail, forms,
values—the m i n u t e b u t vital significances revealed so exquisitely by
the lens—deserve e x p l o r a t i o n a n d a p p r e c i a t i o n . It takes time to really
see a fine p r i n t , to feel t h e almost endless revelation of p o i g n a n t
reality which, in o u r p r e o c c u p i e d haste, we h a v e sadly neglected.
Hence, t h e "look-through-a-stack-of-prints-while-you're-waiting" atti-
t u d e has some p a i n f u l connotations.
S y m p a t h e t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n seldom evolves f r o m a p r e d a t o r y atti-
tude; t h e c o m m o n term "taking a p i c t u r e " is m o r e t h a n just an
idiom; it is a symbol of e x p l o i t a t i o n . " M a k i n g a p i c t u r e " implies a
creative resonance w h i c h is essential to p r o f o u n d expression.
My a p p r o a c h to p h o t o g r a p h y is based o n my belief in t h e vigor a n d
values of t h e w o r l d of nature—in t h e aspects of g r a n d e u r a n d of t h e
minutiae all a b o u t us. I believe in g r o w i n g things, a n d in t h e things
which h a v e g r o w n a n d died magnificently. I believe in p e o p l e a n d in
the simple aspects of h u m a n life, a n d in t h e r e l a t i o n of m a n to n a t u r e .
I believe m a n m u s t be free, b o t h in spirit a n d society, t h a t he m u s t
b u i l d strength i n t o himself, affirming the " e n o r m o u s b e a u t y of t h e
w o r l d " a n d a c q u i r i n g t h e confidence to see a n d to express his vision.
A n d I believe in p h o t o g r a p h y as o n e m e a n s of expressing this affirma-
tion, a n d of achieving a n u l t i m a t e h a p p i n e s s a n d f a i t h .

INTRODUCTION 1948
Portfolio One, San Francisco.
T o p h o t o g r a p h t r u t h f u l l y a n d effectively is to see b e n e a t h t h e sur-
faces a n d record t h e qualities of n a t u r e a n d h u m a n i t y w h i c h live or
are l a t e n t in all things. I m p r e s s i o n is n o t e n o u g h . Design, style, tech-
nique,—these, too, are not e n o u g h . A r t m u s t r e a c h f u r t h e r t h a n im-
pression or sclf-revelation. A r t , said A l f r e d Stieglitz, is t h e a f f i r m a t i o n
of life. A n d life, o r its e t e r n a l evidence, is e v e r y w h e r e .
Some p h o t o g r a p h e r s t a k e reality as the s c u l p t o r s take wood a n d
stone a n d u p o n it i m p o s e the d o m i n a t i o n s of t h e i r o w n t h o u g h t a n d
spirit. O t h e r s come b e f o r e reality m o r e t e n d e r l y a n d a p h o t o g r a p h to
t h e m is an i n s t r u m e n t of love a n d r e v e l a t i o n . A t r u e p h o t o g r a p h n e e d
n o t be e x p l a i n e d , n o r can b e c o n t a i n e d in words.
E x p r e s s i o n s w i t h o u t d o c t r i n e , m y p h o t o g r a p h s are p r e s e n t e d h e r e
as e n d s in themselves, images of t h e endless m o m e n t s of t h e world.
I d e d i c a t e t h e m to t h e m e m o r y a n d to the spirit of A l f r e d Stieglitz.

FRANCIS BRUGUIERE (1880-1945) What lives in pictures is very difficult

to define . . . it finally becomes a thing beyond the thing portrayed . . . some
sort of section of the soul of the artist that gets detached and comes out to one
from the picture. . . . I do think that the idea of "that living thing" must be in
the heart before it can be brought to life by an artist. (From a letter to a young
artist, n.d.)

CREATIVE PHOTOGRAPHY 1935-36

Modern Photography Annual, pp. 9-14.

In the closing years of the nineteenth century there were many

signs to show that a maximum of exact representativeness in art
had passed.
Now again, in the first and second decades of the twentieth cen-
tury we find art turning away, as if glutted from reality, disregarding
outer form for the traces of motion, becoming once more analytical
and symbolical. The drift seems likely to continue. It is also helped
now by the increasing efficiency of photography for merely circum-
stantial precision. The world wearies of undigested fact.

THE OUTLINE OF HISTORY: H. G. WELLS

1
T h e a b o v e g e n e r a l s t a t e m e n t of t h e p o s i t i o n of a r t in o u r time,
t h o u g h it r e f e r s i n g e n e r a l to p a i n t i n g , s c u l p t u r e a n d a r c h i t e c t u r e ,
m a y also b e said to a p p l y t o t h e i r h a n d m a i d e n , p h o t o g r a p h y . Con-
s i d e r i n g t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y is a scientific, c h e m i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t of
t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y a n d is scarcely a h u n d r e d years o l d , it is n o
w o n d e r t h a t it h a s b e e n looked o n askance. T h i s q u e s t i o n i n g a t t i t u d e
is easily u n d e r s t o o d , as it is t h e g e n e r a l state of m i n d in w h i c h most
p e o p l e i n d u l g e w h e n c o n f r o n t e d by a n y t h i n g t h a t does n o t fit i n t o
t h e i r p r e c o n c e i v e d ideas of w h a t a t h i n g s h o u l d be.
M r . Wells speaks of t h e " m e r e l y c i r c u m s t a n t i a l p r e c i s i o n " of pho-
t o g r a p h y , a n d this is t h e g e n e r a l c o n c e p t of w h a t p h o t o g r a p h y s h o u l d
be. If t h a t w e r e so it w o u l d m e a n the e n d of all efforts t o w a r d s ex-
p e r i m e n t a l c r e a t i o n in t h e m e d i u m . I n the last few years, t h r o u g h
t h e p e r f e c t i n g of t h e e n l a r g i n g process, p h o t o g r a p h s h a v e b e c o m e
a d a p t a b l e to m u r a l decorations. T h i s w o u l d seem to offer h o p e t h a t
the p h o t o g r a p h e r may become a decorative artist. I n N e w York large
surfaces of wall are covered by p h o t o g r a p h s t h a t q u i t e h o l d their
own in interest in relation to p a i n t i n g s o n a similar scale. It is possi-
ble, by t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of some of t h e principles I h a v e indicated, to
t r a n s f o r m t h e " c i r c u m s t a n t i a l precision" of t h e p h o t o g r a p h i n t o
s o m e t h i n g q u i t e as creative in mass, line a n d t o n e as decorative
mural painting.
U p to t h e present, large-scale colour p h o t o g r a p h y is n o t possible,
so the decorative p h o t o g r a p h is in masses of black a n d white. B u t
p h o t o g r a p h i c colour of q u a l i t y seems to be o n the way. T h e colour
p h o t o g r a p h s of C u r t i s M o f f a t show t h a t c o l o u r is capable of indi-
v i d u a l t r e a t m e n t , realistically as well as abstractly.
T h e a p p l i c a t i o n of design to the p h o t o g r a p h is entirely in t h e
h a n d s of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r . It m e a n s t h a t he m u s t be e q u i p p e d b o t h
technically a n d aesthetically. T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r ultimately will have
to be t r a i n e d w i t h as m u c h care as those w h o practice the o t h e r arts.
I t will n o t be a h a p h a z a r d p u r s u i t as it is now, b u t will d e p e n d o n
the creative capabilities of t h e i n d i v i d u a l . P h o t o g r a p h y is n o t easily
mastered. One's a t t i t u d e to it s h o u l d be one of c o n t i n u a l q u e s t i o n i n g
a n d dissatisfaction. Its progress d e p e n d s o n striving to preserve it
f r o m easy pitfalls.
2
T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r can interest himself in n u m e r o u s technical
devices i n o r d e r to k e e p his interest alive.
T h e r e is t h a t a i m of all p h o t o g r a p h e r s — " t h e perfect negative."
T h i s , in itself, is a n ideal w h i c h is rarely if ever o b t a i n e d . I do n o t
k n o w w h a t a "perfect negative" is; b u t I suppose it m u s t be o n e f r o m
w h i c h a n absolutely satisfactory p r i n t can be m a d e w i t h o u t any
d o d g i n g or m a n i p u l a t i o n . T h e n t h e tones of t h e p r i n t are in perfect
relationship, t h e detail of the lightest p a r t s b e i n g in a b s o l u t e balance
w i t h the detail of t h e deepest shadows, a n d t h e s u b o r d i n a t e tones
h o l d i n g their r e l a t i o n s h i p to t h e highest lights a n d deepest darks in
a way t h a t is above criticism. Such a state of affairs exists in n a t u r e ,
a n d it is o n e of t h e p r o b l e m s of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r to r e c o r d a p p r o x i -
mately this ideal balance w i t h his camera.
A p h o t o g r a p h has been said to look "just like n a t u r e , " b u t no o n e
has ever agreed just how n a t u r e looks; it may, therefore, be q u e s t i o n e d
w h e t h e r a p h o t o g r a p h really looks a n y t h i n g like n a t u r e . T h e photo-
g r a p h is a species of g r a p h , r e p r e s e n t i n g n a t u r e , t h a t may m o r e or
less resemble it. It can never h a v e t h e l u m i n o u s t e x t u r e of light in
n a t u r e , n o r t h e q u a l i t y of n a t u r e ' s colour, any m o r e t h a n a p a i n t i n g
can. It is a c o m p r o m i s e ! A t times it seems to be m o r e t h a n n a t u r e ,
at o t h e r times less!
Even in a p h o t o g r a p h n a t u r e can "look u p " ! A p h o t o g r a p h can be
s o m e t h i n g in itself—it can exist i n d e p e n d e n t l y as a p h o t o g r a p h a p a r t
f r o m t h e subject; it can take o n a life of its own, aside f r o m its
d o c u m e n t a r y value.
3
T h e d o c u m e n t a r y value of a p h o t o g r a p h is immense, as is uni-
versally a c k n o w l e d g e d : a b o u t such a self-evident value it is unneces-
sary to speak, seeing t h a t t h e r e already exists so m u c h u n d e r l i n i n g
of t h e obvious.
T h e m a j o r i t y of p h o t o g r a p h e r s are interested only in the docu-
m e n t a r y side of p h o t o g r a p h y : t h a t m e a n s p o i n t i n g the camera at a
subject w h i c h exists in n a t u r e , a n d trying to r e n d e r t h e subject
clearly as far as t h e limits of the m a t e r i a l s of p h o t o g r a p h y will p e r m i t .
T h e r e are any n u m b e r of v a r i a n t s to this r e n d e r i n g of the subject,
such as t h e type of film, lens, or p l a t e used. A large n u m b e r of special
m a t e r i a l s can be e m p l o y e d , a n d their use is best d e t e r m i n e d by con-
s u l t i n g a speed card, such as is p u b l i s h e d by W a t k i n s , f o r p l a t e speed
n u m b e r s , or by c o n s u l t i n g t h e advertisements in t h e British Journal
of Photography.
Some of the emulsions o n plates a n d films a r e very r a p i d , some
very slow, some sensitive to all t h e colours of the s p e c t r u m , some
r e n d e r i n g only a few in their supposed relative shades. So w h a t is
actually r e n d e r e d o n the negative is a variable q u a n t i t y of n a t u r e
based o n the m a t e r i a l used.
Again, there are colour screens w h i c h allow t h e light to pass
t h r o u g h t h e lens to the sensitive p l a t e at d i f f e r e n t degrees of speed;
these, in t u r n , govern the q u a l i t y of t h e r e s u l t a n t image.
T h e n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of the latent image i n t o a negative is gov-
e r n e d by t h e time, t e m p e r a t u r e a n d chemical f o r m u l a of t h e de-
veloper, w h i c h greatly affects t h e q u a l i t y of the negative p r o d u c e d .
All this is w h a t m i g h t be t e r m e d t h e f u n d a m e n t a l base of pho-
tography. It has p r i m a r i l y to d o w i t h visible light, a n d as it is this
q u a l i t y t h a t t h e o r d i n a r y , non-scientific p h o t o g r a p h is concerned
w i t h , o u r r e m a r k s are confined to this b r a n c h of p h o t o g r a p h y .
Parenthetically, it may be observed t h a t the infra-red p h o t o is a
subject t h a t m i g h t well h o l d t h e a t t e n t i o n of some p h o t o g r a p h e r s ,
for it deserves p a i n s t a k i n g e x p e r i m e n t .
Now, all this seems to p o i n t to t h e fact t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y is a
m e d i u m t h a t expresses t h e action of light reflected f r o m objects. T h i s
light is p r e c i p i t a t e d chemically, h a v i n g been c a u g h t by t h e lens o n
sensitive m a t e r i a l : t h e result is a p h o t o g r a p h . L i g h t acts o n photo-
g r a p h i c material, p r o d u c i n g a result t h a t is called p h o t o g r a p h i c , a n d
is b r o u g h t to a final result chemically.
T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r has t h e choice of either d e a l i n g w i t h t h e things
t h a t can be seen (landscapes, portraits, still-lifes), or of c r e a t i n g his
own world. P o r t r a i t s a n d still-life studies are c a p a b l e of b e i n g ar-
r a n g e d in an infinite n u m b e r of ways, a n d of b e i n g lit in an infinite
n u m b e r of ways. In landscape p h o t o g r a p h y it m e a n s w a i t i n g for w h a t
the p h o t o g r a p h e r considers t h e r i g h t m o m e n t : he m u s t use his judg-
m e n t accordingly.
4
It is possible f o r p h o t o g r a p h e r s to m a k e or design objects t h a t can
be treated w i t h light, thereby c r e a t i n g a w o r l d of t h e i r o w n w h i c h is
in m a n y ways as interesting as t h e visible, e x t e r n a l w o r l d . T h e same
laws of composition of light a n d shade a n d line govern this personal
world, only it has n o t the so-called aspect of n a t u r e t h a t is t e r m e d
documentary.
By m a n y p r a c t i t i o n e r s of p h o t o g r a p h y it is n o t considered "legiti-
m a t e " to create a p e r s o n a l w o r l d : they limit t h e p h o t o g r a p h to the
d o c u m e n t a r y , a n d seem to be satisfied t h a t it shall r e m a i n a docu-
m e n t for ever. H u m a n beings like to t h i n k of things in secure a n d
p r o p e r places, to w h i c h they a l o n e h o l d the key; if a n y o n e t a m p e r s
w i t h t h e lock, h e is a p a r i a h ! I h a v e seen it stated by well-known
p h o t o g r a p h e r s , a n d h e a r d it f r o m their o w n lips, t h a t t h e p h o t o g r a p h
m u s t be exactly t h e d o c u m e n t they h a v e defined, a n d t h a t n o t h i n g
else m u s t exist in t h e m e d i u m !
Some of these p h o t o g r a p h e r s were, at o n e time, a r d e n t advocates
of t h e g u m b i c h r o m a t e , a n d the g u m p l a t i n u m p r i n t ; to say n o t h i n g
of using u n c o r r e c t e d or "fuzzy" lenses. T h e g u m a n d oil p r i n t s per-
haps took too m u c h h a n d work: some were n o t good, b u t some were!
It is the result w h i c h counts! A good g u m or oil p r i n t is just as inter-
esting as t h e most meticulous, microscopically d e t a i l e d d o c u m e n t a r y
p h o t o g r a p h , which d e p e n d s for its q u a l i t y o n t h e most exact lens
corrections. I n fact t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g h u m a n in t h e g u m p r i n t s '
faults a n d strivings, s o m e t h i n g w h i c h m a c h i n e accuracy misses. H o w -
ever, these are m e d i u m s little practised today; p e r h a p s the processes
were too indirect, a l t h o u g h interesting.
T h e process, w h i c h was observed f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g of photog-
raphy, t e r m e d "solarization," has been technically perfected by M a n
Ray. It is accomplished by exposing a fully developed negative or
p r i n t to t h e light f o r a few seconds, a n d t h e n c o n t i n u i n g d e v e l o p m e n t
a n d fixing. It is, as far as I know, t h e most p r o m i s i n g process in t h e
h a n d s of t h e m o d e r n p h o t o g r a p h e r . H e r e t h e r e is n o h a n d work, the
results b e i n g controlled by light a n d chemicals: t h e r e is w h a t m i g h t
be t e r m e d " l e g i t i m a t e " m a n i p u l a t i o n of t h e light, similar to t h a t
used in " d o d g i n g " — a n d w h a t p h o t o g r a p h e r does n o t " d o d g e " his
prints? T h e possibilities of the r e s u l t a n t image r a n g e f r o m a slight
to a c o m p l e t e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c image.
I n m a k i n g subjects of my own, I h a v e used paper-cut designs
b r o u g h t i n t o low relief, a n d lit, generally, by o n e small spot l a m p
of 250 watts: t h e same l a m p has b e e n placed in different positions
t h r o u g h a series of exposures. T h e field is n o t l i m i t e d to p a p e r ; any
plastic m a t e r i a l will answer t h e p u r p o s e . T h e n you can h a v e t h e
pleasure of m a k i n g y o u r o w n " u n n a t u r a l " world, to which it is n o t
u n p l e a s a n t t o r e t u r n if you are a p h o t o g r a p h e r , a n d h a v e been
w o r k i n g daily w i t h fashions, p o r t r a i t s , o r a d v e r t i s i n g !
5
T h e r e are o t h e r m e t h o d s of m a k i n g " u n n a t u r a l " p h o t o s . T h e r e
is the p h o t o g r a m , f r o m w h i c h p h o t o g r a p h y o r i g i n a t e d . I t is accom-
p l i s h e d by p l a c i n g o b j e c t s o n sensitive p a p e r or film a n d e x p o s i n g a
light a b o v e t h e m or f r o m d i f f e r e n t angles. T h e s h a d o w of t h e objects
is cast a n d r e m a i n s l i g h t ; or, if t r a n s p a r e n t o r s e m i - t r a n s p a r e n t
o b j e c t s are used, b e a u t i f u l designs of m u l t i p l e tones are b u i l t u p .
T h e r e is the use of a piece of p a p e r in place of t h e lens. I n this
p a p e r a design is cut, a n d t h r o u g h it the l i g h t f r o m a f i l a m e n t of an
electric light b u l b is p r o j e c t e d . Q u i t e b e a u t i f u l p a t t e r n s of light m a y
b e t h u s o b t a i n e d , t h a t c a n only be seen u n d e r a c o n d i t i o n of this
k i n d . Silver p a p e r , h i g h l y m i r r o r e d , allows m o s t i n t e r e s t i n g p a t t e r n s
to be f o r m e d , w h i c h a r e p h o t o g r a p h i c .
T h e n t h e r e is m u l t i p l e e x p o s u r e t h r o u g h w h i c h c o m p o s i t i o n s can
be m a d e in endless variety to suit i n d i v i d u a l taste.
S u c h processes involve a c e r t a i n a m o u n t of p a t i e n c e o n t h e p a r t
of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r . T h e y are n o n e of t h e m c o m m e r c i a l , unless
s o m e a d v e r t i s e r m a y fall for " t h e novelty of a n i d e a . "
By r e f e r r i n g to p a t i e n c e , I d o n o t m e a n t h a t it takes a n y t h i n g like
20 o r 30 h o u r s to p r o d u c e a p h o t o g r a p h : m o s t of t h e p h o t o g r a p h s I
h a v e m a d e h a v e n o t t a k e n m e as m a n y m i n u t e s .
A critic o n c e said to m e : " I t m u s t take you m a n y h o u r s to d o o n e
of those p h o t o g r a p h s ; is it w o r t h t h e e x p e n d i t u r e of t i m e ? " H e m i g h t
well ask t h e q u e s t i o n , for h e c o n s i d e r e d t h a t all steps i n t h e d i r e c t i o n
of m a k i n g t h e p h o t o g r a p h a m e d i u m of e x p r e s s i o n are d o o m e d to
f a i l u r e by t h e f a c t t h a t t h e p h o t o g r a p h is b e l i e v e d to be i m p e r m a n e n t ,
t h a t a n y o n e w h o w a n t s to c a n easily d o s o m e t h i n g of a s i m i l a r n a t u r e .
I n fact, h e e c h o e d the g e n e r a l o p i n i o n h e l d by those w h o k n o w little
a b o u t t h e m e d i u m . It w o u l d a p p e a r f r o m this t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y is
c o n s i d e r e d a k i n d of j o u r n a l i s m : n o t a t h i n g of b e a u t y a n d a joy
for ever, b u t s o m e t h i n g q u i c k l y to b e d i s c a r d e d .
B u t h o w e v e r t h a t m a y be, for m a n y w h o p r a c t i s e it, it is a fascinat-
i n g m e d i u m , c a p a b l e of e x p a n s i o n in the r i g h t h a n d s . O n e looks t o
t h e a m a t e u r for w h a t e v e r a d v a n c e m a y b e a c c o m p l i s h e d in t h e f u t u r e ;
for h e a l o n e has t h e leisure a n d m o n e y , a n d is n o t beset by t h e prac-
tical p r o b l e m s of a c o m m e r c i a l p h o t o g r a p h e r . P h o t o g r a p h y m a y be
c o n s i d e r e d a n expensive m e d i u m in w h i c h to e x p e r i m e n t .

The camera will develop into the perfect instrument for the artist.
It reacts instantly to his sensitiveness and creative imagination. But
it is a foreign tool to the artist. Not much technique has been de-
veloped for it as yet. The pencil or brush is a simple thing to master.
The camera is intricate.
HORIZONS: NORMAN BEL GEDDES
WYNN BULLOCK (1902-) There is nothing mysterious about space-time.
Every speck of matter, every idea, is a space-time event. We cannot experience
anything or conceive of anything that exists outside of space-time. Just as
experience precedes all awareness and creative expression, the visual language
of our photographs should ever more strongly express the fourth dimensional
structure of the real world. P H O T O G R A P H I C E D U C A T I O N . (From an unpublished
manuscript, 1965.)

SPACE AND TIME 1962

Photography, Vol. 17, No. 9, pp. 42-49.
For a n u m b e r of years I h a v e felt the need for b e i n g consciously
aware t h a t n a t u r e is n o t alone a t h r e e d i m e n s i o n a l w o r l d of e x t e r n a l
appearances t h a t o u r physical senses perceive as objects, b u t equally a
world in which all things have a f o u r t h d i m e n s i o n . T h i s a d d e d d i m e n -
sion is perceived by still u n d e f i n e d senses t h a t m a k e u p t h e m i n d .
T h i s has led m e to search for the m e a n i n g of t h e f o u r t h d i m e n s i o n .
I a m convinced t h a t f o r t h e creative p a i n t e r or p h o t o g r a p h e r to
interpret a n object in terms of its e x t e r n a l surface d i m e n s i o n s is to see'
the object superficially. Searching d e e p e r i n t o t h e n a t u r e of things,
I ask myself w h a t makes o n e person m o r e interesting visually t h a n
a n o t h e r person or o n e tree d i f f e r e n t or m o r e m e a n i n g f u l t h a n a n o t h e r
tree.
O r d i n a r i l y , objects are seen a n d felt most easily a n d strongly in t h e
ever-recurring now of time. Seen in this way the m e a n i n g of a particu-
lar tree is i m p r i s o n e d in a n a t t i t u d e of m i n d t h a t tends to limit its
reality to its surface a p p e a r a n c e . T h e five senses o n a physical level
can only react by outside s t i m u l a t i o n in t h e ever-recurring now. T h e y
c a n n o t b r i n g back t h e past or r e s p o n d to t h e f u t u r e reality of any-
thing because three-dimensionality is t h e f u n c t i o n of the senses. So
reality to the physical senses always r e m a i n s only a tiny fraction of
the reality of t h e tree.
T h i s level of reality is a static e x p e r i e n c e w h i c h only the m i n d can
m a k e d y n a m i c by b l e n d i n g past, present a n d f u t u r e i n t o a greater
measure of reality. T h e present is only a n intersection in t h e time of
every event in t h e universe. It is like the single f r a m e of a m o t i o n
picture film. W h e n t h e single f r a m e is seen the m o t i o n stops. It is a
f u n c t i o n of t h e creative m i n d to overcome the inertia of the (now)
perceived reality.
W h e n Cartier-Bresson r e f e r r e d to the decisive moment of taking a
picture he m e a n t , I feel, t h e m i r r o r e d m o m e n t t h a t expresses the
object so as to evoke in t h e m i n d of the viewer significant a n d i n n e r
qualities.
O n c e the m i n d is aware of t h e p r o f o u n d difference between seeing
a n object for its three-dimensionality only, a n d seeing it f o u r t h - d i m e n -
sionally as a n event in t i m e a n d space, only t h e n does the m i n d search
for a n d find symbols to express this a d d e d d i m e n s i o n .
T h i s is a desired goal in all m e d i u m s of art expression. T h e great-
ness of music in large p a r t is related to the fact t h a t it is n o t basically
a t h r e e d i m e n s i o n a l m e d i u m of expression. It seeks its m e a n i n g in
t h e infinite a n d invisible w o r l d of s o u n d , w h i c h in itself is a f o u r t h -
d i m e n s i o n a l event. It differs f r o m t h e object w o r l d as a source of
m a t e r i a l for t h e creative m i n d , i n t h a t the object o n the visual level
is l i m i t e d by its o w n m e a n i n g as a n event. As such this acts as a limi-
t a t i o n in terms of creative expression. S o u n d , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , is a n
event of f a r g r e a t e r m a g n i t u d e r e l a t e d in fact to all objects a n d all
space, thereby offering u n l i m i t e d creative possibilities in terms of
source m a t e r i a l .
Visual expressions of all k i n d s in terms of f o u r t h - d i m e n s i o n a l
m e a n i n g s have b e e n h e l d back, relative to music, because of t h e m a n y
u t i l i t a r i a n a n d practical reasons for expressing objects literally. How-
ever, in t h e last h u n d r e d years p a i n t i n g has a d v a n c e d r a p i d l y in free-
ing itself f r o m this practical e m p h a s i s to one of abstract expression
t h a t relates it m o r e , i n terms of f r e e d o m of expression, to music.
As a result, its m e a n i n g has become m o r e p r o f o u n d a n d subtle by
m a k i n g t h e p a i n t i n g or p i c t u r e itself, t h r o u g h the basic visual ele-
m e n t s it employs, expressive of h i g h e r d i m e n s i o n a l m e a n i n g s f o u n d
in n a t u r e . M o r e specifically, visual e l e m e n t s such as dots, lines, planes
a n d forms, w h e n used abstractly or non-objectively, can be used as a n
expression of their own basic m e a n i n g in n a t u r e itself.
T h e use of these e l e m e n t s can in fact be r e l a t e d almost directly to
music in terms of m e a n i n g . A d o t can be used, as K a n d i n s k y has
p o i n t e d o u t , as a n e q u i v a l e n t to a s o u n d effect b u t o n t h e visual level.
F o r e x a m p l e a d o t in t h e center of a circle is a silent sound. Dots
a r r a n g e d w i t h i n t h e f r a m e of a p i c t u r e can express a n o r d e r of stac-
cato s o u n d s as well as c r e a t i n g i n n e r tensions related to space a n d
time dimensions.
If so simple a m e a n s can p r o d u c e such a p r o f o u n d difference, t h i n k
of t h e u n l i m i t e d possibilities i n h e r e n t in dots a n d lines to p i c t u r e
f r a m e . T h e s e possibilities are directly related to t h e qualities of move-
m e n t , rest, grace, awkwardness, order, space a n d time, etc., w h i c h
define t h e m e a n i n g of t h e d o t a n d linear c h a r a c t e r of objects in the
physical w o r l d . It s h o u l d be u n d e r s t o o d t h a t dots a n d lines a n d t h e
three-dimensional forms together w i t h all t h e m e a n s r e q u i r e d to
express t h e m w i t h i n t h e p i c t u r e f r a m e are t h e t r u e i n h a b i t a n t s of
this w o r l d . Used o t h e r t h a n f o r t h e i r o w n qualities d i m i n i s h e s their
meaning.
Proof of this, n o t o n a theoretical, b u t o n a p u r e l y practical level is
evidenced by the fact t h a t v a r y i n g degrees of abstraction or even
c o m p l e t e non-objectivity h a v e become t h e d o m i n a n t style of p a i n t -
ing today.
B u t w h a t a b o u t p h o t o g r a p h y ? U n t i l very recently any a t t e m p t to
bridge the g a p b e t w e e n t h e literal object w o r l d a n d the world of
abstract images has been spoken of as e x p e r i m e n t a l . T h i s adjective
was a p p l i e d by no less a n a u t h o r i t y t h a n B e a u m o n t N e w h a l l to t h e
work of o u r great n a m e p h o t o g r a p h e r s M a n R a y a n d Moholy-Nagy.
I t is t r u e t h a t t e c h n i q u e s used, such as solarization a n d p h o t o g r a m s ,
were e x p e r i m e n t a l in the sense t h a t t h e exact final result could n o t be
d e t e r m i n e d at t h e t i m e of t a k i n g a picture. M a n y of t h e m e t h o d s
p o p u l a r l y used today, such as m o v i n g t h e camera d u r i n g exposure,
p h o t o g r a p h i n g fast m o v i n g objects, r e c o r d i n g light p a t t e r n s o n mov-
ing w a t e r also have this l i m i t i n g control factor, a n d I believe t h a t
this is a w e a k e n i n g of t h e creative process.
It is most interesting to note, however, t h a t d u r i n g t h e past few
years t h e r e has been a vital new interest in abstract p h o t o g r a p h y .
T h i s can be seen in t h e work of a small b u t select g r o u p of photog-
r a p h e r s in America. M i n o r W h i t e a n d some of his advanced students,
W a l t e r C h a p p e l l , a n d t h e p i o n e e r in the field, A a r o n Siskind, are
representative. O n e of the largest a n d most i m p o r t a n t e x h i b i t s in
N e w York City at t h e M u s e u m of M o d e r n Art, called " T h e Sense of
Abstraction," was a n i m p o r t a n t r e c o g n i t i o n of the t r e n d .
T h e favorite t e c h n i q u e s used today i n c l u d e solarization, photo-
grams, close-up p h o t o g r a p h y of objects t h a t destroys their literal
m e a n i n g b u t employ abstract q u a l i t i e s of t h e image, a n d equivalents.
I find m a n y of the pictures m a d e by these m e t h o d s visually provoca-
tive b u t I am led in a different d i r e c t i o n f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g reasons.
T h e e l e m e n t of chance i n e v i t a b l e at t h e time of t a k i n g these p i c t u r e s
is one. A n o t h e r is t h e lack of plasticity i n h e r e n t in c r e a t i n g images
of objects. T h i s is less a factor in closeup p h o t o g r a p h y t h a n it is in
conventional distances, b u t it still has a degree of weakness. A n d
such weaknesses are n o t f o u n d in either m u s i c or p a i n t i n g .
I n my o w n work I feel t h a t I h a v e f o u n d a way of o v e r c o m i n g some
of t h e weaknesses previously m e n t i o n e d . It is the t e c h n i q u e of pro-
d u c i n g light pictures. A m a z i n g t h e way light a n d s o u n d are f o u n d to
have e q u i v a l e n t virtues for creative expression. S o u n d is everywhere.
It is completely plastic, it has psychological a n d physiological impact.
Its levels of m e a n i n g a n d d i m e n s i o n a l qualities are so great it need
n o t be subservient to practical uses. It has great time a n d space
dimensions. All of these things m a k e it g r e a t as subject m a t t e r in
its own right.
Let us e x a m i n e light. L i g h t is everywhere. It is completely plastic
a n d lends itself freely a n d instantly to all d i m e n s i o n a l levels of
expression. It has psychological a n d physiological impact, like s o u n d ,
—both b e i n g vibrations. It need n o t d e p e n d o n i m i t a t i o n . It has all
the visible colors a n d , in itself, f a r greater time a n d space d i m e n -
sions t h a n sound. I t h i n k , w i t h o u t a q u e s t i o n of a d o u b t , t h a t in t h e
f u t u r e light pictures viewed as transparencies a n d backed w i t h a
l u m i n o u s glass (that is now b e i n g developed h e r e in America) will
h a n g o n t h e walls of homes, offices, a n d p u b l i c b u i l d i n g s j u s t as
abstract a n d non-objective p a i n t i n g s do today. Such pictures will
h a v e a scale of color values n o t possible by any p i c t u r e s seen by
reflected l i g h t a n d in a c t u a l i t y will b e in a sense a live p i c t u r e . I find
it g r a t i f y i n g t h a t m y i n t e r e s t in these p i c t u r e s is s h a r e d by a large
n u m b e r of p e o p l e c o n n e c t e d w i t h colleges a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l p h o t o -
g r a p h i c associations. R e c e n t l y I was given t h e highest a w a r d of t h e
N o r t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a P r o f e s s i o n a l P h o t o g r a p h e r s Association for con-
t r i b u t i o n s to professional p h o t o g r a p h y as a fine a r t . M y l i g h t p i c t u r e s
w e r e a n i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r in d e c i d i n g t h e a w a r d .
T h e s e are m a d e w i t h a 3 5 m m E x a k t a w i t h e x t e n s i o n bellows f o r
close-up w o r k . M a n y p e o p l e w h o d o close-up w o r k wish to preserve
t h e physical i d e n t i t y of t h e objects used. I d o j u s t t h e o p p o s i t e . I wish
to destroy the o b j e c t reality a n d c r e a t e t h e reality of t h e w o r l d of
l i g h t . A l l t h e d i m e n s i o n s of t h e physical w o r l d , p l u s t h e f u l l s p e c t r u m
of colors t o g e t h e r w i t h t i m e a n d space d i m e n s i o n s c o m b i n e to m a k e
u p this w o r l d . I use a light source ( s u n l i g h t o r t u n g s t e n ) a n d d i r e c t
it o n a n y objects t h a t h a v e an affinity f o r light, s u c h as w a t e r , cello-
p h a n e , a n d glass. I use t h e g r o u n d glass of m y c a m e r a as the p a i n t e r
uses canvas. I k n o w h o w light reacts to m y m a t e r i a l s a n d a r r a n g e
t h e m r o u g h l y in f r o n t of t h e c a m e r a ' s lens. W i t h this d o n e I begin
to m o v e t h e m slowly o n e way o r a n o t h e r , c o n t r o l l i n g t h e a c t i o n of
light so as to create t h e p i c t u r e desired. I use o n l y s t r a i g h t p h o t o -
g r a p h i c m e t h o d s a n d so h a v e c o n t r o l of the m e d i u m at all times.
HARRY CALLAHAN (1912-) It's the subject matter that counts. Vm inter-
ested in revealing the subject in a new way to intensify it. P H O T O G R A P H S :
HARRY C A L L A H A N , Santa Barbara, Van Riper & Thompson, 1964.

AN ADVENTURE IN PHOTOGRAPHY 1946

Minicam Photography, Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 28-29.
T h e s e p i c t u r e s of weeds in t h e snow are d e s i r e d to express f e e l i n g
m o r e t h a n a n y t h i n g else a n d if they convey f e e l i n g to you, I'll be
ever so pleased.
T a k i n g t h e m was a s t a n d a r d p h o t o g r a p h i c p r o b l e m . T h e r e was n o
s u n a n d I was n o t i n t e r e s t e d in t h e snow t e x t u r e s , b u t in t h e lines t h a t
t h e weeds m a d e . So, I d o u b l e d t h e n o r m a l e x p o s u r e o n t h e snow a n d
over d e v e l o p e d the negative. T h e p h o t o g r a p h s s h o w i n g light o n t h e
w a t e r w e r e a c o m b i n a t i o n of s i m p l e i m a g i n a t i o n p l u s a n i n t e r e s t in
the m o v i n g h i g h l i g h t s t h a t t h e s u n o n the w a t e r makes. T h i s was an
e x p e r i m e n t , n o t n e w p r o b a b l y , b u t n e w to m e w h i c h was t h e e x c i t i n g
p a r t of it. I n l o o k i n g i n t o t h e g r o u n d glass I c o u l d see t h e s h a p e s t h a t
the m o v i n g w a t e r m a d e w i t h t h e s u n reflecting u p o n t h e m . I was
a n x i o u s to see w h a t these shapes w o u l d be o n t h e film. T h e y w e r e
m a d e at o n e second e x p o s u r e . All p h o t o g r a p h s are c o n t a c t p r i n t s f r o m
9 x 1 2 cm. negatives m a d e w i t h 9 \ / 2 " l e n s -
P h o t o g r a p h y is an a d v e n t u r e j u s t as life is a n a d v e n t u r e . If m a n
wishes to express himself p h o t o g r a p h i c a l l y , he m u s t u n d e r s t a n d ,
surely to a certain e x t e n t , his r e l a t i o n s h i p to life. I a m i n t e r e s t e d in
r e l a t i n g t h e p r o b l e m s t h a t affect m e to s o m e set of values t h a t I a m
t r y i n g to discover a n d establish as b e i n g my life. I w a n t to discover
a n d establish t h e m t h r o u g h p h o t o g r a p h y . T h i s is strictly m y affair
a n d does n o t e x p l a i n these p i c t u r e s by a n y m e a n s . A n y o n e else n o t
h a v i n g the desire to take t h e m w o u l d realize t h a t I m u s t h a v e felt
this was p u r e l y p e r s o n a l . T h i s reason, w h e t h e r it be g o o d or b a d , is
the only reason I can give for these p h o t o g r a p h s .
T h e p h o t o g r a p h s t h a t excite m e are p h o t o g r a p h s t h a t say some-
t h i n g in a n e w m a n n e r ; not for the sake of b e i n g d i f f e r e n t , b u t ones
t h a t are d i f f e r e n t because the i n d i v i d u a l is d i f f e r e n t a n d t h e indi-
v i d u a l expresses himself. I realize t h a t we all d o express ourselves,
b u t those w h o express t h a t w h i c h is always b e i n g d o n e are those
whose t h i n k i n g is a l m o s t in every way in accord w i t h e v e r y o n e else.
Expression o n this basis h a s become d u l l to those w h o wish to t h i n k
for themselves.
I wish m o r e p e o p l e felt t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y was a n a d v e n t u r e t h e
same as life itself a n d felt t h a t t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l feelings w e r e w o r t h
expressing. T o me, t h a t makes p h o t o g r a p h y m o r e exciting.

HENRI CARTIER-BRESSON (1908-) Thinking should be done beforehand

and afterwards—never while actually taking a photograph. Success depends
on the extent of one's general culture, on one's set of values, one's clarity of
mind and vivacity. The thing to be feared most is the artificially contrived,
the contrary to life, H E N R I CARTIER-BRESSON ON T H E ART O F P H O T O G R A P H Y , ( a n
interview by Yvonne Baby), Harper's Magazine, November 1961, p. 74.

INTRODUCTION 1952
The Decisive Moment, New York, Simon & Schuster.

I, like m a n y a n o t h e r boy, b u r s t i n t o t h e w o r l d of p h o t o g r a p h y w i t h
a B o x B r o w n i e , w h i c h I used for t a k i n g h o l i d a y s n a p s h o t s . Even as a
child, I h a d a passion for p a i n t i n g , w h i c h I " d i d " o n T h u r s d a y s a n d
Sundays, t h e days w h e n F r e n c h school c h i l d r e n d o n ' t h a v e school.
G r a d u a l l y , I set myself to try to discover t h e v a r i o u s ways in w h i c h I
could play w i t h a c a m e r a . F r o m the m o m e n t t h a t I b e g a n t o use the
c a m e r a a n d to t h i n k a b o u t it, h o w e v e r , t h e r e was a n e n d to h o l i d a y
snaps a n d silly p i c t u r e s of my f r i e n d s . I b e c a m e serious. I was o n the
scent of s o m e t h i n g , a n d I was busy s m e l l i n g it o u t .
T h e n t h e r e w e r e the movies. F r o m s o m e of t h e great films, I l e a r n e d
to look, a n d to see. "Mysteries of N e w York," w i t h P e a r l W h i t e ; the
g r e a t films of D. W . Griffith—"Broken Blossoms"; the first films of
S t r o h e i m ; " G r e e d " ; Eisenstein's " P o t e m k i n " ; a n d Dreyer's " J e a n n e
d'Arc"—these w e r e some of t h e t h i n g s t h a t impressed m e deeply.
L a t e r I met p h o t o g r a p h e r s w h o h a d s o m e of Atget's p r i n t s . T h e s e
I considered r e m a r k a b l e a n d , accordingly, I b o u g h t myself a t r i p o d ,
a black cloth, a n d a p o l i s h e d w a l n u t c a m e r a t h r e e by f o u r inches.
T h e c a m e r a was fitted with—instead of a shutter—a lenscap, w h i c h
o n e took off a n d t h e n p u t o n to m a k e t h e e x p o s u r e . T h i s last detail,
of course, c o n f i n e d my c h a l l e n g e to the static w o r l d . O t h e r p h o t o -
g r a p h i c subjects seemed to m e to be too complicated, or else to be
" a m a t e u r stuff." A n d by this time I fancied t h a t by disregarding
them, I was d e d i c a t i n g myself to A r t w i t h a capital " A . "
N e x t I took to d e v e l o p i n g this A r t of m i n e in my washbasin. I
f o u n d the business of b e i n g a p h o t o g r a p h i c Jack-of-All-Trades q u i t e
entertaining. I knew nothing about printing, and had no inkling that
certain kinds of p a p e r p r o d u c e d soft p r i n t s a n d certain o t h e r highly
contrasted ones. I d i d n ' t b o t h e r m u c h a b o u t such things, t h o u g h I
invariably got m a d w h e n the images d i d n ' t come o u t r i g h t o n t h e
paper.
I n 1931, w h e n I was twenty-two, I w e n t to Africa. O n t h e Ivory
Coast I b o u g h t a m i n i a t u r e camera of a k i n d I h a v e never seen b e f o r e
or since, m a d e by t h e F r e n c h firm Krauss. It used film of a size that
3 5 m m w o u l d be w i t h o u t the sprocket holes. For a year I took pictures
w i t h it. O n my r e t u r n to F r a n c e I h a d my pictures developed—it was
n o t possible before, for I lived in t h e bush, isolated, d u r i n g most of
t h a t year—and I discovered that t h e d a m p h a d got i n t o t h e camera
a n d t h a t all my p h o t o g r a p h s were e m b e l l i s h e d w i t h t h e superim-
posed p a t t e r n s of g i a n t ferns.
I h a d h a d blackwater fever in Africa, a n d was n o w obliged to
convalesce. I w e n t to Marseille. A small allowance e n a b l e d m e to
get along, a n d I worked w i t h e n j o y m e n t . I h a d just discovered the
Leica. It became t h e e x t e n s i o n of my eye, a n d I have never been
separated f r o m it since I f o u n d it. I p r o w l e d t h e streets all day, feel-
ing very s t r u n g - u p a n d ready to p o u n c e , d e t e r m i n e d to " t r a p " life—
to preserve life in t h e act of living. Above all, I craved to seize the
whole essence, in t h e confines of one single p h o t o g r a p h , of some
situation t h a t was in t h e process of u n r o l l i n g itself before my eyes.
T h e idea of m a k i n g a p h o t o g r a p h i c reportage, that is to say, of
telling a story in a sequence of pictures, was s o m e t h i n g which never
e n t e r e d my h e a d at t h a t time. I began to u n d e r s t a n d m o r e a b o u t it
later, as a result of looking at the work of my colleagues a n d at t h e
illustrated magazines. In fact, it was only in the process of w o r k i n g
for t h e m t h a t I eventually learned—bit by bit—how to m a k e a report-
age w i t h a camera, how to m a k e a picture-story.
I have travelled a good deal, t h o u g h I d o n ' t really k n o w how to
travel. I like to take my time a b o u t it, leaving between o n e country
a n d the next an interval in which to digest w h a t I've seen. O n c e I
have arrived in a new c o u n t r y , I feel almost like settling d o w n
there, so as to live o n p r o p e r terms w i t h the country. I could never
be a globe-trotter.
I n 1947, five free-lance p h o t o g r a p h e r s , of w h o m I was one, f o u n d e d
o u r co-operative e n t e r p r i s e called " M a g n u m Photos."
T h i s co-operative e n t e r p r i s e distributes o u r picture-stories to
magazines in various countries.
Twenty-five years have passed since I started to look t h r o u g h my
view-finder. B u t I regard myself still as a n a m a t e u r , t h o u g h I a m n o
longer a d i l e t t a n t e .
T H E PICTURE-STORY
W h a t actually is a p h o t o g r a p h i c reportage, a picture-story? Some-
times t h e r e is one u n i q u e p i c t u r e whose c o m p o s i t i o n possesses such
vigor a n d richness, a n d whose c o n t e n t so r a d i a t e s o u t w a r d f r o m it,
t h a t this single p i c t u r e is a w h o l e story in itself. B u t this rarely
h a p p e n s . T h e elements which, together, can strike sparks o u t of a
subject, are o f t e n scattered—either in terms of space or time—and
b r i n g i n g t h e m together by force is "stage m a n a g e m e n t , " a n d , I feel,
cheating. B u t if it is possible to m a k e pictures of the "core" as well
as t h e struck-off sparks of the subject, this is a picture-story; a n d t h e
page serves to r e u n i t e t h e c o m p l e m e n t a r y e l e m e n t s w h i c h a r e dis-
persed t h r o u g h o u t several p h o t o g r a p h s .
T h e picture-story involves a j o i n t o p e r a t i o n of the b r a i n , t h e eye,
a n d the h e a r t . T h e objective of this j o i n t o p e r a t i o n is to depict t h e
content of some event w h i c h is in t h e process of u n f o l d i n g , a n d to
c o m m u n i c a t e impressions. Sometimes a single event can be so rich
in itself a n d its facets t h a t it is necessary to m o v e all a r o u n d it in
your search for t h e s o l u t i o n to the p r o b l e m s it poses—for the w o r l d is
m o v e m e n t , a n d you c a n n o t be stationary in y o u r a t t i t u d e t o w a r d
s o m e t h i n g t h a t is m o v i n g . Sometimes you light u p o n the p i c t u r e in
seconds; it m i g h t also r e q u i r e h o u r s or days. B u t t h e r e is no s t a n d a r d
plan, no p a t t e r n f r o m which to work. You m u s t be o n t h e alert w i t h
the b r a i n , t h e eye, t h e h e a r t ; a n d h a v e a suppleness of body.
Things-As-They-Are offer such a n a b u n d a n c e of m a t e r i a l t h a t a
p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t g u a r d against t h e t e m p t a t i o n of trying to d o
everything. It is essential to cut f r o m t h e r a w m a t e r i a l of life—to cut
a n d cut, b u t to cut with d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . W h i l e he is actually work-
ing, a p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t reach a precise awareness of w h a t he is
trying to do. Sometimes you h a v e t h e feeling t h a t you h a v e already
taken t h e strongest possible p i c t u r e of a p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n or
scene; nevertheless, you find yourself compulsively shooting, because
you c a n n o t be sure in advance exactly how t h e situation, the scene,
is going to u n f o l d . You m u s t stay w i t h t h e scene, just in case the
elements of the s i t u a t i o n shoot off f r o m the core again. At t h e same
time, it's essential to avoid s h o o t i n g like a m a c h i n e - g u n n e r a n d
b u r d e n i n g yourself w i t h useless recordings which clutter your
m e m o r y a n d spoil the exactness of the r e p o r t a g e as a whole.
Memory is very i m p o r t a n t , p a r t i c u l a r l y in respect to t h e recollec-
tion of every p i c t u r e you've taken w h i l e you've been g a l l o p i n g at the
speed of the scene itself. T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t m a k e sure, while he
is still in t h e presence of the u n f o l d i n g scene, t h a t he hasn't left any
gaps, t h a t he has really given expression to the m e a n i n g of the scene
in its entirety, for a f t e r w a r d it is too late. H e is never able to w i n d
the scene b a c k w a r d in o r d e r to p h o t o g r a p h it all over again.
 For p h o t o g r a p h e r s , t h e r e are two kinds of selection to be m a d e ,
a n d either of t h e m can lead to e v e n t u a l regrets. T h e r e is the selec-
tion we m a k e w h e n we look t h r o u g h t h e view-finder at t h e subject;
a n d t h e r e is t h e o n e we m a k e a f t e r the films have been developed
a n d p r i n t e d . A f t e r d e v e l o p i n g a n d p r i n t i n g , you m u s t go a b o u t
s e p a r a t i n g the pictures which, t h o u g h they are all right, a r e n ' t t h e
strongest. W h e n it's too late, t h e n you k n o w with a terrible clarity
exactly w h e r e you failed; a n d at this p o i n t you o f t e n recall the telltale
feeling you h a d w h i l e you were actually m a k i n g the pictures. W a s it
a feeling of hesitation d u e to u n c e r t a i n t y ? W a s it because of some
physical gulf between yourself a n d the u n f o l d i n g event? W a s it simply
t h a t you d i d n o t take i n t o account a certain detail in r e l a t i o n to the
whole setup? O r was it (and this is m o r e f r e q u e n t ) t h a t your glance
b e c a m e vague, your eye w a n d e r e d off?
In t h e case of each of us it is f r o m o u r own eye t h a t space begins
a n d slants off, e n l a r g i n g itself progressively t o w a r d infinity. Space, in
t h e present, strikes us w i t h g r e a t e r or lesser intensity, a n d t h e n leaves
us, visually, to be closed in o u r m e m o r y a n d to m o d i f y itself there.
Of all the m e a n s of expression, p h o t o g r a p h y is t h e only o n e t h a t fixes
forever t h e precise a n d transitory instant. W e p h o t o g r a p h e r s deal in
things which are c o n t i n u a l l y vanishing, a n d w h e n they have vanished,
there is no contrivance o n e a r t h w h i c h can m a k e t h e m come back
again. W e c a n n o t develop a n d p r i n t a m e m o r y . T h e writer has time
to reflect. H e can accept a n d reject, accept again; a n d b e f o r e com-
m i t t i n g his t h o u g h t s to p a p e r he is able to tie t h e several r e l e v a n t
elements together. T h e r e is also a p e r i o d w h e n his b r a i n "forgets,"
a n d his subconscious works o n classifying his t h o u g h t s . B u t for
p h o t o g r a p h e r s , w h a t has gone, has gone forever. F r o m t h a t fact stem
the anxieties a n d s t r e n g t h of o u r profession. W e c a n n o t d o o u r story
over again once we've got back to t h e hotel. O u r task is to perceive
reality, almost s i m u l t a n e o u s l y r e c o r d i n g it in t h e sketchbook which is
o u r camera. W e m u s t n e i t h e r try to m a n i p u l a t e reality while we are
shooting, n o r m u s t we m a n i p u l a t e t h e results in a d a r k r o o m . T h e s e
tricks are p a t e n t l y discernible to those w h o h a v e eyes to see.
In s h o o t i n g a picture-story we m u s t c o u n t the p o i n t s a n d the
r o u n d s , r a t h e r like a b o x i n g referee. In w h a t e v e r picture-story we try
to do, we are b o u n d to arrive as i n t r u d e r s . It is essential, therefore,
to a p p r o a c h the subject o n tiptoe—even if the subject is still-life. A
velvet h a n d , a hawk's eye—these we s h o u l d all have. It's no good
jostling or elbowing. A n d no p h o t o g r a p h s t a k e n w i t h t h e aid of
flashlight either, if only o u t of respect for the actual light—even
w h e n there isn't any of it. Unless a p h o t o g r a p h e r observes such con-
ditions as these, he may become a n intolerably aggressive character.
T h e profession d e p e n d s so m u c h u p o n the r e l a t i o n s t h e photog-
r a p h e r establishes w i t h the p e o p l e he's p h o t o g r a p h i n g , t h a t a false
relationship, a w r o n g word or a t t i t u d e , can r u i n everything. W h e n
the subject is in any way uneasy, the personality goes away w h e r e
the camera c a n ' t reach it. T h e r e are n o systems, for each case is
i n d i v i d u a l a n d d e m a n d s t h a t we be u n o b t r u s i v e , t h o u g h we m u s t
be at close range. Reactions of people differ m u c h f r o m c o u n t r y to
country, a n d f r o m one social g r o u p to a n o t h e r . T h r o u g h o u t t h e
whole of the O r i e n t , for e x a m p l e , a n i m p a t i e n t p h o t o g r a p h e r — o r
one w h o is simply pressed for time—is subject to ridicule. If you
have m a d e yourself obvious, even just by g e t t i n g your light-meter
out, the only t h i n g to d o is to forget a b o u t p h o t o g r a p h y for t h e
m o m e n t , a n d a c c o m m o d a t i n g l y allow t h e children w h o come r u s h i n g
at you to cling to your knees like burrs.
THE SUBJECT
T h e r e is subject in all that takes place in t h e world, as well as in
o u r personal universe. W e c a n n o t negate subject. It is everywhere.
So we m u s t be lucid toward w h a t is g o i n g o n in t h e world, a n d
honest a b o u t w h a t we feel.
Subject does n o t consist of a collection of facts, for facts in them-
selves offer little interest. T h r o u g h facts, however, we can reach a n
u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the laws t h a t govern them, a n d be better able to
select the essential ones w h i c h c o m m u n i c a t e reality.
I n p h o t o g r a p h y , t h e smallest t h i n g can be a great subject. T h e
little, h u m a n detail can become a leitmotiv. W e see a n d show t h e
world a r o u n d us, b u t it is a n event itself w h i c h provokes t h e o r g a n i c
r h y t h m of forms.
T h e r e are t h o u s a n d s of ways to distill the essence of s o m e t h i n g
t h a t captivates us, let's n o t c a t a l o g u e t h e m . W e will, instead, leave
it in all its freshness. . . .
T h e r e is a whole territory w h i c h is no longer exploited by p a i n t i n g .
Some say it is because of the discovery of p h o t o g r a p h y . H o w e v e r it
came a b o u t , p h o t o g r a p h y has taken over a p a r t of this territory in
the f o r m of illustration.
O n e k i n d of subject m a t t e r greatly d e r i d e d by present-day p a i n t e r s
is the p o r t r a i t . T h e frock coat, t h e soldier's cap, t h e horse—now repel
even the most academic of painters. T h e y feel suffocated by all the
gaiter b u t t o n s of t h e Victorian p o r t r a i t makers. For photographers—
p e r h a p s because we are r e a c h i n g for s o m e t h i n g m u c h less lasting in
value t h a n the painters—this is n o t so m u c h i r r i t a t i n g as a m u s i n g ,
because we accept life in all its reality.
People have an urge to p e r p e t u a t e themselves by m e a n s of a por-
trait, a n d they p u t their best profiles f o r w a r d for posterity. M i n g l e d
with this urge, t h o u g h , is a certain fear of black magic; a feeling
that by sitting for a c a m e r a p o r t r a i t they are e x p o s i n g themselves to
t h e workings of witchcraft of a sort.
O n e of t h e fascinating things a b o u t p o r t r a i t s is t h e way they e n a b l e
us to trace the sameness of m a n . M a n ' s c o n t i n u i t y somehow comes
t h r o u g h all t h e e x t e r n a l things w h i c h constitute him—even if it is
only to the extent of someone's m i s t a k i n g U n c l e for Little N e p h e w
in t h e family a l b u m . If t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r is to have a chance of
achieving a t r u e reflection of a person's world—which is as m u c h
outside h i m as inside him—it is necessary t h a t t h e subject of t h e
p o r t r a i t s h o u l d be in a s i t u a t i o n n o r m a l to h i m . W e m u s t respect the
a t m o s p h e r e w h c h s u r r o u n d s t h e h u m a n being, a n d integrate i n t o t h e
p o r t r a i t t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s habitat—for m a n , no less t h a n animals, has
his h a b i t a t . Above all, t h e sitter m u s t be m a d e to forget a b o u t t h e
camera a n d t h e m a n w h o is h a n d l i n g it. C o m p l i c a t e d e q u i p m e n t a n d
light reflectors a n d various o t h e r items of h a r d w a r e are e n o u g h , to
my m i n d , to p r e v e n t t h e b i r d i e f r o m c o m i n g o u t .
W h a t is t h e r e m o r e f u g i t i v e a n d transitory t h a n t h e expression o n
a h u m a n face? T h e first impression given by a p a r t i c u l a r face is o f t e n
t h e r i g h t one; b u t t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s h o u l d try always to s u b s t a n t i a t e
t h e first impression by " l i v i n g " w i t h t h e person concerned. T h e
decisive m o m e n t a n d psychology, n o less t h a n c a m e r a position, a r e
the p r i n c i p a l factors in the m a k i n g of a good p o r t r a i t . It seems to
m e it w o u l d be pretty difficult to be a p o r t r a i t p h o t o g r a p h e r for
customers w h o o r d e r a n d pay since, a p a r t f r o m a Maecenas or two,
they w a n t to be flattered, a n d t h e result is no longer real. T h e sitter
is suspicious of t h e objectivity of t h e camera, while w h a t the photog-
r a p h e r is a f t e r is an acute psychological study of t h e sitter.
It is true, too, t h a t a c e r t a i n identity is m a n i f e s t in all the p o r t r a i t s
taken by one p h o t o g r a p h e r . T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r is searching for iden-
tity of his sitter, a n d also trying to fulfill an expression of himself.
T h e t r u e p o r t r a i t emphasizes n e i t h e r the suave n o r t h e grotesque,
b u t reflects t h e personality.
I infinitely prefer, to contrived portraits, those little identity-card
p h o t o s which are pasted side by side, row a f t e r row, in t h e w i n d o w s
of passport p h o t o g r a p h e r s . At least t h e r e is o n these faces s o m e t h i n g
t h a t raises a q u e s t i o n , a simple f a c t u a l testimony—this in place of
the poetic identification we look for.
COMPOSITION
If a p h o t o g r a p h is to c o m m u n i c a t e its subject in all its intensity,
the r e l a t i o n s h i p of f o r m m u s t be rigorously established. P h o t o g r a p h y
implies t h e recognition of a r h y t h m in the world of real things. W h a t
t h e eye does is to find a n d focus o n the p a r t i c u l a r subject w i t h i n t h e
mass of reality; w h a t the camera does is simply to register u p o n film
t h e decision m a d e by t h e eye. W e look at a n d perceive a p h o t o g r a p h ,
as a p a i n t i n g , in its entirety a n d all in o n e glance. In a p h o t o g r a p h ,
composition is the result of a s i m u l t a n e o u s coalition, the o r g a n i c
co-ordination of e l e m e n t s seen by t h e eye. O n e does n o t a d d composi-
tion as t h o u g h it were a n a f t e r t h o u g h t s u p e r i m p o s e d o n the basic
subject material, since it is impossible to separate c o n t e n t f r o m f o r m .
C o m p o s i t i o n m u s t h a v e its own inevitability a b o u t it.
 In p h o t o g r a p h y there is a new k i n d of plasticity, p r o d u c t of t h e
i n s t a n t a n e o u s lines m a d e by m o v e m e n t s of t h e subject. W e work in
unison w i t h m o v e m e n t as t h o u g h it were a p r e s e n t i m e n t of t h e way
in which life itself unfolds. B u t inside m o v e m e n t there is one m o m e n t
at which the elements in m o t i o n are in balance. P h o t o g r a p h y must
seize u p o n this m o m e n t a n d h o l d i m m o b i l e the e q u i l i b r i u m of it.
T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s eye is p e r p e t u a l l y evaluating. A p h o t o g r a p h e r
can b r i n g coincidence of line simply by moving his head a f r a c t i o n of
a millimeter. H e can m o d i f y perspectives by a slight b e n d i n g of the
knees. By placing t h e camera closer to o r f a r t h e r f r o m the subject,
he draws a detail—and it can be s u b o r d i n a t e d , or he can by tyrannized
by it. B u t he composes a p i c t u r e in very nearly the same a m o u n t of
time it takes to click the s h u t t e r , at t h e speed of a reflex action.
Sometimes it h a p p e n s t h a t you stall, delay, wait for s o m e t h i n g to
h a p p e n . Sometimes you have t h e feeling t h a t here are all the m a k i n g s
of a picture—except for just one t h i n g t h a t seems to be missing. B u t
what one thing? P e r h a p s s o m e o n e s u d d e n l y walks i n t o your r a n g e of
view. You follow his progress t h r o u g h the view-finder. You wait a n d
wait, a n d t h e n finally you press t h e b u t t o n — a n d you d e p a r t w i t h t h e
feeling ( t h o u g h you d o n ' t k n o w why) t h a t you've really got some-
thing. Later, to s u b s t a n t i a t e this, you can take a p r i n t of this picture,
trace o n it t h e g e o m e t r i c figures w h i c h come u p u n d e r analysis, a n d
you'll observe that, if t h e s h u t t e r was released at t h e decisive m o m e n t ,
you have instinctively fixed a g e o m e t r i c p a t t e r n w i t h o u t which t h e
p h o t o g r a p h w o u l d have been b o t h formless a n d lifeless.
C o m p o s i t i o n m u s t be o n e of o u r constant preoccupations, b u t at
the m o m e n t of s h o o t i n g it can stem only f r o m o u r i n t u i t i o n , for we
are o u t to c a p t u r e the fugitive m o m e n t , a n d all the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s
involved a r e on the move. In a p p l y i n g t h e G o l d e n R u l e , the only p a i r
of compasses at the p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s disposal is his own p a i r of eyes.
Any geometrical analysis, any r e d u c i n g of t h e p i c t u r e to a schema,
can be d o n e only (because of its very n a t u r e ) a f t e r the p h o t o g r a p h
has been taken, developed, a n d p r i n t e d — a n d then it can be used only
for a post-mortem e x a m i n a t i o n of t h e picture. I h o p e we will never
see the day w h e n p h o t o s h o p s sell little schema grills to c l a m p o n t o
o u r viewfinders; a n d the G o l d e n R u l e will never be f o u n d etched o n
o u r g r o u n d glass.
If you start c u t t i n g or c r o p p i n g a good p h o t o g r a p h , it means d e a t h
to t h e geometrically correct i n t e r p l a y of p r o p o r t i o n s . Besides, it very
rarely h a p p e n s t h a t a p h o t o g r a p h which was feebly composed can
be saved by reconstruction of its composition u n d e r the d a r k r o o m ' s
enlarger; t h e integrity of vision is no longer there. T h e r e is a lot of
talk a b o u t camera angles; b u t the only valid angles in existence are
the angles of the geometry of composition a n d n o t t h e ones fabri-
cated by the p h o t o g r a p h e r w h o falls flat o n his stomach or p e r f o r m s
o t h e r antics to p r o c u r e his effects.
COLOR

I n t a l k i n g a b o u t composition we have been so far t h i n k i n g only

in terms of t h a t symbolic color called black. Black a n d w h i t e photog-
r a p h y is a d e f o r m a t i o n , t h a t is to say, an a b s t r a c t i o n . In it, all t h e
values are transposed; a n d this leaves t h e possibility of choice.
Color p h o t o g r a p h y brings w i t h it a n u m b e r of p r o b l e m s w h i c h are
h a r d to resolve today, a n d some of which a r e difficult even to foresee,
o w i n g to its complexity a n d its relative i m m a t u r i t y . At present, color
film emulsions are still very slow. C o n s e q u e n t l y , p h o t o g r a p h e r s using
color have a tendency to confine themselves to static subjects; or
else to use ferociously strong artificial lights. T h e slow speed of color
film reduces the d e p t h of focus in the field of vision in relatively close
shots; a n d this c r a m p i n g o f t e n makes for d u l l composition. O n top
of that, b l u r r e d b a c k g r o u n d s in color p h o t o g r a p h s are distinctly
displeasing.
Color p h o t o g r a p h s in t h e form of transparencies seem q u i t e pleas-
ing sometimes. B u t t h e n the engraver takes over; a n d a c o m p l e t e
u n d e r s t a n d i n g w i t h t h e e n g r a v e r w o u l d a p p e a r to be as desirable in
this business as it is in l i t h o g r a p h y . Finally, there are the inks a n d
the p a p e r , b o t h of w h i c h are capable of acting capriciously. A color
p h o t o g r a p h r e p r o d u c e d in a m a g a z i n e or semi-luxury e d i t i o n some-
times gives t h e impression of a n a n a t o m i c a l dissection w h i c h has
been badly b u n g l e d .
It is t r u e t h a t color r e p r o d u c t i o n s of pictures a n d d o c u m e n t s have
already achieved a certain fidelity to the original; b u t w h e n t h e color
proceeds to take on real life, it's a n o t h e r m a t t e r . W e are only in the
infancy of color p h o t o g r a p h y . B u t all this is not to say we should
take no f u r t h e r interest in t h e q u e s t i o n , or sit by w a i t i n g for the
perfect color film—packaged w i t h the talent necessary to use it—to
d r o p i n t o o u r laps. W e m u s t c o n t i n u e to try to feel o u r way.
T h o u g h it is difficult to foresee exactly how color p h o t o g r a p h y is
g o i n g to grow in p h o t o - r e p o r t i n g , it seems certain t h a t it r e q u i r e s
a new a t t i t u d e of m i n d , an a p p r o a c h d i f f e r e n t t h a n t h a t which is
a p p r o p r i a t e for black a n d white. Personally, I am half a f r a i d t h a t
this c o m p l e x new e l e m e n t may t e n d to p r e j u d i c e t h e a c h i e v e m e n t of
t h e life a n d m o v e m e n t which is o f t e n c a u g h t by black a n d white.
T o really be able to create in t h e field of color p h o t o g r a p h y , we
s h o u l d t r a n s f o r m a n d m o d u l a t e colors, a n d t h u s achieve liberty of
expression w i t h i n t h e f r a m e w o r k of t h e laws w h i c h were codified by
the Impressionists a n d f r o m w h i c h even a p h o t o g r a p h e r c a n n o t shy
away. ( T h e law, for instance, of s i m u l t a n e o u s contrast: t h e law t h a t
every color tends to tinge t h e space next to it w i t h its c o m p l e m e n t a r y
color; that if two tones c o n t a i n a color which is c o m m o n to t h e m
b o t h , t h a t c o m m o n color is a t t e n u a t e d by p l a c i n g the two tones side
by side; t h a t two c o m p l e m e n t a r y colors placed side by side emphasize
b o t h , b u t m i x e d together they a n n i h i l a t e each o t h e r ; a n d so on.)
T h e o p e r a t i o n of b r i n g i n g t h e color of n a t u r e in space to a p r i n t e d
surface poses a series of p r o b l e m s extremely complex. T o t h e eye,
certain colors advance, others recede. So we w o u l d h a v e to be able
to a d j u s t t h e relations of t h e colors o n e to t h e other, f o r colors w h i c h
place themselves i n n a t u r e in the d e p t h of space, claim a different
p l a c i n g o n a p l a n e surface—whether it is t h e flat surface of a p a i n t i n g
or a p h o t o g r a p h .
T h e difficulties involved in s n a p s h o o t i n g are precisely t h a t we can-
n o t control t h e m o v e m e n t of the subject; a n d in color-photography
r e p o r t i n g , t h e real difficulty is t h a t we are u n a b l e to control t h e inter-
relation of colors w i t h i n t h e subject. It w o u l d n ' t be h a r d to a d d to
the list of difficulties involved, b u t it is q u i t e certain t h a t t h e develop-
m e n of p h o t o g r a p h y is tied u p w i t h the d e v e l o p m e n t of its t e c h n i q u e .
TECHNIQUE
C o n s t a n t new discoveries in chemistry a n d optics are w i d e n i n g
considerably o u r field of action. It is u p to us to a p p l y t h e m to o u r
t e c h n i q u e , to i m p r o v e ourselves, b u t t h e r e is a w h o l e g r o u p of fetishes
which h a v e developed o n the subject of t e c h n i q u e .
T e c h n i q u e is i m p o r t a n t only insofar as you m u s t m a s t e r it in o r d e r
to c o m m u n i c a t e w h a t you see. Y o u r own personal t e c h n i q u e has to
be created a n d adapted.solely in o r d e r to m a k e your vision effective
o n film. B u t only the results c o u n t , a n d t h e conclusive evidence is
the finished p h o t o g r a p h i c p r i n t ; otherwise t h e r e w o u l d be n o e n d
to the n u m b e r of tales p h o t o g r a p h e r s w o u l d tell a b o u t pictures w h i c h
they ever-so-nearly got—but w h i c h are merely a m e m o r y in t h e eye
of t h e nostalgia.
O u r t r a d e of p h o t o - r e p o r t i n g has b e e n in existence only a b o u t
thirty years. It c a m e to m a t u r i t y d u e to t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of easily
h a n d l e d cameras, faster lenses, a n d fast fine-grain films p r o d u c e d for
the movie industry. T h e camera is for us a tool, n o t a pretty mechani-
cal toy. I n t h e precise f u n c t i o n i n g of t h e m e c h a n i c a l object p e r h a p s
t h e r e is a n unconscious c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r t h e anxieties a n d uncer-
tainties of daily e n d e a v o r . I n any case, p e o p l e t h i n k far too m u c h
a b o u t t e c h n i q u e s a n d n o t e n o u g h a b o u t seeing.
It is e n o u g h if a p h o t o g r a p h e r feels at ease w i t h his camera, a n d
if it is a p p r o p r i a t e to t h e j o b w h i c h he w a n t s it to do. T h e actual
h a n d l i n g of t h e camera, its stops, its exposure-speeds a n d all t h e
rest of it, a r e things w h i c h s h o u l d be as a u t o m a t i c as t h e c h a n g i n g
of gears in a n a u t o m o b i l e . It is n o p a r t of my business to go i n t o the
details or r e f i n e m e n t s of any of these operations, even t h e most
complicated ones, f o r they are all set f o r t h w i t h military precision in
t h e m a n u a l s w h i c h t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r s p r o v i d e along w i t h the camera
a n d the nice, o r a n g e calf-skin case. If t h e camera is a b e a u t i f u l gadget,
we should progress b e y o n d t h a t stage at least in conversation. T h e
same applies to t h e hows a n d whys of m a k i n g pretty p r i n t s in t h e
darkroom.
 D u r i n g the process of enlarging, it is essential to re-create t h e
values a n d m o o d of t h e time t h e p i c t u r e was t a k e n ; or even to m o d i f y
t h e p r i n t so as to b r i n g it i n t o line w i t h t h e i n t e n t i o n s of t h e photog-
r a p h e r at the m o m e n t h e shot it. It is necessary also to re-establish t h e
b a l a n c e w h i c h t h e eye is c o n t i n u a l l y establishing between light a n d
shadow. A n d it is f o r these reasons t h a t the final act of c r e a t i n g in
p h o t o g r a p h y takes place in t h e d a r k r o o m .
I am constantly a m u s e d by t h e n o t i o n t h a t some p e o p l e h a v e a b o u t
p h o t o g r a p h i c technique—a n o t i o n w h i c h reveals itself in a n insatiable
craving f o r sharpness of images. Is this the passion of an obsession?
O r d o these p e o p l e h o p e , by this " t r o m p e 1'ceil" t e c h n i q u e , to get to
closer grips w i t h reality? I n either case, they are just as far away f r o m
t h e real p r o b l e m as those of t h a t o t h e r g e n e r a t i o n w h i c h used to
e n d o w all its p h o t o g r a p h i c anecdotes w i t h an i n t e n t i o n a l u n s h a r p -
ness such as was d e e m e d to be "artistic."
T H E CUSTOMERS
T h e c a m e r a e n a b l e s us to k e e p a sort of visual chronicle. For me,
it is my diary. W e p h o t o - r e p o r t e r s a r e p e o p l e w h o supply i n f o r m a t i o n
to a w o r l d in a h u r r y , a w o r l d w e i g h t e d d o w n w i t h preoccupations,
p r o n e to cacophony, a n d full of beings w i t h a h u n g e r for informa-
tion, a n d n e e d i n g the c o m p a n i o n s h i p of images. W e p h o t o g r a p h e r s ,
in the course of t a k i n g pictures, inevitably m a k e a j u d g m e n t o n w h a t
we see, a n d t h a t implies a great responsibility. W e are, however,
d e p e n d e n t o n p r i n t i n g , since it is to t h e illustrated magazines t h a t
we, as artisans, deliver r a w m a t e r i a l .
It was i n d e e d a n e m o t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e f o r m e w h e n I sold my first
p h o t o g r a p h (to t h e F r e n c h magazine Vu). T h a t was t h e start of a
long alliance w i t h magazines. It is t h e magazines t h a t p r o d u c e for us
a public, a n d i n t r o d u c e us to that p u b l i c ; a n d they know how to get
picture-stories across in t h e way t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r i n t e n d e d . B u t
sometimes, u n h a p p i l y , they distort t h e m . T h e magazine can p u b l i s h
exactly w h a t t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r w a n t e d to show; b u t t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r
r u n s t h e risk of l e t t i n g himself be m o l d e d by t h e taste or the require-
m e n t s of t h e magazine.
In a picture-story, t h e captions s h o u l d invest the pictures w i t h a
verbal context, a n d s h o u l d i l l u m i n a t e w h a t e v e r relevant t h i n g it may
have been b e y o n d t h e p o w e r of c a m e r a to reach. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , in
the sub-editor's r o o m , mistakes sometimes slip i n w h i c h are n o t just
simple misspellings or m a l a p r o p i s m s . F o r these mistakes t h e r e a d e r
o f t e n holds t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r responsible. Such things d o h a p p e n .
T h e pictures pass t h r o u g h t h e h a n d s of t h e e d i t o r a n d t h e layout
m a n . T h e e d i t o r has to m a k e his choice f r o m t h e thirty or so pictures
of which t h e average picture-story consists. (It is r a t h e r as t h o u g h
he h a d to cut a text article to pieces in o r d e r to e n d u p w i t h a series
of quotations!) For a picture-story, as for a novel, t h e r e are certain
set forms. T h e pictures of t h e editor's choice h a v e to be laid o u t
w i t h i n t h e space of two, three, or f o u r pages, a c c o r d i n g to the a m o u n t
of interest he t h i n k s they are likely to arouse, or according to the
c u r r e n t state of p a p e r shortage.
T h e great art of the layout m a n lies in his k n o w i n g how to pick
f r o m this pile of pictures t h e p a r t i c u l a r one which deserves a full-
page or a double-page s p r e a d ; in his k n o w i n g where to insert t h e small
p i c t u r e which m u s t serve as a n indispensable l i n k in the story. ( T h e
p h o t o g r a p h e r , w h e n he is actually t a k i n g t h e pictures for his story,
should give a t h o u g h t to t h e ways in w h i c h it will be possible to lay
o u t those pictures to the most advantage.) T h e layout m a n will o f t e n
h a v e to crop o n e p i c t u r e so as to leave only t h e most i m p o r t a n t section
of it—since, for h i m , it is t h e u n i t y of the whole page or of t h e whole
spread t h a t counts above all else. A p h o t o g r a p h e r can scarcely be too
appreciative of t h e layout m a n w h o gives his work a b e a u t i f u l presen-
tation of a k i n d which keeps t h e full i m p o r t of the story; a display in
which t h e pictures h a v e spatially correct m a r g i n s a n d stand o u t as
they should; a n d in which each page possesses its o w n a r c h i t e c t u r e
and rhythm.
T h e r e is a t h i r d a n g u i s h for a p h o t o g r a p h e r — w h e n he looks for
his story in a magazine.
T h e r e are o t h e r ways of c o m m u n i c a t i n g o u r p h o t o g r a p h s t h a n
t h r o u g h p u b l i c a t i o n in magazines. E x h i b i t i o n s , for instance; a n d
t h e book form, w h i c h is almost a f o r m of p e r m a n e n t e x h i b i t i o n .
I have talked at some length, b u t of only one k i n d of p h o t o g r a p h y .
T h e r e are m a n y kinds. Certainly t h e f a d i n g snapshot carried in the
back of a wallet, t h e glossy advertising catalogue, a n d the great r a n g e
of things in between—are p h o t o g r a p h y . I d o n ' t a t t e m p t to define it
for everyone. I only a t t e m p t to define it to myself:
T o me, p h o t o g r a p h y is t h e s i m u l t a n e o u s recognition, in a fraction
of a second, of the significance of an event as well as of a precise
organization of forms which give t h a t event its p r o p e r expression.
I believe that, t h r o u g h t h e act of living, t h e discovery of oneself is
m a d e concurrently w i t h the discovery of t h e world a r o u n d us which
can m q l d us, b u t which can also be affected by us. A balance m u s t be
established between these two worlds—the o n e inside us a n d t h e one
outside us. As t h e result of a constant reciprocal process, b o t h these
worlds come to form a single one. A n d it is this world t h a t we m u s t
communicate.
B u t this takes care only of the c o n t e n t of t h e picture. F o r me,
content c a n n o t be separated f r o m f o r m . By form, I m e a n a rigorous
organization of t h e interplay of surfaces, lines, a n d values. It is in
this organization a l o n e t h a t o u r conceptions a n d e m o t i o n s become
concrete a n d c o m m u n i c a b l e . I n p h o t o g r a p h y , visual organization
can stem only f r o m a developed instinct.
ALVIN LANGDON COBURN (1882-1966) / believe that most creative artists
worthy of the name, of whatever school or medium be it pen or brush, marble
or scale of tones, have an inner world of inspiration which interpenetrates this
world of action, and into this sanctuary they may, yea must, at times retire for
meditation and refreshment. Some say in sleep this state is reached, and
dreams the bringing back of some vague glimmerings to the waking life; but
the way is more firm than this, and happy is he who finds the central way.
M O R E M E N O F M A R K , London, Duckworth & Co., 1922, p. 19.

THE RELATION OF TIME TO ART 1911

Camera Work, No. 36, pp. 72-73.

A f t e r living c o n s t a n t l y f o r t w o years in the q u i e t a n d seclusion of

a L o n d o n suburb, and then suddenly being plunged into the rush
a n d t u r m o i l of N e w York, w h e r e t i m e a n d space are of m o r e v a l u e
t h a n in any o t h e r p a r t of o u r w o r l d , this c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n
of time to art has b e e n forced u p o n m e .
As p h o t o g r a p h y has, u p to t h e p r e s e n t time, b e e n my sole m e a n s of
expression, I can best u n d e r s t a n d a n d a t t e m p t to e x p l a i n my m e a n i n g
by c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e p a r t t i m e plays in the a r t of t h e c a m e r a .
P h o t o g r a p h y is t h e m o s t m o d e r n of the arts, its d e v e l o p m e n t a n d
p r a c t i c a l u s e f u l n e s s e x t e n d s b a c k o n l y i n t o t h e m e m o r y of l i v i n g m e n ;
in fact, it is m o r e s u i t e d to t h e a r t r e q u i r e m e n t s of this age of scientific
a c h i e v e m e n t t h a n a n y o t h e r . It is, h o w e v e r , o n l y by c o m p a r i n g it w i t h
t h e o l d e r art of p a i n t i n g t h a t we will get the f u l l v a l u e of o u r argu-
m e n t p l a i n l y b e f o r e us; a n d in d o i n g so we shall find t h a t t h e essential
d i f f e r e n c e is n o t so m u c h a m e c h a n i c a l o n e of b r u s h e s a n d p i g m e n t s
as c o m p a r e d w i t h a lens a n d dry plates, b u t r a t h e r a m e n t a l o n e of a
slow, g r a d u a l , u s u a l b u i l d i n g u p , as c o m p a r e d w i t h a n i n s t a n t a n e o u s ,
c o n c e n t r a t e d m e n t a l i m p u l s e , f o l l o w e d by a l o n g e r p e r i o d of f r u i t i o n .
P h o t o g r a p h y b o r n of this age of steel seems t o h a v e n a t u r a l l y a d a p t e d
itself to the necessarily u n u s u a l r e q u i r e m e n t s of a n art t h a t m u s t live
in skyscrapers, a n d it is because it h a s b e c o m e so m u c h at h o m e in
these g i g a n t i c s t r u c t u r e s t h a t t h e A m e r i c a n s u n d o u b t e d l y are t h e
recognized leaders in the w o r l d m o v e m e n t of p i c t o r i a l p h o t o g r a p h y .
J u s t i m a g i n e a n y o n e t r y i n g to p a i n t at t h e c o r n e r of T h i r t y - f o u r t h
street, w h e r e B r o a d w a y a n d Sixth A v e n u e cross! T h e c a m e r a h a s
r e c o r d e d a n i m p r e s s i o n in t h e flashing f r a g m e n t of a second. B u t
w h a t a b o u t t h e t r a i n i n g , you will say, t h a t has m a d e this seizing of
t h e m o m e n t a r y vision possible? I t is, let m e tell you, n o easy t h i n g to
a c q u i r e , a n d necessitates years of p r a c t i c e a n d s o m e t h i n g of t h e in-
stinctive q u a l i t y t h a t m a k e s a g o o d m a r k s m a n . J u s t t h i n k of t h e com-
b i n a t i o n of k n o w l e d g e a n d sureness of vision t h a t was r e q u i r e d to
m a k e possible Stieglitz's " W i n t e r o n F i f t h A v e n u e . " If you call it a
"glorified s n a p s h o t " you m u s t r e m e m b e r t h a t life has m u c h of this
s a m e q u a l i t y . W e are comets across t h e sky of e t e r n i t y .
I t h a s been said of me, to come to t h e p e r s o n a l aspect of this p r o b -
lem, t h a t I w o r k too q u i c k l y , a n d t h a t I a t t e m p t to p h o t o g r a p h all
N e w York in a week. N o w to m e N e w York is a vision t h a t rises o u t
of t h e sea as I come u p the h a r b o r o n m y A t l a n t i c liner, a n d w h i c h
g l i m m e r s for a w h i l e i n t h e s u n f o r t h e first of m y stay a m i d s t its
pinnacles; b u t w h i c h vanishes, b u t for f r a g m e n t a r y glimpses, as I
b e c o m e o n e of t h e grey c r e a t u r e s t h a t crawl a b o u t like ants, at t h e
b o t t o m of its g l o o m y caverns. M y a p p a r e n t l y u n s e e m l y h u r r y has f o r
its o b j e c t m y b u r n i n g desire to record, t r a n s l a t e , create, if you like,
these visions of m i n e b e f o r e they f a d e . I c a n d o o n l y t h e creative p a r t
of p h o t o g r a p h y , t h e m a k i n g of t h e negative, w i t h t h e fire of e n t h u s i -
asm b u r n i n g at the w h i t e h e a t ; b u t t h e final stage, t h e p r i n t , r e q u i r e s
q u i e t c o n t e m p l a t i o n , t i m e , in fact, for its fullest expression. T h a t is
why m y best w o r k is f r o m A m e r i c a n negatives p r i n t e d in E n g l a n d .
T h i n k f o r a m o m e n t of t h e l i m i t a t i o n s of p h o t o g r a p h y . You are
c o n f i n e d to w h a t a f r i e n d of m i n e s u m s u p in the h i g h - s o u n d i n g
words, " c o n t e m p o r a r y a c t u a l i t y , " a n d n o w I find t h a t m y vision of
N e w York h a s g r a d u a l l y t a k e n u p o n itself a still n a r r o w e r range, for
it is o n l y at t w i l i g h t t h a t t h e city reveals itself to m e i n t h e fullness of
its b e a u t y , w h e n t h e arc lights o n t h e A v e n u e click i n t o b e i n g . M a n y
an e v e n i n g I h a v e w a t c h e d t h e m a n d s t u d i e d c a r e f u l l y j u s t w h i c h
ones a p p e a r e d first a n d w h y . T h e y b e g i n s o m e w h e r e a b o u t T w e n t y -
gixth street, w h e r e it is d a r k e s t , a n d t h e n g r a d u a l l y the great w h i t e
globes glow o n e by o n e , u p past t h e W a l d o r f a n d t h e n e w L i b r a r y ,
like t h e s t r i n g i n g of pearls, u n t i l they b u r s t o u t i n t o a d i a m o n d
p e n d a n t at t h e g r o u p of h o t e l s at F i f t y - n i n t h street.
P r o b a b l y t h e r e is a m a n at a s w i t c h b o a r d s o m e w h e r e , b u t t h e effect
is like destiny, a n d r e g u l a r l y e a c h n i g h t , like t h e stars, we h a v e this
l i g h t i n g u p of t h e A v e n u e .

THE FUTURE OF PICTORIAL PHOTOGRAPHY 1916

Photo grams of the Year 1916, pp. 23-24.

A n artist is a m a n w h o tries to express t h e inexpressible. H e strug-

gles a n d suffers k n o w i n g t h a t h e c a n never realise his m o s t p e r f e c t
ideal. Occasional m o m e n t s of ecstasy l u r e h i m on, b u t n o t h i n g is final
in art; it is always p r o g r e s s i n g a n d a d v a n c i n g , as m a n ' s i n t e l l i g e n c e
e x p a n d s in t h e l i g h t of m o r e p e r f e c t k n o w l e d g e of himself a n d t h e
universe.
I t is this progress of the arts t h a t h a s i n t e r e s t e d m e . W h e r e is it
l e a d i n g us? T h e r e are the " m o d e r n s " in P a i n t i n g , in Music, a n d in
L i t e r a t u r e . W h a t w o u l d o u r g r a n d f a t h e r s h a v e said of t h e w o r k of
Matisse, Stravinsky, a n d G e r t r u d e Stein? W h a t do o u r g r a n d f a t h e r s
say? T h e y h o l d u p t h e i r h a n d in h o r r o r , they show t h e i r b a d m a n -
ners by scoffing a n d j e e r i n g at s o m e t h i n g they are too a n t i q u a t e d to
u n d e r s t a n d . I t is the r e v o l u t i o n a r y of today, h o w e v e r , w h o is t h e
"classic" of t o m o r r o w ; t h e r e is n o e s c a p i n g t h e r u t h l e s s f o r w a r d m a r c h
of time.
Yes, if we a r e alive to t h e spirit of o u r t i m e it is these m o d e r n s w h o
interest us. T h e y are striving, r e a c h i n g o u t towards the f u t u r e , analys-
ing t h e mossy s t r u c t u r e of t h e past, a n d b u i l d i n g afresh, in colour
a n d s o u n d a n d g r a m m a t i c a l construction, t h e scintillating vision of
their minds; a n d b e i n g interested p a r t i c u l a r l y in p h o t o g r a p h y , it has
occurred to me, why s h o u l d n o t t h e c a m e r a also t h r o w off t h e shackles
of c o n v e n t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a n d a t t e m p t s o m e t h i n g fresh a n d un-
tried? W h y s h o u l d n o t its subtle r a p i d i t y be utilised to study move-
m e n t ? W h y n o t r e p e a t e d successive exposures of a n object in m o t i o n
o n t h e same plate? W h y s h o u l d n o t perspective be s t u d i e d f r o m
angles h i t h e r t o neglected or u n o b s e r v e d ? W h y , I ask you earnestly,
n e e d we go o n m a k i n g c o m m o n p l a c e little exposures of subjects t h a t
may be sorted i n t o g r o u p s of landscapes, portraits, a n d figure studies?
T h i n k of the joy of d o i n g s o m e t h i n g w h i c h it w o u l d be impossible to
classify, or to tell w h i c h was t h e t o p a n d w h i c h t h e b o t t o m !
I n last year's e x h i b i t i o n of t h e R o y a l P h o t o g r a p h i c Society t h e r e
was a little g r o u p of p r i n t s by A m e r i c a n workers, mostly e n t i t l e d
"Design"—many of my readers will r e m e m b e r t h e m . T h e y were
g r o u p s of various objects p h o t o g r a p h e d because of t h e i r shape a n d
colour value, a n d w i t h n o t h o u g h t of their s e n t i m e n t a l associations.
T h e r e were, I believe, tables, golf clubs, portfolios, etc, etc. T h e idea
was to be as abstract as it is possible to be w i t h t h e camera. M a x
W e b e r , t h e C u b i s t p a i n t e r - p o e t , was responsible f o r t h e idea of these
designs, a n d W e b e r is o n e of t h e most sincere artists t h a t it h a s ever
been my good f o r t u n e to meet; b u t of course these e x p e r i m e n t s in a
n e w direction only m e t w i t h sneers a n d laughter—it is always t h e
same w i t h a n i n n o v a t i o n in a n y d i r e c t i o n . I n his n e w book, "Essays
o n A r t , " W e b e r says: " T o express m o o d s t h a t stir t h e e m o t i o n f r o m
w i t h i n , as does music, t h e plastic artist, w h e n h e conceives of energetic
r h y t h m i c i n t e r l a c e d f o r m s or units, s h o u l d be m u c h m o r e m o v e d
t h a n even by music. It is like c e m e n t i n g a t h o u g h t , or arresting a
perfect m o m e n t of time, or like giving body to space, or solidity to
air, or c o l o u r e d light to darkness."
H o w m a n y of us a r e m o v e d like this in p h o t o g r a p h y ? W e t h i n k of
the c a m e r a as a r a t h e r m a t e r i a l m e a n s of self-expression—if we t h i n k
a b o u t it at all; b u t is it really so? Pause for a m o m e n t a n d consider
the mysterious q u a l i t y of light registering itself in sensitized gelatine
—all t h e scientific p o e t r y i n t h e w o r d s " l a t e n t image." In t h e days
w h e n m e n were b u r n e d at t h e stake f o r practising "black m a g i c " t h e
p h o t o g r a p h e r w o u l d h a v e b e e n a n u n d o u b t e d victim if it h a d been
i n v e n t e d in those d a r k times; b u t now every " n i p p e r " has a
" B r o w n i e , " a n d a p h o t o g r a p h is as c o m m o n as a b o x of matches—
p e r h a p s even m o r e so, this b e i n g w a r time! P h o t o g r a p h y is too easy
in a superficial way, a n d i n c o n s e q u e n c e is treated slightingly by
p e o p l e w h o o u g h t to k n o w b e t t e r . O n e does n o t consider Music a n
i n f e r i o r art simply because little M a r y can play a scale. W h a t we need
in p h o t o g r a p h y is m o r e sincerity, m o r e respect for o u r m e d i u m a n d
less respect for its decayed conventions.
All t h e s u m m e r I h a v e been p a i n t i n g , a n d so I can come back to
p h o t o g r a p h y w i t h a m o r e or less fresh viewpoint, a n d it makes m e
w a n t to shout, " W a k e u p ! " to m a n y of my p h o t o g r a p h i c colleagues.
" D o s o m e t h i n g outrageously b a d if you like, b u t let it be freshly
seen." If we go o n fishing o u t o u r old negatives a n d m a k i n g a few
feeble p r i n t s of them, just as we have been d o i n g for the past ten
years, p h o t o g r a p h y will stagnate. I have the very greatest respect for
p h o t o g r a p h y as a m e a n s of personal expression, a n d I w a n t to see it
alive to the spirit of progress; if it is not possible to be " m o d e r n " w i t h
the newest of all t h e arts, we h a d b e t t e r bury o u r black boxes, a n d go
back to scratching w i t h a s h a r p b o n e in t h e m a n n e r of o u r r e m o t e
D a r w i n i a n ancestors. I d o n o t t h i n k t h a t we have b e g u n to even
realize t h e possibilities of t h e camera. T h e beauty of design displayed
by t h e microscope seems to m e a w o n d e r f u l field to e x p l o r e f r o m t h e
purely pictorial p o i n t of view, the use of prisms for the splitting of
images i n t o segments has b e e n very slightly e x p e r i m e n t e d with, a n d
m u l t i p l e exposures o n t h e same plate—outside of t h e childish fakes
of the so-called "spirit p h o t o g r a p h s " — h a v e been neglected almost
entirely.
As a start I suggest t h a t a n e x h i b i t i o n be organised of "Abstract
P h o t o g r a p h y " ; t h a t in t h e entry f o r m it be distinctly stated t h a t n o
work will be a d m i t t e d in w h i c h t h e interest of t h e subject m a t t e r is
greater t h a n t h e a p p r e c i a t i o n of t h e e x t r a o r d i n a r y . A sense of design
is, of course, all i m p o r t a n t , a n d an o p p o r t u n i t y for t h e expression of
suppressed or unsuspected originality s h o u l d prove very beneficial.
You may t h i n k w h a t you like a b o u t t h e m o d e r n m o v e m e n t in t h e
arts, b u t t h e world will never be the same place again. W e may dis-
a p p r o v e of m o d e r n i t y in art, b u t we can never go back to Academicism
w i t h the s m u g complacency of yore. T h e hollowness, t h e u n t h i n k a b l e
dullness of it all, is now only too clearly a p p a r e n t . A n d it is my h o p e
that p h o t o g r a p h y may fall in l i n e w i t h all the o t h e r arts, a n d with her
infinite possibilities, d o things stranger a n d m o r e fascinating t h a n t h e
most fantastic dreams.

ROBERT DEMACHY (1859-1938) . . . a consensus of feeling which appears

to be coming universal amongst people who write tends to confine us hence-
forth within what they call, without further explanation—and Heaven knows
we should be grateful for one—the Limits of Photography; so that a print
purely artistic in its nature can not be admirable unless it distinctly offers
us the photographic character and the qualities of the medium carried to
their highest degree of perfection, M O N S I E U R D E M A C H Y AND E N G L I S H P H O T O -
G R A P H I C A R T , Camera Work, No. 18, 1907, p. 42.

ON THE STRAIGHT PRINT 1907

Camera Work, No. 19, pp. 21-24.
T h e o l d war b e t w e e n straight p h o t o g r a p h y a n d t h e o t h e r one—
call it as you like—has b e g u n over again. It is not, as it o u g h t to be,
a q u e s t i o n of p r i n c i p l e . N o , it has become a personal q u e s t i o n
amongst a good m a n y p h o t o g r a p h e r s , because most of them, a n d
especially those w h o take p u r e l y d o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h s , look to
b e i n g recognized as artists. It follows t h a t any d e f i n i t i o n of a r t t h a t
does not fit in w i t h their m e t h o d s will be violently attacked because
the recognition of such a d e f i n i t i o n w o u l d l i m i t pictorial p h o t o g r a p h y
to a c e r t a i n n u m b e r of m e n instead of t h r o w i n g o p e n t h e doors of
the t e m p l e to t h e vast h o r d e of camera carriers.
It is n o t w i t h o u t c e r t a i n misgivings t h a t I a m a t t e m p t i n g to give
a clear r e s u m e of this ever d e b a t e d q u e s t i o n , for I k n o w t h a t t h e abdve
p a r a g r a p h will be used against me a n d I shall be accused of " p l e a d i n g
for my s a i n t " as we say. As a fact I a m d o i n g n o t h i n g of t h e sort, for
t h o u g h I believe firmly t h a t a work of a r t can only be evolved u n d e r
certain circumstances, I am equally convinced t h a t these same cir-
cumstances will n o t perforce e n g e n d e r a w o r k of art. M e d d l i n g w i t h
a g u m p r i n t may or may n o t a d d t h e vital spark, t h o u g h w i t h o u t t h e
m e d d l i n g t h e r e will surely be no spark w h a t e v e r .
My m e a n i n g I h o p e has been m a d e clear. Still t h e r e is a second
p o i n t to be e l u c i d a t e d , a n d t h a t is t h e precise signification of a term
t h a t we shall be using presently, " s t r a i g h t p r i n t . " A c c o r d i n g to t h e
sense t h a t is given to this term t h e w h o l e s t r u c t u r e of o u r a r g u m e n t s
may be radically c h a n g e d a n d t h e s u b s e q u e n t verdict falsified. For
h e r e is par avarice my o p i n i o n in a few words. A straight p r i n t may
be b e a u t i f u l , a n d it may prove s u p e r - a b u n d a n t l y t h a t its a u t h o r is a n
artist; b u t it can n o t be a work of art. You see now t h a t it is necessary
before e n t e r i n g i n t o details to give a clear d e f i n i t i o n of t h e n a t u r e of
t h e straight p r i n t as I u n d e r s t a n d it, a n d also a d e f i n i t i o n of t h e work
of art. A straight p r i n t , to be w o r t h y of its n a m e , m u s t first of all be
taken f r o m a straight negative. T h e r e m u s t b e n o playing u p o n
words in a serious controversy of this n a t u r e . O n e m u s t n o t call
" s t r a i g h t " a b r o m i d e m e c h a n i c a l l y p r i n t e d , b u t f r o m a negative
r e d u c e d locally a n d p a i n t e d o n t h e glass side w i t h all the colors of
t h e r a i n b o w . T h i s leads us to describe t h e straight negative. It will
be a negative p r o d u c e d by n o r m a l d e v e l o p m e n t , or b e t t e r still by
t a n k d e v e l o p m e n t , d u r i n g w h i c h no control is possible; a n d of course
it will n o t be s u b m i t t e d to any s u b s e q u e n t r e t o u c h i n g e i t h e r o n t h e
film or o n t h e glass. F r o m this negative a p r i n t will be t a k e n w i t h a
n o r m a l exposure w i t h o u t local s h a d i n g . If t h e p a p e r used for p r i n t i n g
has to be developed, it will not be developed locally n o r i n t e r f e r e d
w i t h in any way d u r i n g d e v e l o p m e n t . It will be m o u n t e d or f r a m e d
w i t h o u t its surface b e i n g t o u c h e d by a finger or a b r u s h .
T h i s is my idea of the sense of t h e t e r m " s t r a i g h t p r i n t . " If any
readers consider t h a t it is a false idea they h a d better leave t h e n e x t
pages u n r e a d . Now, s p e a k i n g of g r a p h i c m e t h o d s only, w h a t are the
distinctive qualities of a work of art? A work of a r t m u s t be a
transcription, n o t a copy, of n a t u r e . T h e beauty of t h e m o t i v e in
n a t u r e has n o t h i n g to d o w i t h t h e q u a l i t y t h a t makes a w o r k of art.
T h i s special q u a l i t y is given by t h e artist's way of expressing himself.
I n o t h e r words, there is n o t a particle of art in the most b e a u t i f u l
scene of n a t u r e . T h e a r t is m a n ' s alone, it is subjective n o t objective.
If a m a n slavishly copies n a t u r e , n o m a t t e r if it is w i t h h a n d a n d
pencil or t h r o u g h a p h o t o g r a p h i c lens, he may be a s u p r e m e artist
all t h e while, b u t t h a t p a r t i c u l a r work of his can n o t be called a
work of art.
I h a v e so o f t e n h e a r d t h e terms " a r t i s t i c " a n d " b e a u t i f u l " em-
ployed as if they were synonymous t h a t I believe it is necessary to
insist o n t h e radical difference b e t w e e n t h e i r m e a n i n g s . Q u i t e lately
I have r e a d in t h e course of a n interesting article o n A m e r i c a n
pictorial p h o t o g r a p h y the following p a r a g r a p h : " I n n a t u r e t h e r e
is t h e b e a u t i f u l , the c o m m o n p l a c e a n d t h e ugly, a n d he w h o has t h e
insight to recognize t h e o n e f r o m t h e o t h e r a n d the c u n n i n g to
separate a n d transfix only the b e a u t i f u l , is t h e artist." T h i s w o u l d
i n d u c e us to believe t h a t w h e n R e m b r a n d t p a i n t e d the "Lesson in
A n a t o m y " he p r o v e d himself n o artist. Is t h e r e a n y t h i n g uglier in
n a t u r e t h a n a greenish, half-disemboweled corpse; or a n y t h i n g m o r e
c o m m o n p l a c e t h a n a score of m e n dressed in black s t a n d i n g r o u n d a
table? Nevertheless, t h e result of this c o m b i n a t i o n of the ugly a n d
the c o m m o n p l a c e is one of t h e greatest masterpieces in p a i n t i n g . Be-
cause t h e artist i n t e r v e n e d .
If R e m b r a n d t h a d p a i n t e d t h a t scene exactly as he saw it in n a t u r e
he w o u l d have given us exactly t h e same impression t h a t he w o u l d
have felt in f r o n t of t h e actual scene, a sensation of disgust—mingled
p e r h a p s w i t h a vivid a d m i r a t i o n f o r t h e m a n u a l a n d visual skill of
the copyist, b u t w i t h o u t a shadow of any art sensation.
Let us c h a n g e t h e circumstances a n d take as e x a m p l e a b e a u t i f u l
motive such as a sunset. D o you t h i n k t h a t T u r n e r ' s sunsets existed
in n a t u r e such as h e p a i n t e d them? D o you t h i n k t h a t if h e h a d
p a i n t e d t h e m as they were, a n d n o t as he felt t h e m , he w o u l d have left
a n a m e as a n artist? W h y , if t h e choice of a b e a u t i f u l m o t i v e was suffi-
cient to m a k e a work of a r t n i n e t y p e r c e n t of t h e g r a p h i c works in
the world, p a i n t i n g s , drawings, p h o t o g r a p h s a n d c h r o m o s w o u l d be
works of art, a few of t h e m only, distinctly ugly a n d n o t as m a n y
commonplace.
Choose t h e m a n w h o m you consider t h e very first landscape artist
p h o t o g r a p h e r in t h e world; suppose he has, t h a n k s to his artistic na-
ture a n d visual training, chosen t h e h o u r a n d spot, of all others. Im-
agine h i m s h a d o w e d by some atrocious p h o t o g r a p h i c b o u n d e r fur-
nished w i t h t h e same plates a n d lens as t h e master. I m a g i n e this
plagiarist setting his t r i p o d in t h e actual d e n t s left by t h e artist's ma-
chine a n d t a k i n g t h e same p i c t u r e w i t h t h e same exposure. Now,
suppose t h a t b o t h are straight printers? W h o will be able later o n
to tell w h i c h is the artist's a n d w h i c h is t h e o t h e r one's picture? B u t
figure to yourself t h e artist p r i n t i n g his negative, selectively, by t h e
g u m b i c h r o m a t e or t h e oil process, or d e v e l o p i n g his p l a t i n o t y p e p r i n t
w i t h glycerine. Even if t h e o t h e r m a n used t h e same p r i n t i n g m e t h o d ,
one p r i n t will h a v e t h e artist's s i g n a t u r e all over it f r o m t h e sky to
t h e g r o u n d , t h e o t h e r will be a meaningless m u d d l e . For the man
has i n t e r v e n e d in b o t h cases. O n e has m a d e a w o r k of art o u t of a
simply b e a u t i f u l picture, t h e o t h e r has p r o b a b l y spoiled its beauty
a n d certainly has i n t r o d u c e d no art. T h e m o r a l of this fable is two-
fold. It shows that a b e a u t i f u l s t r a i g h t p r i n t may be m a d e by a m a n
i n c a p a b l e of p r o d u c i n g a work of art, a n d t h a t a straight p r i n t can
n o t possibly be a work of art even w h e n its a u t h o r is a n artist, since
it may be identical to t h a t taken by a m a n w h o is n o artist.
You will answer t h a t a g u m or a n oil p r i n t f r o m a m a s t e r can be
copied by a p a t i e n t a n d p a i n s t a k i n g worker, just as the above beauti-
f u l motive was stolen f r o m t h e artist—well, you may try. I k n o w of
a m a n w h o has been copying Steichen to the e x t e n t of h a v i n g canvas
b a c k g r o u n d p a i n t e d exactly like the b r u s h - d e v e l o p e d b a c k g r o u n d of
o n e of his g u m portraits. I p r e f e r n o t to speak of t h e result. T h a t it
was all to t h e credit of Steichen you may believe.
N o t once b u t m a n y times h a v e I h e a r d it said t h a t t h e choice of the
motive is sufficient to t u r n a n otherwise mechanically p r o d u c e d posi-
tive i n t o a work of art. T h i s is n o t t r u e ; w h a t is t r u e is t h a t a carefully
chosen m o t i v e ( b e a u t i f u l , ugly, or c o m m o n p l a c e , b u t well composed
a n d p r o p e r l y lighted) is necessary in t h e s u b s e q u e n t evolution
towards art. It is n o t the same t h i n g . No, you can n o t escape the
consequences of t h e m e r e copying of n a t u r e . A copyist may be an
artist b u t his copy is n o t a work of art; t h e m o r e a c c u r a t e it is, the
worse art it will be. Please do n o t u n e a r t h t h e old story a b o u t Zeuxis
a n d Apelles, w h e n t h e bird a n d t h e n the p a i n t e r were taken in.
I h a v e no f a i t h in sparrows as a r t critics a n d I t h i n k t h e mistake of
t h e p a i n t e r was a n insult to his b r o t h e r artist.
T h e result of all this a r g u m e n t will be t h a t I shall be taxed w i t h
h a v i n g said t h a t all u n m o d i f i e d p r i n t s are detestable p r o d u c t i o n s ,
fit for the w a s t e p a p e r basket, a n d t h a t b e f o r e locally developed
p l a t i n o t y p e , g u m b i c h r o m a t e , ozotype a n d oils, t h e r e were n o artists
to be f o u n d a m o n g s t p h o t o g r a p h e r s . I d e n y all this. I h a v e seen m a n y
straight p r i n t s t h a t were b e a u t i f u l a n d t h a t gave evidence of the
artistic n a t u r e of their a u t h o r s , w i t h o u t being, in my private o p i n i o n ,
works of art. F o r a work of a r t is a big thing. I have also seen so-called
s t r a i g h t p r i n t s that struck me as works of art, so m u c h so t h a t I
i m m e d i a t e l y asked for some technical details a b o u t their genesis, a n d
f o u n d to my i n t i m a t e satisfaction t h a t they were not straight p r i n t s
at all. I have seen brush-developed, m u l t i - m o d i f i e d g u m p r i n t s t h a t
were worse—immeasurably worse—than t h e vilest t i n t y p e in exist-
ence, a n d I h a v e seen a n d h a v e in my possession straight p r i n t s by
Miss C a m e r o n a n d by Salomon, o n e of o u r first professionals, just
after D a g u e r r e ' s time, t h a t are u n d o u b t e d l y t h e work of artists. All is
n o t artistically b a d in a straight p r i n t . Some values are o f t e n well
r e n d e r e d ; some "passages" f r o m light to shade are excellent, a n d the
d r a w i n g can be good if p r o p e r lenses are used at a p r o p e r distance
f r o m the motive; b u t t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g w a n t i n g , s o m e t h i n g all
i m p o r t a n t , extremely difficult to express i n words. If you can see it
there is n o use trying to describe it; if you d o not, it is useless also,
for you w o u l d n o t u n d e r s t a n d . B u t a p a r t f r o m t h e absence of this
mysterious something, this t h u m b - m a r k of the living, t h i n k i n g , a n d
feeling artist, a r e there n o t o t h e r things w r o n g in all straight photo-
graphs—faults d u e not only to t h e inevitable h u m a n errors in ex-
posure a n d d e v e l o p m e n t , b u t to p h o t o g r a p h y itself, p h o t o g r a p h i c
faults in the r e n d e r i n g of values (that n o o r t h o c h r o m a t i c plates are
capable of correcting w i t h o u t creating o t h e r exaggerations just as
bad), faults in t h e e q u a l translation of i m p o r t a n t a n d useless detail,
in t h e m o n o t o n o u s registering of different textures, in the exaggera-
tion of b r i l l i a n t spots, a n d in o t h e r things, too? W h a t will t h e p u r e
p h o t o g r a p h e r do w h e n he has detected these faults? If he allows t h e m
to r e m a i n o u t of respect for t h e laws of t h e p u r e goddess photog-
r a p h y , he may prove himself a h i g h priest p h o t o g r a p h i c , b u t will he
still be a t r u e artist, f a i t h f u l to the gospel of art? I believe that, unless
he has h a d his fingers a m p u t a t e d according to t h e dictates of B e r n a r d
Shaw, he will feel t h e m i t c h i n g to t o n e d o w n or to lighten this spot
or that, a n d to d o o t h e r things also. B u t he may not do these things,
the L a w of t h e Straight P r i n t f o r b i d s it. T h e conclusion is simple
e n o u g h , f o r t h e r e is n o m i d d l e course between the mechanical copy
of n a t u r e a n d t h e personal t r a n s c r i p t i o n of n a t u r e . T h e law is there;
b u t there is no sanction to it, a n d the b u t t o n p r e s s e r s will c o n t i n u e to
extol t h e p u r i t y of their i n t e n t i o n s a n d to m a k e a v i r t u e of their
incapacity to correct a n d m o d i f y t h e i r mechanical copies. A n d too
many pictorialists will m e d d l e with their p r i n t s in t h e f o n d belief
that any a l t e r a t i o n , however b u n g l i n g , is t h e touchstone of art. L a t e r
o n p e r h a p s a sane, m o d e r a t e school of pictorial p h o t o g r a p h y will
evolve. La verite est en marche, mais elle marche lentement.
Before e n d i n g I can n o t b u t confess my a s t o n i s h m e n t at the neces-
sity of such a profession of f a i t h as t h e one I have been m a k i n g .
Pictorial p h o t o g r a p h y owes its b i r t h to the universal dissatisfaction
of artist p h o t o g r a p h e r s in f r o n t of the p h o t o g r a p h i c errors of t h e
straight p r i n t . Its false values, its lack of accents, its e q u a l d e l i n e a t i o n
of things i m p o r t a n t a n d useless, were universally recognized a n d
d e p l o r e d by a host of malcontents. T h e r e was a general cry toward
liberty of t r e a t m e n t a n d liberty of correction. Glycerine-developed
p l a t i n o t y p e a n d g u m b i c h r o m a t e were soon a f t e r h a i l e d with enthusi-
asm as liberators; today the oil process opens o u t e r a n d i n n e r doors
to personal t r e a t m e n t . A n d yet, a f t e r all this outcry against old-
PETER H . EMERSON 60

f a s h i o n e d a n d n a r r o w - m i n d e d m e t h o d s , a f t e r this t h a n k f u l accept-
ance of n e w ones, t h e m e n w h o f o u g h t f o r n e w ideas a r e n o w fighting
f o r old errors. T h a t d o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h e r s s h o u l d h o l d u p t h e
s t r a i g h t p r i n t as a m o d e l is b u t n a t u r a l , they will c o n t i n u e d o i n g so
in aeternum for v a r i o u s p e r s o n a l reasons; b u t t h a t m e n like A a n d B
s h o u l d extol t h e virtues of m e c h a n i c a l p h o t o g r a p h y as an art process,
I can n o t u n d e r s t a n d .
I c o n s i d e r t h a t , f r o m a n a r t p o i n t of view, the s t r a i g h t p r i n t of
today is n o t a w h i t b e t t e r t h a n t h e s t r a i g h t p r i n t of fifteen years ago.
If it was f a u l t y t h e n it is still f a u l t y n o w . If it was all t h a t can be
desired, p i c t o r i a l p h o t o g r a p h e r s , t h e L i n k s arid t h e v a r i o u s seces-
sionists of t h e n e w a n d t h e old w o r l d h a v e b e e n w a s t i n g t h e i r t i m e ,
to say the least, d u r i n g t h e last d e c a d e .

PETER H. EMERSON (1856-1936) The opticians were right from the mathe-
matical standpoint, and I was right from the physiological and psychological
standpoints, and so it ivas evident there were two truths to nature—the per-
spective or mathematical truth and the psychological or visual truth, N A T U R A L -
ISTIC P H O T O G R A P H Y , 3rd ed., New York, Scoville & Adams, 1899, p. 170.

SCIENCE AND ART 1899

Naturalistic Photography, 3d ed. rev.. New York, Scovill & Adams,
Appendix A, pp. 67-79. (Paper read at the Camera Club Conference
held in the rooms of the Society of Arts, London, March 26, 1889.)
M R . P R E S I D E N T , L A D I E S , AND F E L L O W - P H O T O G R A P H E R S : — B e f o r e be-
g i n n i n g this p a p e r I w o u l d f a i n ask of you t w o things—your a t t e n t i o n
a n d y o u r charity, b u t especially y o u r c h a r i t y . T h e r e c e p t i o n w h i c h
you accord me, ladies a n d g e n t l e m e n , assures m e you will give b o t h ,
a n d I t h a n k you b e f o r e h a n d .
Since all m e n t a l progress consists, as M r . H e r b e r t S p e n c e r has
shown, for t h e most p a r t in d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n — t h a t is in t h e analysis of
a n u n k n o w n c o m p l e x i n t o k n o w n components—surely it were a folly
to c o n f u s e a n y longer t h e a i m s of Science a n d A r t . R a t h e r s h o u l d we
e n d e a v o r to d r a w a n i n d e l i b l e l i n e of d e m a r c a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m , for
in this way w e m a k e m e n t a l progress, a n d Science a n d A r t at the s a m e
t i m e begin to g a t h e r t o g e t h e r t h e i r scattered forces, e a c h o n e t a k i n g
u n d e r its s t a n d a r d those p o w e r s t h a t b e l o n g to it, a n d t h u s b e c o m i n g
i n t e g r a t e d , a n d necessarily s t r o n g e r a n d m o r e p e r m a n e n t ; for evolu-
t i o n is i n t e g r a t i o n a n d d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n passing i n t o a c o h e r e n t hetero-
geneity. N o w I d o n o t m e a n to p r e m i s e t h a t this c o n f u s i o n b e t w e e n
Science a n d A r t exists everywhere—it does not. B u t I feel sure t h a t it
exists largely in t h e ever-increasing b o d y of persons w h o practise
p h o t o g r a p h y . T h e m a j o r i t y of t h e m h a v e n o t t h o r o u g h l y , nay, n o t
even a d e q u a t e l y , t h o u g h t t h e m a t t e r o u t . It is obvious, a c c o r d i n g
to t h e teachings of e v o l u t i o n , t h a t , if we are to m a k e progress, this
d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n m u s t be m a d e , t h o r o u g h l y u n d e r s t o o d a n d rigidly
a d h e r e d to by every p r a c t i t i o n e r of p h o t o g r a p h y . E a c h o n e m u s t h a v e
his a i m clearly s t a m p e d u p o n his m i n d , w h e t h e r it be t h e a d v a n c e -
m e n t of science or the creation of works whose a i m a n d e n d is to give
aesthetic pleasure. Proceed we now to analyze the difference between
the aims a n d ends of Science a n d Art. Let us first a p p r o a c h t h e
subject f r o m t h e scientific s t a n d p o i n t .
Assuming t h a t we have b e f o r e us a living m a n , let us proceed
together to study h i m scientifically, for t h e n o n c e i m a g i n i n g o u r
minds to be virginal tablets, w i t h o u t score or scratch. Let us proceed
first to record the color of his skin, his h a i r a n d eyes, t h e t e x t u r e of
his skin, t h e relative positions of t h e various orifices in his face, the
n u m b e r of his limbs, t h e various m e a s u r e m e n t s of all these members.
So we go o n i n t e g r a t i n g a n d d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g u n t i l we find t h a t we
have actually b u i l t u p a science—ethnology. If we p u r s u e the study,
a n d begin to c o m p a r e d i f f e r e n t races of m e n with each other, we find
our ethnology e x t e n d s to a m o r e c o m p l e x a n t h r o p o l o g y .
W e next observe t h a t t h e eyelids o p e n a n d close, the lips o p e n ,
sounds issue f r o m t h e m o u t h , a n d o u r curiosity leads us to dissect a
dead subject, a n d we find t h a t b e n e a t h t h e skin, fat, a n d superficial
fasciae there a r e muscles, each s u p p l i e d w i t h vessels a n d nerves to
their c o m m o n origins, a n d a r e led to t h e h e a r t a n d b r a i n . I n short,
we find t h e science of a n a t o m y grows u p u n d e r o u r hands, a n d if we
go o n w i t h o u r studies we a r e led i n t o microscopy. T h e n we begin to
p o n d e r o n the reasons why the blood flows, o n t h e reasons why t h e
corrugator supercilii a n d depressores anguli oris act in weeping, the
musculus superbus in practical arrogance, a n d t h e levator anguli oris
in snarling or sneering. So we go o n s t u d y i n g t h e f u n c t i o n s of all t h e
organs we find in o u r m a n , a n d lo! we a r e d e e p in physiology; a n d
if we go deeply e n o u g h we find t h e t h r e a d lost in the most c o m p l e x
problems of o r g a n i c chemistry a n d m o l e c u l a r physics. A n d so we
might go o n s t u d y i n g this m a n ; a n d if o u r lives were long e n o u g h ,
a n d if we h a d capacity e n o u g h , we s h o u l d be led t h r o u g h a study of
this m a n to a k n o w l e d g e of all physical p h e n o m e n a , so w o n d e r f u l
a n d b e a u t i f u l is t h e all-pervading p r i n c i p l e of t h e conservation of
energy, a n d so indestructible is m a t t e r . As we proceeded with o u r
studies we s h o u l d h a v e been observing, recording, positing hypothe-
ses, a n d either p r o v i n g or d i s p r o v i n g t h e m . In all these ways we
should have been a d d i n g to t h e s u m of knowledge. A n d in t h e great-
est steps we m a d e in o u r a d v a n c e m e n t we should have m a d e use of
our constructive imagination—the highest intellectual power, accord-
ing to recent psychologists.
T h e results of these investigations, if we were wise, w o u l d h a v e
been recorded in t h e simplest a n d tersest l a n g u a g e possible, for such
is the language of Science. It is needless to p o i n t o u t t h a t in these
records of o u r studies, as in t h e records of all scientific studies, too
many facts could not possibly be registered. Every little fact is wel-
come in scientific study, so long as it is true. A n d t h u s the h u m b l e s t
scientific worker may h e l p in t h e great w o r k ; his mite is always
 62 PETER H. EMERSON

acceptable. Such is, alas, not the case with t h a t jealous goddess, Art;
she will have n o t h i n g to d o w i t h mediocrity. A b a d work of a r t has no
raison d'etre; it is worse t h a n useless—it is h a r m f u l .
T o s u m up, then, "Science," as Professor H u x l e y says, "is the
k n o w l e d g e of t h e laws of N a t u r e o b t a i n e d by observation, experi-
m e n t , a n d reasoning. N o line can be d r a w n between c o m m o n knowl-
edge of things a n d scientific k n o w l e d g e ; nor between c o m m o n rea-
s o n i n g a n d scientific reasoning. I n strictness, all accurate k n o w l e d g e
is Science, a n d all exact r e a s o n i n g is scientific reasoning. T h e m e t h o d
of observation a n d experiment by w h i c h such great results are ob-
t a i n e d in Science is identically t h e same as t h a t w h i c h is e m p l o y e d
by every one, every day of his life, b u t refined a n d r e n d e r e d precise."
N o w let us t u r n to Art, a n d look at o u r i m a g i n a r y m a n f r o m t h e
artistic s t a n d p o i n t . A s s u m i n g t h a t we h a v e l e a r n e d t h e t e c h n i q u e of
some m e t h o d of artistic expression, a n d t h a t is p a r t of t h e science
we r e q u i r e , we will proceed w i t h o u r work.
Let us look at t h e figure b e f o r e us f r o m t h e sculptor's p o i n t of
view. N o w w h a t is o u r m e n t a l a t t i t u d e ? W e no longer care for m a n y
of the facts t h a t vitally interested us w h e n we were s t u d y i n g t h e m a n
scientifically; we care little a b o u t his a n a t o m y , less a b o u t his physiol-
ogy, a n d n o t h i n g at all a b o u t o r g a n i c chemistry a n d m o l e c u l a r phys-
ics. W e care n o t h i n g for his m o r a l i t y , his t h o u g h t s , his habits a n d
customs—his sociological history, in fact; n e i t h e r d o we care a b o u t
his ethnological characters. If he be a good model, it m a t t e r s little
w h e t h e r he be Greek, Italian, or Circassian. B u t we d o care, above
all, for his type, his b u i l d , a n d t h e grace w i t h which he c o m p o r t s
himself; for o u r a i m is to m a k e a s t a t u e like h i m , a s t a t u e possessing
qualities t h a t shall give aesthetic pleasure. F o r t h e raison d'etre of
a work of a r t ends w i t h itself; t h e r e s h o u l d be n o u l t e r i o r motive
b e y o n d t h e giving of aesthetic pleasure to t h e most cultivated a n d
sensitively refined natures.
T h e first thing, t h e n , we m u s t d o is to sit in j u d g m e n t o n o u r
m o d e l . W i l l he d o f o r t h e p u r p o s e ? Are his features suitable? Is he
well m o d e l l e d in all parts? Does he move easily a n d w i t h grace? If he
fulfils all these c o n d i t i o n s we take h i m . T h e n we w a t c h his move-
m e n t s a n d seize o n a b e a u t i f u l pose. N o w w i t h o u r clay we begin to
m o d e l h i m . As we go o n w i t h o u r work we begin to see t h a t it is
utterly impossible to record all t h e facts a b o u t h i m w i t h o u r material,
a n d we soon find it is u n d e s i r a b l e to d o so—nay, pernicious. W e can-
n o t m o d e l those h u n d r e d s of fine wrinkles, those t h o u s a n d s of hairs,
those m y r i a d s of pores i n t h e skin t h a t we see b e f o r e us. W h a t , then,
m u s t we do? W e obviously select some—the most salient, if we are
wise—and leave out the rest.
All at once t h e f u n d a m e n t a l d i s t i n c t i o n between Science a n d Art
draws u p o n us. W e cannot r e c o r d too m a n y facts in Science; the
fewer facts we record i n Art, a n d yet express t h e subject so t h a t it
cannot be better expressed, the better. All the greatest artists h a v e
left out as m u c h as possible. T h e y have e n d e a v o r e d to give a fine
analysis of t h e model, a n d the Greeks succeeded.
It is beside the q u e s t i o n to show how Science has exercised an
i n j u r i o u s influence u p o n certain schools in art; b u t t h a t w o u l d be
very easy to do. At the same time, the best A r t has been f o u n d e d on
scientific principles—that is, the big physical facts have been t r u e
to n a t u r e .
T o sum up, then, Art is t h e selection, a r r a n g e m e n t , a n d r e c o r d i n g
of certain facts, w i t h t h e a i m of giving aesthetic pleasure; a n d it
differs f r o m Science f u n d a m e n t a l l y , in t h a t as few facts as are com-
patible w i t h c o m p l e t e expression are chosen, a n d these are a r r a n g e d
so as to a p p e a l to the e m o t i o n a l side of m a n ' s n a t u r e , whereas the
scientific facts a p p e a l to his intellectual side.
But, as in m a n y e r r o n e o u s ideas t h a t have h a d currency for long,
there lurks a germ of t r u t h , so there lurks still a leaven of Art in
Science a n d a leaven of Science in A r t ; b u t in each these leavenings
are s u b o r d i n a t e , a n d n o t at the first blush a p p r e c i a b l e . For e x a m p l e ,
in Science the facts can be r e c o r d e d or d e m o n s t r a t e d w i t h selection,
a r r a n g e m e n t , a n d lucidity; that is the leaven of Art in Science. W h i l s t
in Art the big physical facts of n a t u r e m u s t be t r u t h f u l l y r e n d e r e d ;
that is the leaven of Science i n A r t .
A n d so we see t h e r e is a r e l a t i o n s h i p between science a n d art, a n d
yet they are as t h e poles a s u n d e r .
2
W e shall now e n d e a v o r to discuss briefly how o u r r e m a r k s a p p l y
to p h o t o g r a p h y . Any s t u d e n t of p h o t o g r a p h i c l i t e r a t u r e is well aware
t h a t n u m e r o u s papers a r e constantly being p u b l i s h e d by persons w h o
evidently are n o t aware of this radical distinction between science
a n d art.
T h e s t u d e n t will see it constantly advocated t h a t every detail of
a p i c t u r e s h o u l d be i m p a r t i a l l y r e n d e r e d w i t h a b i t i n g accuracy, a n d
this in all cases. T h i s b i t i n g sharpness being, as landscape p a i n t e r s
say, "Quite fatal from the artistic standpointIf t h e r e n d e r i n g were
always given sharply, t h e work would b e l o n g to t h e category of
t o p o g r a p h y or the knowledge of places, t h a t is Science. T o c o n t i n u e ,
the s t u d e n t will find directions for p r o d u c i n g an unvarying quality
in his negative. H e will be told h o w negatives of low-toned effects
may be m a d e to give p r i n t s like negatives taken in b r i g h t sunshine;
in short, he will find t h a t these writers have a scientific ideal, a sort
of standard negative by which to g a u g e all others. A n d if these writers
are questioned, t h e s t u d e n t will find t h e standard negative is one in
which all detail is r e n d e r e d with microscopic sharpness, a n d o n e
taken evidently in the brightest sunshine. W e once h e a r d it seriously
proposed t h a t there s h o u l d be some sort of standard lantern-slide.
My allotted time is too brief to give f u r t h e r examples. Suffice it to say,
t h a t this u n v a r y i n g standard negative w o u l d be a d m i r a b l e if Nature
were u n v a r y i n g in her moods; u n t i l t h a t comes to pass there m u s t be
as m u c h variety in negatives as t h e r e are in different moods in N a t u r e .
It is, we t h i n k , because of the c o n f u s i o n of t h e aims of Science a n d
A r t t h a t the m a j o r i t y of p h o t o g r a p h s fail e i t h e r as scientific records
or pictures. It w o u l d be easy to p o i n t o u t how the m a j o r i t y are false
scientifically, a n d easier still to show how they are simply devoid of
all artistic qualities. T h e y serve, however, as m a n y have served, as
t o p o g r a p h i c a l records of faces, buildings, a n d landscapes, b u t o f t e n
incorrect records at t h a t . It is curious a n d interesting to observe t h a t
such work always r e q u i r e s a name. It is a p h o t o g r a p h of Mr. Jones,
of Mont Blanc, or of t h e Houses of Parliament. O n the other hand,
a work of Art really r e q u i r e s no name—it speaks for itself. It has no
b u r n i n g desire to be n a m e d , for its a i m is to give t h e b e h o l d e r aesthe-
tic pleasure, a n d not to a d d to his k n o w l e d g e or t h e Science of places,
i.e., t o p o g r a p h y . T h e work of Art, it c a n n o t too o f t e n be r e p e a t e d ,
appeals to m a n ' s e m o t i o n a l side; it has no wish to a d d to his knowl-
edge—to his Science. O n the o t h e r h a n d , t o p o g r a p h i c a l works a p p e a l
to his intellectual side; they refresh his memory of absent persons or
landscapes, or they a d d to his knowledge. T o a n t i c i p a t e criticism,
I s h o u l d like to say t h a t of course in all m e n t a l processes t h e intellec-
tual, a n d e m o t i o n a l factors are inseparable, yet t h e one is always
s u b o r d i n a t e d to t h e o t h e r . T h e e m o t i o n a l is s u b o r d i n a t e w h e n we
are solving a m a t h e m a t i c a l p r o b l e m , the intellectual is decidedly
s u b o r d i n a t e w h e n we are m a k i n g love. Psychologists h a v e analyzed
to a r e m a r k a b l e e x t e n t the intellectual p h e n o m e n a b u t the knowl-
edge of t h e c o m p o n e n t s of t h e s e n t i m e n t s or t h e e m o t i o n a l phe-
n o m e n a is, as M r . H e r b e r t Spencer says, " a l t o g e t h e r vague in its out-
lines, a n d has a s t r u c t u r e w h i c h c o n t i n u e s indistinct even u n d e r t h e
most p a t i e n t introspection. D i m traces of d i f f e r e n t c o m p o n e n t s may
be discerned; b u t t h e l i m i t a t i o n s b o t h of t h e whole a n d of its parts
are so faintly m a r k e d , a n d at the same time so e n t a n g l e d , t h a t n o n e
b u t very general results can be r e a c h e d . "
T h e chief t h i n g , t h e n , t h a t I w o u l d impress u p o n all beginners is
t h e necessity for b e g i n n i n g w r ork w i t h a clear distinction between the
aims a n d ends of Science a n d A r t . W h e n the A r t s t u d e n t has acquired
e n o u g h knowledge—that is, Science—to express w h a t he wishes, let
him, w i t h jealous care, keep t h e scientific m e n t a l a t t i t u d e , if I may
so express it, far away. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , if t h e s t u d e n t ' s a i m is
scientific, let h i m cultivate rigidly scientific m e t h o d s , a n d n o t weaken
himself by a t t e m p t i n g a c o m p r o m i s e w i t h Art. W e in t h e photo-
g r a p h i c world s h o u l d be e i t h e r scientists or pictorial p h o t o g r a p h e r s ;
we s h o u l d be a i m i n g e i t h e r to increase knowledge—that is, science—
or to p r o d u c e works whose a i m a n d e n d is to give aesthetic pleasure.
I do n o t imply any c o m p a r i s o n between Science a n d A r t to the ad-
v a n t a g e of either one. T h e y are b o t h of t h e highest w o r t h , a n d I
a d m i r e all sincere, honest, a n d c a p a b l e workers in e i t h e r b r a n c h
w i t h i m p a r t i a l i t y . B u t I do n o t wish to see t h e aims a n d ends of t h e
two c o n f u s e d , t h e workers w e a k e n e d thereby, a n d above all, t h e
progress of Science h i n d e r e d a n d delayed.
3
N e x t I shall discuss briefly t h e ill-effects of a too sedulous study of
Science u p o n a n A r t s t u d e n t .
T h e first a n d , p e r h a p s , t h e greatest of these ill-effects is t h e positive
m e n t a l a t t i t u d e t h a t Science fosters. A scientific s t u d e n t is only con-
cerned w i t h s t a t i n g a fact clearly a n d simply; he m u s t tell the t r u t h ,
a n d t h e whole truth. Now, a scientific study of p h o t o g r a p h y if
pushed too far, leads, as a r u l e to t h a t state of m i n d w h i c h delights
in a wealth of clearly-cut detail. T h e scientific p h o t o g r a p h e r wishes
to see t h e veins in a lily-leaf a n d t h e scales o n a butterfly's wing. H e
looks, in fact, so closely, so microscopically, at the butterfly's w i n g
t h a t he never sees t h e poetry of t h e life of t h e butterfly itself, as w i t h
b u o y a n t wheelings it d i s a p p e a r s in m a r r i a g e flight over t h e lush grass
a n d p i n k cuckooflowers of May.
I feel sure t h a t this general d e l i g h t i n detail, b r i l l i a n t s u n s h i n y
effects, glossy prints, etc., is chiefly d u e to t h e e v o l u t i o n of photog-
r a p h y : these tastes have been developed w i t h t h e art, f r o m t h e silver
plate of Daguerre to the d o u b l e - a l b u m e n i z e d p a p e r of today. But,
as t h e a r t develops, we find t h e love f o r gloss a n d detail giving way
before p l a t i n o t y p e p r i n t s a n d photo-etchings.
T h e second great artistic evil e n g e n d e r e d by Science is the careless
m a n n e r in w h i c h things a r e expressed. T h e scientist seeks for t r u t h ,
a n d is o f t e n i n d i f f e r e n t to its m e t h o d of expression. T o h i m , " C a n
you n o t wait u p o n t h e l u n a t i c ? " is, as t h e late M a t t h e w A r n o l d said,
as good as " C a n s t t h o u n o t minister to a m i n d diseased?" T o the
literary artist, o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , these sentences a r e as the poles
asunder—the one i n b a l d t r u t h , t h e o t h e r l i t e r a t u r e . T h e y b o t h
suggest t h e same thing; yet w h a t aesthetic p l e a s u r e we get f r o m the
one, a n d w h a t a d u l l fact is, " C a n you n o t w a i t u p o n t h e lunatic?"
T h e r e are p h o t o g r a p h s a n d p h o t o g r a p h s ; t h e one giving as m u c h
pleasure as the literary sentence, t h e o t h e r being as d u l l as the m a t t e r -
of-fact q u e s t i o n . T h e s t u d e n t w i t h u n d e r s t a n d i n g will see the f u n d a -
m e n t a l a n d vital distinction between Science a n d A r t as s h o w n even
in these two short sentences.
A n d now, ladies a n d g e n t l e m e n , I d o n o t t h i n k I can d o b e t t e r
t h a n finish this section by q u o t i n g a n o t h e r passage f r o m t h e writings
of t h e late M a t t h e w A r n o l d .
"Deficit una mihi symmetria prisca.—'The a n t i q u e symmetry was
the o n e t h i n g w a n t i n g to me,' said L e o n a r d o d a Vinci, a n d he was
an I t a l i a n . I will n o t p r e s u m e to speak for t h e A m e r i c a n , b u t I am
sure t h a t in t h e E n g l i s h m a n , the w a n t of this a d m i r a b l e symmetry
of the Greeks is a t h o u s a n d times m o r e great a n d crying t h a n in any
I t a l i a n . T h e results of t h e w a n t show themselves m o s t glaringly,
p e r h a p s , in o u r architecture, b u t they show themselves also in o u r art.
Fit details strictly combined, in view of a large general result nobly
conceived: t h a t is just t h e b e a u t i f u l symmetria prisca of t h e Greeks,
a n d it is just where we English fail, where all o u r a r t fails. Striking
ideas we have, a n d well e x e c u t e d details we have; b u t t h a t h i g h sym-
m e t r y which, w i t h satisfying d e l i g h t f u l effect, c o n t a i n s them, we
seldom or never have. T h e glorious beauty of the Acropolis at A t h e n s
d i d n o t arise f r o m single fine things stuck a b o u t o n t h a t hill, a s t a t u e
here, a gateway there. No, it arose f r o m all things b e i n g perfectly
c o m b i n e d f o r a s u p r e m e total effect."
CONCLUSION.
A n d now I m u s t finish my remarks. I h a v e n o t p e r h a p s told you
very m u c h , b u t if I h a v e succeeded in impressing u p o n beginners a n d
some o t h e r s t h e vital a n d f u n d a m e n t a l distinction b e t w e e n Science
a n d Art, s o m e t h i n g will have b e e n achieved. A n d if those students
w h o find a n y t h i n g suggestive in my p a p e r are by it led to look u p o n
p h o t o g r a p h y in f u t u r e f r o m a n e w m e n t a l a t t i t u d e , s o m e t h i n g m o r e
i m p o r t a n t still will h a v e b e e n a t t a i n e d . For, in my h u m b l e o p i n i o n ,
t h o u g h it is a p p a r e n t l y b u t a little t h i n g I h a v e to tell, still its effect
may be vital a n d far-reaching f o r m a n y a n honest worker, a n d if I
h a v e h e l p e d a few such, my l a b o r will h a v e b e e n richly r e w a r d e d
indeed.

ROBERT FRANK (1924-) Black and white are the colors of photography.
To me, they symbolize the alternatives of hope and despair to which mankind
is forever subjected. Most of my photographs are of people; they are seen
simply, as through the eyes of the man in the street. There is one thing the
photograph must contain, the humanity of the moment. This kind of photog-
raphy is realism. But realism is not enough—there has to be vision, and the
two together can make a good photograph. It is difficult to describe this thin
line where matter ends and mind begins, BLACK AND WHITE ARE THE COLORS
OF ROBERT FRANK, quoted by Edna Bennett, Aperture, Vol. 9, No. 1,1961, p. 22.

A STATEMENT 1958
U. S. Camera Annual, p. 115.
I a m g r a t e f u l to the G u g g e n h e i m F o u n d a t i o n for t h e i r confidence
a n d t h e provisions they m a d e for m e to w o r k freely i n my m e d i u m
over a p r o t r a c t e d period. W h e n I a p p l i e d f o r t h e G u g g e n h e i m Fel-
lowship, I wrote: . . T o p r o d u c e a n a u t h e n t i c c o n t e m p o r a r y docu-
m e n t , t h e visual i m p a c t s h o u l d be such as will n u l l i f y e x p l a n a t i o n — "
W i t h these p h o t o g r a p h s , I h a v e a t t e m p t e d to show a cross-section
of t h e A m e r i c a n p o p u l a t i o n . M y effort was to express it simply a n d
w i t h o u t c o n f u s i o n . T h e view is personal a n d , t h e r e f o r e , various facets
of A m e r i c a n life a n d society h a v e been ignored. T h e p h o t o g r a p h s
were taken d u r i n g 1955 a n d 1956; f o r the most p a r t in large cities
such as Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, N e w York a n d in m a n y o t h e r
places d u r i n g my j o u r n e y across the country. My book, c o n t a i n i n g
these p h o t o g r a p h s , will b e p u b l i s h e d in P a r i s by R o b e r t D e l p i r e , 1958.
I h a v e b e e n f r e q u e n t l y accused of d e l i b e r a t e l y t w i s t i n g s u b j e c t
m a t t e r to m y p o i n t of view. A b o v e all, I k n o w t h a t life f o r a p h o t o g -
r a p h e r c a n n o t be a m a t t e r of i n d i f f e r e n c e . O p i n i o n o f t e n consists of
a k i n d of criticism. B u t criticism c a n c o m e o u t of love. I t is i m p o r t a n t
to see w h a t is invisible t o o t h e r s — p e r h a p s t h e look of h o p e o r the look
of sadness. Also, it is always t h e i n s t a n t a n e o u s r e a c t i o n to oneself t h a t
produces a photograph.
My p h o t o g r a p h s are n o t p l a n n e d or c o m p o s e d in a d v a n c e a n d I d o
not a n t i c i p a t e t h a t t h e o n looker will s h a r e m y v i e w p o i n t . H o w e v e r ,
I feel t h a t if m y p h o t o g r a p h leaves a n i m a g e o n his m i n d — s o m e t h i n g
has b e e n a c c o m p l i s h e d .
I t is a d i f f e r e n t state of affairs for m e to be w o r k i n g o n a s s i g n m e n t
for a m a g a z i n e . I t suggests to m e t h e f e e l i n g of a h a c k w r i t e r o r a com-
mercial i l l u s t r a t o r . Since I sense t h a t m y ideas, m y m i n d a n d m y eye
are n o t c r e a t i n g t h e p i c t u r e b u t t h a t t h e e d i t o r s ' m i n d s a n d eyes will
finally d e t e r m i n e w h i c h of m y p i c t u r e s will be r e p r o d u c e d to suit the
magazines' purposes.
I h a v e a g e n u i n e d i s t r u s t a n d " m e f i a n c e " t o w a r d all g r o u p activi-
ties. Mass p r o d u c t i o n of u n i n s p i r e d p h o t o j o u r n a l i s m a n d p h o t o g -
r a p h y w i t h o u t t h o u g h t becomes a n o n y m o u s m e r c h a n d i s e . T h e air
becomes i n f e c t e d w i t h t h e " s m e l l " of p h o t o g r a p h y . If t h e p h o t o g -
r a p h e r w a n t s to b e a n artist, his t h o u g h t s c a n n o t b e d e v e l o p e d over-
n i g h t at t h e c o r n e r d r u g s t o r e .
I a m n o t a pessimist, b u t l o o k i n g at a c o n t e m p o r a r y p i c t u r e maga-
zine m a k e s it difficult f o r m e t o speak a b o u t t h e a d v a n c e m e n t of
p h o t o g r a p h y , since p h o t o g r a p h y t o d a y is a c c e p t e d w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n ,
a n d is also p r e s u m e d t o be u n d e r s t o o d by all—even c h i l d r e n . I feel
t h a t o n l y t h e i n t e g r i t y of t h e i n d i v i d u a l p h o t o g r a p h e r can raise its
level.
T h e w o r k of t w o c o n t e m p o r a r y p h o t o g r a p h e r s , Bill B r a n d t of
E n g l a n d a n d t h e A m e r i c a n , W a l k e r Evans, h a v e i n f l u e n c e d m e . W h e n
I first l o o k e d at W a l k e r E v a n s ' p h o t o g r a p h s , I t h o u g h t of s o m e t h i n g
M a l r a u x w r o t e : " T o t r a n s f o r m d e s t i n y i n t o a w a r e n e s s . " O n e is em-
barrassed to w a n t so m u c h for oneself. B u t , h o w else are you g o i n g to
justify y o u r f a i l u r e a n d y o u r effort?

DOROTHEA LANGE (1895-1965) On my darkroom door for many years I

had posted the words of Francis Bacon: "The contemplation of things as they
are, without substitution or imposture, without error or confusion, is in itself
a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention" (From a Memo to Nancy
Newhall, April 13, 1958.)
DOCUMENTARY PHOTOGRAPHY 1940
A Pageant of Photography, San Francisco, p. 28.
D o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h y records t h e social scene of o u r time. It
m i r r o r s t h e p r e s e n t a n d d o c u m e n t s for t h e f u t u r e . Its focus is m a n
in his r e l a t i o n to m a n k i n d . I t records his c u s t o m s at work, at war,
at play, o r his r o u n d of activities t h r o u g h t w e n t y - f o u r h o u r s of t h e
day, t h e cycle of t h e seasons, o r t h e s p a n of a life. I t p o r t r a y s his
institutions—family, c h u r c h , g o v e r n m e n t , political o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,
social clubs, l a b o r u n i o n s . I t shows not merely t h e i r facades, b u t seeks
to reveal t h e m a n n e r in w h i c h they f u n c t i o n , a b s o r b t h e life, h o l d
the loyalty, a n d i n f l u e n c e t h e b e h a v i o r of h u m a n beings. I t is con-
c e r n e d w i t h m e t h o d s of w o r k a n d the d e p e n d e n c e of w o r k m e n o n
each o t h e r a n d o n t h e i r e m p l o y e r s . I t is p r e - e m i n e n t l y s u i t e d to b u i l d
a r e c o r d of c h a n g e . A d v a n c i n g t e c h n o l o g y raises s t a n d a r d s of living,
creates u n e m p l o y m e n t , c h a n g e s t h e face of cities a n d of t h e agricul-
t u r a l l a n d s c a p e . T h e e v i d e n c e of these trends—the s i m u l t a n e o u s
existence of past, p r e s e n t , a n d p o r t e n t of t h e future—is c o n s p i c u o u s
in old a n d n e w forms, old a n d n e w customs, o n every h a n d . Docu-
m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h y s t a n d s o n its o w n m e r i t s a n d has validity by
itself. A single p h o t o g r a p h i c p r i n t may b e " n e w s , " a " p o r t r a i t , " " a r t , "
o r " d o c u m e n t a r y " — a n y of these, all of t h e m , o r n o n e . A m o n g t h e
tools of social science—graphs, statistics, m a p s , a n d t e x t — d o c u m e n t a -
t i o n by p h o t o g r a p h n o w is a s s u m i n g place. D o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g -
r a p h y invites a n d n e e d s p a r t i c i p a t i o n by a m a t e u r s as well as by pro-
fessionals. O n l y t h r o u g h t h e i n t e r e s t e d work of a m a t e u r s w h o choose
t h e m e s a n d f o l l o w t h e m c a n d o c u m e n t a t i o n by t h e c a m e r a of o u r
age a n d o u r c o m p l e x society be i n t i m a t e , pervasive, a n d a d e q u a t e .

PHOTOGRAPHING THE FAMILIAR 1952

(with Daniel Dixon) Aperture, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 4-15.
P h o t o g r a p h y today a p p e a r s to be in a state of flight.
T h i s is clearly a h a r s h j u d g m e n t . Some will feel it to be a false
j u d g m e n t ; o t h e r s will t h i n k it clumsy o r ill-considered. B u t still
o t h e r s m a y feel it to h a v e m e r i t . T h e y , p e r h a p s less d e v o u t l y enlisted
in this o r t h a t p h o t o g r a p h i c cause, m a y find in t h e i r u n c e r t a i n t i e s a
r e a s o n to believe the j u d g m e n t s o u n d . T h e m s e l v e s in disorder, they
may sense s o m e design of a larger d i s o r d e r . I t is in a n effort to e x p l a i n
t h a t design—and in the c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e r e can b e f o u n d f o r dis-
o r d e r a r e m e d y — t h a t we say w h a t we d o : t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y a p p e a r s
to be in a state of flight.
B u t why flight? W h a t in flight f r o m ? If in flight, w h a t c a n be d o n e ?
T o b e g i n w i t h , p h o t o g r a p h y is still a very y o u n g t e c h n i q u e — o n e
t h a t has f o u n d p o w e r a n d e x p r e s s i o n in t h e m a s t e r y of its o w n
mechanics. T h i s is n o t o n l y t r u e of p h o t o g r a p h y . I t a p p l i e s e q u a l l y
to all y o u n g techniques—to t h e s t e a m e n g i n e a n d t h e c a m e r a alike.
D u r i n g t h e early years, all p h o t o g r a p h e r s w e r e in a sense inventors,
a n d p h o t o g r a p h y as a field is still i n f a n t e n o u g h to h a v e u n d e v e l o p e d
in it some of t h e f e a t u r e s of i n v e n t i o n . C o l o r , f o r instance, is b e g i n n i n g
now to assert itself as a p h o t o g r a p h i c value; t h e r e is excited talk of a
n e w d i m e n s i o n in the m o t i o n p i c t u r e ; in an age p e r h a p s m o r e t h a n
any o t h e r d e d i c a t e d to techniques, science presents to the photo-
g r a p h i c technician a challenge m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n any he has h a d
to face before.
But, o n t h e whole, t h e day is g o n e w h e n t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r could
find in e x p l o r a t i o n of his e q u i p m e n t t h e expression he sought. Set-
tled to a d i f f e r e n t pace, technical a d v a n c e has p e r m i t t e d t h e photog-
r a p h e r to catch u p . T h e ranges of t e c h n i q u e have been largely con-
q u e r e d ; a n d t h a t e x p l o r a t i o n e n d e d , t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t seek
another.
N o w it is no accident t h a t t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r becomes a photog-
r a p h e r any m o r e t h a n the lion t a m e r becomes a lion t a m e r . J u s t as
there is a necessary element of h a z a r d in one, i n t h e o t h e r is a neces-
sary e l e m e n t of t h e m e c h a n i c a l . F o r b e t t e r or for worse, the destiny
of the p h o t o g r a p h e r is b o u n d u p w i t h t h e destinies of a m a c h i n e . I n
this alliance is presented a very special p r o b l e m . O u r s is a time of t h e
machine, a n d o u r s is a need to know t h a t the m a c h i n e can be p u t to
creative h u m a n effort. If it is not, t h e m a c h i n e can destroy us. It is
w i t h i n t h e p o w e r of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r to h e l p p r o h i b i t this destruc-
tion, a n d h e l p m a k e t h e m a c h i n e a n agent m o r e of good t h a n of evil.
T h o u g h n o t a poet, n o r a p a i n t e r , n o r a composer, he is yet a n artist,
a n d as a n artist u n d e r t a k e s n o t only risks b u t responsibility. A n d it is
with responsibility t h a t b o t h t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r a n d his m a c h i n e a r e
b r o u g h t to their u l t i m a t e tests. H i s m a c h i n e m u s t prove t h a t it can be
e n d o w e d w i t h t h e passion a n d t h e h u m a n i t y of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r ; the
p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t prove t h a t he has the passion a n d the h u m a n i t y
with w h i c h to e n d o w t h e m a c h i n e .
T h i s certainly is o n e of t h e great questions of o u r time. U p o n such
an e n d o w m e n t of t h e m e c h a n i c a l device may d e p e n d n o t only t h e
state of the present b u t the prospects of the f u t u r e . T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r
is privileged t h a t it is a q u e s t i o n w h i c h in his work he can h e l p to
answer.
B u t does he?
U n f o r t u n a t e l y , very o f t e n not. F o r in his n a t u r a l zeal to master his
craft, he has too long relied u p o n the technical to engage his energies.
Nov/ the technical has relaxed its challenge, he is o f t e n left w i t h the
feeling t h a t t h e r e is n o w h e r e to go. H e is lost; he is confused; he is
bewildered. Accustomed to discovery, now s u d d e n l y he is obliged to
interpret.
But, his history b e i n g t h a t of the inventor, he is o f t e n u n p r e p a r e d
to i n t e r p r e t . So he plunges off in search of new discoveries. H o p i n g to
preserve his t r a d i t i o n of invention, this time h e gropes, n o t for t h e
new chemical or lens, b u t for w h a t he calls t h e "new a n g l e . " H e
searches a m o n g t h e complexities of a p p r o a c h for an e x p e r i e n c e
k i n d r e d to t h a t he h a d k n o w n in technical e x p e r i m e n t . T h e harshest
d e m a n d of his own art—the d e m a n d t h a t he serve it as a n a r t i s t -
he seeks to escape a l o n g t h e f r o n t i e r s of shock. T h u s the spectacular
is cherished above the m e a n i n g f u l , t h e frenzied above the q u i e t , t h e
u n i q u e above the p o t e n t . T h e f a m i l i a r is m a d e strange, t h e u n f a m i l -
iar grotesque. T h e a m a t e u r forces his Sundays i n t o a series of un-
n a t u r a l poses; the w o r l d is forced by t h e professional i n t o u n n a t u r a l
shapes. L a n d s c a p e , season, occasion—these are c o m p e l l e d to a twisted
service in which they need n o t be i n t e r p r e t e d b u t , like a process,
invented.
I n this unwillingness to accept a f a m i l i a r world p h o t o g r a p h y p u t s
i n v e n t i o n to a destructive w o r k . T h a t t h e f a m i l i a r w o r l d is o f t e n
unsatisfactory c a n n o t be denied, b u t it is n o t , for all t h a t , one we need
a b a n d o n . A w k w a r d t h o u g h it may be, o u r s is a w o r l d t h a t still confers
u p o n t h e artist a n energy a n d sometimes even a c o m f o r t . W e need
n o t refuse to recognize t h a t world any m o r e t h a n we n e e d blow it u p .
W e need n o t be seduced i n t o evasion of it any m o r e t h a n we need be
a p p a l l e d by it i n t o silence. W e n e e d not, for fear of the world's image,
either h i d e in or r u i n t e c h n i q u e . W e need take n e i t h e r t h e view of
angel nor devil. W e can, instead, take the view of m a n . W e can con-
cern ourselves w i t h presence r a t h e r t h a n w i t h p h a n t o m , image r a t h e r
t h a n w i t h c o n j u r e . Bad as it is, t h e w o r l d is p o t e n t i a l l y f u l l of good
p h o t o g r a p h s . B u t to be good, p h o t o g r a p h s h a v e to be f u l l of t h e w o r l d .
So it can be seen how, in its distrust of t h e familiar, p h o t o g r a p h y
a p p e a r s to be in flight—in flight as m u c h f r o m itself as f r o m a n y t h i n g
else. T h e q u e s t i o n r e m a i n s : w h a t can be d o n e a b o u t it?
As we have suggested, m a n y p h o t o g r a p h e r s may find an answer to
this q u e s t i o n in a r e f r e s h e d r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the world—or worlds—
they k n o w best. T h i s f o r some w o u l d m e a n loneliness a n d privacy,
their most f a m i l i a r territories seldom e n t e r e d by any b u t themselves.
T h e s e , t h o u g h , are few, f o r the c a m e r a does n o t easily c a p t u r e t h e
image of a secret, t h o u g h w h e n it does we are, as always, w a r m e d w i t h
t h e h o n o r of b e i n g told. Most of us, however, live in w o r l d s at least
cousin to each o t h e r , worlds t h a t visit a n d e n t e r t a i n , q u a r r e l a n d
gossip, worlds t h a t c a n n o t k e e p a secret a n d w o u l d n ' t if they could.
So w h a t is f a m i l i a r to o n e of us may very likely be f a m i l i a r to
a n o t h e r . Sweat in the eyes, sun o n t h e back, cold in the heart—these
things we all know. M o r e i m p o r t a n t , we all k n o w s o m e t h i n g of w h a t
they m e a n . H a r d work, w a r m w e a t h e r , p a i n , we all have e n o u g h in
c o m m o n to m a k e most of o u r m a n y worlds c o m p a n i o n to each other.
W e eating, we sleeping, we m o u r n i n g a n d rejoicing, we h a t i n g , we
loving—it is t h e same w i t h these. T h e s e we k n o w ; so knowing, these
we see; a n d it is in these t h a t a great p h o t o g r a p h speaks, n o t of e a t i n g
a n d sleeping, b u t of ourselves. W h e t h e r of a b o a r d fence, a n eggshell,
a m o u n t a i n p e a k or a b r o k e n s h a r e c r o p p e r , t h e great p h o t o g r a p h first
asks, t h e n answers, two questions. "Is t h a t my world? W h a t , if not,
has t h a t world to do w i t h m i n e ? "
Yet even t h o u g h we live i n worlds f a m i l i a r to each o t h e r , t h e r e is
in t h e p h o t o g r a p h y of h o w they a r e f a m i l i a r a very special difficulty.
If n o t by n a t u r e , t h e n at least by t r a d i t i o n t h e artist is i n d i v i d u a l .
His art, he insists, finds its expression in i n d i v i d u a l i t y . H i s g i f t
is n o t t h a t which brings together b u t w h i c h sets a p a r t . B u t in w o r k i n g
with a w o r l d of t h e f a m i l i a r this is n o t so m u c h so. T h e n t h e photog-
r a p h e r m u s t himself become a familiarity. H e c a n n o t e n t e r t h e house-
h o l d as a m a n f r o m Mars. H e m u s t , instead, become a m e m b e r of t h e
family. I n order to see t h e f a m i l i a r , he m u s t act a n d feel t h e f a m i l i a r .
His impulse can be a m o v e m e n t of t h e c o m m o n ; his instinct can be a
gesture of t h e o r d i n a r y ; his vision can be a focus of the usual. T h r o u g h
his lens m u s t be t r a n s m i t t e d n o t only detail b u t v o l u m e ; in his p r i n t
must a p p e a r n o t only t h e specific b u t t h e general.
T h i s does n o t m e a n t h a t t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r need m a k e a sacrifice
of his r i g h t to express himself. O n t h e contrary, he expresses himself—
p e r h a p s m o r e fully—in a d i f f e r e n t way. A m o n g t h e familiar, his
behavior is t h a t of t h e i n t i m a t e r a t h e r t h a n of t h e stranger. R a t h e r
t h a n acknowledge, h e embraces; r a t h e r t h a n p e r f o r m , he responds.
Moving in a world so m u c h composed of himself, he c a n n o t h e l p b u t
express himself. Every image he sees, every p h o t o g r a p h he takes,
becomes i n a sense a self-portrait. T h e p o r t r a i t is m a d e m o r e mean-
ingful by intimacy—an intimacy shared n o t only by the p h o t o g r a p h e r
with his subject b u t by t h e audience.
For these same reasons, t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r need n o t suspect t h e
familiar for fear of t h e domestic. T h e two a r e n o t t h e same. N o b o d y
likes to look at d u l l p h o t o g r a p h s ; b o r e d o m , in the e n d , is as out-
landish as o u t r a g e ; a n d certainly t h e tedious is as easily registered as
the outrageous. W h i l e t h e r e is p e r h a p s a province in w h i c h t h e
p h o t o g r a p h can tell us n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n w h a t we see w i t h o u r own
eyes, there is a n o t h e r in w h i c h it proves to us h o w little o u r o w n eyes
o f t e n p e r m i t us to see. A n d h e r e again it is t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s sense
of the f a m i l i a r t h a t provides t h e proof. F o r in t h a t intimacy, even
with t h e c o m m o n p l a c e , will be discovered passages a n d o p e n i n g s
denied to t h e outsider. T h e i n t i m a t e will be a d m i t t e d to subtleties
a n d complexities s h u t to t h e stranger. H e will find t h e simple to be
complicated, t h e m i n i a t u r e to be e n o r m o u s , t h e insignificant decisive.
T h r o u g h f a m i l i a r i t y t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r will find n o t only the f a m i l i a r
b u t the strange, n o t only the o r d i n a r y b u t t h e rare; n o t only t h e
m u t u a l b u t , t h e singular. I n a search for these there is, in photog-
r a p h y or in a n y t h i n g else, n o loss of self, n o s u r r e n d e r to t h e domestic.
T h e r e are instead those qualities—challenge, purpose, a n d promise—
which m o r e t h a n any others n o u r i s h t h e personality, a n d w i t h o u t
which even the most u n i q u e expression w o u l d soon become h u m d r u m .
These, t h e n , are the issues: w h e t h e r we, as p h o t o g r a p h e r s , can
make of o u r m a c h i n e an i n s t r u m e n t of h u m a n creation, w h e t h e r we,
as artists, can m a k e of o u r w o r l d a place for creation. T o o , these are
issues we have sometimes failed to meet. For whatever reasons of
fear, worship, convenience or custom, p h o t o g r a p h y seems o f t e n m o r e
c o n c e r n e d w i t h illusion t h a n reality. I t does n o t reflect b u t contrives.
It lives in a w o r l d of its o w n . L i v i n g in a w o r l d of its o w n , it is n o t ,
e i t h e r as art o r science, successful.
W e believe t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y m u s t r e c o n s i d e r its f u n c t i o n . I t is the
n a t u r e of t h e c a m e r a to d e a l w i t h w h a t is—we u r g e those w h o use the
c a m e r a to r e t i r e f r o m w h a t might be. W e suggest t h a t , as p h o t o g -
r a p h e r s , we t u r n o u r a t t e n t i o n t o the f a m i l i a r i t i e s of w h i c h we a r e a
p a r t . So t u r n i n g , we in o u r w o r k can s p e a k m o r e t h a n of o u r subjects
—we can s p e a k w i t h t h e m ; we c a n m o r e t h a n s p e a k a b o u t o u r subjects
—we can speak f o r t h e m . T h e y , given t o n g u e , will b e a b l e to speak
w i t h a n d for us. A n d in this l a n g u a g e will b e p r o p o s e d t o t h e lens
t h a t w i t h w h i c h , in t h e e n d , p h o t o g r a p h y m u s t b e concerned—time,
a n d place, a n d t h e w o r k s of m a n .

LASZLO MOHOLY-NAGY (1895-1946) Photography has not yet achieved

anything like its full stature, has not articulated its own intrinsic structure.
Yet this lack of "results99 does not contradict the almost unbelievable impact
ivhich photographic vision has had upon our culture, VISION IN MOTION, Chi-
cago, Paul Theobald, 1947, p. 178.
LIGHT—A MEDIUM OF PLASTIC EXPRESSION 1923
Broom, Vol. 4, pp. 283-84.
Since the discovery of p h o t o g r a p h y v i r t u a l l y n o t h i n g n e w has been
f o u n d as f a r as t h e p r i n c i p l e s a n d t e c h n i q u e of t h e process are con-
cerned. All i n n o v a t i o n s a r e b a s e d o n t h e a e s t h e t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i v e
c o n c e p t i o n s e x i s t i n g i n D a g u e r r e ' s t i m e ( a b o u t 1830), a l t h o u g h these
c o n c e p t i o n s , i.e., t h e c o p y i n g of n a t u r e by m e a n s of t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c
c a m e r a a n d t h e m e c h a n i c a l r e p r o d u c t i o n of perspective, h a v e b e e n
r e n d e r e d o b s o l e t e by t h e w o r k of m o d e r n artists.
D e s p i t e t h e o b v i o u s f a c t t h a t t h e sensitivity to light of a chemically
p r e p a r e d s u r f a c e (of glass, m e t a l , p a p e r , etc.) was t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t
e l e m e n t in t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c process, i.e., c o n t a i n i n g its o w n laws,
t h e sensitized s u r f a c e was always s u b j e c t e d to the d e m a n d s of a
camera obscura a d j u s t e d to t h e t r a d i t i o n a l laws of p e r s p e c t i v e w h i l e
t h e full possibilities of this c o m b i n a t i o n w e r e n e v e r sufficiently tested.
T h e p r o p e r u t i l i z a t i o n of the p l a t e itself w o u l d h a v e b r o u g h t to
light p h e n o m e n a i m p e r c e p t i b l e to t h e h u m a n eye a n d m a d e visible
only by m e a n s of t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c a p p a r a t u s , t h u s p e r f e c t i n g t h e eye
by m e a n s of p h o t o g r a p h y . T r u e , this p r i n c i p l e h a s a l r e a d y been
a p p l i e d in c e r t a i n scientific e x p e r i m e n t s , as in t h e s t u d y of m o t i o n
(walking, l e a p i n g , g a l l o p i n g ) a n d zoological a n d m i n e r a l forms, b u t
these h a v e always b e e n isolated efforts whose results c o u l d n o t be
c o m p a r e d or r e l a t e d .
I t m u s t b e n o t e d h e r e t h a t o u r i n t e l l e c t u a l e x p e r i e n c e comple-
m e n t s spatially a n d f o r m a l l y t h e o p t i c a l p h e n o m e n a p e r c e i v e d by
the eye a n d r e n d e r s t h e m i n t o a c o m p r e h e n s i b l e whole, w h e r e a s the
p h o t o g r a p h i c a p p a r a t u s r e p r o d u c e s the p u r e l y o p t i c a l p i c t u r e (dis-
tortion, bad drawing, foreshortening).
 O n e way of e x p l o r i n g this field is to investigate a n d a p p l y v a r i o u s
chemical m i x t u r e s w h i c h p r o d u c e l i g h t effects i m p e r c e p t i b l e to t h e
eye (such as e l e c t r o - m a g n e t i c rays, x-rays).
A n o t h e r way is by t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of n e w a p p a r a t u s , first by t h e
use of t h e camera obscura; second by the e l i m i n a t i o n of perspective.
I n t h e first case u s i n g a p p a r a t u s w i t h lenses a n d m i r r o r - a r r a n g e m e n t s
which can cover t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t f r o m all sides; in the second case,
using a n a p p a r a t u s w h i c h is b a s e d o n n e w o p t i c a l laws. T h i s last
leads to the possibility of " l i g h t - c o m p o s i t i o n , " w h e r e b y light w o u l d
be c o n t r o l l e d as a new plastic m e d i u m , j u s t as color in p a i n t i n g a n d
t o n e in music.
T h i s signifies a perfectly new m e d i u m of expression whose novelty
offers a n u n d r e a m e d of scope. T h e possibilities of this m e d i u m of
c o m p o s i t i o n b e c o m e g r e a t e r as w e p r o c e e d f r o m static r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
to the m o t i o n p i c t u r e s of the c i n e m a t o g r a p h .
I h a v e m a d e a few p r i m i t i v e a t t e m p t s in this d i r e c t i o n , whose
initial results, however, p o i n t to t h e most positive discoveries ( a n d as
soon as these a t t e m p t s c a n be tested e x p e r i m e n t a l l y in a l a b o r a t o r y
especially devised for t h e p u r p o s e , the results are c e r t a i n to be f a r
m o r e impressive).
I n s t e a d of h a v i n g a p l a t e w h i c h is sensitive to light r e a c t m e c h a n i -
cally to its e n v i r o n m e n t t h r o u g h t h e r e f l e c t i o n o r a b s o r p t i o n of light,
I h a v e a t t e m p t e d to control its a c t i o n by m e a n s of lenses a n d m i r r o r s ,
by light passed t h r o u g h fluids like water, oil, acids, crystal, m e t a l ,
glass, tissue, etc. T h i s m e a n s t h a t the filtered, reflected o r r e f r a c t e d
light is d i r e c t e d u p o n a screen a n d t h e n p h o t o g r a p h e d . O r a g a i n , t h e
light-effect can be t h r o w n directly o n t h e sensitive p l a t e itself, instead
of u p o n a screen. ( P h o t o g r a p h y w i t h o u t a p p a r a t u s . ) Since these light
effects a l m o s t always show themselves in m o t i o n , it is clear t h a t the
process reaches its h i g h e s t d e v e l o p m e n t in t h e film.
FROM PIGMENT TO LIGHT 1936
Telehor, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 32-36.
T h e t e r m i n o l o g y of a r t " i s m s " is t r u l y b e w i l d e r i n g . W i t h o u t b e i n g
exactly c e r t a i n w h a t t h e w o r d s i m p l y , p e o p l e talk of impressionism,
neo-impressionism, p o i n t i l l i s m , expressionism, f u t u r i s m , c u b i s m , su-
p r e m a t i s m , neoplasticism, p u r i s m , c o n s t r u c t i v i s m , d a d a i s m , super-
realism—and in a d d i t i o n t h e r e are p h o t o g r a p h y , the film, a n d light
displays. Even specialists c a n n o longer k e e p a b r e a s t of this apo-
calyptic c o n f u s i o n .
It is o u r task to find t h e c o m m o n d e n o m i n a t o r in all this c o n f u s i o n .
Such a c o m m o n d e n o m i n a t o r exists. It is o n l y necessary to study the
lessons of t h e w o r k of the last h u n d r e d years in o r d e r to realize t h a t
the consistent d e v e l o p m e n t of m o d e r n p a i n t i n g h a s s t r i k i n g analogies
in all o t h e r s p h e r e s of artistic c r e a t i o n .
THE COMMON DENOMINATOR
T h e i n v e n t i o n of p h o t o g r a p h y destroyed the c a n o n s of representa-
tional, imitative art. Ever since t h e decline of n a t u r a l i s t i c p a i n t i n g ,
conceived as "color m o r p h o s i s , " unconsciously or consciously sought
to discover the laws a n d e l e m e n t a r y q u a l i t i e s of color. T h e m o r e this
p r o b l e m e m e r g e d as the central issue, t h e less i m p o r t a n c e was a t t a c h e d
to r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . The creator of optical images learned to work with
elementary, purely optical means.
A p p r o a c h e d f r o m this p o i n t of view all the m a n i f o l d "isms" are
merely t h e m o r e or less i n d i v i d u a l m e t h o d s of work of one or m o r e
artists, w h o in each case c o m m e n c e d w i t h t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of t h e old
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l image in o r d e r to achieve new experiences, a new
wealth of optical expression.
SIGNS O F T H E N E W O P T I C S

T h e e l e m e n t s of t h e new imagery existed in e m b r y o in this very

act of destruction. P h o t o g r a p h y w i t h its almost dematerialized light,
a n d especially t h e use of direct light rays in camera-less p h o t o g r a p h y
a n d in the m o t i o n picture, m a d e clarification a n u r g e n t necessity.
Investigations, experiments, theories of color a n d light, abstract
displays of light-images—as yet far too f r a g m e n t a r y a n d i s o l a t e d -
p o i n t towards t h e f u t u r e , t h o u g h they c a n n o t as yet provide a precise
p i c t u r e of a n y t h i n g like the f u t u r e ' s scope.
B u t one result has already e m e r g e d f r o m these efforts: the clear
recognition t h a t a p a r t f r o m all i n d i v i d u a l e m o t i o n , a p a r t f r o m t h e
p u r e l y subjective a t t i t u d e of t h e spectator, objective factors d e t e r m i n e
t h e effectiveness of a n optical work of a r t : factors c o n d i t i o n e d by the
m a t e r i a l qualities of t h e optical m e d i u m of expression.
M I N I M U M DEMANDS

O u r k n o w l e d g e c o n c e r n i n g light, brightness, darkness, color, color

harmony—in o t h e r words o u r k n o w l e d g e of t h e elementary foun-
d a t i o n s of optical expression is still very limited (in spite of t h e
tireless work of t h e n u m e r o u s artists). Existing theories of h a r m o n y
are no m o r e t h a n the p a i n t e r s ' dictionary. T h e y were e l a b o r a t e d to
meet the needs of t r a d i t i o n a l art. T h e y d o n o t t o u c h o u r present
aesthetic sensibilities, o u r present aims, m u c h less t h e e n t i r e field of
optical expression. U n c e r t a i n t y reigns even w i t h r e g a r d to the most
e l e m e n t a r y facts. I n n u m e r a b l e p r o b l e m s of basic i m p o r t a n c e still
c o n f r o n t t h e p a i n t e r w i t h t h e need for c a r e f u l e x p e r i m e n t a l e n q u i r y :
W h a t is the n a t u r e of light a n d shade? Of brightness—darkness? W h a t
are light values? W h a t are time a n d p r o p o r t i o n ? N e w m e t h o d s of
registering t h e intensity of light? T h e n o t i o n of light? W h a t are
refractions of light? W h a t is color (pigment)? W h a t are t h e m e d i a
i n f u s i n g life with color? W h a t is color intensity? T h e chemical
n a t u r e of color a n d effective lights? Is f o r m c o n d i t i o n a l o n color?—
O n its position in space?—On t h e e x t e n t of its surface area? Biological
functions? Physiological reactions? Statics a n d dynamics of composi-
tion? Spraying devices, p h o t o a n d film cameras, screens? T h e tech-
n i q u e of color application? T h e t e c h n i q u e of projection? Specific
p r o b l e m s of m a n u a l a n d m a c h i n e work? etc., etc., etc. Research i n t o
the physiological a n d psychological p r o p e r t i e s of t h e m e d i a of artistic
creation is still in its e l e m e n t a r y stages, c o m p a r e d w i t h physical re-
search. Practical e x p e r i e n c e in t h e creative use of artificial color
(light) as yet scarcely exists.
T H E FEAR O F P E T R I F I C A T I O N
Artists f r e q u e n t l y hesitate to a p p l y t h e results of their e x p e r i m e n t s
to their practical work, f o r they share t h e universal fear t h a t mech-
anization m a y lead to a petrification of art. T h e y fear t h a t t h e o p e n
revelation of e l e m e n t s of construction, or any artificial s t i m u l a t i o n
of the intellect or t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of m e c h a n i c a l contrivances may
sterilize all creative efforts.
T h i s fear is u n f o u n d e d , since t h e conscious evocation of all t h e
elements of c r e a t i o n m u s t always r e m a i n an impossibility. However,
many optical canons are e l a b o r a t e d in detail, all optical creation will
retain t h e unconscious s p o n t a n e i t y of its e x p e r i e n c e as its basic ele-
m e n t of value.
Despite all canons, all inflexible laws, all technical perfection, this
inventive potency, this genetic tension w h i c h defies analysis, deter-
mines t h e character of every w o r k of art. It is t h e o u t c o m e of i n t u i t i v e
knowledge b o t h of t h e p r e s e n t a n d of t h e basic tendencies of t h e
future.
ART AND T E C H N I Q U E
T h e a t t e m p t was m a d e , at least partially, to restore t h e capacity
for s p o n t a n e o u s color experience—which h a d been lost t h r o u g h t h e
spread of t h e p r i n t e d w o r d a n d t h e recent p r e d o m i n a n c e of litera-
ture—by intellectual means. T h i s was only n a t u r a l , for in t h e first
phase of i n d u s t r i a l a d v a n c e the artist was o v e r w h e l m e d by the intel-
lectual achievements of t h e technician, whose achievements e m b o d i e d
the constructive side of creation.
G i v e n a clear d e t e r m i n a t i o n of f u n c t i o n , t h e latter could w i t h o u t
difficulty (at least in theory) p r o d u c e objects of r a t i o n a l design. T h e
same was assumed to be t r u e in art, u n t i l it became a p p a r e n t t h a t a n
exaggerated e m p h a s i s o n its d e t e r m i n a b l e intellectual aspects merely
served as a smoke-screen, once t h e elements of optical expression as
such—quite a p a r t f r o m t h e i r " a r t i s t i c " qualities—had been mastered.
It was, of course, necessary first to develop a s t a n d a r d l a n g u a g e of
optical expression, before really g i f t e d artists could a t t e m p t to raise
the elements thus established to t h e level of " a r t . " T h a t was t h e basic
aim of all recent artistic a n d pedagogic efforts in the optical sphere.
If today the sub-compensated e l e m e n t of feeling revolts against this
tendency, we can only w a i t u n t i l the p e n d u l u m will react in a less
violent m a n n e r .
FROM P A I N T I N G T O T H E DISPLAY O F L I G H T
All technical achievements in t h e sphere of optics m u s t be utilized
for t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of this s t a n d a r d language. A m o n g t h e m t h e
mechanical and technical requisites of art are of p r i m a r y i m p o r t a n c e .
U n t i l recently they were c o n d e m n e d o n t h e g r o u n d s t h a t m a n u a l
skill, t h e " p e r s o n a l t o u c h , " s h o u l d be r e g a r d e d as t h e essential t h i n g
in art. T o d a y they already h o l d t h e i r own in t h e conflict of o p i n i o n s ;
t o m o r r o w they will t r i u m p h ; t h e day a f t e r t o m o r r o w they will yield
results accepted w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n . B r u s h w o r k , t h e subjective m a n i p -
u l a t i o n of a tool is lost, b u t the clarity of f o r m a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s is
increased to an e x t e n t almost t r a n s c e n d i n g t h e l i m i t a t i o n s of m a t t e r ;
a n e x t e n t in w h i c h t h e objective c o n t e x t becomes t r a n s p a r e n t l y clear.
M a x i m u m precision, the law of t h e n o r m , replaces t h e m i s i n t e r p r e t e d
significance of m a n u a l skill.
It is difficult today to p r e d i c t t h e f o r m a l a c h i e v e m e n t s of t h e f u t u r e .
For the f o r m a l crystallization of a work of art is c o n d i t i o n e d n o t
merely by the incalculable factor of talent, b u t also by t h e intensity
of t h e struggle for t h e mastery of its m e d i u m (tools, today machines).
B u t it is safe to predict even today t h a t t h e optical c r e a t i o n of t h e
f u t u r e will n o t be a m e r e t r a n s l a t i o n of o u r p r e s e n t f o r m s of optical
expression, for t h e new i m p l e m e n t s a n d t h e h i t h e r t o neglected
m e d i u m of light m u s t necessarily yield results in c o n f o r m i t y w i t h
their own i n h e r e n t properties.
PURPOSIVE PROGRESS O F T H O U G H T , CIRCULAR ADVANCE O F T E C H N I Q U E
D u r i n g t h e i n t e r m e d i a r y stages, however, we m u s t n o t overlook a
well-known factor r e t a r d i n g t h e advance of a r t : i n d i v i d u a l pioneers
invent new i n s t r u m e n t s , new m e t h o d s of work, r e v o l u t i o n i z i n g t h e
t r a d i t i o n a l f o r m s of p r o d u c t i o n . B u t usually a long time m u s t elapse
before t h e new can be generally a p p l i e d . T h e old h a m p e r s its ad-
vance. T h e creative p o t e n t i a l i t i e s of t h e new may be clearly felt, b u t
for a certain time it will a p p e a r clothed in t r a d i t i o n a l f o r m s t h a t are
r e n d e r e d obsolete by its emergence.
T h u s in t h e s p h e r e of music we m u s t for t h e present c o n t e n t our-
selves w i t h the noisy t r i u m p h s of t h e m e c h a n i c a l p i a n o a n d of t h e
c i n e m a o r g a n , instead of h e a r i n g the n e w electro-mechanical music
t h a t is entirely i n d e p e n d e n t of all previously existing i n s t r u m e n t s .
I n t h e sphere of p a i n t i n g t h e same r e v o l u t i o n a r y significance already
applies to t h e use of s p r a y i n g devices, of p o w e r f u l e n a m e l reflectors
a n d of such reliable synthetic m a t e r i a l s as galalith, trolit, bakelite,
zellon, or a l u m i n u m . T h e s i t u a t i o n is similar in t h e r e a l m of the
cinema, w h e r e a m e t h o d of p r o d u c t i o n is r e g a r d e d as "revolution-
ary," whose creative achievements a r e scarcely g r e a t e r t h a n those t h a t
m i g h t be o b t a i n e d could classical p a i n t i n g s be set in m o t i o n .
T h i s situation is unsatisfactory a n d s u p e r a n n u a t e d w h e n j u d g e d
in terms of a f u t u r e in which light displays of any desired q u a l i t y a n d
m a g n i t u d e will s u d d e n l y blaze u p , a n d m u l t i c o l o r e d floodlights
with t r a n s p a r e n t sheaths of fire will project a c o n s t a n t flow of im-
material, evanescent images i n t o space by t h e simple m a n i p u l a t i o n
of switches. A n d in t h e film of t h e f u t u r e we shall h a v e constant
change in the speed a n d intensity of light; space in m o t i o n constantly
varied t h r o u g h the m e d i u m of light r e f r a c t e d f r o m efflorescent re-
flectors; flashes of light a n d black-outs; chiaroscuro, distance a n d
proximity of light; ultra-violet rays, infra-red p e n e t r a t i o n of darkness
r e n d e r e d visible—a w e a l t h of u n d r e a m t - o f optical experiences t h a t
will be p r o f o u n d l y stirring to o u r emotions.
A NEW I N S T R U M E N T O F VISION
In p h o t o g r a p h y we possess a n e x t r a o r d i n a r y i n s t r u m e n t for repro-
duction. B u t p h o t o g r a p h y is m u c h m o r e t h a n t h a t . T o d a y it is in a
fair way to b r i n g i n g (optically) s o m e t h i n g entirely new into t h e
world. T h e specific elements of p h o t o g r a p h y can be isolated f r o m
their a t t e n d a n t complications, n o t only theoretically, b u t tangibly,
a n d in their m a n i f e s t reality.
THE UNIQUE QUALITY OF PHOTOGRAPHY
T h e p h o t o g r a m , or camera-less record of forms p r o d u c e d by light,
which e m b o d i e s t h e u n i q u e n a t u r e of t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c process, is
the real key to p h o t o g r a p h y . It allows us to c a p t u r e the p a t t e r n e d
interplay of light o n a sheet of sensitized p a p e r w i t h o u t recourse to
any a p p a r a t u s . T h e p h o t o g r a m o p e n s u p perspectives of a h i t h e r t o
wholly u n k n o w n morphosis g o v e r n e d by optical laws peculiar to
itself. It is t h e most completely d e m a t e r i a l i z e d m e d i u m which the
new vision c o m m a n d s .
W H A T IS O P T I C A L Q U A L I T Y ?
T h r o u g h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of black-and-white p h o t o g r a p h y , light
a n d shadow were for t h e first time fully revealed; a n d t h a n k s to it,
too, they first began to be e m p l o y e d w i t h s o m e t h i n g m o r e t h a n a
purely theoretical knowledge. (Impressionism in p a i n t i n g may be
regarded as a parallel achievement). T h r o u g h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of
reliable artificial i l l u m i n a t i o n (more p a r t i c u l a r l y electricity), a n d
the power of r e g u l a t i n g it, an increasing a d o p t i o n of flowing light
a n d richly g r a d a t e d shadows ensued; a n d t h r o u g h these, again a
greater a n i m a t i o n of surfaces, a n d a m o r e delicate optical intensifica-
tion. T h i s m a n i f o l d i n g of g r a d a t i o n s is one of the f u n d a m e n t a l
" m a t e r i a l s " of optical f o r m a l i s m : a fact w h i c h holds equally well if
we pass b e y o n d t h e i m m e d i a t e sphere of black-white-grey values a n d
learn to t h i n k a n d w o r k in terms of colored ones.
W h e n p u r e color is placed against p u r e color, t o n e against tone,
a h a r d , poster-like decorative effect generally results. O n t h e o t h e r
h a n d the same colors used in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h their i n t e r m e d i a t e
tones will dispel this poster-like effect, a n d create a m o r e delicate
a n d m e l t i n g impression. T h r o u g h its black-white-grey r e p r o d u c t i o n s
of all colored a p p e a r a n c e s p h o t o g r a p h y has e n a b l e d us to recognize
the most subtle d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s of values in b o t h the grey a n d
c h r o m a t i c scales: differentiations t h a t r e p r e s e n t a new a n d ( j u d g e d
by previous standards) h i t h e r t o u n a t t a i n a b l e q u a l i t y in optical ex-
pression. T h i s is, of course, only o n e p o i n t a m o n g m a n y . B u t it is t h e
p o i n t w h e r e we h a v e to begin to m a s t e r p h o t o g r a p h y ' s i n w a r d p r o p e r -
ties, a n d t h a t at w h i c h we h a v e to d e a l m o r e w i t h t h e artistic f u n c t i o n
of expression t h a n w i t h t h e r e p r o d u c t i v e f u n c t i o n of p o r t r a y a l .
SUBLIMATED TECHNIQUE
I n r e p r o d u c t i o n — c o n s i d e r e d as the o b j e c t i v e fixation of t h e sem-
b l a n c e of an object—we find j u s t as r a d i c a l a d v a n c e s a n d transmogri-
fications, c o m p a r e d w i t h p r e v a i l i n g o p t i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , as in direct
records of f o r m s p r o d u c e d by l i g h t ( p h o t o g r a m s ) . T h e s e p a r t i c u l a r
d e v e l o p m e n t s are well k n o w n : bird's-eye views, s i m u l t a n e o u s inter-
ceptions, reflections, elliptical p e n e t r a t i o n s , etc. T h e i r systematic
c o - o r d i n a t i o n o p e n s u p a new field of visual p r e s e n t a t i o n in w h i c h
still f u r t h e r progress becomes possible. I t is, f o r instance, a n im-
m e n s e e x t e n s i o n of t h e o p t i c a l possibilities of r e p r o d u c t i o n t h a t we
are able to register precise fixations of objects, even in t h e most diffi-
cult circumstances, in a h u n d r e d t h o r t h o u s a n d t h of a second. I n d e e d ,
this a d v a n c e in t e c h n i q u e a l m o s t a m o u n t s to a psychological trans-
f o r m a t i o n of o u r eyesight*, since t h e s h a r p n e s s of t h e lens a n d t h e
u n e r r i n g accuracy of its d e l i n e a t i o n h a v e n o w t r a i n e d o u r p o w e r s
of o b s e r v a t i o n u p to a s t a n d a r d of visual p e r c e p t i o n w h i c h e m b r a c e s
u l t r a - r a p i d s n a p s h o t s a n d t h e m i l l i o n f o l d m a g n i f i c a t i o n of d i m e n -
sions e m p l o y e d in m i c r o s c o p i c p h o t o g r a p h y .
IMPROVED PERFORMANCE
P h o t o g r a p h y , t h e n , i m p a r t s a h e i g h t e n e d , o r (in so f a r as o u r eyes
are c o n c e r n e d ) increased, p o w e r of sight in t e r m s of t i m e a n d space.
A p l a i n , matter-of-fact e n u m e r a t i o n of t h e specific p h o t o g r a p h i c
elements—purely technical, n o t artistic, elements—will be e n o u g h to
e n a b l e us to d i v i n e t h e p o w e r l a t e n t in t h e m , a n d p r o g n o s t i c a t e to
w h a t they lead.
T H E E I G H T VARIETIES O F P H O T O G R A P H I C VISION
1. A b s t r a c t seeing by m e a n s of d i r e c t records of f o r m s p r o d u c e d by
light: t h e p h o t o g r a m w h i c h c a p t u r e s t h e m o s t d e l i c a t e g r a d a t i o n s of
light values, b o t h c h i a r o s c u r o a n d colored.
2. E x a c t seeing by m e a n s of the n o r m a l fixation of t h e a p p e a r a n c e
of things: r e p o r t a g e .
3. R a p i d seeing by m e a n s of t h e fixation of m o v e m e n t s in t h e short-
est possible t i m e : s n a p s h o t s .
4. Slow seeing by m e a n s of t h e fixation of m o v e m e n t s s p r e a d over a
p e r i o d of t i m e : e.g., t h e l u m i n o u s tracks m a d e by t h e h e a d l i g h t s of
m o t o r cars passing a l o n g a r o a d at n i g h t : p r o l o n g e d t i m e exposures.
5. Intensified seeing by m e a n s of:
a) m i c r o - p h o t o g r a p h y ;
b) filter-photography, w h i c h , by v a r i a t i o n of t h e c h e m i c a l com-
p o s i t i o n of t h e sensitized surface, p e r m i t s p h o t o g r a p h i c p o t e n t i a l i t i e s
•Helmholtz used to tell his pupils that if an optician were to succeed in making a
human eye, and brought it to him for his approval, he would be bound to say:
"this is a clumsy job of work."
to be a u g m e n t e d in various ways—ranging f r o m t h e revelation of
far-distant landscapes veiled in haze or fog to exposures in c o m p l e t e
darkness: infra-red p h o t o g r a p h y .
6. P e n e t r a t i v e seeing by m e a n s of X-rays: r a d i o g r a p h y .
7. S i m u l t a n e o u s seeing by m e a n s of t r a n s p a r e n t s u p e r i m p o s i t i o n :
the f u t u r e process of a u t o m a t i c p h o t o m o n t a g e .
8. Distorted seeing: optical jokes t h a t can be a u t o m a t i c a l l y pro-
duced by:
a) exposure t h r o u g h a lens fitted w i t h prisms, a n d t h e device of
reflecting mirrors; or
b) m e c h a n i c a l a n d chemical m a n i p u l a t i o n of the negative a f t e r
exposure.
W H A T IS T H E PURPOSE O F T H E E N U M E R A T I O N ?
W h a t is to be gleaned f r o m this list? T h a t t h e most astonishing
possibilities r e m a i n to be discovered in the r a w m a t e r i a l of photog-
raphy, since a d e t a i l e d analysis of each of these aspects furnishes us
with a n u m b e r of v a l u a b l e indications in regard to their a p p l i c a t i o n ,
a d j u s t m e n t , etc. O u r investigations will lead us in a n o t h e r direction,
however. W e w a n t to discover w h a t is t h e essence a n d significance of
photography.
T H E N E W VISION
All i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of p h o t o g r a p h y have h i t h e r t o been influenced
by t h e aesthetic-philosophic concepts t h a t circumscribed p a i n t i n g .
T h e s e were for l o n g h e l d to be equally a p p l i c a b l e to p h o t o g r a p h i c
practice. U p to now, p h o t o g r a p h y has r e m a i n e d in r a t h e r rigid de-
pendence o n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f o r m s of p a i n t i n g ; a n d like p a i n t i n g it
has passed t h r o u g h t h e successive stages of all t h e various art "isms";
t h o u g h in n o sense to its a d v a n t a g e . F u n d a m e n t a l l y new discoveries
cannot f o r long be confined to t h e m e n t a l i t y a n d practice of bygone
periods w i t h i m p u n i t y . W h e n t h a t h a p p e n s all p r o d u c t i v e activity is
arrested. T h i s was plainly evinced in p h o t o g r a p h y , w h i c h has yielded
no results of any value except in those fields where, as in scientific
work, it has b e e n e m p l o y e d w i t h o u t artistic a m b i t i o n s . H e r e a l o n e
did it prove t h e p i o n e e r of a n original d e v e l o p m e n t , or of o n e
peculiar to itself.
I n this c o n n e c t i o n it c a n n o t be too plainly stated t h a t it is q u i t e
u n i m p o r t a n t w h e t h e r p h o t o g r a p h y p r o d u c e s " a r t " or not. Its own
basic laws, n o t t h e o p i n i o n s of art critics, will p r o v i d e the only valid
measure of its f u t u r e w o r t h . It is sufficiently u n p r e c e d e n t e d t h a t such
a " m e c h a n i c a l " t h i n g as p h o t o g r a p h y , a n d o n e r e g a r d e d so con-
temptuously in an artistic a n d creative sense, should h a v e a c q u i r e d
the power it has, a n d become o n e of t h e p r i m a r y objective visual
foims, in barely a century of evolution. Formerly t h e p a i n t e r im-
pressed his o w n perspective o u t l o o k o n his age. W e have only to
recall t h e m a n n e r in which we used to look at landscapes, a n d com-
pare it w i t h t h e way we perceive t h e m now! T h i n k , too, of the incisive
s h a r p n e s s of those c a m e r a p o r t r a i t s of o u r c o n t e m p o r a r i e s , p i t t e d
w i t h pores a n d f u r r o w e d by lines. O r a n air-view of a s h i p at sea
m o v i n g t h r o u g h waves t h a t seem f r o z e n in light. O r the e n l a r g e m e n t
of a w o v e n tissue, or t h e chiselled delicacy of a n o r d i n a r y sawn block
of w o o d . O r , in fact, a n y of t h e w h o l e g a m u t of s p l e n d i d details of
s t r u c t u r e , t e x t u r e a n d " f a c t o r " of w h a t e v e r objects we care to choose.
T H E N E W E X P E R I E N C E O F SPACE
T h r o u g h p h o t o g r a p h y , too, we c a n p a r t i c i p a t e in new experiences
of space, a n d in even g r e a t e r m e a s u r e t h r o u g h t h e film. W i t h t h e i r
help, a n d t h a t of t h e n e w school of architects, we h a v e a t t a i n e d a n
e n l a r g e m e n t a n d s u b l i m a t i o n of o u r a p p r e c i a t i o n of space, t h e com-
p r e h e n s i o n of a n e w s p a t i a l c u l t u r e . T h a n k s to the p h o t o g r a p h e r ,
h u m a n i t y has a c q u i r e d the p o w e r of p e r c e i v i n g its s u r r o u n d i n g s , a n d
its very existence, w i t h n e w eyes.
THE HEIGHT OF ATTAINMENT
B u t all these are isolated characteristics, s e p a r a t e a c h i e v e m e n t s ,
n o t a l t o g e t h e r dissimilar to those of p a i n t i n g . I n p h o t o g r a p h y we
m u s t l e a r n to seek, n o t t h e " p i c t u r e , " n o t t h e a e s t h e t i c of t r a d i t i o n ,
b u t t h e ideal i n s t r u m e n t of expression, t h e self-sufficient vehicle for
education.
SERIES ( P H O T O G R A P H I C I M A G E SEQUENCES O F T H E S A M E O B J E C T )
T h e r e is n o m o r e s u r p r i s i n g , yet, in its n a t u r a l n e s s a n d o r g a n i c
sequence, s i m p l e r f o r m t h a n t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c series. T h i s is the
logical c u l m i n a t i o n of p h o t o g r a p h y . T h e series is n o l o n g e r a "pic-
t u r e , " a n d n o n e of t h e c a n o n s of p i c t o r i a l aesthetics can be a p p l i e d
to it. H e r e the s e p a r a t e p i c t u r e loses its i d e n t i t y as such a n d becomes
a detail of assembly, a n essential s t r u c t u r a l e l e m e n t of t h e w h o l e
w h i c h is t h e t h i n g itself. I n this c o n c a t e n a t i o n of its s e p a r a t e b u t
i n s e p a r a b l e p a r t s a p h o t o g r a p h i c series i n s p i r e d by a d e f i n i t e p u r p o s e
c a n b e c o m e at o n c e t h e m o s t p o t e n t w e a p o n a n d t h e t e n d e r e s t lyric.
T h e t r u e significance of t h e film will o n l y a p p e a r in a m u c h later,
less c o n f u s e d a n d g r o p i n g age t h a n o u r s . T h e p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r this
r e v e l a t i o n is, of course, the r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t a k n o w l e d g e of p h o t o g -
r a p h y is j u s t as i m p o r t a n t as t h a t of t h e a l p h a b e t . T h e i l l i t e r a t e of t h e
f u t u r e will be i g n o r a n t of t h e use of c a m e r a a n d p e n alike.

MAN RAY (1890-) Of course, there will always be those who look only at
technique, who ask "how " while others of a more curious nature will ask
"whyPersonally, I have always preferred inspiration to information, MAN
RAY, Modern Photography, November 1957, p. 85.
THE AGE OF LIGHT 1934
Preface to Man Ray Photographs 1920-1934, Paris,
Hartford, James T. Soby.
I n this age, like all ages, w h e n the p r o b l e m of t h e p e r p e t u a t i o n of
a r a c e o r class a n d t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of its enemies, is t h e a l l - a b s o r b i n g
m o t i v e of civilized society, it seems i r r e l e v a n t a n d w a s t e f u l still t o
c r e a t e works whose only i n s p i r a t i o n s are i n d i v i d u a l h u m a n e m o t i o n
a n d desire. T h e a t t i t u d e seems to be t h a t one may be p e r m i t t e d a
r e t u r n to t h e idyllic o c c u p a t i o n s only a f t e r m e r i t i n g this r e t u r n by
solving t h e m o r e vital p r o b l e m s of existence. Still, we k n o w that the
incapacity of race or class to i m p r o v e itself is as great as its incapacity
to learn f r o m previous errors in history. All progress results f r o m an
intense i n d i v i d u a l desire to i m p r o v e t h e i m m e d i a t e present, f r o m an
all-conscious sense of m a t e r i a l insufficiency. I n this e x a l t e d state,
m a t e r i a l action imposes itself a n d takes t h e f o r m of r e v o l u t i o n in one
form or a n o t h e r . R a c e a n d class, like styles, t h e n become irrelevant,
while t h e e m o t i o n of t h e h u m a n i n d i v i d u a l becomes universal. For
what can be m o r e b i n d i n g a m o n g s t beings t h a n t h e discovery of a
c o m m o n desire? A n d w h a t can be m o r e i n s p i r i n g to action t h a n the
confidence aroused by a lyric expression of this desire? F r o m t h e first
gesture of a child p o i n t i n g to a n object a n d simply n a m i n g it, b u t
with a w o r l d of i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g , to t h e d e v e l o p e d m i n d t h a t creates
an image whose strangeness a n d reality stirs o u r subconscious to its
inmost depths, t h e a w a k e n i n g of desire is the first step to participa-
tion a n d experience.
It is in t h e spirit of a n e x p e r i e n c e a n d n o t of e x p e r i m e n t t h a t the
following a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l images are presented. Seized in m o m e n t s
of visual d e t a c h m e n t d u r i n g periods of e m o t i o n a l contact, these
images a r e oxidized residues, fixed by light a n d chemical elements,
of living organisms. N o plastic expression can ever be m o r e t h a n a
residue of a n experience. T h e r e c o g n i t i o n of a n image t h a t has
tragically survived a n experience, recalling t h e event m o r e or less
clearly, like t h e u n d i s t u r b e d ashes of a n o b j e c t c o n s u m e d by flames,
the recogntion of this object so little representative a n d so fragile,
a n d its s i m p l e identification o n t h e p a r t of t h e spectator w i t h a
similar personal experience, precludes all psychoanalytical classifica-
tion or assimilation i n t o a n a r b i t r a r y decorative system. Questions of
merit a n d of e x e c u t i o n can always be taken care of by those w h o
hold themselves aloof f r o m even t h e f r o n t i e r s of such experiences.
For, w h e t h e r a p a i n t e r , e m p h a s i z i n g t h e i m p o r t a n c e of the idea he
wishes to convey i n t r o d u c e s bits of ready-made chromos alongside his
h a n d i w o r k , or w h e t h e r a n o t h e r , w o r k i n g directly w i t h light a n d
chemistry, so d e f o r m s t h e s u b j e c t as almost to h i d e t h e identity of t h e
original, a n d creates a n e w f o r m , t h e e n s u i n g violation of t h e m e d i u m
employed is t h e most perfect assurance of t h e a u t h o r ' s convictions.
A certain a m o u n t of c o n t e m p t for t h e m a t e r i a l e m p l o y e d to express
an idea is i n d i s p e n s a b l e to t h e purest realization of this idea.
Each one of us, i n his timidity, has a limit b e y o n d which he is out-
raged. It is inevitable t h a t he w h o by c o n c e n t r a t e d a p p l i c a t i o n has
extended this l i m i t for himself, s h o u l d arouse t h e r e s e n t m e n t of
those w h o have accepted c o n v e n t i o n s which, since accepted by all,
r e q u i r e n o initiative of a p p l i c a t i o n . A n d this r e s e n t m e n t generally
takes t h e f o r m of meaningless l a u g h t e r or of criticism, if not of perse-
c u t i o n . B u t this a p p a r e n t v i o l a t i o n is p r e f e r a b l e to t h e m o n s t r o u s
h a b i t s c o n d o n e d by e t i q u e t t e a n d aestheticism.
A n effort i m p e l l e d by desire m u s t also h a v e a n a u t o m a t i c o r sub-
conscious e n e r g y to a i d its r e a l i z a t i o n . T h e reserves of this energy
w i t h i n us are limitless if we will d r a w o n t h e m w i t h o u t a sense of
s h a m e o r of p r o p r i e t y . L i k e t h e scientist w h o is m e r e l y a prestidigi-
t a t o r m a n i p u l a t i n g the a b u n d a n t p h e n o m e n a of n a t u r e a n d p r o f i t i n g
by every so called h a z a r d o r law, the c r e a t o r d e a l i n g in h u m a n values
allows t h e subconscious forces t o filter t h r o u g h h i m , c o l o r e d by his
o w n selectivity, w h i c h is u n i v e r s a l h u m a n desire, a n d exposes to the
light, m o t i v e s a n d instincts l o n g repressed, w h i c h s h o u l d f o r m the
basis of a c o n f i d e n t f r a t e r n i t y . T h e i n t e n s i t y of this message c a n be
d i s t u r b i n g o n l y in p r o p o r t i o n to the f r e e d o m t h a t has b e e n given to
a u t o m a t i s m o r t h e s u b c o n s c i o u s self. T h e r e m o v a l of i n c u l c a t e d
m o d e s of p r e s e n t a t i o n , r e s u l t i n g in a p p a r e n t artificiality o r strange-
ness, is a c o n f i r m a t i o n of t h e f r e e f u n c t i o n i n g of this a u t o m a t i s m a n d
is to be w e l c o m e d .
O p e n confidences a r e b e i n g m a d e every day, a n d it r e m a i n s f o r the
eye to t r a i n itself to see t h e m w i t h o u t p r e j u d i c e o r r e s t r a i n t .

HENRY P. ROBINSON (1830-1901) Photography would be better if its

elements were not so easily comprehended as to make it almost a frivolous
pursuit, and to cause it to be included with amusements and recreations, THE
ELEMENTS OF A PICTORIAL PHOTOGRAPH, London, Percy Lund & Co1896,
p. 163.

PARADOXES OF ART, SCIENCE, AND PHOTOGRAPHY 1892

Wilson's Photographic Magazine, Vol. 29, pp. 242-45.

"Stick to n a t u r e , m y b o y ! " is a n a d m o n i t i o n o f t e n h e a r d a m o n g
artists, yet it is most t r u e t h a t , b e y o n d a c e r t a i n p o i n t , the closer the
i m i t a t i o n is to n a t u r e t h e f u r t h e r it is f r o m a r t .
A r t is n o t so m u c h a m a t t e r of f a c t as of i m p r e s s i o n ; e v e n realists
a d m i t this. T h e i r o b j e c t i o n s t o w h a t is called i m p r e s s i o n i s m is t h a t
t h e impressionists s e l d o m say a n y t h i n g w o r t h saying, a n d s o m e t i m e s
n o t h i n g at all, l e a v i n g a s h r e w d s u s p i c i o n t h a t they h a v e n o t h i n g to
say, a n d glory i n h a v i n g n o mission e x c e p t t o u p s e t t h e e x p e r i e n c e
a n d p r a c t i c e of c e n t u r i e s .
N o possible a m o u n t of scientific t r u t h will in itself m a k e a p i c t u r e .
S o m e t h i n g m o r e is r e q u i r e d . T h e t r u t h t h a t is w a n t e d is artistic t r u t h
—quite a d i f f e r e n t t h i n g . A r t i s t i c t r u t h is a c o n v e n t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a -
t i o n t h a t looks like t r u t h w h e n we h a v e b e e n e d u c a t e d u p to accept-
i n g it as a s u b s t i t u t e for t r u t h . T h e N o r t h A m e r i c a n I n d i a n d i d n o t
u n d e r s t a n d a p o r t r a i t less t h a n life size o r a profile w i t h o n e eye
only; h e was n o t e d u c a t e d u p to t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l .
Of l a t e years t h e r e h a s b e e n a g r e a t d e m a n d for t r u t h in a r t , what-
ever t h a t d a r k saying m a y m e a n . W e h a v e been impressed by literalists
to be f a i t h f u l to n a t u r e . T o q u o t e M r . O s c a r W i l d e , " T h e y call u p o n
Shakespeare—they always do—and q u o t e t h a t hackneyed passage
a b o u t A r t h o l d i n g t h e m i r r o r u p to N a t u r e , f o r g e t t i n g t h a t this
u n f o r t u n a t e a p h o r i s m is deliberately said by H a m l e t in o r d e r to con-
vince the bystanders of his a b s o l u t e insanity o n all a r t m a t t e r s . . .",
reducing genius to t h e position of a looking-glass. O n the o t h e r h a n d ,
it is sometimes said, p e r h a p s jokingly—for we s h o u l d n o t take M r .
Brett or M r . Pennell too seriously—that p h o t o g r a p h y c a n n o t be art
because it has n o capacity for lying. A l t h o u g h t h e saying is w r o n g as
regards o u r art, this is p u t t i n g the semblance of a great t r u t h in a
coarse way. I n o t h e r a n d m o r e p o l i t e words, n o m e t h o d can be ade-
q u a t e m e a n s to a n artistic e n d t h a t will n o t a d a p t itself to t h e will
of the artist. T h e reason is this, if it can be r e d u c e d to reason: a d m i t
that all art m u s t be based o n n a t u r e ; b u t n a t u r e is n o t art, a n d art,
not being n a t u r e , c a n n o t fail to be m o r e or less c o n v e n t i o n a l . T h i s is
one of those d e l i g h t f u l c o n t r a d i c t i o n s t h a t m a k e the study of art an
intellectual o c c u p a t i o n . M e n n a t u r a l l y t u r n to n a t u r e . W e have
evidence of this f r o m p r e h i s t o r i c times. T h e o r n a m e n t of all time,
of all nations, w i t h scarcely a n exception, has been based o n nature—
the Greeks a n d Moors a r e t h e i m p o r t a n t exceptions—yet the orna-
m e n t t h a t a p p r o a c h e d nearest to exact i m i t a t i o n of n a t u r e has always
been the most debased a n d worst. It is the lowest intellects that take
the most delight i n deceptive i m i t a t i o n . M r . Lewis F. Day puts this
very a d m i r a b l y in one of his recent p u b l i c a t i o n s : " T h o s e w h o profess
to follow N a t u r e , " he says, "seem sometimes to be r a t h e r d r a g g i n g
her in t h e dust. T h e r e is a wider view of n a t u r e , w h i c h includes
h u m a n n a t u r e , a n d t h a t selective a n d idealizing instinct which is
n a t u r a l to m a n . It is a long way f r o m b e i n g yet proved t h a t t h e
naturalistic designer is m o r e ' t r u e to n a t u r e ' t h a n a n o t h e r . It is one
t h i n g to study n a t u r e , a n d a n o t h e r to p r e t e n d t h a t studies are works
of art. I n no b r a n c h of design has it ever been held by t h e masters
that n a t u r e was e n o u g h . It is only t h e very callow s t u d e n t w h o opens
his m o u t h to swallow all n a t u r e , whole; t h e o l d e r b i r d knows b e t t e r . "

It is clear, t h e n , t h a t a m e t h o d t h a t will n o t a d m i t of t h e modifica-

tions of t h e artist c a n n o t be an art, a n d t h e r e f o r e is p h o t o g r a p h y in
a perilous state if we c a n n o t prove t h a t it is e n d o w e d with possibilities
of u n t r u t h . B u t they who, looking p e r h a p s only at their own l i m i t e d
experiments, say p h o t o g r a p h y c a n n o t lie, take a very n a r r o w view a n d
greatly u n d e r r a t e the capabilities of t h e art. All arts have their limits,
and I a d m i t t h a t the limits of p h o t o g r a p h y are r a t h e r narrow, b u t in
good h a n d s it can be m a d e to lie like a T r o j a n . H o w e v e r m u c h t r u t h
may be desirable in t h e abstract, to t h e artist t h e r e is n o merit in a
process t h a t c a n n o t be m a d e to say the t h i n g t h a t is not.
H e r e I a m b o u n d to a d m i t a considerable weakness in my argu-
ment. W e are told by a writer in a p o p u l a r new magazine, edited by
a m e m b e r of o u r C l u b , t h a t it is "always t h e best policy to tell the
truth—unless, of course, you are a n exceptionally good liar!" T h i s is,
indeed, a m i s f o r t u n e , for t h e r e is n o t , I am a s h a m e d to say, very great
scope for s p a r k l i n g u n v e r a c i t y in o u r art. T h a t is to say, we c a n n o t
p r o d u c e b r i l l i a n t falsifications such as t h e p a i n t e r may i n d u l g e in.
O n e m a n may steal a horse, w h i l e a n o t h e r may n o t look over a hedge.
A p a i n t e r may u n b l u s h i n g l y p r e s e n t us w i t h a n angel w i t h wings
t h a t w o n ' t work, w h i l e a p h o t o g r a p h e r is l a u g h e d at, very properly,
if he gives us a n y t h i n g n e a r e r a n angelic f o r m t h a n t h a t of a spook
raised by a m e d i u m .
It m u s t be confessed t h a t it takes considerable skill to p r o d u c e the
best k i n d of lies. It is in t h e h a n d s of first-class p h o t o g r a p h e r s only—
a n d p e r h a p s t h e i n d i f f e r e n t ones—that p h o t o g r a p h y can lie. W i t h the
first, possibly, graciously; w i t h t h e latter, b r u t a l l y . T h e p h o t o g r a p h -
ers of only average a t t a i n m e n t s , a n d such as we s h o u l d get t u r n e d o u t
in q u a n t i t i e s by a n art-less I n s t i t u t e , seldom get b e y o n d t h e plain,
naked, u n i n t e r e s t i n g t r u t h . Yet I t h i n k t h a t m a n y will agree w i t h m e
t h a t the very good a n d t h e very b a d a r e m u c h m o r e interesting t h a n
t h e mediocre. T h a t the best are interesting is clear; t h a t t h e worst
are o f t e n t h e cause of a good l a u g h is t h e e x p e r i e n c e of all; it is only
the m i d d l i n g g o o d t h a t i n d u c e indifference.
T h e r e can be little d o u b t that, in this respect, a n d l o o k i n g at it
f r o m this p o i n t of view, p a i n t i n g is a m u c h greater art t h a n photog-
r a p h y ; b u t w h a t I a m concerned to prove is t h a t , a l t h o u g h photog-
r a p h y is only a h u m b l e liar, yet it is n o t t h e guileless i n n o c e n t t h a t
some p e o p l e suppose, a n d has a capacity for lying sufficient to e n a b l e
it to w o r t h i l y enroll its n a m e a m o n g t h e n o b l e arts. N a y , is it n o t the
greater for its humility? P h o t o g r a p h y gives us t h e m e a n s of a n e a r e r
i m i t a t i o n of n a t u r e t h a n any o t h e r art, yet has sufficient elasticity to
show t h e d i r e c t i n g m i n d , a n d t h e r e f o r e is t h e most perfect a r t of all.
If we m u s t h a v e paradoxes, let us carry t h e m to the b i t t e r end.
" L e t us h a v e t r u t h , " says t h e conscientious writer w h o knows not
w h a t t r u t h is. W h a t s h o u l d we get in a r t if we could c a p t u r e it? W e
s h o u l d have a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of n a t u r e as we see it in a m i r r o r , colors
a n d all, a n d s h o u l d tire of it as soon as the novelty wore off. T h e
worst t h i n g t h a t c o u l d h a p p e n to p h o t o g r a p h y as a n a r t w o u l d be
t h e discovery of a process giving t h e colors of nature—the one im-
possible t h i n g in n a t u r e , I h o p e a n d believe. Its one great d e v i a t i o n
f r o m faultless v i r t u e is, as I h a v e e n d e a v o r e d to show, t h a t it is m o r e
truthful than painting.
A writer, i n n o c e n t of t h e resources of t h e art, a n d w i s h i n g to
d e p r e c i a t e it, makes a p o i n t of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r h a v i n g n o control
over the action of the developer so as to p r o d u c e t h e variation f r o m
n a t u r e he desires. I can only reply t h a t a m o n g my own pictures t h e r e
is scarcely one t h a t does n o t owe a good deal of any m e r i t it may h a v e
to control of the developer. T h e possibilities of control were greater,
perhaps, in t h e collodion process t h a n t h e gelatine, b u t we a r e speak-
ing of the capabilities of p h o t o g r a p h y , n o t of any p a r t i c u l a r process.
T h e scientist may prove, b e y o n d any possibility of d o u b t , t h a t t h e
relative values c a n n o t be altered in d e v e l o p m e n t , b u t the photog-
r a p h e r knows t h a t v a r i a t i o n in d e v e l o p m e n t varies the a p p e a r a n c e
of his results, a n d t h a t s h o u l d be q u i t e e n o u g h for h i m . It is so diffi-
cult, a n d yet so t e m p t i n g , to "find o u t w h a t c a n n o t be done, a n d
then to go a n d d o it!"
I feel serious p r o m p t i n g s h e r e to have a fling at science t h a t will
surely b r i n g d o w n t h e w r a t h of o u r President o n my u n f o r t u n a t e
head. I will try to a m e l i o r a t e him by saying t h a t science d e m a n d s o u r
greatest respect. N o o n e can h a v e m o r e reverence for science t h a n I
have myself—when it keeps its place. B u t we are suffering f r o m science,
a n d fancy is d y i n g o u t of t h e l a n d . It is d o i n g serious h a r m to photog-
r a p h y as a p i c t u r e - p r o d u c i n g art. W h e n a s t u d e n t o u g h t to be study-
ing t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a picture, a n d d e v e l o p i n g in his soul t h e a r t
of lying, he is led away by t h e flickering ignis fatuus of science, a n d
goes m a d over developers. " A n o t h e r new d e v e l o p e r " has m o r e effect
on t h e t e n d e r feelings of t h e b r e t h r e n of the camera t h a n w o u l d t h e
advent of a p o e t - p h o t o g r a p h e r . T h i s suggests a v a r i a t i o n o n R e j l a n d -
er's Two Ways of Life. O n e y o u t h travels a l o n g the pleasant a n d
v i r t u o u s walks of art, not listening to the Sirens of Fact; b u t dozens
of others a r e decoyed to t h e worser way, a n d are soon lost in the
seductive vanities a n d subtleties of science. T h e y last long e n o u g h ,
perhaps, to m o d i f y a developer—with w h i c h science, however, tells
t h e m they can d o little or n o t h i n g — a n d a r e h e a r d of no more, except
in t h e m u l t i t u d i n o u s p l a t i t u d e s used in t h e endless discussions of
abstractions in society papers; a n d the scientific d r e a m of t h e f u t u r e
is an I n s t i t u t e of P h o t o g r a p h y f r o m which a r t is to be excluded. A r t
will be very glad to p a r t c o m p a n y .
Let us be generous a n d a d m i t t h a t science has its good points, b u t
it is d o i n g a good deal of h a r m in the world. It is r o b b i n g us of o u r
illusions. T h e science of history has d e f r a u d e d R i c h a r d I I I of his
h u m p , m a d e H e n r y V I I I a m o r a l character, a n d gone audaciously
nigh to p r o v i n g t h a t Jack t h e G i a n t Killer never existed. W e are bored
by the tedious p a p e r s of those w h o " h a v e n o t the wit to exaggerate
nor t h e genius to r o m a n c e , " a n d a s y n o n y m for dullness is a lecture
at the. Royal Society. B u t scientists are n o t w i t h o u t their hilarious
moments. In o u r own art I c a n n o t h e l p t h i n k i n g t h a t scientists are
trifling w i t h a serious subject w h e n they tell us t h a t we c a n n o t d o
as we like w i t h o u r developers or w h e n they b r i n g l o g a r i t h m s to bear
on picture-making. B u t the h u m o r is not all o n one side, a n d we n o t
u n f r e q u e n t l y e n j o y a smile at the p r o d i g i o u s engines they sometimes
use to crack o u r p o o r little nuts.
W h a t has science to do w i t h art, except to p r o v i d e m a t e r i a l s for
its use? It is only of late t h a t a r t has, o n t h e one h a n d , been m a d e to
d e p e n d o n absolute scientific t r u t h ; a n d , o n t h e other, by the same
writers, been proved, in t h e case of p h o t o g r a p h y , n o t to be an a r t
because it c a n n o t deviate f r o m t r u t h . It is merely a n incident, a n
accident, a detail—call it w h a t you will—that science, sometimes of
the highest a n d most distracting k i n d , is c o n n e c t e d w i t h picture-
m a k i n g p h o t o g r a p h y . T h e science t h a t deals w i t h t h e n a t u r e of t h e
image or t h e calculation of t h e c u r v e of a lens is a very d i s t a n t cousin,
indeed, to p i c t u r e - m a k i n g by t h e use of p h o t o g r a p h i c materials. T h e
use of m a t e r i a l s i n v e n t e d by o t h e r s f o r a definite p u r p o s e can scarcely
be called science. N o scientific theory s h o u l d be allowed to have
weight w i t h a n artist w h o has practised his a r t successfully f o r years
a n d knows w h a t he wants a n d h o w to get it. If, for instance, I was
told t h a t it was p r o v e d by science t h a t t h e negative w o u l d n o t yield
all the tones of n a t u r e , I s h o u l d reply t h a t m a n y years' practice h a d
convinced m e of t h a t well-known fact, b u t t h e m e r e fact of it b e i n g
proved scientifically d i d n o t alter t h e facts or f u r t h e r limit t h e tones.
W h e n it wras proved scientifically to Diogenes t h a t he could n o t walk
r o u n d his t u b , t h a t h u m o r o u s p h i l o s o p h e r settled t h e m a t t e r by
w a l k i n g r o u n d t h a t desirable residence. I a m a f r a i d I have used this
illustration s o m e w h e r e before, b u t let it pass. I n a r t t h e artist sees
his results, a n d it is f o r h i m to j u d g e , f r o m his k n o w l e d g e of a r t a n d
n a t u r e , not science, w h e t h e r his results are true, or, at any rate, if
they lie p r o p e r l y a n d are w h a t he wants. T h e artist has to d o w i t h
a p p e a r a n c e s , t h e scientist w i t h facts. It is n o t e n o u g h to say, T h i s is
n o t true. T h e q u e s t i o n is, Is it t r u e e n o u g h for artistic purposes?
I h a v e a l l u d e d to d e v e l o p m e n t once o r twice. T w o very clever
scientists, w h o m I m u c h respect, D r . H u r t e r a n d M r . Driffeld, h a v e
proved to everybody's u n s a t i s f a c t i o n t h a t p h o t o g r a p h e r s h a v e n o
control over the g r a d a t i o n s ; b u t this does n o t alter t h e fact that—
to p u t t h e simplest case—he k n o w s w h e n a negative is over- or under-
exposed or developed too dense or too t h i n to p r o p e r l y represent his
idea of n a t u r e as far as in h i m lies a n d his a r t will allow. T h e n t h e r e
has been a n o t h e r great a t t e m p t m a d e to show t h a t t h e perspective of
p h o t o g r a p h y is n o t scientifically true. If t h e a t t e m p t was successful,
w h i c h is very d o u b f u l , who cares? It has been t r u e e n o u g h n o t to be
f o u n d o u t f o r fifty years, a n d t h a t is good e n o u g h f o r p h o t o g r a p h y .
C a n it have been t h e w a n t of t r u t h t h a t has unconsciously com-
pelled artists since t h e b e g i n n i n g to a d m i r e t h e t r u t h of p h o t o g r a p h i c
perspective a n d rely o n its veracity? H e r e is a n o t h e r p a r a d o x i c a l n u t
to crack.
B u t my business is n o t to m a k e a f e a t u r e of t h e t r u t h of any p a r t
of p h o t o g r a p h y . O n the contrary, I w a n t to clear its c h a r a c t e r of
the un-artistic v i r t u e of b e i n g n o t h i n g b u t a t r u t h f u l , inevitable,
s t u p i d p u r v e y o r of prosaic fact.
P a i n t e r s sometimes trust to us f o r t r u t h ; t h e law courts are becom-
ing m o r e wary, a n d a p p r e c i a t e o u r deviations. I was o n c e f o u n d fault
w i t h by a n artist f o r " a l t e r i n g " a p h o t o g r a p h , o n t h e plea t h a t it
w o u l d mislead a p a i n t e r if he w a n t e d to copy it. I f o u n d h e had
copied it before he saw the scene, a n d w h e n he a f t e r w a r d c o m p a r e d
his p i c t u r e with it, he f o u n d a c l u m p of trees that should have ap-
peared on t h e left transferred to t h e right. I h a d m a d e the alteration
by d o u b l e p r i n t i n g , a n d i m p r o v e d the composition. I did not w a n t a
mere local view. I d o n ' t know t h a t there is a n y t h i n g m o r e exasperat-
ing t h a n for a p a i n t e r to take it for g r a n t e d that it is a p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s
business to play jackal to his lion, a n d h u n t u p food for h i m ; b u t it is
a blessed t r u t h that we can deceive h i m if we like. Painters o u g h t to
be m o r e g r a t e f u l to us t h a n they are. Besides p r o v i d i n g some of t h e m
with subjects, we have t a u g h t t h e m w h a t to avoid—educated them on
the S p a r t a n a n d H e l o t principle—and art has vastly i m p r o v e d d u r i n g
the half-century of o u r existence. W e have m a d e t h e c o l u m n a n d
curtain b a c k g r o u n d a b s u r d . W h e n o u r art was b o r n p a i n t e r s t h o u g h t
n o t h i n g of violating perspective by p l a c i n g the horizon as low as t h e
feet of their portraits, a n d m a d e no difficulties a b o u t h a n g i n g heavy
curtains f r o m t h e sky, a n d we are still fulfilling o u r useful mission of
showing artists t h e ridiculous things they o u g h t n o t to do, b u t it is
asking too m u c h to provide subjects for them—idea, composition, a n d
detail. A p a i n t e r s h o u l d never use p h o t o g r a p h y u n t i l he is capable
of g e t t i n g o n w i t h o u t it, a n d t h e n he s h o u l d m a k e his own photo-
graphs. T o copy a n o t h e r m a n ' s work is n o t honest, a n d is a lazy a n d
mischievous m e t h o d of a t t e m p t i n g to m a k e a living.
I am a f r a i d I have filled my space w i t h o u t giving as m a n y speci-
mens as I could wish of t h e possible d e l i n q u e n c i e s a n d u n t r u t h f u l -
nesses t h a t art requires a n d p h o t o g r a p h y can accomplish, b u t I h o p e
I have shown t h a t if it c a n n o t lie like p a i n t , it has the merit of
a p p r o a c h i n g it in m e n d a c i t y .
I will conclude w i t h a n o t h e r illustration of t h e capabilities of o u r
art for useful falsification. I once k n e w a p h o t o g r a p h e r (it sounds
better to p u t it t h a t way) w h o was employed, for the purposes of a
p a r l i a m e n t a r y committee, to m a k e a series of p h o t o g r a p h s showing
t h a t o n e place was m u c h m o r e p i c t u r e s q u e t h a n a n o t h e r . Some ugly
gas-works were to be erected, a n d it was desirable to place t h e m on
the least b e a u t i f u l of two spots. It may be also m e n t i o n e d that it was
likewise necessary t h a t they s h o u l d be placed on the site that best
suited the promoters. Both places were very picturesque, b u t in t h e
p h o t o g r a p h s it was easy to see the one site was a little rustic paradise
(with suitable figures a n d fine skies) a n d the o t h e r a dreary desert, all
f o r e g r o u n d of t h e plainest! Yet b o t h were t r u e to fact, a n d they h a d
the i n t e n d e d effect.
I n conclusion, let m e express t h e pleasure I feel in b e i n g afforded
the fascinating o p p o r t u n i t y of saying a few h u m b l e words in praise
of lying in a r o o m which has been s a t u r a t e d with t r u t h a n d fact for
m o r e t h a n a h u n d r e d years—ever since, indeed, Barry "restored t h e
a n t i q u e spirit in a r t " by p a i n t i n g his a n a c h r o n i s m s o n the walls, a n d
f r o m w h i c h b u i l d i n g e m a n a t e s t h e prospectus of the Chicago Exhi-
b i t i o n , w h i c h h o n o r s o u r art w i t h t h e c r o w n i n g p a r a d o x of classing
p h o t o g r a p h y w i t h I n s t r u m e n t s of Precision.

ARTHUR SIEGEL (1913-) Painting and photography have both been affected
by the same events and they have interacted on each other, but for nearly a
hundred years "creative" photographers confused ends with means. PHOTOG-
RAPHY IS, Aperture, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1961, p. 48.

FIFTY YEARS OF DOCUMENTARY 1951

American Photography, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 21-26.

I n p h o t o g r a p h y , d o c u m e n t a r y is t h e t e r m used to d e s c r i b e a specific
a t t i t u d e which sees, in the creative p r o d u c t i o n a n d use of p h o t o -
g r a p h s , a l a n g u a g e for g i v i n g a f u l l e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of m a n as a
social a n i m a l .
By e x a m i n i n g closely, by i s o l a t i n g a n d r e l a t i n g his subjects, the
documentary photographer penetrates the surface appearances and
reveals t h e w o r l d a b o u t us. T h e d o c u m e n t a r y e d i t o r , e i t h e r by work-
i n g directly w i t h t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r o r by a s s e m b l i n g previously un-
r e l a t e d pictures, c o m b i n e s t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c i m a g e w i t h text to
create m e a n i n g in s o m e area of t h e social scene. I n e i t h e r case, t h e
e n d e a v o r to i n f l u e n c e h u m a n b e h a v i o r by g i v i n g a d e e p e r u n d e r -
s t a n d i n g of the social process is t h e same.
As we look t h r o u g h t h e m a j o r d o c u m e n t a r y w o r k s of t h e past 50
years, we find t h a t e a c h o n e , in o r d e r to fulfill this a i m , has ap-
p r o a c h e d the p r o b l e m t h r o u g h t h e analysis of a specific t i m e p e r i o d ,
a specific place o r a specific aspect of h u m a n life. W e find works
w h i c h h a v e c o n c e n t r a t e d o n a p e r i o d in t i m e : a day, a year, a d e c a d e .
O t h e r works h a v e c o n c e r n e d themselves m a i n l y w i t h the place: a
d w e l l i n g , a street, a state, a n a t i o n .
T h e final a n d largest g r o u p , w h i c h places t h e e m p h a s i s o n a par-
t i c u l a r s e g m e n t of t h e social process, r a n g e s f r o m a s t u d y d o n e in
terms of o n e m a n ' s daily r o u t i n e to t h e c o m p l e x p i c t u r e of a n a t i o n
g r i p p e d by e c o n o m i c depression. T h i s g r o u p i n c l u d e s intense studies
o n wars a n d racial conflicts, o n p r o b l e m s of a g r i c u l t u r e a n d i n d u s t r y ,
on t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n . I t also i n c l u d e s the m o r e
s u b t l e w o r k s d e a l i n g w i t h the symbols of past a n d p r e s e n t c u l t u r e s
a n d w i t h t h e s p i r i t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s existing b e t w e e n m e n . T h e
c r e a t o r s of these visions u n d e r s t o o d t h e fact t h a t h u m a n society is a
c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g process a n d n o t a static t h i n g . T o p r o d u c e un-
d e r s t a n d i n g of society t h r o u g h p h o t o g r a p h s it was necessary to r e l a t e
the p i c t u r e s in a m e a n i n g f u l way.
I n g e n e r a l , t h e history of p h o t o g r a p h y , f r o m its i n v e n t i o n to the
p r e s e n t , seems to b e d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e m a j o r p e r i o d s . F r o m 1839 to
a b o u t 1885, the p h o t o g r a p h e r t r i e d to r e c o r d the face of t h e w o r l d
in an o b j e c t i v e way. H e r o a m e d f a r a n d w i d e to c a p t u r e t h e images
of f o r e i g n p e o p l e a n d places never b e f o r e seen by his excited audi-
ence. B u t w h e t h e r h e traveled in e x o t i c l a n d s o r r e m a i n e d at h o m e ,
the p h o t o g r a p h e r was satisfied w i t h his records of surface appear-
ances a n d felt no need to search b e n e a t h t h a t surface w i t h his camera.
F r o m 1885 to a b o u t 1918, the great p h o t o g r a p h i c movements, par-
ticularly t h e Photo-Secession, concerned themselves w i t h t h e super-
imposition of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s personality over t h e subject m a t t e r
in terms of stylistic m a n n e r i s m s . T h e personality of the "photo-
g r a p h i c a r t i s t " m a n i f e s t e d itself by destroying t h e m a c h i n e - m a d e
image by controlled h a n d w o r k a n d t h e misguided copying of certain
Victorian p a i n t e r s ' vision. T h i s u l t i m a t e l y led to t h e stereotyped see-
ing of t h e present-day pictorialists, whose work is usually devoid of
any personal m e a n i n g .
F r o m 1918 to t h e present, t h e flowering of mass p r o d u c t i o n raised
t r e m e n d o u s p r o b l e m s of d i s t r i b u t i o n a n d t h e o w n e r s h i p of goods.
Such new m e t h o d s of c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n as t h e
r a d i o a n d t h e a i r p l a n e compressed the world a n d m a d e neighbors of
those w h o h a d never b e f o r e h e a r d of each o t h e r . N e w d y n a m i c psy-
chologies, such as F r e u d ' s studies, gave m a n the ability to e x p l o r e
more deeply t h a n ever b e f o r e his i n n e r needs, wishes a n d fears. Sci-
ence even gave m a n t h e p o w e r to destroy himself completely: t h e
atom a n d h y d r o g e n b o m b s . D u r i n g t h a t time t h e sincere photog-
raphers b e c a m e increasingly aware of d e e p e r implications. T h e y con-
sciously e x p l o r e d b e n e a t h t h e surface chaos of m a n ' s world to dis-
cover t h e relationships a n d significance of o u t e r appearances.
T h e conscious d o c u m e n t a r y a t t i t u d e t o w a r d p h o t o g r a p h y devel-
oped in this last p e r i o d a n d it is n o t s u r p r i s i n g that, as a result of
the complications of life in t h e 20th century, p h o t o g r a p h y evolved
a discipline t h a t is directly concerned w i t h these p r o b l e m s a n d at-
tempts to suggest possible solutions. W h o were t h e m e n w h o first
a d o p t e d this a t t i t u d e a n d w h a t were t h e p r o b l e m s t h a t challenged
them?
As this century began, America's rapidly e x p a n d i n g m a c h i n e econ-
omy with its p r o m i s e of e c o n o m i c f r e e d o m set u p a p o w e r f u l attrac-
tion to t h e oppressed of E u r o p e . T h e y p o u r e d i n t o N e w York City
a n d o t h e r ports in a n o v e r w h e l m i n g flood. I n the ten years between
1903 a n d 1913, ten m i l l i o n i m m i g r a n t s arrived in the l a n d of plenty
with h i g h hopes. Ill e q u i p p e d by l a n g u a g e a n d t r a i n i n g to cope with
the new culture, they were forced to begin o n t h e lowest r u n g s of t h e
cultural l a d d e r . W o r k i n g in sweat shops a n d at b a c k b r e a k i n g m a n u a l
labor, e x p l o i t e d by l a n d l o r d a n d employer, they created terrific prob-
lems of e d u c a t i o n , housing, h e a l t h a n d i n t e g r a t i o n i n t o t h e new
society.
Lewis H i n e , t r a i n e d as a sociologist, began p h o t o g r a p h i n g these
people a n d t h e i r p r o b l e m s in 1903. H i s pictures m a d e vivid t h e ex-
p l o i t a t i o n of c h i l d r e n a n d a d u l t s alike. P e n e t r a t i n g i n t o the miser-
able living a n d w o r k i n g c o n d i t i o n s of slum t e n e m e n t s a n d the sweat-
shops, he exposed these sores to t h e conscience of t h e public. T h e
resulting i n d i g n a t i o n h e l p e d , to some e x t e n t , to destroy these evils.
A f t e r W o r l d W a r I, h e d o c u m e n t e d t h e R e d Cross relief activities in
m i d d l e E u r o p e a n c o u n t r i e s a n d his p i c t u r e s revealed t h e vast h u m a n
suffering caused by t h e w a r a n d t h e great n e e d for relief. I n t h e later
years of his life, H i n e was c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e affirmation of t h e
dignity of labor. H i s w o r k p o r t r a i t s clearly showed t h e resourceful
skill a n d t h e p r i d e in a j o b well d o n e .
Lewis H i n e was t h e classic d o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h e r . H i s work
at t h e b e g i n n i n g of the c e n t u r y p r o v i d e d a p a t t e r n to follow a n d
develop. W o r k i n g in a l i m i t e d social area at a given time in history,
p h o t o g r a p h i c analysis p r o v i d e d a rich basis f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of a n d
action u p o n m a n y social p r o b l e m s . W h e n he stated, " I w a n t e d to
show t h e things t h a t h a d to be corrected. I w a n t e d to show t h e things
t h a t h a d to be a p p r e c i a t e d , " he d e f i n e d very simply t h e d o c u m e n t a r y
attitude.
Across the c o n t i n e n t in San Francisco in a t i g h t ghetto, was a n
o l d e r i m m i g r a n t , t h e Chinese. I m p o r t e d in t h e early days of t h e gold
r u s h a n d t h e b u i l d i n g of t h e railroads, h e was n o t allowed to assimi-
late i n t o t h e general c o m m u n i t y . H e f u n c t i o n e d as servant, cook, fish-
cutter, l a u n d r y m a n a n d small f a r m e r . G r a d u a l l y , he was b u i l t u p to
be m e n a c e to A m e r i c a n labor, a n d Congress finally passed t h e Exclu-
sion L a w p r e v e n t i n g h i m f r o m b e c o m i n g a n A m e r i c a n citizen.
A r n o l d G e n t h e p h o t o g r a p h e d San Francisco's C h i n a t o w n f o r a b o u t
ten years u n t i l it was destroyed in t h e e a r t h q u a k e of 1906. H e used a
small h a n d c a m e r a w h i c h allowed h i m to p h o t o g r a p h his subjects
u n a w a r e . H e tried to show t h e Chinese as h u m a n beings, w h o traded,
g a m b l e d , loved a n d h a t e d in t h e m a n n e r of o t h e r people. H i s pictures
of C h i n a t o w n are o n t h e p i c t u r e s q u e side, obviously influenced by
the p r e v a i l i n g " a r t i s t i c " p h o t o g r a p h y , b u t they a r e a n o b l e a n d early
use of t h e c a n d i d camera. G e n t h e ' s p h o t o g r a p h s of t h e San Francisco
e a r t h q u a k e m u s t also be m e n t i o n e d . T h e y p r o v i d e d a n insight i n t o
t h e effects of a great n a t u r a l c a t a s t r o p h e . T h e d i s r u p t i o n of n o r m a l
c o m m u n i t y life was clearly shown a n d h e l p e d to b r i n g aid to the
stricken city.
M e a n w h i l e , in Paris, w o r k i n g in obscurity f r o m 1898 to 1927 was
E u g e n e Atget. H i s influence o n his p h o t o g r a p h i c c o n t e m p o r a r i e s was
nil, a n d n o t u n t i l his rescue f r o m o b l i v i o n by Berenice A b b o t t in
the early 30's was his p o w e r felt. Essentially a r o m a n t i c , he photo-
g r a p h e d Paris w i t h the single-mindedness of a m a n in love. W o r k i n g
with a large c a m e r a o n a t r i p o d , he w a r m l y e x a m i n e d its people,
shops, buildings, interiors a n d exteriors, palace a n d p a u p e r ' s place,
street signs, vehicles a n d vegetation. H e r e are lyrical images, peaceful
pictures. A m a n e x a m i n i n g w i t h tenderness a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e
symbols of a fast v a n i s h i n g 19th c e n t u r y . I n t h e 30's, t h e widespread
p u b l i c a t i o n of Atget's pictures affected m a n y p h o t o g r a p h e r s . H i s
directness of vision, his richly organized tones a n d t e x t u r e s were
a d o p t e d by m a n y p h o t o g r a p h e r s for their own purposes.
F r o m t h e e n d of t h e first world w a r u n t i l t h e 30's, A m e r i c a pro-
duced u n d r e a m e d of physical b o u n t y . Everyone worked, the stock
m a r k e t values steadily increased, w o m e n were e m a n c i p a t e d f r o m
many previous moral, e c o n o m i c a n d political shackles, p r o h i b i t i o n
p r o d u c e d a disrespect for t h e law a n d everyone e n j o y e d m o r e physi-
cal comforts. B u t there were a few q u e s t i o n i n g souls w h o w o n d e r e d
a b o u t the loss of spiritual values. A m o n g these was A l f r e d Stieglitz.
F r o m the early days of the 90's Stieglitz h a d used his camera as a
tool for e x p l o r i n g m e n a n d their spiritual relationships. In the 20's,
a series of o n e - m a n shows d e m o l i s h e d t h e old concepts of p o r t r a i t u r e .
Previously, the p h o t o g r a p h e r h a d m a d e p o r t r a i t s in the i m i t a t i o n of
the p a i n t e r a n d tried to synthesize i n t o o n e image all the qualities
of t h e i n d i v i d u a l . Stieglitz d e m o n s t r a t e d a new k i n d of p o r t r a i t based
on the camera's ability to analyze a n d to isolate small areas. Some of
his portraits h a d as m a n y as 45 images in a g r o u p . H e showed t h a t a
p o r t r a i t c o u l d be s o m e t h i n g m o r e t h a n a h e a d a n d that a g r o u p of
images consisting of p a r t s of the body could together p r o d u c e a new
kind of p o r t r a i t .
P h o t o g r a p h i c p o r t r a i t u r e has never been the same since these ex-
hibits. Aside f r o m the portraits of people, he m a d e p o r t r a i t s of the
city. T h e city h a d become an o v e r p o w e r i n g g r o u p of m o n u m e n t s
that were engulfing m e n . T h e h u m a n values were being d e v o u r e d
by the m a c h i n e age. A p a r t f r o m his p h o t o g r a p h i c work, Stieglitz
stood as a spiritual oasis in a materialistic desert. W r i t e r s , p a i n t e r s
and p h o t o g r a p h e r s w h o were w o n d e r i n g a n d q u e s t i o n i n g g a t h e r e d
a r o u n d h i m for s t i m u l a t i o n a n d strength. A m o n g these was Paul
Strand, w h o in 1916 h a d already m a d e h u g e c a n d i d closeups of the
h u r t a n d d w a r f e d city people.
In 1920, Strand c o n t i n u e d his e x p l o r a t i o n of t h e city a n d m a d e a
poetic d o c u m e n t a r y m o t i o n p i c t u r e of N e w York with Charles Sheeler.
T h e y looked d o w n f r o m the towers of M a n h a t t a n to t h e little ants
below. N e w angles were e x p l o i t e d to jolt t h e observer i n t o awareness.
In 1929, S t r a n d e x p a n d e d his vision w i t h a series m a d e in the Gaspe.
T h e f o r m a l a n d precise o r d e r i n g of land, people, boats, houses, sky
proclaimed that a new level of visual organization for the d o c u m e n -
tary p h o t o g r a p h e r h a d been achieved.
In Mexico at this time was E d w a r d W e s t o n . P a r t i c i p a t i n g in the
Mexican renaissance, he was d e v e l o p i n g a n intensive p o r t r a i t u r e a n d
a feeling for landscape a n d its f o r m s that greatly e n r i c h e d the docu-
m e n t a r y t r a d i t i o n of the 30's. H e also h a d discovered t h e p o w e r f u l
m e a n i n g of signs a n d t h e relation of buildings to people. All of these
elements fused in his later work in California and the West to pro-
duce a new k i n d of lyrical d o c u m e n t a r y image.
At the same time Steichen was discovering a n d e x p l o i t i n g the rich
p o t e n t i a l of controlled artificial light sources. In a series of sculptural
p o r t r a i t s a n d vivid advertisements, he a d d e d a new rich vocabulary of
light use to the l a n g u a g e of t h e p h o t o g r a p h s . W i t h t h e i n v e n t i o n a n d
c o m m o n use of flashbulbs in t h e 30's, this vocabulary was p u t to
i m m e d i a t e use.
I n 1925, the Leica began to come i n t o c o m m o n use. H e r e was a
new tool t h a t could be used almost as a direct extension of t h e eye.
It was light in weight, precise in use a n d e n a b l e d the p h o t o g r a p h e r
to invade new d o m a i n s previously d e n i e d to h i m because of his cum-
bersome c a m e r a or f e a r f u l flash p o w d e r . Pioneers like D r . Erich Salo-
m o n a n d P a u l Wolff used t h e little i n s t r u m e n t to e x p l o r e q u i c k
expressions a n d psychological s i t u a t i o n s t h a t were t h e g r a n d f a t h e r s
of t h e later intensive a n d strange images of Cartier-Bresson a n d H e l e n
Levitt. In 1927, Moholy-Nagy's book Light: Photography: Film, m a d e
conscious t h e power of p h o t o m o n t a g e a n d t h e n e w vision of the
scientific image.
O n Black F r i d a y of O c t o b e r 1929, t h e b u b b l e of easy living ex-
p l o d e d , b l o w i n g A m e r i c a i n t o a p e r i o d of self-analysis a n d a search
for a new set of values. P h o t o g r a p h e r s like Berenice A b b o t t a n d Walk-
er Evans r e t u r n e d to t h e U n i t e d States f r o m E u r o p e a n d focused their
eyes o n their native l a n d . A b b o t t d o c u m e n t e d a c h a n g i n g N e w York
City, a n d Evans surveyed the East a n d South w i t h t h e critical eye of
a c u l t u r a l a n t h r o p o l o g i s t . A l t h o u g h he worked w i t h a large camera,
Evans p r o d u c e d a series of b r i l l i a n t psychological p o r t r a i t s a n d his
p h o t o g r a p h s of b u i l d i n g s h a d t h e flavor of t h e p e o p l e living in t h e m
w h e t h e r they were actually present or not. H e p r o d u c e d a p o w e r f u l
series of c u l t u r a l f r a g m e n t s a n d symbols t h a t d i d for t h e social scene
w h a t Stieglitz h a d d o n e f o r p o r t r a i t s in t h e 20's.
As the e c o n o m i c crisis d e e p e n e d , it called f o r t h reactions i n terms
of a new k i n d of large scale social p l a n n i n g . T o e x p l a i n these prob-
lems a n d the a t t e m p t s at solutions it was necessary to i n a u g u r a t e a
new k i n d of collaborative i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e A m e r i c a n scene. Roy
Stryker, as h e a d of t h e F a r m Security A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ' s Historical
B r a n c h , was t h e brilliant m i d w i f e of this new conscious f o r m of visual
c o m m u n i c a t i o n . A w a r e of t h e i m p a c t of p h o t o g r a p h s a n d words f r o m
his e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n in teaching economics at C o l u m b i a University,
Stryker conceived a vast p o r t r a i t of America. H e assembled a sensitive
g r o u p of p h o t o g r a p h e r s , each of w h o m used his own p h o t o g r a p h i c
t e c h n i q u e f r o m W a l k e r Evans' 8 x 10 to A r t h u r R o t h s t e i n ' s a n d Ben
S h a h n ' s Leica.
Stryker e n c o u r a g e d their social g r o w t h by p r o v i d i n g facts in t h e
form of maps, p a m p h l e t s a n d books. B u t most i m p o r t a n t , his own
person was a constant challenge to t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s to u n d e r s t a n d
the h i d d e n social process b e h i n d t h e obvious p i c t u r e . N o t t h e Ameri-
ca of the u n i q u e , o d d or u n u s u a l h a p p e n i n g , b u t t h e A m e r i c a of h o w
to m i n e a piece of coal, grow a w h e a t field or m a k e a n a p p l e pie. T h e
America of " w h a t does it m e a n , " n o t the A m e r i c a of " a m u s e m e . "
 O u t of this p r o j e c t c a m e significant works like W a l k e r Evans'
American Photographs, Sherwood A n d e r s o n ' s Hometown, Richard
W r i g h t ' s a n d E d Rosskam's 12,000,000 Black Voices, A r c h i b a l d Mac-
leish's Land of the Free a n d D o r o t h e a L a n g e a n d P a u l S. T a y l o r ' s
terrific study of t h e displaced t e n a n t f a r m e r , An American Exodus.
O t h e r p h o t o g r a p h e r s were affected by the F.S.A. project. T h e
P h o t o L e a g u e i n N e w York u n d e r t h e sensitive direction of A a r o n
Siskind p r o d u c e d some m e m o r a b l e g r o u p d o c u m e n t a t i o n s such as
the f a m o u s Harlem Document. M a r g a r e t B o u r k e - W h i t e with Erskine
Caldwell e x a m i n e d t h e South i n You Have Seen Their Faces. I n Eng-
land, Bill B r a n d t was l o o k i n g i n t o t h e s t r u c t u r e of family life a n d
the contrasts of social classes. M a n y of his pictures, taken w i t h t h e
Leica, a r e a m o n g t h e great, sensitive pictures of t h e time. I n France,
Brassai was e x p l o r i n g t h e u n d e r w o r l d a n d half-world of Paris. H i s
pictures were p e n e t r a t i n g analyses of t h e n i g h t creatures in a great
metropolis. T h e y were early f o r e r u n n e r s of Weegee's r a w a n d almost
b r u t a l Naked City, his study of N e w York's n i g h t life. In G e r m a n y
Lerski m a d e close-ups w i t h a n 11 x 14 c a m e r a a n d m a n y sources of
light to reveal t h e s t r u c t u r e a n d surface of t h e h u m a n h e a d i n a n
almost t e r r i f y i n g way.
T h e n e w p r o b l e m s p r o d u c e d by t h e w o r l d wide depression pro-
f o u n d l y influenced t h e moviemakers. E n g l a n d ' s b r i l l i a n t J o h n Grier-
son, t r a i n e d as a sociologist, organized film g r o u p s for t h e E m p i r e
M a r k e t i n g B o a r d a n d t h e Post Office. E m p l o y i n g t h e creative e d i t i n g
principles developed by t h e R u s s i a n s in t h e 20's, these films m a d e
the p h r a s e " d o c u m e n t a r y film" a c o m m o n term. I n H o l l a n d , Joris
Ivens was e x p l o r i n g t h e social i m p a c t of l a n d changes caused by
d a m m i n g t h e Zyder Zee. America, too, was p r o d u c i n g a new k i n d of
film; Pare L o r e n t z p r o d u c e d t h e Plow that Broke the Plains, a search-
ing study of t h e causes of t h e D u s t Bowl, b e a u t i f u l l y p h o t o g r a p h e d by
Paul Strand a n d L e o H u r w i t z . L o r e n t z also p r o d u c e d t h a t classic
study of soil erosion, The River. Even H o l l y w o o d c a m e t h r o u g h w i t h
the m e m o r a b l e Grapes of Wrath. H o w e v e r , it is only recently t h a t t h e
full i m p a c t of t h e d o c u m e n t a r y a p p r o a c h has d a w n e d o n t h e " M o t i o n
Pictures are Y o u r Best E n t e r t a i n m e n t " producers.
In this p e r i o d t h e creative e d i t i n g of still pictures for social u n d e r -
s t a n d i n g came to its first flowering. At t h e b o t t o m of t h e depression
in 1932 a p p e a r e d C h a r l e s Gross' little k n o w n , b u t still jolting, m o n -
tages of pictures, charts, clippings (A Picture of America) which
shocked t h e observer i n t o e c o n o m i c awareness. I n 1933 R o g e r a n d
Allen showed in t h e i r American Procession t h e folkways of A m e r i c a
from t h e Civil W a r to t h e W o r l d W a r . I n t h e f o l l o w i n g year they
dissected N e w York f r o m a sociological p o i n t of view in t h e book,
Metropolis.
T h a t same year, P a r e L o r e n t z p r e s e n t e d The Roosevelt Year, a n
interpretive r e c o r d of t h e first days of t h e N e w Deal. T h i s book has
become a l a n d m a r k for those w h o are interested i n t h e visualization
of social history. I n 1935, M. L i n c o l n Schuster e d i t e d Eyes on the
World. Its p r o p h e t i c i m p l i c a t i o n s of f u t u r e w a r a n d analysis of t h e
forces t h a t were l e a d i n g u p to t h e c a t a s t r o p h e deserve special men-
tion. L a t e r A n i t a B r e n n e r a n d George R . L e i g h t o n c o l l a b o r a t e d o n
The Wind That Swept Mexico, a p r o f o u n d a n d m o v i n g f u s i o n of
news, p i c t u r e s a n d text.
By 1936, t h e e d i t i n g m e t h o d in books h a d b e e n firmly established
a n d t h e t i m e was r i p e f o r its use in a weekly periodical. Life m a g a z i n e
b u r s t o n t h e scene. F r o m its lead story by M a r g a r e t B o u r k e - W h i t e o n
a M o n t a n a m i n i n g t o w n t h r o u g h t h e recent w o n d e r f u l issue devoted
to e d u c a t i o n , Life has used a n d h e l p e d d e v e l o p t h e d o c u m e n t a r y
a p p r o a c h . A r t h u r R o t h s t e i n a n d J o h n V a c h o n of F.S.A. f a m e h a v e
e n r i c h e d t h e pages of Look w i t h their p i c t u r e s m a d e in this spirit.
The Ladies Home Journal p i c t u r e editor, J o h n Morris, has p r o d u c e d
t h e n o t a b l e series, " H o w A m e r i c a Lives."
As t h e depression d i s a p p e a r e d u n d e r t h e i m p a c t of social p l a n n i n g
a n d t h e n e w r e a r m a m e n t p r o g r a m , t h e w o r l d saw in Spain a pre-
l i m i n a r y to t h e m a i n b o u t . I n 1938, R o b e r t C a p a p r e s e n t e d his
h a u n t i n g Death in the Making, p i c t u r e s c r e a t e d by a m a n w h o was
n o t only brave, b u t also sensitive to w h a t was h a p p e n i n g b e n e a t h
t h e surface events. I n F i n l a n d , Carl M y d a n s was p r o b i n g t h e war a n d
s h a r p e n i n g his eye for his b r i l l i a n t later observations of t h e Pacific
fighting. M . T h e r e s e Bonney's h e a r t - w r e n c h i n g pictures of Europe's
Children a p p e a r e d .
B u t these e x a m p l e s were lost o n the a r m e d forces in W o r l d W a r I I .
P h o t o g r a p h y was considered news-oriented r e c o r d - m a k i n g t h a t could
be t a u g h t in t h r e e m o n t h s a n d was b e n e a t h t h e dignity of a n officer's
activity. W h e r e previously t r a i n e d d o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h e r s were
in t h e services, they were generally misused. W i t h t h e sole exceptions
of Steichen's w o n d e r f u l d o c u m e n t a r y u n i t in t h e N a v y ( p r o d u c i n g
a m o n g m a n y o t h e r projects, t h e l o n g to be r e m e m b e r e d Fighting
Lady) a n d P a r e L o r e n t z ' u n i t in the Air T r a n s p o r t C o m m a n d , the
best p i c t u r e s of t h e w a r were usually p r o d u c e d by p h o t o g r a p h e r s
outside of t h e services like W . E u g e n e S m i t h w h o d o c u m e n t e d t h e
Pacific soldier. Some signs of this news-oriented m i s c o n c e p t i o n are
b e g i n n i n g to a p p e a r again in t h e p r e s e n t State D e p a r t m e n t ' s r a p i d l y
e x p a n d i n g Voice of A m e r i c a p i c t u r e o p e r a t i o n .
I n 1939, J u l i a n B r y a n r e c o r d e d t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n of W a r s a w u n d e r
t h e i m p a c t of the N a z i air force. H i s Siege b r o u g h t h o m e to t h e Amer-
ican observer t h e devastation of m o d e r n war. I n 1941, B o u r k e - W h i t e
recorded t h e war's i m p a c t o n Moscow. F o r c i n g us to consider w h a t
we were fighting for, this p e r i o d b r o u g h t o u t d o c u m e n t a r y collec-
tions of belief a n d affirmation like A l e x a n d e r A l a n d ' s study of t h e
f a b r i c of different n a t i o n a l i t y g r o u p s t h a t m a k e t h e cloth of America.
Ansel A d a m s ' p o r t r a i t s of J a p a n e s e - A m e r i c a n s in Born Free and
Equal w e r e a p r o t e s t a g a i n s t t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n c a m p s o n t h e W e s t
Coast.
W i t h t h e e n d of t h e w a r n e w searchings b e g a n . W a y n e M i l l e r of
Steichen's N a v y u n i t p r o d u c e d a n exciting, b u t as yet u n p u b l i s h e d
series o n t h e N e g r o in t h e N o r t h . W r i g h t Morris, o n a G u g g e n h e i m
g r a n t , critically e x a m i n e d in sensitive w o r d s a n d p i c t u r e s t h e effects
of p e o p l e o n t h e s t r u c t u r e s they live in (The Inhabitants) a n d later
m a d e a nostalgic r e - e x a m i n a t i o n of t h e d i s a p p e a r i n g r u r a l scene
(The Home Place). T o d d W e b b e x p l o r e d N e w York a n d f o u n d n e w
facets of b u i l d i n g s a n d people. P a u l S t r a n d a n d N a n c y N e w h a l l h a v e
d u g d e e p i n t o t h e N e w E n g l a n d t r a d i t i o n in t h e i r just p u b l i s h e d
Time in New England. I n this series S t r a n d a t t a i n s n e w h e i g h t s of
o b s e r v a t i o n a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . J o h n Collier's f r u i t f u l c o l l a b o r a t i o n
w i t h a n a n t h r o p o l o g i s t r e s u l t e d in The Awakening Valley, a fasci-
n a t i n g s t u d y of a n I n d i a n c u l t u r e in E c u a d o r . P u b l i s h e d by t h e U n i -
versity of C h i c a g o Press, it o p e n e d a n e w e r a of scholarly c o m m u n i c a -
tion. Steinbeck a n d C a p a p r e s e n t e d t h e life of a c o m m o n citizen in
t h e i r A Russian Journal.
U s i n g p h o t o g r a p h e r s s u c h as Ester B u b l e y , J o h n V a c h o n , E d Ross-
k a m , H a r o l d Corsini, A r n o l d Eagle, J o h n Collier, C h a r l e s R o t k i n ,
Russell Lee, G o r d o n P a r k s a n d T o d d W e b b , R o y Stryker docu-
m e n t e d t h e social r a m i f i c a t i o n s of t h e oil i n d u s t r y for S t a n d a r d O i l
of N e w Jersey in a m a n n e r never b e f o r e a t t e m p t e d by i n d u s t r y . O u t
of this p r o j e c t c a m e o n e of t h e m o s t e x c i t i n g d o c u m e n t a r y books ever
m a d e . E d w i n a n d L o u i s e R o s s k a m ' s Towboat River, a s t u d y of t h e
Mississippi, is a n e w classic in t h e use of w o r d a n d p i c t u r e to c a p t u r e
t h e u n i q u e flavor of p e o p l e a t w o r k a n d t h e e n v i r o n m e n t t h a t pro-
duces this w o r k .
T o s u m u p d o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h y of t h e last 50 years, t h e
f o l l o w i n g t r e n d s are e v i d e n t : 1. F r o m physical a p p e a r a n c e t o s p i r i t u a l
relationships. 2. F r o m a c c i d e n t a l t o f o r m a l visual o r g a n i z a t i o n .
3. F r o m single t e c h n i q u e s to m u l t i p l e t e c h n i q u e s . 4. F r o m single
p i c t u r e s to creative e d i t i n g . 5. F r o m i n d i v i d u a l w o r k e r to g r o u p
collaboration.
W h a t of t h e f u t u r e ? As m a n lives h e creates social p r o b l e m s . A fast
e x p a n d i n g scientific technology, t h e clash of political a n d e c o n o m i c
theories, A f r i c a a n d Asia b e i n g b r o u g h t f r o m f e u d a l i s m i n t o t h e 20th
century, all c o m b i n e to p r o d u c e t r e m e n d o u s p r o b l e m s of a c t i o n a n d
u n d e r s t a n d i n g . T h a t t h e d o c u m e n t a r y a t t i t u d e will e x p a n d its tech-
n i q u e s a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g s is a f o r e g o n e c o n c l u s i o n . T h e d o c u m e n -
tary p h o t o g r a p h e r of the f u t u r e bears a t r e m e n d o u s responsibility;
let us h o p e h e is a d e q u a t e to his task.

AARON SISKIND (1903-) . . . as the language or vocabulary of photography

has been extended, the emphasis of meaning has shifted—shifted from what
the world looks like to what we feel about the world and what we want the
world to mean, PHOTOGRAPHY AS AN ART FORM. (From an unpublished lecture
delivered at The Art Institute of Chicago, November 7, 1958.)

THE DRAMA OF OBJECTS 1945

Minicam Photography, Vol. 8, No. 9, pp. 20-23, 93-94.

L a s t year I s p e n t t h e s u m m e r at t h e f a m o u s N e w E n g l a n d fishing
village of G l o u c e s t e r , a n d m a d e a series of p h o t o g r a p h i c still-lifes of
r o t t i n g s t r a n d s of r o p e , a d i s c a r d e d glove, t w o fishheads, a n d o t h e r
commonplace objects which I f o u n d kicking a r o u n d on the wharves
a n d beaches. F o r t h e first t i m e in m y life, s u b j e c t m a t t e r , as such, h a d
ceased to be of p r i m a r y i m p o r t a n c e . I n s t e a d , I f o u n d myself i n v o l v e d
i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s of these objects, so m u c h so t h a t these p i c t u r e s
t u r n e d o u t to be d e e p l y m o v i n g a n d p e r s o n a l experiences.
T h i s w o r k was a n e w d e p a r t u r e for m e . I used o n e c a m e r a a n d o n e
lens t h r o u g h o u t ( f a m i l i a r e n o u g h to b e a n e x t e n s i o n of m y h a n d a n d
eye), a l i m i t e d n u m b e r of types of film, n o filters. T h e daily w o r k i n g
t i m e (21/2 h o u r s ) was as r e g u l a r as t h e w e a t h e r p e r m i t t e d (it did),
a n d I left t h e s t u d i o e a c h d a y w i t h six p i c t u r e s to b e t a k e n a n d film
e n o u g h to give each p i c t u r e t h r e e exposures. T h e p u r p o s e of this
p r o c e d u r e was to clear m y way f o r c o m p l e t e a b s o r p t i o n in t h e prob-
lem—and this is a b o u t t h e h e a r t of w h a t I w a n t t o say.
C u r i o u s l y e n o u g h , these still-lifes w e r e a n o u t g r o w t h of my docu-
m e n t a r y practice. P r o d u c i n g a p h o t o g r a p h i c d o c u m e n t involves
p r e p a r a t i o n in excess. T h e r e is first t h e e x a m i n a t i o n of t h e idea of the
p r o j e c t . T h e n t h e visits to t h e scene, t h e casual conversations, a n d
m o r e f o r m a l interviews—talking, a n d listening, a n d l o o k i n g , looking.
You r e a d w h a t ' s b e e n w r i t t e n , a n d d i g o u t facts a n d figures for your
o w n w r i t i n g . Follows t h e discussions to a r r i v e at a p o i n t of view a n d
its crystallization i n t o a s t a t e m e n t of a i m . A n d finally, t h e p i c t u r e s
themselves, e a c h o n e p l a n n e d , t a l k e d , t a k e n , a n d e x a m i n e d in terms
of the w h o l e .
I w o r k e d p r e t t y m u c h this way in m a k i n g " H a r l e m D o c u m e n t . "
H o w e v e r , I c a u t i o n e d my co-workers o n this j o b to b e c o m e as passive
as possible w h e n they f a c e d t h e s u b j e c t , to de-energize for t h e mo-
m e n t t h e i r k n o w l e d g e of t h e ideas a b o u t t h e s u b j e c t , to let t h e facts
fall away a n d at t h a t crucial m o m e n t to p e r m i t t h e s u b j e c t to speak
for itself a n d in its o w n way.
F o r some r e a s o n o r o t h e r t h e r e was in m e the desire to see t h e w o r l d
clean a n d fresh a n d alive, as p r i m i t i v e t h i n g s are clean a n d fresh a n d
alive. T h e so-called d o c u m e n t a r y p i c t u r e left m e w a n t i n g s o m e t h i n g .
I t is a p r e t t y u n c o m f o r t a b l e f e e l i n g f o r a d o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g -
r a p h e r to find himself w o r k i n g w i t h o u t a p l a n . B u t t h e i n i t i a l d r i v e
c o u p l e d w i t h s i m p l e , precise w o r k h a b i t s c a r r i e d m e a l o n g for a
while. T h e n c e r t a i n ideas b e g a n to e m e r g e f r o m t h e work, a predilec-
t i o n for c e r t a i n k i n d s of objects, a n d for c e r t a i n k i n d s of r e l a t i o n -
ships. T h a t c a r r i e d m e a l o n g f u r t h e r . A n d they shall c o n t i n u e t o
carry m e a l o n g u n t i l these ideas begin to become fixed, resulting in
cliches. W h e n t h a t h a p p e n s , I shall h a v e to chuck t h e m a n d start o u t
freshly again.
As t h e saying goes, we see in terms of o u r e d u c a t i o n . W e look at
the world a n d see w h a t we have learned to believe is there. W e h a v e
been c o n d i t i o n e d to expect. A n d indeed it is socially u s e f u l t h a t we
agree o n t h e f u n c t i o n of objects.
But, as p h o t o g r a p h e r s , we m u s t l e a r n to relax o u r beliefs. Move
on objects w i t h your eye straight on, to the left, a r o u n d o n t h e right.
W a t c h t h e m grow large as you a p p r o a c h , g r o u p a n d r e g r o u p them-
selves as you shift your position. R e l a t i o n s h i p s g r a d u a l l y emerge, a n d
sometimes assert themselves w i t h finality. A n d that's your p i c t u r e .
W h a t I h a v e just described is a n e m o t i o n a l experience. It is utterly
personal: n o o n e else can ever see q u i t e w h a t you have seen, a n d t h e
picture t h a t emerges is u n i q u e , never before m a d e a n d never to be
repeated. T h e picture—and this is f u n d a m e n t a l — h a s the unity of an
organism. Its e l e m e n t s were n o t p u t together, w i t h whatever skill or
taste or ingenuity. It c a m e i n t o b e i n g as a n i n s t a n t act of sight.
Pressed for the m e a n i n g of these pictures, I s h o u l d answer, ob-
liquely, t h a t they are i n f o r m e d w i t h animism—not so m u c h t h a t these
i n a n i m a t e objects resemble t h e creatures of t h e a n i m a l world (as in-
deed they o f t e n do), b u t r a t h e r t h a t they suggest the energy we usually
associate w i t h t h e m . Aesthetically, they p r e t e n d to the resolution of
these sometimes fierce, sometimes gentle, b u t always conflicting forces.
P h o t o g r a p h i c a l l y speaking, t h e r e is n o c o m p r o m i s e w i t h reality.
T h e objects are r e n d e r e d sharp, fully t e x t u r e d , a n d u n d i s t o r t e d (my
d o c u m e n t a r y training!). B u t t h e p o t e n t fact is n o t any p a r t i c u l a r
object; b u t r a t h e r t h a t the m e a n i n g of these objects exists only in
their r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h o t h e r objects, or in their isolation (which
comes to t h e same thing, for w h a t we feel most a b o u t a n isolated
object is t h a t it has been d e p r i v e d of relationship).
T h e s e p h o t o g r a p h s a p p e a r to be a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a d e e p need
for order. T i m e a n d again "live" forms play their little p a r t against
a b a c k d r o p of strict r e c t a n g u l a r space—a flat, u n y i e l d i n g space. T h e y
c a n n o t escape back i n t o t h e d e p t h of perspective. T h e f o u r edges of
the rectangle a r e a b s o l u t e b o u n d s . T h e r e is only t h e d r a m a of the
objects, a n d you, w a t c h i n g .
Essentially, then, these p h o t o g r a p h s are psychological in character.
T h e y may or may n o t be a good thing. B u t it does seem to m e that
this k i n d of p i c t u r e satisfies a need. I may be wrong, b u t t h e essentially
illustrative n a t u r e of most d o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h y , a n d the wor-
ship of the object perse in o u r best n a t u r e p h o t o g r a p h y is not e n o u g h
to satisfy t h e m a n of today, c o m p o u n d e d as he is of Christ, F r e u d , a n d
M a r x . T h e i n t e r i o r d r a m a is t h e m e a n i n g of t h e exterior event. A n d
each m a n is an essence a n d a symbol.
T h e r e are, I suppose, m a n y ways of g e t t i n g at reality. O u r province
is this small bit of space; a n d o n l y by o p e r a t i n g w i t h i n t h a t l i m i t e d
space—endlessly e x p l o r i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h i n it—can we con-
t r i b u t e o u r special m e a n i n g s t h a t come o u t of m a n ' s v a r i e d life. O t h e r -
wise, o u r p h o t o g r a p h s will b e vague. T h e y will lack i m p a c t , or they
will d e t e r i o r a t e i n t o just " g e n r e " as so m a n y d o c u m e n t a r y shots do.

CREDO 1956
Spectrum, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 27-28.

W h e n I m a k e a p h o t o g r a p h I w a n t it to b e a n a l t o g e t h e r new
o b j e c t , c o m p l e t e a n d self-contained, whose basic c o n d i t i o n is order—
( u n l i k e t h e w o r l d of events a n d actions whose p e r m a n e n t c o n d i t i o n
is c h a n g e a n d d i s o r d e r ) .
T h e business of m a k i n g a p h o t o g r a p h may be said in s i m p l e t e r m s
to consists of t h r e e e l e m e n t s : t h e o b j e c t i v e w o r l d (whose p e r m a n e n t
c o n d i t i o n is c h a n g e a n d disorder), the sheet of p a p e r o n w h i c h t h e
p i c t u r e will be realized, a n d t h e e x p e r i e n c e w h i c h b r i n g s t h e m to-
g e t h e r . First, a n d e m p h a t i c a l l y , I accept t h e flat p l a n e of the p i c t u r e
s u r f a c e as the p r i m a r y f r a m e of r e f e r e n c e of t h e p i c t u r e . T h e experi-
ence itself may be d e s c r i b e d as o n e of t o t a l a b s o r p t i o n in t h e object.
B u t t h e o b j e c t serves only a p e r s o n a l n e e d a n d t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of
the p i c t u r e . T h u s , rocks are s c u l p t u r e d f o r m s ; a section of c o m m o n
d e c o r a t i v e iron-work, s p r i n g i n g r h y t h m i c shapes; f r a g m e n t s of p a p e r
sticking to a wall, a c o n v e r s a t i o n piece. A n d these forms, totems,
masks, figures, shapes, images m u s t finally take t h e i r place in the
t o n a l field of the p i c t u r e a n d strictly c o n f o r m to t h e i r space e n v i r o n -
m e n t . T h e o b j e c t has e n t e r e d t h e p i c t u r e , i n a sense; it has been
p h o t o g r a p h e d directly. B u t it is o f t e n u n r e c o g n i z a b l e ; for it h a s b e e n
r e m o v e d f r o m its u s u a l c o n t e x t , dissassociated f r o m its c u s t o m a r y
neighbors a n d forced into new relationships.
W h a t is the s u b j e c t m a t t e r of this a p p a r e n t l y very p e r s o n a l world?
I t has b e e n suggested t h a t these s h a p e s a n d images are u n d e r w o r l d
characters, the i n h a b i t a n t s of t h a t vast c o m m o n r e a l m of m e m o r i e s
t h a t h a v e g o n e d o w n below the level of conscious c o n t r o l . It may be
they are. T h e degree of e m o t i o n a l i n v o l v e m e n t a n d t h e a m o u n t of
f r e e association w i t h the m a t e r i a l b e i n g p h o t o g r a p h e d w o u l d p o i n t in
t h a t d i r e c t i o n . H o w e v e r , I m u s t stress t h a t m y o w n interest is im-
m e d i a t e a n d in t h e p i c t u r e . W h a t I a m conscious of a n d w h a t I feel
is t h e p i c t u r e I a m m a k i n g , t h e r e l a t i o n of t h a t p i c t u r e to o t h e r s I
h a v e m a d e a n d , m o r e generally, its r e l a t i o n to o t h e r s I h a v e ex-
perienced.

HENRY HOLMES SMITH (1909-) In the present state of things, each one
must conserve the photography he understands, permitting, when his tolerance
is sufficient the remainder of the art to be conserved and examined elsewhere.
Ultimately each of us may find, to our surprise, that our intolerance often rests
on ignorance and our misunderstandings, our accusations of obscurity, unin-
telligibility, or falseness spring from too narrow a view of a medium that offers
an intensity of expression and a range of images much greater than is generally
seen, IMAGE, OBSCURITY & INTERPRETATION, Aperture, Vol. 5, No. 4,1957, p. 141.
PHOTOGRAPHY IN OUR TIME: A NOTE ON SOME 1961
PROSPECTS FOR THE SEVENTH DECADE
Three Photographers, Kalamazoo Art Center,
Bulletin No. 2. (revised 1966)
B e f o r e I can m a k e a n y e s t i m a t e of p h o t o g r a p h y ' s p r e s e n t state a n d
f u t u r e prospects, I n e e d to k n o w w h a t a p h o t o g r a p h s h o u l d look like
a n d I a m n o t at all c e r t a i n t h a t I d o . W h e n I voiced this d o u b t to a
d i s t i n g u i s h e d A m e r i c a n h i s t o r i a n of p h o t o g r a p h y several years ago,
h e d e c l a r e d , " S o m e of us t h i n k we d o ! " T r u e . Yet by his rules we
m u s t e x c l u d e a g o o d m a n y p h o t o g r a p h s I find m e m o r a b l e , a n d w o r k
by several i m p o r t a n t living p h o t o g r a p h e r s , so I t h i n k m y d o u b t is
justified.
T h e h i s t o r i a n , of course, h a d in m i n d t h e "classical" p h o t o g r a p h
w h e n h e spoke. B u t we c a n n o t j u d g e all p h o t o g r a p h s by t h a t stand-
ard; t h e rules for t h e s o n n e t d o n o t a p p l y to all poems.
T h e classical p h o t o g r a p h r e q u i r e s us to use a c a m e r a w i t h a conven-
tional lens w i t h c o n v e n t i o n a l corrections to r e n d e r t h e subject's grays
a n d blacks a n d light a n d s h a d o w in c o n v e n t i o n a l t o n a l passages of
m o n o c h r o m e . T h e classical p h o t o g r a p h i n v a r i a b l y p o i n t s to a m o r e
o r less " u n t o u c h e d " o b j e c t m o r e o r less clearly located in t i m e a n d
space. I t depicts this o b j e c t w i t h a special, o f t e n " e d g y " i n t e n s i t y a n d
clarity. W h e n d o n e s u p e r b l y , this k i n d of p h o t o g r a p h follows t h e
t r a d i t i o n b r o u g h t to its highest d e v e l o p m e n t by A l f r e d Stieglitz. I t
has b e e n r e f i n e d in s o m e ways by o t h e r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y W a l k e r Evans,
in b r i l l i a n t w o r k of twenty-five years ago. P h o t o g r a p h s by F r a n c i s
Brugui&re, H a r r y C a l l a h a n a n d F r e d e r i c k S o m m e r , o n t h e o t h e r
h a n d , d e p a r t f r o m this t r a d i t i o n in q u i t e d i f f e r e n t ways. T h e discus-
sion t h a t follows will t o u c h o n s o m e reasons for w h a t e v e r d i s c o n t e n t
is expressed w i t h p h o t o g r a p h y ' s t r a d i t i o n a l l i m i t a t i o n s a n d d e m o n -
strate t h a t t h e r e is n o n e e d f o r t h e m t o h o l d us s p e l l b o u n d . I h o p e
also to suggest s o m e k i n d s of i m a g e r y t h a t d o n o t d e p e n d o n this
t r a d i t i o n a n d to i n d i c a t e some of t h e t h e m e s w h i c h t u r n p h o t o g -
r a p h e r s t o w a r d n e w images.
T o d i s t i n g u i s h the n o n - t r a d i t i o n a l k i n d s of p h o t o g r a p h s by t h e i r
imagery a n d style, we s h o u l d also h a v e s o m e idea of the n a t u r e of
p h o t o g r a p h y , b o t h as t o its a c c e p t e d m a j o r l i m i t a t i o n s a n d its u n e x -
p l o r e d p o t e n t i a l i t i e s , w h i c h p h o t o g r a p h e r s b r e a k o u t of t h e tradi-
tion to w o r k w i t h .
As for t h e l i m i t a t i o n s , t h e first t w o are i m p o s e d by p h o t o g r a p h y ' s
closeness to n a t u r e . First, in n o o t h e r art does s u b j e c t m a t t e r e n t e r
u p o n a p i c t u r e p l a n e , u s u a l l y in m i n i a t u r e , a n d scurry a b o u t u n t i l
the i n s t a n t w h e n t h e artist imposes h i s will a n d freezes it in place.
T h e r e s u l t is his i m a g e . Since his final goal is to p r o d u c e a n a r t i f a c t ,
h e is i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n of h o w m u c h c r e d i t h e c a n take f o r
t h e imagery he uses. For m o r e t h a n a c e n t u r y this i m p o r t a n t p r o b l e m
b e l o n g e d to camera a n d lens p h o t o g r a p h y alone; now, w i t h t h e ad-
vent of " a c t i o n p a i n t i n g , " some o t h e r artists share it. Second, the
physico-chemical process, w h i c h records t h e image, is always u n d e r
only p a r t i a l control, just like n a t u r a l g r o w t h a n d aging. T h i s fact
gives t h e act of m a k i n g a p h o t o g r a p h some of t h e dignity a n d im-
p o r t a n c e of a n a t u r a l process. It is n o m o r e practical to try to reverse
this process (to p u t t h e p i c t u r e back o n t h e object) t h a n to pack a
p l a n t back i n t o its seed. I i m a g i n e some of t h e excessively sober-sided
p o s t u r i n g a b o u t p h o t o g r a p h y (the " u n t o u c h e d " or " u n d i r e c t e d "
subject) stems f r o m a h a l f - u n d e r s t o o d awareness of this characteristic.
A n o t h e r l i m i t a t i o n arises f r o m t h e way in w h i c h p h o t o g r a p h y
satisfies " t h e most p r o b l e m a t i c d o g m a of aesthetic theory," as Panofsky
describes the n o t i o n t h a t a "work of art is t h e direct a n d f a i t h f u l
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a n a t u r a l o b j e c t . " (See " C o d e x H u y g e n s a n d
L e o n a r d o Da Vinci's Art T h e o r y . " p. 90, footnote.) T h i s d o g m a has
become t h e u n j u s t i f i a b l e basis for m u c h worthless praise a n d super-
ficial criticism of p h o t o g r a p h y . P u b l i c a n d p h o t o g r a p h e r alike know
t h a t pictures are derived directly f r o m objects by the action of light.
C o n s e q u e n t l y a m a j o r i t y of b o t h g r o u p s have come to expect at least
a slight family r e s e m b l a n c e between t h e object a n d its p i c t u r e . ( T h i s
is the p i c t u r e as " f a i t h f u l witness"; how c o u l d a n y o n e cherish or
come to t h e defense of a n u n f a i t h f u l one?) A l i m i t a t i o n this n a r r o w
a n d a r b i t r a r y w o u l d be only a m i n o r a n n o y a n c e if it d i d not s u p p o r t
so perfectly a characteristic defect of o u r time: As Denis de Rouge-
m o n t has p o i n t e d o u t {Love in the Western World, p. 53) " T h e
s u p e r s t i t i o n of o u r time expresses itself in a m a n i a for e q u a t i n g the
s u b l i m e with t h e trivial . . ." a n d to take w h a t e v e r is lower to be
m o r e real.
R e s e m b l a n c e (the ability to m i m i c t h e a p p e a r a n c e of objects) is
t h e lowest c o m m o n d e n o m i n a t o r of the classical p h o t o g r a p h . It
s h o u l d occasion n o great surprise, t h e n , if a large p o r t i o n of o u r
present-day a u d i e n c e s h o u l d r e g a r d resemblance as t h e most " r e a l "
characteristic of p h o t o g r a p h y . T o single o u t the obvious a n d most
easily identified f u n c t i o n of t h e image as m o r e " r e a l " t h a n some
others is sufficient folly; to r e g a r d this same f u n c t i o n as the entire
task of t h e image is inexcusably s i m p l e - m i n d e d . B o t h a t t i t u d e s make
it impossible to e x a m i n e p h o t o g r a p h y as it is b e i n g used in o t h e r
i m p o r t a n t ways today.
F u r t h e r , p h o t o g r a p h y combines a n a t u r a l process w i t h several
c o m p e l l i n g c o n v e n t i o n s derived f r o m the science, technology, a n d art
of t h e past five centuries. It is, for e x a m p l e , an explicit answer of the
sciences of physics a n d chemistry to o n e aspect of the Renaissance
artist's view of n a t u r e . "Distortions," a n d " a b e r r a t i o n s " of simple
lenses m u s t be corrected a c c o r d i n g to certain c o n v e n t i o n a l rules
before they are useful in p h o t o g r a p h y . W h a t aesthetic d o m i n a t e d the
 t h i n k i n g of these lens designers, or those geniuses of t h e 19th C e n t u r y
who preceded t h e m a n d established once a n d for all the visual stand-
ards we now cling to? W h a t ideal d r a f t s m a n h a d they in m i n d ? W h a t
p a i n t i n g s were o n their walls?
A fifth l i m i t a t i o n is related to p h o t o g r a p h y ' s exceptional c a n d o r ,
for nearly a h u n d r e d years looked u p o n as u n p l e a s a n t a n d indecent,
a n d today only p a r t l y tolerated. T h e 19th C e n t u r y , far m o r e t h a n we,
p r e f e r r e d e u p h e m i s m to fact a n d b l i n k e d at m a n y of the embarrass-
ments of t h e h u m a n p r e d i c a m e n t . T h i s a t t i t u d e g o v e r n e d photog-
r a p h y pretty completely u n t i l the 1930's. As I see it, n o t u n t i l t h e
decision p e r m i t t i n g the legal p u b l i c a t i o n of J a m e s Joyce's Ulysses,
in the U n i t e d States d i d the English-speaking p u b l i c begin to q u a l i f y
as an audience f o r p h o t o g r a p h y . T h i s was 1933.
P h o t o g r a p h y is t h e most rigorously logical of m a n ' s m e t h o d s of
m a k i n g images, a l t h o u g h its s t r u c t u r e is less c o m p l e x t h a n , say, m u s i c
or poetry a n d it is f a r m o r e rigid t h a n p a i n t i n g . Nonetheless, in its
newer forms, it is n o t q u i t e as simple as some p e o p l e m a k e it o u t to be.
T r a d i t i o n a l p h o t o g r a p h y is in some ways analogous to f o r m a l verse,
r h y m e d a n d in r e g u l a r meter. T h e newer form, f r e e d f r o m m a n y of
the old conventions, obeys rules m o r e like those of free verse or t h e
s p r u n g r h y t h m s of H o p k i n s . It d e p e n d s heavily on structures we now
recognize in n a t u r e as symbols of p o w e r we respect: t h e action of
water, wind, t e m p e r a t u r e , of g r o w t h a n d d e s t r u c t i o n a n d chance (the
r a n d o m scattering of leaves o n grass, boulders t u m b l e d in a river
bed). T h e new work is q u i t e close b o t h to n a t u r e a n d to m a n ' s n a t u r e
as we now t h i n k of it.
As to certain p o t e n t i a l i t i e s u n e x p l o r e d or only partly e x p l o r e d :
the first is to face squarely t h e e m b a r r a s s m e n t s of t h e h u m a n predica-
m e n t . N o o t h e r m e d i u m is so o p e n in its c a n d o r , so able to emphasize
the peculiarly relevant detail, u n d e r l i n e a n essential vulgarity, m a k e
us aware of some shocking crudity. T h i s t h e m a t i c m a t e r i a l , in t h e
tradition of Bosch a n d t h e Brueghels, is eternally true. It may become
the 20th C e n t u r y ' s c o u n t e r p a r t of the homely subject m a t t e r of earlier
times. (Possibly we are now ready f o r m o r e surgical detail f r o m the
everyday world.) T h e term " s c r u p u l o u s meanness," w h i c h J a m e s
Joyce a p p l i e d to t h e style of Dubliners, may best describe t h e
a p p r o a c h o u t l i n e d here. ( " M e a n n e s s , " in the sense of smallness of
spirit, inferior, shabby, c o n t e m p t i b l e , stingy, malicious.) For such
themes m o r e is to be learned f r o m Evans t h a n f r o m Stieglitz. Second,
the view of the n a t u r a l world which takes i n t o account m u c h m o r e
t h a n t r a d i t i o n a l o p t i m i s m allows for. T h e themes of Melville a n d
Ryder p o i n t toward n a t u r e ' s implacability, impersonality, a n d indif-
ference to t h e fate of m a n . If we agree w i t h T . S. Eliot t h a t b e n e a t h
both beauty a n d ugliness we may see " t h e b o r e d o m , t h e h o r r o r , a n d
the glory," of h u m a n experience, we may recognize t h a t c o n v e n t i o n a l
perspective can r e n d e r accurately the b o r e d o m , b u t it is i n a d e q u a t e
for the h o r r o r a n d t h e glory. H i n t s as to t h e q u a l i t y of this imagery
a b o u n d in t h e arts of p r e h i s t o r i c times, p r i m i t i v e peoples, a n d in
fetishes f r o m m a n y places.
T h e m a t i c a l l y , t h e world of d r e a m s a n d m e t a m o r p h o s i s also occu-
pies the p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s i m a g i n a t i o n today. Lewis Carroll a n d o t h e r
19th C e n t u r y writers d r e w freely o n this m a t e r i a l . ( T h e " N i g h t t o w n "
section of Ulysses, by Joyce, is a 20th C e n t u r y l a n d f a l l in this same
region.) T h e claims of L a u g h l i n a n d T e l b e r g h a v e been staked here-
a b o u t s in o u r time, b u t m u c h u n c h a r t e d territory remains. T h e s e
subjects call for a less definite sense of scene or place t h a n we are
accustomed to in p h o t o g r a p h y . Some of Siskind's p h o t o g r a p h s with
t h e b l a n k w h i t e or d e e p black g r o u n d s achieve this sense of enlarged,
indefinite or a m b i g u o u s setting. M u l t i p l e e x p o s u r e can be used also
to this same e n d ; c o m b i n i n g c o n v e n t i o n a l c a m e r a a n d lens images
in this way, however, involves such a neat balance between t h e ra-
tional a n d the i r r a t i o n a l t h a t it has baffled most p h o t o g r a p h e r s w h o
try it.
P h o t o g r a p h e r s today a r e also interested in m a i n t a i n i n g a special
e q u i l i b r i u m between t h e w o r l d of o r d i n a r y objects i n f a m i l i a r time
a n d space a n d t h e intensely-felt subjective image, which is always the
reason for m a k i n g a first-rate p i c t u r e . ( " I m a g e " refers h e r e to " t h e
r e p r o d u c t i o n in m e m o r y or i m a g i n a t i o n of e x p e r i e n c e of t h e senses."
If one does n o t restrict the p h o t o g r a p h e r to t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n of sight
experience alone, his imagery gains a n e n o r m o u s new r a n g e of mean-
ing-)
T h e e q u i l i b r i u m r e f e r r e d to a b o v e is m a i n t a i n e d between two
poles. At one e n d , t h e c o m m o n p l a c e aspect of t h e subject m a t t e r
d o m i n a t e s the picture, a p u b l i c image results a n d t h e intensity of the
experience of t h e artist is obscured or d i m i n i s h e d . At the opposite
extreme, the p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s p r i v a t e or personal imagery completely
obscures t h e o r i g i n a l subject m a t t e r ; most viewers t h e n lose f a i t h in
their ability to deal w i t h t h e p i c t u r e a n d a b a n d o n it before they have
a chance to see it. F o r b e t t e r t h a n forty-five years some p h o t o g r a p h e r s
have been involved w i t h this p r o b l e m ; o n the one h a n d seeking to
exploit t h e witness-like power of the m e d i u m a n d , o n t h e o t h e r , to
take a d v a n t a g e of a p o t e n t i a l for images t h a t are derived f r o m , b u t
lean only slightly on, the object p i c t u r e d . (Strand's " W h i t e Fence,
1916" is o n e of t h e early e x a m p l e s w i t h w h i c h I a m familiar.)
I have tried to distinguish, i n some ways, t h e p h o t o g r a p h as fact
(the image as witness) f r o m t h e p h o t o g r a p h as artifact (the image
as image). Yet b o t h fact a n d a r t i f a c t are present in every p h o t o g r a p h ,
a n d it is only the emphasis—now m o r e of one, now m o r e of t h e o t h e r
—that makes any distinction possible. T h e y are seldom in e q u a l bal-
ance; p r o b a b l y such exact e q u i l i b r i u m is u n d e s i r a b l e .
C o n t r a r y to w i d e s p r e a d belief, t h e u n f a m i l i a r or difficult image
may actually be a c o m p l e t e a n d i m p o r t a n t h u m a n u t t e r a n c e . Fred-
erick S o m m e r has n o t e d t h a t " P h o t o g r a p h s of p e n e t r a t i n g p e r c e p t i o n
d o n o t easily l e n d themselves to misuse. . . ." F o r this, a n d s i m i l a r
reasons, t h e u n a b r i d g e d p h o t o g r a p h i c s t a t e m e n t is r a r e l y p r i n t e d
a n d receives l i m i t e d c i r c u l a t i o n . C o n s e q u e n t l y , we m a y see too few
of t h e m to l e a r n t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the difficult a n d t h e g a r b l e d .
S o m m e r p u t s it well w h e n h e says, " T h e possibilities of i n t e r e s t i n g
p e o p l e t h r o u g h p h o t o g r a p h y in t h e life a b o u t t h e m h a s . . . h a r d l y
been realized. . . . F a c t is only fact w h e n we h a v e t a k e n its s p i r i t u a l
m e a s u r e . " I n o u r difficult a n d c o m p l i c a t e d w o r l d , we s h o u l d be wary
of t h e easy message; t h e p l a i n o n e will b e h a r d e n o u g h to believe. I n
my view w h a t Stieglitz left us to use was n e i t h e r his style n o r his
imagery, a l t h o u g h they are b o t h i n s p i r i n g . R a t h e r it was a t r a d i t i o n
of f a i t h in o u r o w n vision, w h a t e v e r it m a y be, a n d a desire to use it
w i t h a passion for t r u t h as s t r o n g as we possess.
If we d o k e e p f a i t h w i t h o u r vision, we will b e e q u a l l y a b l e to
p r o t e c t old p h o t o g r a p h i c t r a d i t i o n s a g a i n s t senseless o n s l a u g h t s a n d
see to it t h a t n e w i m a g e r y a n d styles of y o u n g e r artists are n o t reck-
lessly destroyed. O p p o s i t i o n i n s u c h c i r c u m s t a n c e s will take t h e f o r m
of p u b l i c cat a n d d o g fights, w i t h differences p l a i n l y seen, b a t t l e
lines d r a w n a n d ideas k n e e - d e e p in t h e streets.

W. EUGENE SMITH (1918-) Somehow, somewhere there must be a continu-

ing base from which, with practical idealism, real study can be applied—
through which, growth with the clear view and the steady purpose can be
nurtured by those willing to dedicate their lives to bringing into fact the best
potentials of photographic journalism, ONE WHOM I ADMIRE, DOROTHEA LANCE
1895-1965, Popular Photography, Vol. 58, No. 2, 1966, p. 88.
PHOTOGRAPHIC JOURNALISM 1948
Photo Notes, (June) pp. 4-5.
P h o t o g r a p h y is a p o t e n t m e d i u m of expression. P r o p e r l y used it is
a g r e a t p o w e r for b e t t e r m e n t a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g ; misused, it can
k i n d l e m a n y t r o u b l e s o m e fires. P h o t o g r a p h i c j o u r n a l i s m , because of
the t r e m e n d o u s a u d i e n c e r e a c h e d by p u b l i c a t i o n s u s i n g it, h a s m o r e
influence o n p u b l i c t h i n k i n g a n d o p i n i o n t h a n any o t h e r b r a n c h of
p h o t o g r a p h y . F o r these reasons, it is i m p o r t a n t t h a t the p h o t o g -
r a p h e r - j o u r n a l i s t h a v e (beside the essential mastery of his tools) a
strong sense of i n t e g r i t y a n d the i n t e l l i g e n c e to u n d e r s t a n d a n d
present his s u b j e c t m a t t e r accordingly.
T h o s e w h o believe t h a t p h o t o g r a p h i c r e p o r t a g e is "selective a n d
objective, b u t c a n n o t i n t e r p r e t t h e p h o t o g r a p h e d s u b j e c t m a t t e r , "
show a c o m p l e t e lack of u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e p r o b l e m s a n d t h e
p r o p e r w o r k i n g s of this profession. T h e j o u r n a l i s t i c p h o t o g r a p h e r
can h a v e n o o t h e r t h a n a p e r s o n a l a p p r o a c h ; a n d it is impossible for
h i m to be c o m p l e t e l y objective. Honest—yes. Objective—no.
W o r k i n g w i t h d i f f e r e n t t e c h n i q u e s , all of w h i c h are c o m m o n to
o t h e r s in the field, p h o t o g r a p h e r s Lisette M o d e l , Cartier-Bresson,
G j o n Mili, rise f a r a b o v e m e r e t e c h n i c a l proficiency. Yet each of t h e
three, were they to h a n d l e t h e same subject m a t t e r , w o u l d be capable
of giving the world fine a n d i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . Cartier-
Bresson a n d L e o n a r d M c C o m b e are two p h o t o g r a p h e r s w h o work
almost exclusively w i t h 3 5 m m cameras a n d n a t u r a l light. H e r e again,
it could almost be g u a r a n t e e d t h a t their i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of t h e same
subject w o u l d be q u i t e different. W h i c h is the objective t r u t h ? Per-
h a p s all of these p h o t o g r a p h e r s a r e telling t h e t r u t h — t r u t h being
" m a n y things to m a n y p e o p l e . "
U p to a n d i n c l u d i n g the i n s t a n t of exposure, t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r is
w o r k i n g in a n u n d e n i a b l y subjective way. By his choice of technical
a p p r o a c h (which is a tool of e m o t i o n a l control), by his selection of
the subject m a t t e r to be h e l d w i t h i n t h e confines of his negative area,
a n d by his decision as to t h e exact, climactic instant of exposure, he
is b l e n d i n g t h e variables of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n t o a n e m o t i o n a l whole
which will be a basis f o r t h e f o r m a t i o n of o p i n i o n s by t h e viewing
public.
It is the responsibility of the p h o t o g r a p h e r - j o u r n a l i s t to take his
assignment a n d e x a m i n e it—to search w i t h intelligence for t h e fre-
q u e n t l y i n t a n g i b l e t r u t h ; a n d t h e n very carefully ( a n d sometimes
very rapidly) work to b r i n g his insight, as well as the physical char-
acteristics of t h e subject, to his finished pictures.
It is i m p o r t a n t t h a t the i n s p i r a t i o n for the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n should
come f r o m a study of t h e p e o p l e or places to be p h o t o g r a p h e d . T h e
m i n d s h o u l d r e m a i n as o p e n a n d free f r o m p r e j u d i c e as possible, a n d
t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s h o u l d never try to force t h e subject m a t t e r i n t o his
or t h e editor's preconceived idea. T o o o f t e n , a n assignment is given,
the p h o t o g r a p h e r reads t h e instructions a n d t h e suggestions, a n d
t h e n follows t h e m w i t h o u t m u c h m o r e thought—except to photo-
g r a p h as closely as possible to w h a t he believes are t h e desires of t h e
editors. All too f r e q u e n t l y , d u e to f a u l t y research, to i n a d e q u a t e
k n o w l e d g e or to t h e preconceived n o t i o n s just m e n t i o n e d , t h e direc-
tional t h e m e of t h e assignment is a m i s c o n c e p t i o n of t h e living
actuality. B u t because he does n o t wish to offend the editors w h o pay
h i m his b r e a d money, t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r f r e q u e n t l y tries to m a k e his
story c o n f o r m to s o m e o n e else's shortsighted or w a r p e d j u d g m e n t .
T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t b e a r t h e responsibility for his work a n d
its effect. By so m u c h as his work is a d i s t o r t i o n (this is sometimes
i n t a n g i b l e , at o t h e r times shockingly obvious), in such p r o p o r t i o n is
it a crime against h u m a n i t y . Even o n r a t h e r " u n i m p o r t a n t " stories,
this a t t i t u d e m u s t be taken—for p h o t o g r a p h s ( a n d t h e little words
u n d e r n e a t h ) are m o l d e r s of o p i n i o n . A little m i s i n f o r m a t i o n p l u s a
little m o r e m i s i n f o r m a t i o n is t h e k i n d l i n g f r o m which destructive
m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s flare.
T h e m a j o r i t y of p h o t o g r a p h i c stories r e q u i r e a certain a m o u n t of
setting up, r e a r r a n g i n g a n d stage direction, to b r i n g pictorial a n d
editorial coherency to t h e pictures. H e r e , t h e p h o t o - j o u r n a l i s t can
be his m o s t c o m p l e t e l y creative self. W h e n e v e r this is d o n e for the
p u r p o s e of a b e t t e r t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e s p i r i t of t h e actuality, t h e n it is
completely ethical. If the c h a n g e s b e c o m e a p e r v e r s i o n of t h e a c t u a l i t y
for the sole p u r p o s e of m a k i n g a " m o r e d r a m a t i c " o r " s a l e a b l e " pic-
ture, the p h o t o g r a p h e r has i n d u l g e d i n " a r t i s t i c license" t h a t s h o u l d
not be. T h i s is a very c o m m o n t y p e of d i s t o r t i o n . If t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r
has d i s t o r t e d for some u n e t h i c a l reasons, it obviously becomes a
m a t t e r of t h e u t m o s t gravity.
A p e r s o n a l belief of m i n e is t h a t all t h e events in t h e w o r l d w h i c h
cause g r e a t e m o t i o n a l u p h e a v a l s , such as wars, riots, m i n e disasters,
fires, t h e d e a t h of leaders (such as the r e a c t i o n to t h e d e a t h of
Ghandi)—these a n d s i m i l a r h a p p e n i n g s w h i c h t e n d to release h u m a n
e m o t i o n s f r o m c o n t r o l s h o u l d be p h o t o g r a p h e d in a c o m p l e t e l y
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a l m a n n e r . Under no circumstances should an attempt
be made to recreate the moods and happenings of these moments.
I p r e f e r this u n p o s e d i n t e r p r e t i v e a p p r o a c h in t h e d o i n g of all
stories—that is, w h e r e v e r possible. Regardless of t h e " h o w " of inter-
p r e t a t i o n s , t h e j o u r n a l i s t i c field m u s t find m e n of integrity, o p e n -
m i n d e d a n d sincere in p u r p o s e , w i t h t h e i n t e l l i g e n c e a n d insight to
p e n e t r a t e to the vital core of h u m a n r e l a t i o n s h i p s — a n d w i t h the very
rare ability to give t h e f u l l m e a s u r e of t h e i r u n b i a s e d findings to t h e
world. Few m e n are so c o m p l e t e l y e q u i p p e d , b u t t h e s t a n d a r d s of
journalism should be measured high. A n d the individual striving for
this p e r f e c t i o n s h o u l d n o t c o m p r o m i s e . H e m u s t n o t k n u c k l e d o w n
to those p u b l i c a t i o n s w h i c h w o u l d h a v e it otherwise. H e s h o u l d b e
held a c c o u n t a b l e for any p r o l o n g e d misuse of his work, a n d c a n n o t
seek r e f u g e in the w h i n e t h a t he is j u s t a w o r k i n g m a n d o i n g his
assigned j o b .
T o h a v e his p h o t o g r a p h s live o n in history, past t h e i r i m p o r t a n t
b u t short lifespan in a p u b l i c a t i o n , is t h e final desire of n e a r l y every
p h o t o g r a p h e r - a r t i s t w h o works in j o u r n a l i s m . H e can r e a c h this
p l a n e o n l y by c o m b i n i n g a p r o f o u n d p e n e t r a t i o n i n t o the c h a r a c t e r
of the s u b j e c t w i t h a p e r f e c t i o n of c o m p o s i t i o n a n d technique—a
c o n s o l i d a t i o n necessary f o r a n y p h o t o g r a p h i c m a s t e r p i e c e .

EUGENE SMITH PHOTOGRAPHY 1954

Exhibition Catalogue, University of Minnesota.

I w o u l d d r e a m of b e i n g a n artist in a n ivory tower. Yet it is im-

perative t h a t I s p e a k to p e o p l e , so I m u s t desert t h a t ivory tower.
T o d o this I a m a journalist—a p h o t o g r a p h i c j o u r n a l i s t . I n result, I
am c o n s t a n t l y t o r n b e t w e e n t h e a t t i t u d e of the conscientious j o u r -
nalist w h o is a r e c o r d e r of, a n i n t e r p r e t e r of facts, a n d of the creative
artist w h o o f t e n is necessarily at p o e t i c o d d s w i t h the literal facts.
My p r i n c i p a l c o n c e r n is for a n honesty of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n to b e
arrived at by c a r e f u l s t u d y a n d t h r o u g h t h e u t m o s t possible sensi-
tivity of u n d e r s t a n d i n g . I w o u l d f u r t h e r , if t h e s t r e n g t h of t a l e n t be
w i t h i n me, h a v e my a c c o m p l i s h e d i m a g e t r a n s c e n d literal t r u t h by
i n t e n s i f y i n g its t r u t h f u l accuracy, i n d i c a t i n g even of the spirit a n d
symbolizing m o r e . A n d my o n l y e d i t o r w o u l d b e m y conscience a n d
m y conscience w o u l d be of m y responsibilities—in c o n s t a n t disci-
p l i n e d r e j u d g m e n t of m y f a i l u r e s a n d of my f u l f i l l m e n t s .

THE WORLD'S 10 GREATEST PHOTOGRAPHERS 1958

Popular Photography, Vol. 42, No. 5, p. 84.
I d o u b t the existence of a n y p e r f e c t i o n , a l t h o u g h I a m for t r y i n g
t h e rise t o this the impossible a n d w o u l d t a k e m e a s u r e f r o m such
f a i l u r e r a t h e r t h a n f r o m t h e c o n v e n i e n c e of a safe b u t m u n d a n e
success. (I d o n o t d e p l o r e success.) I w o u l d e x p e r i e n c e ever d e e p e r ,
a n d e n d e a v o r to give o u t f r o m this e x p e r i e n c e . My p h o t o g r a p h s at
best h o l d o n l y a small s t r e n g t h , b u t t h r o u g h t h e m I w o u l d suggest
a n d criticize a n d i l l u m i n a t e a n d try to give c o m p a s s i o n a t e u n d e r -
s t a n d i n g . A n d t h r o u g h the passion given i n t o m y p h o t o g r a p h s (no
m a t t e r h o w q u i e t ) I w o u l d call o u t for a s p i r i t u a l i z a t i o n t h a t w o u l d
create s t r e n g t h a n d h e a l i n g a n d p u r p o s e , as t e a c h e r a n d s u r g e o n a n d
e n t e r t a i n e r , a n d w o u l d give c o m m e n t u p o n m a n ' s place a n d preser-
v a t i o n w i t h i n this n e w age—a t e r r i b l e a n d e x c i t i n g age. A n d w i t h
passion. Passion, yes, as passion is in all g r e a t searches a n d is neces-
sary to all creative e n d e a v o r s — w h e t h e r of s t a t e s m a n , o r scientist, or
artist, o r f r e e d o m , o r devil—and D o n J u a n m a y h a v e b e e n w i t h o u t
passion, for sex a n d s e n t i m e n t a n d violence c a n very m u c h be with-
o u t passion. Q u e s t i o n this? T a k e n o t e of t h e values a r o u n d you,
e v e r y w h e r e t h r u s t u p o n you—and w a d e awhile, w i t h this q u e s t i o n in
t h o u g h t , t h r o u g h p u b l i c a t i o n s a n d p u b l i c a t i o n s f r o m cover to cover.

EDWARD STEICHEN (1879-) The use of the term art medium is, to say the
least, misleading, for it is the artist that creates a work of art not the medium.
It is the artist in photography that gives form to content by a distillation of
ideas, thought, experience, insight and understanding, MY LIFE IN PHOTOG-
RAPHY, Saturday Review, Vol. 42, 1959, p. 18.

ON PHOTOGRAPHY 1960
Daedalus, Vol. 42, pp. 136-37.
M a n k i n d is faced w i t h a s t a g g e r i n g a b u n d a n c e of w o r d s a n d images
a d d i n g u p to a c o m p l e x i t y of political, scientific, economic, social,
a n d c u l t u r a l p r o b l e m s w h i c h n o single h u m a n b e i n g can possibly
assimilate. F r o m b i r t h to d e a t h we all f u n c t i o n o n t h e basis of o u r
i n d i v i d u a l a n d u n i q u e g e n e t i c m a k e - u p . T h e f u t u r e artist, as an
i n f a n t , comes w i t h o u t a n I B M card t h a t lists a n d qualifies his apti-
t u d e s or indicates h o w t h e e n o r m o u s influences of e n v i r o n m e n t will
s h a p e his n a t i v e e q u i p m e n t . It is o n l y in t h e retrospective considera-
t i o n of the artist's life w o r k t h a t t h e g e r m of the u l t i m a t e m a s t e r w o r k
becomes e v i d e n t even in his earliest w o r k .
I n a s o m e w h a t s i m i l a r m a n n e r each p e r i o d in t h e arts is t h e result
of its i n h e r i t a n c e of a past s u b j e c t e d to t h e c o n d i t i o n i n g pressures of
the present, a n d it is only in t h e d i s t a n t f u t u r e t h a t we shall be able
to m e a s u r e a n d e v a l u a t e t h e i m p o r t a n c e of w h a t t h e a r t of o u r recent
decades has c o n t r i b u t e d or a d d e d to t h e history of t h e arts a n d t h e
c u l t u r e of o u r period. T h e works of i n d i v i d u a l artists in any p e r i o d
or in r e l a t i o n s h i p to works of o t h e r periods are only m o m e n t a r i l y
avant-garde devices. T h e s e soon become a c a d e m i c r o u t i n e , a n d are
o f t e n used to saddle t h e n e x t g e n e r a t i o n . T h e f u n d a m e n t a l relation-
ship of great art in all periods has m o r e basic similarities t h a n differ-
ences. T h e images created in t h e caves of L a s c a u x a n d A l t a m i r a h a v e
a d e e p k i n s h i p w i t h those c o m i n g f r o m t h e studio of Picasso, a n d
if we can skip c o n d i t i o n i n g a n d prejudices, w h a t looks like radical
differences between Li L u n g M i e n a n d M a r k T o b e y can also be
translated i n t o kinships.
T o d a y it w o u l d seem t h a t the p a i n t i n g a n d s c u l p t u r e of o u r time
has achieved an almost c o m p l e t e break f r o m the long accepted tradi-
tions of literal r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , a n d has assumed an i n d i v i d u a l a n d
personal f r e e d o m t h a t discards all past disciplines.
L o n g before the b i r t h of a w o r d language t h e c a v e m a n c o m m u n i -
cated by visual images. T h e i n v e n t i o n of p h o t o g r a p h y gave visual
c o m m u n i c a t i o n its most simple, direct, universal language. W e are
only b e g i n n i n g to recognize generally a n d accept the potentialities
of p h o t o g r a p h y as a n art m e d i u m , b u t as a visual m e a n s of mass
c o m m u n i c a t i o n it has become a force, a n d stands w i t h o u t a peer.
T h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e a r t of p h o t o g r a p h y as mass c o m m u n i c a t i o n
has been a m p l y d e m o n s t r a t e d by t h e e x h i b i t i o n p r o d u c e d by t h e
M u s e u m of M o d e r n A r t u n d e r t h e title, " T h e Family of M a n . " T h i s
exhibition, in n i n e editions, has already been seen by some seven
million p e o p l e in twenty-eight countries—and it is still circulating.
T h e audiences n o t only u n d e r s t a n d this visual p r e s e n t a t i o n , they also
p a r t i c i p a t e in it, a n d identify themselves w i t h t h e images, as if in
c o r r o b o r a t i o n of t h e w o r d s of a J a p a n e s e poet, " W h e n you look i n t o
a m i r r o r , you d o n o t see your reflection, your reflection sees y o u . "
Almost f r o m the b e g i n n i n g , p h o t o g r a p h e r s have e x p e r i m e n t e d
with t h e p r o d u c t i o n of images t h a t i m i t a t e d , or were inspired by, the
prevalent concepts of o t h e r a r t media. T o d a y a sizable p e r c e n t a g e of
the m o r e t a l e n t e d younger p h o t o g r a p h e r s are p r o b i n g a n d experi-
m e n t i n g in new areas, c r e a t i n g images carrying c o n n o t a t i o n s a n d
meanings b e y o n d , a n d o f t e n only indirectly related to, t h e objects
represented. T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s w o r k i n g in m o t i o n pictures w i t h
a n i m a t e d images in t h e realm of abstraction a n d surrealism, a n d
with the a d d e d a d v a n t a g e s of s o u n d , are m a k i n g a signal c o n t r i b u t i o n
to the m o d e r n use of p h o t o g r a p h y as an art m e d i u m . As p h o t o g r a p h y
I would i n c l u d e color images directly p r o j e c t e d o n a screen by colored
beams of light, even w h e n m a d e w i t h o u t t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n of t h e
camera.
It is q u i t e possible t h a t some richly i m a g i n a t i v e a n d energetic
y o u n g abstract p a i n t e r m a y be even n o w e x p e r i m e n t i n g w i t h t h e
highly developed photographically animated cartoon techniques
c o u p l e d w i t h r e l a t e d s o u n d to o p e n n e w horizons a n d areas in the
d o m a i n of a e s t h e t i c imagery. I n r e c o r d i n g this as a possibility, I m u s t
give e m p h a s i s to the fact t h a t a few p h o t o g r a p h e r s w h o h a v e b e e n
e x p o s e d to t h e s a m e h e r i t a g e as t h e p a i n t e r s , as well as to t h e present-
day i m p i n g e m e n t s of science a n d of aesthetics in t h e arts, are now
t a k i n g a d v a n t a g e also of t h e a v a i l a b l e t e c h n i c a l a d v a n c e s to carry
t h e m t o w a r d these b e c k o n i n g n e w i m a g e horizons.

ALFRED STIEGLITZ (1864-1946) I detest tradition for tradition's sake;

the half-alive; that which is not real. I feel no hatred of individuals, but of
customs, traditions; superstitions that go against life, against truth, against
the reality of experience, against the spontaneous living out of the sense of
wonder—of fresh experience, freshly seen and communicated. ALFRED STIEG-
LITZ, quoted by Dorothy Norman, Aperture, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1960, p. 25.

THE HAND CAMERA—ITS PRESENT IMPORTANCE 1897

The American Annual of Photography, pp. 18-27.
P h o t o g r a p h y as a f a d is well-nigh o n its last legs, t h a n k s p r i n c i p a l l y
to t h e bicycle craze. T h o s e seriously i n t e r e s t e d in its a d v a n c e m e n t d o
n o t look u p o n this state of affairs as a m i s f o r t u n e , b u t as a disguised
blessing, i n a s m u c h as p h o t o g r a p h y h a d b e e n classed as a s p o r t by
n e a r l y all of those w h o d e s e r t e d its r a n k s a n d fled to t h e p r e s e n t idol,
t h e bicycle. T h e only p e r s o n s w h o seem to look u p o n this t u r n of
affairs as e n t i r e l y u n w e l c o m e are those e n g a g e d in m a n u f a c t u r i n g
a n d selling p h o t o g r a p h i c goods. I t was, u n d o u b t e d l y , d u e to the
h a n d c a m e r a t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y b e c a m e so generally p o p u l a r a few
years ago. Every T o m , Dick a n d H a r r y could, w i t h o u t t r o u b l e , l e a r n
h o w to g e T i o m e t h i n g or o t h e r o n a sensitive p l a t e , a n d this is w h a t
t h e p u b l i c w a n t e d — n o w o r k a n d lots of f u n . T h a n k s to t h e efforts of
these persons h a n d c a m e r a a n d b a d w o r k b e c a m e s y n o n y m o u s . T h e
c l i m a x was r e a c h e d w h e n an e n t e r p r i s i n g firm flooded t h e m a r k e t
w i t h a very i n g e n i o u s h a n d c a m e r a a n d t h e a n n o u n c e m e n t , " Y o u
press the b u t t o n , a n d we d o t h e rest." T h i s was t h e b e g i n n i n g of the
" p h o t o g r a p h i n g - b y - t h e - y a r d " era, a n d the r a n k s of e n t h u s i a s t i c But-
t o n Pressers were e n l a r g e d to e n o r m o u s d i m e n s i o n s . T h e h a n d cam-
era ruled supreme.
O r i g i n a l l y k n o w n u n d e r t h e o d i o u s n a m e of " D e t e c t i v e , " neces-
sarily i n s i n u a t i n g t h e o w n e r to b e s o m e w h a t of a sneak, t h e h a n d
c a m e r a was in very b a d r e p u t e w i t h all the c h a m p i o n s of t h e t r i p o d .
T h e y looked u p o n t h e small i n s t r u m e n t , i n n o c e n t e n o u g h in itself,
b u t t e r r i b l e in the h a n d s of t h e u n k n o w i n g , as a m e r e toy, g o o d for
t h e p u r p o s e s of t h e g l o b e - t r o t t e r , w h o w i s h e d to j o t d o w n p h o t o -
g r a p h i c notes as he passed a l o n g his j o u r n e y , b u t in n o way a d a p t e d
to t h e w a n t s of h i m whose a i m it is to d o serious w o r k .
B u t in t h e past year o r two all this h a s been c h a n g e d . T h e r e are
m a n y w h o claim t h a t for j u s t t h e m o s t serious w o r k t h e h a n d cam-
era is n o t only excellently a d a p t e d , b u t t h a t w i t h o u t it the pictorial
p h o t o g r a p h e r is sadly h a n d i c a p p e d .
T h e writer is a m o n g s t the advocates w h o c a n n o t too strongly
r e c o m m e n d t h e trial of t h e h a n d camera for this class of p h o t o g r a p h y .
H e f r a n k l y confesses t h a t for m a n y years he belonged to t h a t class
which opposed its use for p i c t u r e m a k i n g . T h i s was d u e to a p r e j u d i c e
which f o u n d its cause in t h e fact t h a t the impression h a d been given
h i m t h a t for h a n d camera exposures strong s u n l i g h t was sine qua non.
T h e m a n u f a c t u r e r is chiefly to be b l a m e d for this false impression,
as it was he w h o p u t u p t h e u n i f o r m r u l e t h a t t h e camera s h o u l d be
held in such a position t h a t the s u n l i g h t comes f r o m over one of the
shoulders, in o r d e r to insure such lighting as to fully expose t h e
plate. I n short, the m a n u f a c t u r e r himself d i d not realize t h e possi-
bilities of his o w n ware a n d i n v e n t i o n .
I n p r e p a r i n g for h a n d c a m e r a work, t h e choice of t h e i n s t r u m e n t
is of vital i m p o r t a n c e . U p o n this subject t h a t able artist, J . Craig
A n n a n , of Glasgow, w h o does m u c h of his work w i t h t h e h a n d
camera, says: " H a v i n g secured a light-tight camera a n d suitable lens,
there is no m o r e i m p o r t a n t q u a l i t y t h a n ease in m e c h a n i c a l working.
T h e a d j u s t m e n t s o u g h t to be so simple t h a t t h e o p e r a t o r may be able
to b r i n g it f r o m his satchel a n d get it in o r d e r for m a k i n g a n e x p o s u r e
w i t h o u t a conscious t h o u g h t . E a c h worker will have his own idea as
to which style of camera comes nearest to perfection in this respect,
a n d h a v i n g m a d e his choice he s h o u l d study to become so i n t i m a t e
with it t h a t it will become a second n a t u r e w i t h his h a n d s to p r e p a r e
the c a m e r a w h i l e his m i n d a n d eyes are fully occupied w i t h the
subject before h i m . "
T o this let m e add, t h a t w h a t e v e r c a m e r a may be chosen let it be
w a t e r p r o o f , so as to p e r m i t p h o t o g r a p h i n g in r a i n or shine w i t h o u t
damage to t h e box. T h e writer does n o t a p p r o v e of complicated
mechanisms, as they are sure to get o u t of o r d e r at i m p o r t a n t mo-
ments, t h u s causing considerable unnecessary swearing, a n d o f t e n
the loss of a precious o p p o r t u n i t y . M y o w n camera is of t h e simplest
p a t t e r n a n d has never left m e in t h e lurch, a l t h o u g h it has h a d some
very t o u g h h a n d l i n g in w i n d a n d storm. T h e reliability of the
shutter is of greater i m p o r t a n c e t h a n its speed. As racehorse scenes,
express trains, etc., are rarely w a n t e d in pictures, a s h u t t e r w o r k i n g
at a speed of o n e - f o u r t h to one-twenty-fifth of a second will answer
all purposes. Microscopic sharpness is of n o pictorial value. A little
blur in a m o v i n g subject will o f t e n aid in giving t h e impression of
action a n d m o t i o n .
As for plates, use t h e fastest you can get. T h e y c a n n o t be too fast.
Do n o t stop d o w n your lens except at the seashore, a n d set your
shutter at as slow speed as t h e subject will p e r m i t . T h i s will e n s u r e
a fully exposed plate. U n d e r exposures are best relegated to t h e ash-
barrel, as they a r e useless for pictorial work.
 T h e o n e q u a l i t y a b s o l u t e l y necessary for success in h a n d c a m e r a
work is Patience.
T h i s is really t h e k e y n o t e to the w h o l e m a t t e r . I t is a m u s i n g to
w a t c h the m a j o r i t y of h a n d c a m e r a w o r k e r s s h o o t i n g off a t o n of
plates helter-skelter, t a k i n g t h e i r chances as to the u l t i m a t e result.
O n c e in a w h i l e these p e o p l e m a k e a h i t , a n d it is d u e to this cause
t h a t m a n y p i c t u r e s p r o d u c e d by m e a n s of the h a n d c a m e r a h a v e
been considered flukes. A t t h e s a m e t i m e it is i n t e r e s t i n g to n o t e
w i t h w h a t r e g u l a r i t y c e r t a i n m e n seem to be t h e favorites of c h a n c e -
so t h a t it w o u l d lead us to c o n c l u d e t h a t , p e r h a p s , c h a n c e is not
everything, a f t e r all.
I n o r d e r to o b t a i n p i c t u r e s by m e a n s of the h a n d c a m e r a it is well
to choose y o u r subject, regardless of figures, a n d carefully s t u d y t h e
lines a n d l i g h t i n g . A f t e r h a v i n g d e t e r m i n e d u p o n these w a t c h t h e
passing figures a n d await t h e m o m e n t in w h i c h e v e r y t h i n g is in
b a l a n c e ; t h a t is, satisfies y o u r eye. T h i s o f t e n m e a n s h o u r s of p a t i e n t
w a i t i n g . My p i c t u r e , " F i f t h A v e n u e , W i n t e r , " is t h e result of a t h r e e
h o u r s ' s t a n d d u r i n g a fierce snow-storm o n F e b r u a r y 2 2 n d , 1893,
a w a i t i n g t h e p r o p e r m o m e n t . My p a t i e n c e was d u l y r e w a r d e d . Of
course, t h e result c o n t a i n e d a n e l e m e n t of chance, as I m i g h t h a v e
stood t h e r e for h o u r s w i t h o u t s u c c e e d i n g in g e t t i n g the desired
p i c t u r e . I r e m e m b e r h o w u p o n h a v i n g d e v e l o p e d the negative of the
p i c t u r e I s h o w e d it to s o m e of m y colleagues. T h e y smiled a n d
advised m e to t h r o w away s u c h rot. " W h y , it isn't even s h a r p , a n d h e
w a n t s to use it for a n e n l a r g e m e n t ! " S u c h w e r e t h e r e m a r k s m a d e
a b o u t w h a t I k n e w was a piece of w o r k q u i t e o u t of the o r d i n a r y , in
t h a t it was the first a t t e m p t at p i c t u r e m a k i n g w i t h t h e h a n d c a m e r a
in such adverse a n d t r y i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s f r o m a p h o t o g r a p h i c p o i n t
of view. S o m e t i m e later the l a u g h was o n the o t h e r side, for w h e n
the finished p i c t u r e was s h o w n to these same g e n t l e m e n it p r o v e d to
t h e m conclusively t h a t t h e r e was o t h e r p h o t o g r a p h i c w o r k o p e n to
t h e m d u r i n g the " b a d s e a s o n " t h a n t h a t so fully set f o r t h in the
photographic journals under the heading, "Work for the Winter
M o n t h s . " T h i s i n c i d e n t also goes to p r o v e t h a t t h e m a k i n g of t h e
negative a l o n e is n o t t h e m a k i n g of the p i c t u r e . My h a n d c a m e r a
negatives are all m a d e w i t h t h e express p u r p o s e of e n l a r g e m e n t , a n d
it is b u t rarely t h a t I use m o r e t h a n p a r t of the o r i g i n a l shot.
Most of m y successful work of late has b e e n p r o d u c e d by this
m e t h o d . My e x p e r i e n c e h a s t a u g h t m e t h a t t h e p r i n t s f r o m t h e direct
negatives h a v e b u t little v a l u e as such.
T h e h a n d c a m e r a has c o m e to stay—its i m p o r t a n c e is a c k n o w l e d g e d .
A w o r d to t h e wise is sufficient.

HOW I CAME TO PHOTOGRAPH CLOUDS 1923

The Amateur Photographer & Photography,
Vol. 56, No. 1819, p. 255.
 As for t h e cloud series p e r h a p s it will interest you how t h a t came
about.
Last s u m m e r w h e n m a n u s c r i p t s were sent in by t h e various con-
tributors f o r t h e issue of the p u b l i c a t i o n , "M.S.S." devoted to pho-
tography, a n d its aesthetic significance, W a l d o Frank—one of Ameri-
ca's y o u n g literary lights, a u t h o r of Our America, etc.—wrote t h a t
he believed the secret p o w e r in my p h o t o g r a p h y was d u e to the power
of h y p n o t i s m I h a d over my sitters, etc.
I was amazed w h e n I r e a d t h e s t a t e m e n t . I w o n d e r e d w h a t he h a d
to say a b o u t t h e street scenes—the trees, interiors—and o t h e r subjects,
the p h o t o g r a p h s of w h i c h he h a d a d m i r e d so m u c h : or w h e t h e r he
felt they too were d u e to my powers of h y p n o t i s m . C e r t a i n l y a lax
s t a t e m e n t c o m i n g f r o m one professing himself p r o f o u n d a n d fair
t h i n k i n g , a n d interested in e n l i g h t e n i n g .
It h a p p e n e d t h a t the same m o r n i n g in w h i c h I r e a d this c o n t r i b u -
tion my brother-in-law (lawyer a n d musician) o u t of t h e clear sky
a n n o u n c e d to m e t h a t he c o u l d n ' t u n d e r s t a n d h o w o n e as supposedly
musical as I could h a v e entirely given u p playing t h e piano. I looked
at h i m a n d smiled—and I t h o u g h t : even he does n o t seem to u n d e r -
stand. H e plays t h e violin. T h e violin takes u p n o space: t h e p i a n o
does. T h e p i a n o needs looking a f t e r by a professional, etc. I simply
c o u l d n ' t afford a p i a n o , even w h e n I was supposedly rich. It was n o t
merely a q u e s t i o n of m o n e y .
Thirty-five or m o r e years ago I spent a few days in M u r r e n (Swit-
zerland), a n d I was e x p e r i m e n t i n g w i t h o r t h o plates. C l o u d s a n d
their r e l a t i o n s h i p to t h e rest of t h e world, a n d clouds for themselves,
interested me, a n d clouds w h i c h were difficult to p h o t o g r a p h -
nearly impossible. Ever since t h e n clouds have been in my m i n d , most
powerfully at times, a n d I always k n e w I ' d follow u p t h e e x p e r i m e n t
m a d e over 35 years ago. I always w a t c h e d clouds. S t u d i e d t h e m . H a d
u n u s u a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s u p h e r e o n this hillside. W h a t F r a n k h a d said
a n n o y e d me: w h a t m y brother-in-law said also a n n o y e d me. I was in
the midst of my s u m m e r ' s p h o t o g r a p h i n g , trying to a d d to my knowl-
edge, to t h e w o r k I h a d done. Always evolving—always going m o r e
a n d m o r e deeply i n t o life—into p h o t o g r a p h y .
My m o t h e r was dying. O u r estate was going to pieces. T h e old
horse of 37 was being k e p t alive by t h e 70-year-old c o a c h m a n . I, f u l l
of the feeling of today: all a b o u t m e disintegration—slow b u t sure:
dying c h e s t n u t trees—all t h e chestnuts in this c o u n t r y h a v e b e e n
dying for years: t h e pines d o o m e d too—diseased: I, poor, b u t at work:
the world in a great mess: t h e h u m a n b e i n g a q u e e r animal—not as
dignified as o u r g i a n t c h e s t n u t tree o n t h e hill.
So I m a d e u p my m i n d I ' d answer M r . F r a n k a n d my brother-in-
law. I ' d finally d o s o m e t h i n g I h a d in m i n d for years. I ' d m a k e a
series of cloud pictures. I told Miss O'Keeffe of my ideas. I w a n t e d to
p h o t o g r a p h clouds to find o u t w h a t I h a d learned in 40 years a b o u t
p h o t o g r a p h y . T h r o u g h clouds to p u t d o w n m y p h i l o s o p h y of life—
to show t h a t my p h o t o g r a p h s w e r e n o t d u e to s u b j e c t m a t t e r — n o t to
special trees, or laces, or interiors, to special privileges—clouds were
t h e r e for everyone—no tax as yet o n them—free.
So I b e g a n to work w i t h the clouds—and it was great e x c i t e m e n t -
daily for weeks. Every t i m e I d e v e l o p e d I was so w r o u g h t u p , always
b e l i e v i n g I h a d n e a r l y g o t t e n w h a t I was a f t e r — b u t h a d failed. A
m o s t t a n t a l i z i n g s e q u e n c e of days a n d weeks. I k n e w exactly w h a t I
was a f t e r . I h a d told Miss O ' K e e f f e I w a n t e d a series of p h o t o g r a p h s
w h i c h w h e n seen by Ernest Bloch (the great composer) h e w o u l d
e x c l a i m : Music! M u s i c ! M a n , why t h a t is music! H o w d i d you ever
d o t h a t ? A n d h e w o u l d p o i n t to violins, a n d flutes, a n d oboes, a n d
brass, f u l l of e n t h u s i a s m , a n d w o u l d say h e ' d h a v e to w r i t e a sym-
p h o n y called " C l o u d s . " N o t like Debussy's b u t much, much more.
A n d w h e n finally I h a d my series of t e n p h o t o g r a p h s p r i n t e d , a n d
Bloch saw t h e m — w h a t I said I w a n t e d to h a p p e n h a p p e n e d verbatim.
S t r a i g h t p h o t o g r a p h s , all gaslight p a p e r , except o n e p a l l a d i o t y p e .
All in the p o w e r of every p h o t o g r a p h e r of all t i m e , a n d I satisfied
I h a d l e a r n t s o m e t h i n g d u r i n g t h e 40 years. It's 40 years this year
t h a t I b e g a n in B e r l i n w i t h Vogel.
N o w if the c l o u d series are d u e to my p o w e r s of h y p n o t i s m I p l e a d
" G u i l t y . " O n l y s o m e " P i c t o r i a l p h o t o g r a p h e r s " w h e n they c a m e to
t h e e x h i b i t i o n seemed totally b l i n d to t h e c l o u d pictures. My photo-
g r a p h s look like p h o t o g r a p h s — a n d in t h e i r eyes they t h e r e f o r e can't
be art. As if they h a d the slightest idea of art or p h o t o g r a p h y —
o r any idea of life. My a i m is increasingly to m a k e my p h o t o g r a p h s
look as m u c h like p h o t o g r a p h s t h a t unless o n e has eyes a n d sees, they
w o n ' t be seen—and still everyone will never forget t h e m h a v i n g once
looked at t h e m . I w o n d e r if t h a t is clear.

ALFRED STIEGLITZ: FOUR HAPPENINGS 1942

Twice-A-Year, edited by Dorothy Norman, No. 8/9, pp. 105-36.
I. WHY I G O T O U T O F BUSINESS

In S e p t e m b e r , 1890, I r e t u r n e d f r o m n i n e years' stay in E u r o p e .

My eldest sister h a d d i e d in c h i l d b i r t h in Los Angeles a n d m y p a r e n t s
felt it was t i m e for m e to c o m e h o m e .
I h a d h o p e d to r e m a i n in E u r o p e . T h e life t h e r e was congenial.
My l a t h e r h a d assured m e a small a n n u a l i n c o m e a n d I felt I could
live on t h a t w i t h c o m f o r t .
My d e m a n d s w e r e modest—traveling t h i r d class o n slow trains,
e a t i n g in i n e x p e n s i v e r e s t a u r a n t s , s t a n d i n g at the R o y a l O p e r a H o u s e
d o w n s t a i r s for thirty-seven a n d a half cents—as a s t u d e n t , g e t t i n g
rebates on books, on R o m a n baths—a r e b a t e even o n tickets to the
race track, a n d a r e b a t e o n tickets f o r t h e best t h e a t r e s a n d music,
in a d d i t i o n to h a v i n g all t h e a d v a n t a g e s of t h e University a n d t h e
Polytechnic, havens of perfect f r e e d o m — h a v i n g n o social aspirations,
being passionately devoted to p h o t o g r a p h y a n d crazy a b o u t billiards,
as well as a b o u t race horses—what m o r e could life offer anywhere?
I n t u i t i v e l y I felt t h a t it w o u l d be very d i f f e r e n t in my own country,
even t h o u g h I h a d always loved it as a n idea. " T h e Boys of Seventy-
Six" h a d been my bible as I was g r o w i n g up, w i t h N a t h a n a e l G r e e n e
as my hero; I, feeling t h a t w o n d e r f u l as George W a s h i n g t o n was,
G r e e n e satisfied s o m e t h i n g in my n a t u r e t h a t W a s h i n g t o n d i d n ' t .
G r e e n e seemed always to be b e a t e n in t h e battles w i t h t h e English,
b u t to m e it was ever a victory a n d n o t a defeat, for in his battles it
was so a n d so m a n y h u n d r e d E n g l i s h m e n killed, so a n d so m a n y
prisoners taken, while G r e e n e r e t r e a t e d w i t h b u t a h a n d f u l of Ameri-
cans killed a n d b u t a h a n d f u l of A m e r i c a n s falling into English h a n d s .
T h i s is at least the way it seemed to m e as I ' d r e a d t h e story of G r e e n e
over a n d over again. T h e r e seemed to be a sense of h u m o r in Greene's
strategy. A n d as f a r as W a s h i n g t o n was concerned, I h a d always been
told t h a t he was the quintessence of perfection, never even h a v i n g
told a lie. T h i s i m p l i e d t h a t everybody else d i d tell a lie at some time
or other. T h i s , to me, m a d e W a s h i n g t o n not q u i t e h u m a n a n d I k n e w
that if I h a d lived in the days of the A m e r i c a n R e v o l u t i o n , I ' d have
p r e f e r r e d to fight u n d e r G r e e n e t h a n to fight u n d e r W a s h i n g t o n . Of
course later in life I realized t h a t a fairytale h a d been passed o n to
me a n d I was gullible—or should I call it i n n o c e n t enough—to take
it literally. B u t G r e e n e was a h u m a n being like myself. W a s h i n g t o n
was m a d e to a p p e a r a G o d a n d I k n e w t h a t I d i d n ' t belong amongst
Gods. B u t at t h e same time I h a d believed in the fairytale of America.
I n my various rooms in Berlin—rooms w h i c h I gave u p d u r i n g the
s u m m e r m o n t h s w h i l e I was foot-trotting Switzerland, t h e T y r o l , the
B a v a r i a n h i g h l a n d s , u p p e r Italy—I always h a d a p a i n t i n g of my
m o t h e r w h i c h a f r i e n d of mine, a G e r m a n artist, w h o h a d lived with
my family in N e w York for some years, h a d p a i n t e d for me for my
twenty-first b i r t h d a y , h a n g i n g over a n u p r i g h t piano. I was never
w i t h o u t a p i a n o d u r i n g those years.
O n t h e o p e n p i a n o t h e r e always were scores of " C a r m e n , " of
W a g n e r , of Gluck—my favorites. A n d over my m o t h e r ' s p i c t u r e
there was d r a p e d an A m e r i c a n flag twelve feet long.
T h i s flag was m a d e by a f r i e n d of m i n e , p o o r in money, very poor.
H e was the son of a Konigsberg professor. H e was t h e youngest in the
family—he h a d seven sisters.
H e h a d a s t i p e n d of six h u n d r e d m a r k s a year. H e was as gifted as
he was p o o r . H e was brilliant. H e played p i a n o , he played violin a n d
the flute, he was s t u d y i n g engineering, he was as homely as sin a n d
in six weeks I h a d t a u g h t h i m sufficient English so t h a t he could read
W a s h i n g t o n Irving's Alhambra.
H e k n e w of my passion for my h o m e country. Because of this he
one day surprised m e in b r i n g i n g m e the A m e r i c a n flag I h a v e men-
tioned. H e h a d m a d e it himself.
 A n d now—in 1890—1 was back in A m e r i c a . I was a f o r l o r n soul,
even t h o u g h I lived w i t h my p a r e n t s . O n e day my f a t h e r said, " D o n ' t
you t h i n k you o u g h t to be e a r n i n g your o w n living?"
I felt I should, b u t how? I seemed like a fish o u t of water. Yes, I
h a d a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e p u t a t i o n as a p h o t o g r a p h e r , b u t w h a t of it?
H o w c o u l d it be p u t to use, t h a t is, t u r n e d i n t o money? T h a t d i d n ' t
seem to interest me.
O n e day M r . F o o r d , a f r i e n d of t h e family for years, asked to see
me, invited m e to l u n c h w i t h h i m at t h e o l d Astor H o u s e . (It was
opposite this place t h a t two years later I p h o t o g r a p h e d " T h e C a r
Horses.")
M r . F o o r d at twenty-six—he was a S c o t c h m a n by birth—had been
e d i t o r of t h e New York Times. W h e n we h a d l u n c h together at this
time, he was e d i t o r of Harper's Weekly. L a t e r o n he b e c a m e e d i t o r
of Asia.
I n some way or o t h e r , in 1889, h e h a d b e e n i n d u c e d to become
interested i n establishing a c o m p a n y devoted to m a k i n g three-color
p h o t o g r a p h i c r e p r o d u c t i o n s . H e h a d become interested in this even
t h o u g h he was still e d i t o r of Harper's Weekly.
A m a n n a m e d Gast, son of t h e f o u n d e r of t h e old Gast L i t h o g r a p h
C o m p a n y , h a d been w o r k i n g w i t h t h e C o l o r t y p e C o m p a n y w h i c h
was t h e first c o m p a n y i n A m e r i c a to p r o d u c e three-color p r i n t i n g .
(I know this is sometimes disputed.)
M r . Gast h a d b e e n w o r k i n g w i t h t h e C o l o r t y p e C o m p a n y w h e n
it was f o u n d e d . H e h a d s o m e h o w m a n a g e d to come i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h
M r . F o o r d a n d h a d told M r . F o o r d t h a t he h a d discovered a new
process f o r p r i n t i n g color o n t h e p r i n t i n g press, a n d t h a t t h e r e were
millions in it.
M r . F o o r d listened, w e n t to his friends, N a t h a n Straus, Isidore
Straus a n d Oscar Straus, t o l d t h e m of the process a n d they h a d taken
stock in t h e n e w c o m p a n y t h a t was t h e n f o r m e d . A t t h e time they
h a d b u i l t a L a k e w o o d H o t e l as a protest against some Jewish ques-
tion w h i c h h a d arisen in t h e most f a s h i o n a b l e of the L a k e w o o d hotels.
L a k e w o o d at t h e time was a f a s h i o n a b l e center. Posters for t h e h o t e l
enterprise h a d subsequently been ordered from the Heliochrome
C o m p a n y , w h i c h was t h e n a m e of t h e new c o m p a n y t h a t was f o u n d e d
by Mr. Gast w i t h t h e m o n e y t h a t F o o r d h a d g o t t e n t h e Strauses to
put up.
W h e n I m e t M r . F o o r d at l u n c h t h a t day he told m e t h a t my f a t h e r
h a d t a k e n a t h o u s a n d d o l l a r interest in the n e w v e n t u r e . H e h a d d o n e
this because he felt t h a t I m i g h t be t e m p t e d to become interested in
such a c o m p a n y , as I was such a great p h o t o g r a p h e r .
I told M r . F o o r d t h a t I k n e w n o t h i n g a b o u t business—I knew
n o t h i n g a b o u t process work—as a m a t t e r of fact, p h o t o g r a p h y as
business d i d n ' t interest me—that I felt completely unfit for any
such job.
 H e told m e I was m u c h too modest, t h a t a gifted person like myself
could quickly learn w h a t was essential to develop such a company.
H e f r a n k l y told me t h a t the H e l i o c h r o m e C o m p a n y he h a d or-
ganized was a b o u t to go o n the rocks—that the big posters that the
c o m p a n y h a d m a d e for the big Lakewood Hotel were finished a n d
h a d been p a i d for, b u t that t h e r e was practically no money left in
the b a n k , a n d there were no orders in sight.
D i d n ' t I t h i n k t h a t I could reorganize t h e c o m p a n y a n d make a
good t h i n g of it for all concerned, i n c l u d i n g myself?
W h e n I came h o m e I told my f a t h e r w h a t h a d h a p p e n e d a n d I told
my ex-roommates of Berlin, b o t h of w h o m h a d taken their degrees
as doctors of philosophy. Both were chemists—both their fathers h a d
died a b o u t a year or two before, a n d h a d left t h e m i n d e p e n d e n t
young men.
N e i t h e r of t h e m wished to work as chemists for a paltry h u n d r e d
dollars a month—so w h e n they h a d h e a r d of the offer to me, my f a t h e r
said to us, " W h y can't you three go into this c o m p a n y a n d do some-
thing w i t h it?"
My f r i e n d s h a d no business experience of any k i n d , b u t they felt
t h a t they'd like to do s o m e t h i n g a n d if I ' d go in they'd go in with me.
I w e n t to Mr. Foord a n d told him t h a t we w o u l d take over t h e
concern p r o v i d e d t h a t we w o u l d take over n o n e of t h e liabilities a n d
that we w o u l d become sole owners of t h e new concern. I said t h a t if
I did reorganize it, I w o u l d d r o p the old n a m e a n d call the new
c o m p a n y the P h o t o c h r o m e E n g r a v i n g C o m p a n y .
After h e m m i n g a n d h a w i n g he finally agreed. In reality there were
no assets except a camera, a h a n d - p r o o f i n g press a n d some chemicals.
T h e r e were six w o r k m e n to be taken care of if we wished to con-
t i n u e u s i n g t h e m in the business.
Mr. Gast was the artist—that is, he was t h e m a n w h o seemed to
know a b o u t the process. T h e r e was a salesman—an I r i s h m a n , Mr.
M u r p h y , w h o was g u a r a n t e e d forty dollars a week for soliciting orders
on a commission basis. Mr. Gast received, if I r e m e m b e r correctly,
seventy-five dollars a week—the others averaged s o m e t h i n g like thirty
dollars each a week. T h e p r o o f m a n was a Scotchman—an a r d e n t
Salvation A r m y m a n . T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r of the half-tone plates was
a G e r m a n , w h o was full of b r i l l i a n t theories a n d n o t very perfect
as a p h o t o g r a p h e r .
W e started with a capital of ten t h o u s a n d dollars. I called in the
w o r k m e n a n d told t h e m how things stood. First of all, t h a t the three
of us knew n o t h i n g whatsoever of business nor of the processes of
the company—that n o n e of us would d r a w a single cent of salary
until we felt we h a d e a r n e d it. T h a t we were p u p i l s a n d that they,
t h e w o r k m e n , were o u r teachers. T h a t t h e books would ever be o p e n
to t h e m a n d that I felt we were o n e family w o r k i n g together for a
c o m m o n good.
 Nearly a year passed before a single o r d e r came in. W e h a d started
business at a f r i g h t f u l time, for business generally was at a low ebb.
T h e r e was practically n o business in nearly all fields. W e h a d been
m a k i n g s a m p l e plates—heaven knows h o w many—both in black a n d
w h i t e a n d in color. I was t h e one to m a k e prices a n d estimates, a n d
was technical h e a d . I was l e a r n i n g . I h a d a g i f t f o r figures.
O u r concern quickly got the r e p u t a t i o n of d o i n g some of the best
work in t h e city. Also t h a t o u r q u o t a t i o n s , or estimates, were high.
For w h a t we were ready to give they were really low. I rarely a d d e d
a n y t h i n g to the actual cost. All I w a n t e d was to cover the expense
of r e n t , which was relatively n o m i n a l , a n d t h e cost of t h e w o r k i n g
m e n . T h a t was relatively high, for we d i d n o t d e d u c t for holidays,
n o r for illness, n o r d i d we p u t a n y b o d y o n p a r t time. O t h e r firms did.
T i m e s , we were told, were h a r d . T h e y certainly were h a r d f o r us.
At t h e e n d of t h e year practically all t h e capital was gone. I h a d
learned e n o u g h a n d I w a n t e d to get o u t , b u t my p a r t n e r s i n d u c e d
m e to c o n t i n u e . T h e r e seemed to be a " b e g i n n i n g . "
My f a t h e r was willing t h a t I s h o u l d go o n . A few m e n were a d d e d
to o u r list of w o r k i n g people.
W h e n I was p e r s u a d e d to go o n we m o v e d f r o m t h e r a m s h a c k l e
b u i l d i n g we h a d been in o n F u l t o n Street—a fire trap—an old five-
story b r o w n s t o n e house—to L e o n a r d Street, a new loft b u i l d i n g
between B a x t e r a n d C e n t e r streets. So we were a r o u n d t h e corner
f r o m t h e T o m b s a n d w i t h i n a stone's t h r o w of t h e B a x t e r Street
Jewish c l o t h i n g peddlers—in a p r e t t y r o u g h n e i g h b o r h o o d — n o t f a r
f r o m t h e n o t o r i o u s Five Points.
W e h a d as o u r first real customer t h e Cassier Magazine w h i c h was
p r i m a r i l y devoted to m e c h a n i c a l e n g i n e e r i n g . W e also h a d as cus-
t o m e r t h e Police Gazette—Mr. Carey, the m a n a g e r of t h e Police
Gazette, being f r i e n d l y towards Mr. M u r p h y . T h i s solicitor also
b r o u g h t in an o r d e r one day f o r fifty t h o u s a n d small color portraits.
Cards a b o u t 2\/ 2 by inches. T h e s e little cards were colored
pictures of actors a n d actresses of t h e M u r p h y C o m e d y C o m p a n y ,
a traveling theatrical c o m p a n y . O u r agent told us this o r d e r o u g h t
to r u n i n t o h u n d r e d s of t h o u s a n d s of cards b e i n g needed in time;
t h a t we were to send a t h o u s a n d cards to each of t h e places at which
the M u r p h y C o m e d y C o m p a n y was to give p e r f o r m a n c e s . W e were
to be paid every m o n t h for cards sent. I d i d n o t like t h e idea of o u r
c o m p a n y taking t h e whole risk a n d there n o t even being any collat-
eral whatsoever. So I was opposed to accepting this o r d e r . B u t my
friends voted m e d o w n , saying t h a t we'd never get u n d e r way if we
d i d n ' t take risks. So we began filling the o r d e r a n d sent o u t thou-
sands of cards to various parts of the country. O u r letters asking for
some p a y m e n t r e m a i n e d u n a n s w e r e d , b u t still m o r e a n d m o r e o r d e r s
came in. I finally balked a n d said I r e f u s e d to go on, t h a t I felt we
were b e i n g swindled. T h e r e was q u i t e a h e a t e d a r g u m e n t between
myself a n d my p a r t n e r s . I finally decided to go to see M r . Carey of
the Police Gazette as I knew h e could give m e some advice, he b e i n g
accustomed to d e a l i n g w i t h theatrical people. I h a d never met M r .
Carey, b u t I h a d great f a i t h in t h e integrity of s p o r t i n g people. So I
saw Mr. Carey a n d told h i m t h e story of t h e o r d e r f r o m t h e M u r p h y
C o m e d y C o m p a n y . H e listened attentively, a n d w h e n I was t h r o u g h
he said, "Your concern has been the l a u g h i n g stock of t h e p r i n t e r s
a n d engravers of the city. You m u s t n ' t trust theatrical people. You'll
never see a cent of this m o n e y owed to you." I was r a t h e r horror-
stricken at his generalization a b o u t theatrical p e o p l e a n d I naively
said, "You d o n ' t m e a n to say, M r . Carey, t h a t A u g u s t i n Daly isn't
good for w h a t e v e r he contracts for?" A u g u s t i n Daly was in t h e hey-
day of t h e Daly T h e a t e r a n d this t h e a t e r was at the t o p of all t h e
theaters in N e w York. Mr. Carey smiled a n d said, "Even M r . Daly
must pay cash. H i s credit is very l i m i t e d . " As a m a t t e r of fact he
advised t h a t we k e e p away f r o m all t h e a t r i c a l people. W e were too
naive. I said to M r . Carey, " B u t you a r e identified with the theatrical
business o n a large scale. H o w d o you m a n a g e ? " H e said, "Well, we
know how to take care of ourselves. You d o n ' t . " H e a d d e d , " Y o u r
feeling n o t to trust t h e M u r p h y C o m e d y C o m p a n y was right. A n d
your feeling t h a t you c o u l d trust practically all s p o r t i n g p e o p l e is
also r i g h t . "
W h e n I r e p o r t e d this to my p a r t n e r s they were n o t convinced that
I was r i g h t in q u e s t i o n i n g t h e M u r p h y C o m e d y C o m p a n y order.
I felt there a n d t h e n t h a t I s h o u l d w i t h d r a w f r o m the business, b u t
I was p e r s u a d e d to c o n t i n u e in it, m u c h against my better wisdom.
T h e n one day a n o r d e r came in f r o m the W a g n e r Palace C a r Com-
pany for colored advertisements—small cards. I d o n ' t r e m e m b e r how
many, b u t I believe the o r d e r was five t h o u s a n d dollars—this figure
may n o t be a c c u r a t e b u t it was for us a h u g e amount—truly a be-
ginning.
I i n f o r m e d t h e w o r k m e n of w h a t h a d h a p p e n e d . I h a d h a r d l y
r e t u r n e d to t h e office w h e n one of t h e engravers n a m e d Klomberg,
a well set-up six footer k n o c k e d at t h e d o o r a n d c a m e in a n d said,
" M r . Stieglitz, I r e p r e s e n t t h e m e n . H a v i n g h e a r d of the wind-fall
f o r the c o m p a n y they ask f o r a ten per-cent increase in wages."
" K l o m b e r g , " I said, " a r e n ' t you fellows g o i n g to give us a chance
to get o n o u r feet?"
H e shrugged his shoulders a n d he said, " I ' m simply r e p r e s e n t i n g
the m e n . "
I told h i m to come back in fifteen m i n u t e s . My p a r t n e r s asked
me w h a t I was g o i n g to do. I told t h e m to wait a n d see.
I n fifteen m i n u t e s M r . K l o m b e r g r e t u r n e d a n d I i n f o r m e d h i m
that wages w o u l d be raised ten per-cent b u t w i t h the u n d e r s t a n d i n g
t h a t the m e n w o u l d have to be p u t o n t h e same basis as m e n in o t h e r
engraving plants—that is, t h a t holidays were n o t to be p a i d for, nor
days of sickness—that only the t i m e spent in t h e s h o p at w o r k w o u l d
count, a n d t h e only difference between o u r s h o p a n d the others
w o u l d be t h a t we w o u l d h a v e n o time-clock. Every m a n was to be
o n his h o n o r .
W h e n he left, I said to h i m , " T e l l t h e m e n a n d r e p o r t to m e if they
are satisfied w i t h t h e c o n d i t i o n s . "
I n a few m i n u t e s he h a d r e t u r n e d a n d i n f o r m e d us t h a t e v e r y t h i n g
was satisfactory.
At the time we also were w o r k i n g o n a j o b for t h e p u b l i s h i n g house
of P u t n a m . It a m o u n t e d to a b o u t a t h o u s a n d dollars. W e were mak-
ing, I d o n ' t r e m e m b e r how m a n y , h a l f - t o n e plates a n d line cuts. I h a d
m a d e t h e estimate o n a n a b s o l u t e cost basis.
W h e n the work was b r o u g h t in I f o u n d t h a t t h e r e were twelve m o r e
originals t h a n we h a d e s t i m a t e d o n a n d I called t h e solicitor's atten-
tion to it. H e l a u g h e d a n d said, " W e l l , just average these things, t h a t
will be all r i g h t . "
W h e n the j o b was d o n e a n d t h e cuts a n d proofs were sent to Put-
n a m , w o r d came back t h a t we h a d d o n e a g r a n d job. A b o u t f o u r
weeks later a c h e q u e c a m e for o u r bill w i t h t h e a m o u n t for the
twelve extra things d e d u c t e d .
I told the solicitor w h a t h a d h a p p e n e d a n d told h i m w e ' d h a v e to
be p a i d for o u r work.
H e smiled a n d said, "Of course they'll pay for t h e work. Some s m a r t
aleck has d o n e this."
T o m a k e a long story short, we were n o t to be p a i d . I insisted o n
pay. P u t n a m ' s p a i d , a n d I received a letter telling m e t h a t we w o u l d
get no m o r e orders f r o m t h e m as we seemed to be so illiberal a n d
d i d not u n d e r s t a n d o u r business.
T h i s h a d h a r d l y h a p p e n e d w h e n I felt I ' d call in M r . K l o m b e r g
to find o u t w h e t h e r t h e new regime was w o r k i n g to t h e satisfaction
of the m e n . H e c a m e in a n d I asked h i m , " A r e t h e m e n satisfied w i t h
t h e new regime? Are t h e wives, sweethearts, aunts, sisters, grand-
m o t h e r s satisfied?"
H e l a u g h e d a n d he said, "Yes, they're all satisfied."
A n d in reply I said, "So are we."
W h e n he h a d left the office my p a r t n e r s asked me, " W h a t ' s t h e
m e a n i n g of all this theatre?"
I said, " B e t w e e n the p e o p l e w h o give us work like P u t n a m ' s a n d
t h e w o r k m e n , J d o n ' t see w h e r e I come in. I'd b e t t e r get out. I just
d o n ' t belong. T o d o business in this c o u n t r y it seems necessary to
h a v e a p o l i c e m a n o n one side a n d a lawyer o n t h e o t h e r a n d even
t h o u g h I respect each I p r e f e r o t h e r c o m p a n y . Do you realize t h a t
t h e w o r k m e n will have received a b o u t six per cent less in pay o n
the new basis t h a n they w o u l d h a v e received o n t h e old? N o , I c a n ' t
r e m a i n w i t h such p e o p l e . "
Even my p a r t n e r s seemed surprised, a n d were n o t a w a r e of these
facts. I n d u e season I q u i t "business." I h a d learned my lesson. I
h a d h a d five or six years of business experience, the only business
experience I have ever h a d in my life. D u r i n g that time I h a d received
no salary a n d no interest or dividends o n the capital invested by my
f a t h e r for me, b u t I h a d come i n t o contact w i t h N e w York. I h a d
b e g u n p h o t o g r a p h i n g it d u r i n g this period, as early as 1892, w h e n I
p h o t o g r a p h e d the s t e a m i n g " C a r Horses" at the Terminal—Astor
House, a n d " W i n t e r , F i f t h Avenue"—the l u m b e r i n g stagecoach with
its horses a n d driver m o v i n g n o r t h w a r d t h r o u g h a blizzard o n F i f t h
Avenue. T h e s e pictures f o r m e d a l a n d m a r k , not only in my own life,
b u t in p h o t o g r a p h i c history as well.
My share of t h e business eventually was t u r n e d over to t h e work-
m e n ; my o n e p a r t n e r r e t i r e d n o t long after I did, the o t h e r c o n t i n u e d
the p h o t o g r a v u r e b r a n c h u n d e r a new n a m e , u n t i l he finally also got
out. So eventually t h e w o r k m e n b e c a m e the sole owners of t h e
business.
II. T H E O R I G I N OF T H E PHOTO-SECESSION
AND H O W I T BECAME "291''
1
T h e Camera Club of New York was in its hey-day.
I h a d taken the d y i n g Society of Amateur Photographers and the
all b u t dead N. Y. Camera Club a n d called f o r t h a live body. A n
a m a l g a m a t i o n of t h e d y i n g a n d t h e dead. T h e m e m b e r s of b o t h
bodies believed t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y as a passion h a d come to a n e n d
for all time. T h i s was in the 1890's.
I gave t h e Camera Club all my time a n d t h o u g h t . I h a d f o u n d e d
Camera Notes as a q u a r t e r l y o r g a n of t h e Camera Club. It was the
m a k i n g of t h e Camera Club.
As always, w i t h o u t a break, f r o m 1883 in Berlin on, I was fighting
for p h o t o g r a p h y . Camera Notes was a battlefield as well as a bugle
call. M e m b e r s of t h e club received Camera Notes free of charge a n d
m a n y sold the f o u r n u m b e r s of a year for twenty to thirty dollars, so
covering their m e m b e r s h i p dues to t h e Camera Club, w h i c h were
twenty dollars a year. T h e edition was limited to a t h o u s a n d .
T h e battle of p h o t o g r a p h y was r a g i n g in this c o u n t r y as well as in
E u r o p e . A r t institutions h a d become involved. I h a d very definite
ideas, w i t h o u t any f o r m u l a . F r o m the very b e g i n n i n g I felt convinced
that p h o t o g r a p h y could be a new, a d d i t i o n a l m e d i u m of expression,
possibly a creative one.
G e r t r u d e Kasebier, H o l l a n d Day, Clarence H . W h i t e , F r a n k
Eugene, J o s e p h T . Keiley, Steichen, C o b u r n , all u n k n o w n at the
time, were g r a d u a l l y discovered by me a n d became an integral p a r t
of my fight for p h o t o g r a p h y , as I u n d e r s t o o d p h o t o g r a p h y . T h e y
were all Americans.
T h e r e was w a r f a r e finally in the c l u b itself. T h e bulk of the mem-
bers d i d n o t see why I s h o u l d n ' t consider t h e Camera Club primarily
as a social institution before considering p h o t o g r a p h y itself.
 It so h a p p e n e d t h a t I h a d h e l p e d d r a w u p the c o n s t i t u t i o n of t h e
club. Its first article r e a d — " T h e C a m e r a C l u b is f o u n d e d to f u r t h e r
t h e art a n d science of p h o t o g r a p h y . " I was g u i d e d by t h a t .
Everywhere in the world w h e r e p h o t o g r a p h y played any role I was
looked u p o n as the l e a d i n g spirit in A m e r i c a n p h o t o g r a p h y , a n d as
such I was called u p o n to send collections of A m e r i c a n p h o t o g r a p h s
to this a n d t h a t i n t e r n a t i o n a l e x h i b i t i o n .
Such collections were never sent unless t h e c o n d i t i o n s t h a t I laid
d o w n were accepted w i t h o u t reservation. O n l y in this way, I felt,
w o u l d t h e Art I n s t i t u t i o n s (for it was these t h a t I was d e a l i n g with)
respect t h e spirit of my e n d e a v o r . I was ever really fighting for a
new spirit in life t h a t w e n t m u c h d e e p e r t h a n just a fight for photog-
r a p h y . Steichen's work, a n d that of Clarence W h i t e , Keiley a n d Kase-
bier was so " n e w " as p h o t o g r a p h y , t h a t their work was looked u p o n
in the conservative r a n k s t h a t were in control in t h e world, as pre-
posterous, as so m u c h insolence—a challenge to the decencies of
p h o t o g r a p h y a n d good taste. It was the old story of a new vision
s u p p l a n t i n g the d e a d , or s u p p l a n t i n g t h e lack of all vision.
I d i d not know t h a t in time I w o u l d be b r o a d e n i n g the fight, a
fight t h a t involved painters, sculptors, literary people, musicians,
a n d all t h a t is g e n u i n e in every sphere of life.
A c l u b h a d been f o r m e d called t h e National Arts Club—Charles
de Kay, the art e d i t o r a n d associate e d i t o r of t h e New York Times,
brother-in-law of R i c h a r d W a t s o n Gilder, t h e poet, a n d e d i t o r of t h e
Century Magazine w h e n the Century Magazine was a real force, was
its f o u n d e r a n d its director. As t h e latter he received a m u n i f i c e n t
salary.
O n e day he a p p e a r e d at t h e Camera Club a n d said, "Stieglitz, why
d o n ' t you show these A m e r i c a n p h o t o g r a p h s in N e w York—the photo-
g r a p h s t h a t you send a b r o a d to a r t institutions a n d t h a t are creating
such a stir there?"
I told h i m t h a t t h e r e was n o place in N e w York fit to h o l d such a
show, a n d t h e r e wasn't. At the time the A m e r i c a n p r i n t s I h a d sent
to t h e o p e n i n g of the N e w Glasgow Art Galleries at the request of
J . C r a i g A n n a n , a great p h o t o g r a p h e r himself, were o n their way back
to this country.
De Kay said, " W h y c a n ' t we have those p r i n t s that were shown in
Glasgow?"
" W e l l , de Kay," I said, "if your c l u b will give m e a r o o m , in your
gallery, to show such prints as I see fit, a n d let m e h a n g t h e m in my
own way, n o t a soul c o m i n g i n t o t h e r o o m b e f o r e I o p e n the doors,
it's a go."
" B u t how a b o u t o u r a r t c o m m i t t e e ? "
" I d o n o t recognize committees. E i t h e r you w a n t to show or you
d o n ' t . Your c o m m i t t e e will p r o b a b l y say, 'Let t h a t crazy m a n go
ahead.' "
 T h e n e x t day he c a m e a n d he said, " I was told, 'Let t h a t crazy
m a n go a h e a d . ' "
So the e x h i b i t i o n f o u n d its way to t h e walls there. I m a d e Steichen
the concert master of the orchestra. Steichen himself was in Paris—
w h e n I say Steichen, I m e a n his p r i n t s .
As soon as de Kay h a d given m e permission to go a h e a d he said,
" N o w we've got to h a v e some publicity. W h a t will we call this?"
I said, " A n y t h i n g you like—preferably An Exhibition of American
Photographs
" T h a t will a t t r a c t no attention,"; he said. " W h y n o t Exhibition of
American Photographs arranged by the Camera Club of New York?"
" W h y , the m e m b e r s of the Camera Club, t h e b i g m a j o r i t y , h a t e
the k i n d of work I ' m fighting f o r . "
" W e l l , why n o t Exhibition of American Photographs arranged by
Alfred Stieglitz?" he said.
" N o , no, they'd h a n g me o n t h e first l a m p post.—That I w o u l d n ' t
m i n d , b u t I d o n ' t w a n t my n a m e exploited. De Kay," I said, "I've
got it—it's a good one—call it An Exhibition of American Photog-
raphy arranged by the Photo-Secession"
" W h a t ' s t h a t ? " he asked. " W h o is it?"
"Yours truly, for t h e present, a n d there'll be others w h e n the show
opens. T h e idea of Secession is h a t e f u l to t h e American—they'll be
t h i n k i n g of t h e Civil W a r . I ' m not. Photo-Secession actually m e a n s
a seceding f r o m the accepted idea of w h a t constitutes a p h o t o g r a p h ;
besides which, in E u r o p e , in G e r m a n y a n d in Austria, there've been
splits in t h e a r t circles a n d t h e m o d e r n s call themselves Secessionists,
so Photo-Secession really hitches u p w i t h t h e art world. T h e r e is a
sense of h u m o r in the w o r d Photo-Secession."
H e raced away a n d t h e n e x t m o r n i n g there was a l o n g editorial in
the New York Times a b o u t the c o m i n g e x h i b i t i o n of A m e r i c a n pho-
tographs a r r a n g e d by t h e Photo-Secession a n d to be h e l d at the
National Arts Club.
At the o p e n i n g , w h e n Kasebier appeared—it was a blizzard n i g h t -
she said to me, " W h a t ' s this Photo-Secession? A m I a photo-seces-
sionist?"
My answer was, " D o you feel you are?"
"I d o . "
"Well, t h a t ' s all there is to it," I said.
T h e n a m a n w h o was secretary of the Architectural League a n d
a m e m b e r of t h e Camera Club, a f u t u r e president of the Camera
Club, a n d w h o was o n several committees in t h e National Arts Club
a n d occasionally m a d e a p h o t o g r a p h of a n u d e which was half-way
acceptable—one of t h e m h a n g i n g o n t h e walls of this e x h i b i t i o n -
came to m e a n d said, "Stieglitz, a m I a secessionist?"
I said, " N o . "
 It d i d n ' t take long b e f o r e t h e Photo-Secession was k n o w n all over
t h e world. It was a force for light.
2
I n 1904, t h o u g h a very sick m a n , I w e n t w i t h my wife, my six-year
old d a u g h t e r , a n d her n u r s e to E u r o p e . I h a d b e e n o n t h e firing-line
for f o u r t e e n years i n N e w York, fighting t h e fight of p h o t o g r a p h y .
T h e fight I am still fighting.
T h i s fight includes e v e r y t h i n g in life as far as I a m concerned.
A fight f o r my o w n life as well as a fight for t h e lives of all t r u e work-
ers, w h e t h e r A m e r i c a n or any other—with p e r h a p s an e m p h a s i s o n
A m e r i c a n s because I believe they h a v e n e e d e d it most, since t h e t r u e
w o r k e r in A m e r i c a has seemed to become r a r e r a n d r a r e r in t h e sense
in w h i c h I use t h e term " t r u e w o r k e r . " I n o t h e r countries—Europe,
or C h i n a or J a p a n — a t the time, t h e r e was a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e
t r u e worker w h i c h d i d n o t exist in America. By t h a t I m e a n t h e
" q u a l i t y w o r k e r , " n o t in a theoretical b u t in a living sense.
A m e r i c a n p h o t o g r a p h y h a d b e e n placed o n t h e m a p . Steichen,
K'asebier, W h i t e , C o b u r n , E u g e n e a n d others h a d b e e n given to the
world. T h e i r work h a d m a d e t h e r o u n d s of art m u s e u m s in E u r o p e .
T h e e x h i b i t i o n s of t h e g r o u p u n d e r my direction—the Photo-Seces-
sion—had aroused great interest, relatively as m u c h interest as later
o n was aroused by so-called " m o d e r n a r t . "
E v e n t u a l l y t h e r e were factions in the m a k i n g . P h o t o g r a p h y was
being m a d e safe f o r Democracy as early as 1902. I was considered a
tyrant, u n - A m e r i c a n a n d heaven knows w h a t not. W h i l e I was in
E u r o p e , Mr. C u r t i s Bell, w h o was a p h o t o g r a p h e r , a n d steward of
t h e Lotus Club, became i m b u e d w i t h the idea t h a t it was time to
save p h o t o g r a p h y f r o m Stieglitz a n d w h a t Stieglitz represented. As I
h a d said, it was t i m e for h i m to milk the cow a n d castrate t h e bull.
Mr. C u r t i s Bell was g o i n g to go i n t o t h e business of p h o t o g r a p h y ,
a n d as an i n t r o d u c t i o n he created a n o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h the p u r p o s e
of h o l d i n g a p h o t o g r a p h i c e x h i b i t i o n as a challenge to all I h a d
stood for a n d w o r k e d f o r in my country. H e g a t h e r e d a b o u t h i m
"all of A m e r i c a , " i n c l u d i n g t h e Morgans, t h e G o u l d s , t h e Have-
meyers—people of t h a t class. T h e y were the p a t r o n s . T h e y were to
give t h e m o n e y a n d prestige. H e g a t h e r e d a b o u t h i m as j u r y t h e
great artists, I do n o t know how m a n y of t h e m . T h e y i n c l u d e d
L a Farge a n d J o h n A l e x a n d e r a n d , I believe, K e n y o n Cox. It was
to be a great i n t e r n a t i o n a l affair.
A n n o u n c e m e n t s were sent all over t h e w o r l d . W h i l e I was in
E u r o p e , p r o m i n e n t a n d r e v o l u t i o n a r y p h o t o g r a p h e r s w h o h a d been
in touch with my w o r k for years, a n d w h o were following my lead
in t h e b a t t l e for p h o t o g r a p h y , w r o t e to m e a n d asked w h e t h e r the
i n v i t a t i o n they h a d received h a d any c o n n e c t i o n w i t h me. My reply
was a simple one. I wrote a letter to t h e London Times a n d to some
L o n d o n p h o t o g r a p h i c weeklies. I let it be k n o w n t h a t n e i t h e r I n o r
any of the Photo-Secession could in any way be identified with this
noisy p r o j e c t for p o p u l a r i z i n g t h e " a r t " side of p h o t o g r a p h y , u n d e r
the auspices of the so-called professional art p a t r o n s a n d the profes-
sional artists. Finally, w h e n I r e t u r n e d to America, I, i m a g i n i n g t h a t
the e x h i b i t i o n w o u l d be held in some very large place, was i n f o r m e d
that it was to take place o n the top floor of a small b r o w n s t o n e build-
ing owned by Clausen, t h e art dealer, t h e same Clausen w h o some
years later was forced to go o u t of business because he h a d been f o u n d
selling fictitious Innesses a n d W y a n t s a n d Blakelocks to m e m b e r s of
the Lotus Club a n d o t h e r art clubs. C l a u s e n may have been i n n o c e n t
b u t he h a d to go o u t of business nevertheless.
I n t h e m e a n t i m e there was q u i t e some excitement a m o n g t h e
shining lights a b o u t me. T h e n a m e s of M o r g a n a n d G o u l d a n d Van-
derbilt seemed to symbolize m u c h money. Of the m e n a b o u t me,
many were p o o r . A n d if I, h o l d i n g aloof s h o u l d be m a k i n g a mistake,
it w o u l d be fatal possibly to t h e i r f u t u r e . So one n i g h t at the corner
of 31st Street a n d 5 t h A v e n u e (the Camera Club was in 31st Street
a n d Steichen was living at 291 F i f t h Avenue), Steichen said to me,
" L o o k here, Stieglitz, d o n ' t you t h i n k you are m a k i n g a terrible
mistake in s t a n d i n g u p against the Lotus Club w i t h t h e Morgans,
the Goulds, t h e V a n d e r b i l t s a n d Astors b a c k i n g this enterprise of
Curtis Bell's?" A n d I said, "If you feel t h a t way, you still have a
chance to j o i n w i t h t h a t crowd a n d show your work, b u t personally
I feel t h a t these p e o p l e have no m o r e to d o w i t h t h a t e x h i b i t i o n t h a n
I have. T h e y lend their names in courtesy to M r . Bell. T h e Ameri-
can likes to be courteous, especially w h e n it costs h i m n o t h i n g . It is
p a r t of his e d u c a t i o n . "
W h e t h e r Steichen w o u l d decide to show or not, I d i d n ' t know. H e
was his o w n master. A f t e r a m o m e n t or so, he s u d d e n l y asked, "Stieg-
litz, h a v e n ' t you any ideas? W e o u g h t to have a n e x h i b i t i o n in N e w
York, b u t w h e r e is t h e place for it? You always insist t h a t it is impos-
sible to show p h o t o g r a p h s as they really s h o u l d be shown—I m e a n ,
shows like you a r r a n g e d in all those E u r o p e a n cities, a n d even for
some A m e r i c a n cities—like the Chicago Art Institute's, the Pennsyl-
vania Academy's in P h i l a d e l p h i a , a n d t h e Carnegie's in Pittsburgh.
S o m e t h i n g m u s t be d o n e to give N e w York at least a chance to see
what we have been d o i n g all these years."
A n d as we stood there he s u d d e n t l y said, " T h e r e is a room in my
house, a couple of rooms, where two w o m e n artists are living. T h e
whole b u i l d i n g seems to be filled w i t h the o d o r of their cooking.
I t h i n k t h a t they have a m o n t h l y lease a n d could be p e r s u a d e d to
vacate a n d I h a v e a feeling t h a t these two rooms plus a f r o n t r o o m
could be h a d for n o t a very large a m o u n t of money—for a b o u t six
h u n d r e d dollars a year—and the rooms could be t u r n e d i n t o galleries
and a series of p h o t o g r a p h i c e x h i b i t i o n s could take place t h e r e
covering a year, a n d in t h a t way N e w York w o u l d at least have a
chance to u n d e r s t a n d w h a t we have be£n t a l k i n g a b o u t , as well as
w h a t we h a v e already d o n e . " So I said to Steichen, " W e ' l l look i n t o
t h e m a t t e r a n d w h e n I see you t o m o r r o w give m e a definite idea of
w h a t you feel can be d o n e . "
T h e next day Steichen was filled w i t h e n t h u s i a s m . H e told m e t h a t
he h a d seen the agent of t h e l a n d l o r d (at t h e time M a r s h a l l Field).
T h e r e n t w o u l d be $600 a year—§50 a m o n t h . Steichen himself w o u l d
decorate t h e r o o m s a n d get t h e m i n t o shape for exhibitions. T h e cost
of installing the electric fixtures a n d t h e necessary c a r p e n t r y w o u l d
not be m o r e t h a n three h u n d r e d dollars. Mrs. Steichen lived across
t h e hall. She w o u l d h a v e the key a n d could take care of the visitors
w h o w a n t e d to see t h e galleries.
As I was eager to have N e w York see t h e p h o t o g r a p h s m a d e in all
c o u n t r i e s a n d see t h e m in the p r o p e r way a n d in the p r o p e r s u r r o u n d -
ings, a n d relying on Steichen's e n t h u s i a s m , a n d , above all, o n his
ability, I t h e n a n d there told h i m we w o u l d go a h e a d . I signed a lease.
In d u e time—actually in 1905—what were t h e n called the Photo-
Secession Galleries were o p e n e d a n d these galleries were a revelation
to all of New York. C o l u m n s were devoted in the editorial pages of
the daily press to this new spirit. I n the course of a year t h e master-
pieces of p h o t o g r a p h y of t h e world, f r o m t h e earliest days to t h e most
recent, were shown in these small a n d b e a u t i f u l rooms.
T h e rooms were also s t a r t e d w i t h t h e idea t h a t t h e r e m i g h t be
things shown there o t h e r t h a n p h o t o g r a p h y so t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y
could be m e a s u r e d in j u x t a p o s i t i o n to o t h e r m e d i a of expression.
T h e s e e x h i b i t i o n s were t h e b e g i n n i n g of w h a t g r a d u a l l y evolved i n t o
w h a t was later k n o w n as "291." I m i g h t a d d t h a t the great e n t e r p r i s e
of C u r t i s Bell t h a t Steichen seemed so a f r a i d of, t u r n e d o u t to be a
flat failure f r o m every p o i n t of view.
Curtis Bell's venture—to m a k e p h o t o g r a p h y safe for D e m o c r a c y -
was really the b e g i n n i n g of t h e p o p u l a r i z a t i o n of p h o t o g r a p h y of a
very low s t a n d a r d . P o p u l a r i z a t i o n inevitably m e a n s low standards.
Mr. Bell o p e n e d his professional gallery w i t h his A m e r i c a n Salon
e x h i b i t i o n a n d Mrs. Clarence Mackey as his chief patroness. H e
became a flourishing p h o t o g r a p h e r on F i f t h Avenue. T h e great com-
b i n a t i o n of M o r g a n , V a n d e r b i l t , Astor, Mackey, C l a u s e n et al h a d in
no way i n t e r f e r e d w i t h the d e v e l o p m e n t of t h a t work w h i c h was my
life. N o r with Steichen's, nor W h i t e ' s , nor any of the o t h e r Seces-
sionists.
T h a t is the story of t h e b e g i n n i n g of "291."
3
T h e Photo-Secession b e c a m e the l e a d i n g factor in the i n t e r n a t i o n a l
pictorial p h o t o g r a p h i c world. Its " f o u n d i n g " h a d led to t h e o p e n i n g
of its own gallery at 291 F i f t h Avenue.
At the e n d of the series of e x h i b i t i o n s held there—at the e n d of
the first year—Steichen, w h o h a d h a d a o n e - m a n show in o u r Photo-
Secession galleries a n d a one-man p a i n t i n g show in t h e " h i g h class"
galleries of E u g e n e Glaenzer n o t a block away o n F i f t h Avenue, de-
cided t h a t A m e r i c a was n o place for h i m . H e w o u l d go to Paris w i t h
his wife a n d his child.
W h e n I c a m e h o m e a n d told my wife t h a t Steichen was going, she
said, " T h a n k God, he's going. N o w we two can travel a n d you can
give u p all t h a t nonsense, for w i t h o u t Steichen you can't go a h e a d . "
T h e very next m o r n i n g I told Steichen of w h a t h a d h a p p e n e d .
So I called u p the real estate agent a n d asked h i m w h e t h e r he c o u l d
r e n e w the lease for two years at t h e same r a t e we h a d been paying,
which was six h u n d r e d dollars a year. My p r o p o s i t i o n was accepted.
W h e n I came h o m e a n d told my wife w h a t I h a d d o n e she burst
o u t crying.
"You can t h a n k yourself," I said. " I h a d n o idea of d o i n g this u n t i l
you spoke as you d i d . "
Steichen moved to E u r o p e a n d I c o n t i n u e d w i t h t h e Photo-Seces-
sion Gallery.
Jealousies h a d been d e v e l o p i n g over t h e years a m o n g s t the Seces-
sionists. I was g e t t i n g sick a n d tired of t h e arrogance of the photog-
r a p h e r s w h o h a d b a n d e d a b o u t me. T h e y h a d come to believe that
my life was to be d e d i c a t e d solely to t h e m a n d d i d n o t realize t h a t
my b a t t l e was f o r a n idea bigger t h a n any i n d i v i d u a l . A l t h o u g h the
battle of p h o t o g r a p h y h a d been established f r o m my p o i n t of view,
it h a d n o t yet been clearly won. T h e n one day a strange w o m a n
a p p e a r e d , P a m e l a C o l e m a n Smith. She h a d several p o r t f o l i o s of draw-
ings. She i m a g i n e d t h a t the Photo-Secession Gallery m i g h t be inter-
ested in her work. T h e r e was a d r a w i n g in washes, a n illustration
called " D e a t h in t h e H o u s e . " T h e m o m e n t I saw this p i c t u r e I de-
cided to show her work. " D e a t h in t h e H o u s e " really illustrated my
feeling at t h e time.
Steichen, w h o m I k e p t in close t o u c h w i t h w h a t I h a d been doing,
one day wrote to m e f r o m Paris: "You seem to have o p e n e d t h e
doors of t h e Photo-Secession to things n o t p h o t o g r a p h y . D o you w a n t
an e x h i b i t i o n of selected R o d i n drawings?" I cabled back: "Yes."
T h e n Steichen arrived shortly a f t e r w a r d s w i t h a w o n d e r f u l lot of
selected R o d i n drawings—Steichen b e i n g very close to R o d i n , a sort
of foster son. H e h a d p h o t o g r a p h e d R o d i n i n n u m e r a b l e times a n d
h a d p h o t o g r a p h e d his sculpture. W h e n Steichen arrived he h a d
b r o u g h t w i t h h i m a collection of t h e evolution of a p a i n t e r I h a d
never h e a r d of: Matisse. T h e e v o l u t i o n in t h e f o r m of drawings,
watercolors, a n d a n oil c o n t r i b u t e d by George F. Of, the p a i n t e r .
T h i s was t h e real i n t r o d u c t i o n of m o d e r n a r t to America.
It was in those Photo-Secession rooms t h a t the ice was b r o k e n for
m o d e r n a r t in America, a n d t h a t t h e series of d e m o n s t r a t i o n s of
p h o t o g r a p h y as I u n d e r s t o o d p h o t o g r a p h y were c o n t i n u e d . A n d I
came m o r e a n d m o r e in touch w i t h people, with t h e world—I, w i t h
n o t h i n g b u t the t h o u g h t of l i b e r a t i n g the p e o p l e f r o m superstition,
f r o m labels, f r o m bias a n d t h e idea t h a t m o n e y could b u y everything.
A n d t h e n , w h e n finally, a f t e r t h r e e years, t h e r e n t was to be
•

d o u b l e d , a n d a lease of t h r e e years h a d to be taken, it was t h e n t h a t

I called quits, even t h o u g h a y o u n g girl n a m e d Agnes Ernst w o r k i n g
f o r t h e Sun, a p p e a r e d o n t h e scene, a n d h e a r i n g w h a t was a b o u t to
h a p p e n v o l u n t e e r e d to get ten t h o u s a n d dollars for us. She k n e w
where she c o u l d get it. T h i s girl b e c a m e Mrs. E u g e n e Meyer, Jr.,
w i t h i n a few years. Of course I c o u l d n ' t possibly e n t e r t a i n her pro-
position t h a t she get m o n e y to s u p p o r t my ideas.
I n reality I told her t h a t if she respected w h a t I was d o i n g she
w o u l d m a k e no a t t e m p t to get any m o n e y .
It was at t h e R o d i n show t h a t she h a d first a p p e a r e d — w h e n she
h a d been commissioned to interview m e for t h e New York Sun. I h a d
d e n i e d her the interview, b u t she h a d insisted.
"It's my first order, my first chance. I ' m h e a r t a n d soul w i t h you.
D o give m e a c h a n c e . "
So t h e interview took place.
D u r i n g t h e R o d i n show two tall h a n d s o m e y o u n g m e n w i t h un-
usually fine faces h a d a p p e a r e d o n t h e scene a n d b o t h h a d a c q u i r e d
R o d i n drawings, w a x i n g enthusiastic—Paul H a v i l a n d a n d his
b r o t h e r , F r a n k H a v i l a n d (later k n o w n as F r a n k Burty).
W h e n finally in 1908 t h e Photo-Secession h a d to be given u p be-
cause of t h e raise of t h e r e n t , P a u l H a v i l a n d came to m e a n d said,
" I ' v e taken a lease for t h r e e years o n a r o o m opposite t h e ones you
h a v e h a d . " ( T h e tailor w h o ' d b e e n in t h e one t h a t H a v i l a n d h a d
taken h a d m o v e d i n t o t h e ones I h a d had—a f a s h i o n a b l e ladies'
tailor. It h a p p e n e d t h a t b e f o r e t h e tailor occupied those q u a r t e r s
they were t h e h o m e of Steichen a n d his wife a n d his n e w b o r n child.)
W h e r e we h a d been was 291 F i f t h Avenue. Across the hallway was
293 F i f t h A v e n u e .
I told H a v i l a n d I c o u l d n o t accept t h e lease he h a d taken. It was
five h u n d r e d dollars a year. I told h i m I was too tired to go o n a n d
I was.
H e said, "You d o n ' t h a v e to d o a n y t h i n g . I'll h a v e t h e place
cleaned a n d p a i n t e d " (it n e e d e d b o t h badly), " a n d I'll p u t in a
small table w i t h a c o u p l e of chairs a n d benches a n d t h u s fellows like
myself a n d others will h a v e a n o p p o r t u n i t y to talk w i t h you."
I c o u l d n ' t believe my ears.
H a v i l a n d ' s f a t h e r was A m e r i c a n . H i s m o t h e r was F r e n c h , t h e
d a u g h t e r of Burty, t h e a r t critic, w h o f o u g h t f o r Meryon, t h e great
etcher. H a v i l a n d was a g r a d u a t e of H a r v a r d .
I told h i m I was g o i n g to L a k e George a n d I ' d see w h a t I w o u l d do.
At L a k e George I h a d a very h a r d s u m m e r . M y child was ill a n d
t h e r e was g e n e r a l f a m i l y e x c i t e m e n t , b u t s o m e h o w or o t h e r t h e lake,
t h e row-boat a n d I were great friends. E v e r y t h i n g b e c a m e clear to me.
W h y n o t c o n t i n u e t h e " w o r k " in one room? W h y n o t t u r n t h a t r o o m
virtually i n t o a facsimile of the m a i n older r o o m , so t h a t w h e n people
came, w h o ' d been accustomed to come, they w o u l d feel at home?
W h y n o t focus even m o r e intensely o n quality?
A n d so, w h e n I c a m e to N e w York, the r o o m t h a t H a v i l a n d h a d
t a k e n was t u r n e d i n t o a "gallery"—the exact d u p l i c a t i o n of the old
m a i n r o o m , a n d it was in this gallery t h a t eventually M a u r e r a n d
M a r i n , Cezanne, Picasso, L a u t r e c , S h a r a k u , t h e first e x h i b i t e d work
of u n t a u g h t c h i l d r e n f r o m two to ten, w h o h a d never been to school,
N e g r o art, Matisse sculpture, W e b e r , Hartley, Dove, M a r i u s de Zayas,
Walkowitz, Strand p h o t o g r a p h s , de Meyer p h o t o g r a p h s , S. Mac-
D o n a l d W r i g h t , K a t h a r i n e R h o a d e s , M a r i o n Beckett a n d finally
Georgia O'Keeffe were i n t r o d u c e d , etc., etc.
Before o p e n i n g the gallery I called in my f r i e n d , J . B. Kerfoot, a
literary critic of Life, w h e n t h e o r i g i n a l Life was still in its hey-day.
I told h i m a b o u t H a v i l a n d a n d said, "I c a n n o t let h i m carry the
whole load. It makes m e feel u n c o m f o r t a b l e . "
I h a d n ' t a cent of my o w n . My little capital I h a d blown in o n
the Photo-Secession a n d Camera Work a n d t h e like. I told Kerfoot
I ' d like to have a f u n d of twelve h u n d r e d dollars, five h u n d r e d to
pay the rent, seven h u n d r e d dollars for light a n d p r i n t i n g a n d o t h e r
overhead.
So he invited George D. P r a t t of t h e S t a n d a r d Oil, w h o was inter-
ested in p h o t o g r a p h y , a n d H e r b e r t G. French, treasurer of Proctor
a n d G a m b l e , w h o was a m e m b e r of the Photo-Secession a n d photo-
g r a p h e d , his brother-in-law, H u n t e r , a collector of rare J a p a n e s e
p r i n t s a n d early A m e r i c a n glass, a wealthy m a n , m a r r i e d b u t w i t h o u t
children, a n d , naturally, H a v i l a n d a n d one or two o t h e r people.
It was all very i m p r o m p t u a n d unofficial.
At tea at t h e H o l l a n d H o u s e , P r a t t g u a r a n t e e d a h u n d r e d dollars
a year, H e r b e r t G. French, fifty. H u n t e r subscribed fifty, Kerfoot also
subscribed fifty, a n d finally, in time, Agnes Meyer, w h e n m a r r y i n g
E u g e n e Meyer, Jr., c h i p p e d in five h u n d r e d a year.
My f a t h e r h a d died a n d left m e ten t h o u s a n d dollars. I h a d sworn
to myself t h a t if ever I got any m o n e y again I ' d n o t touch the capital
a n d yet as twelve h u n d r e d dollars a year were n o t g u a r a n t e e d for
three years I decided to go i n t o my new capital a n d m a k e u p t h e
difference. I could n o t let the idea of money get in t h e way of d o i n g
work properly.
Of course t h e r e was always Camera Work which I carried alone,
b u t that's a n o t h e r story.
T h e new gallery created even m o r e of a sensation t h a n h a d t h e
old one. I d i d n o t like t h e idea of h a v i n g it k n o w n as t h e Photo-
Secession for it was n o longer merely t h a t .
My p h o t o g r a p h i c f r i e n d s could not m a k e o u t w h a t I was doing.
T h e y charged m e w i t h h a v i n g lost interest in p h o t o g r a p h y .
 Steichen w h o was back in Paris seemed to u n d e r s t a n d . H e was big
e n o u g h . H e worked, p r o d u c e d , co-operated s p o n t a n e o u s l y a n d d i d n ' t
carp w h e n he d i d n ' t u n d e r s t a n d . H e absolutely t r u s t e d me. W e were
w o r k i n g together even t h o u g h over t h r e e t h o u s a n d physical miles
apart.
H a v i l a n d a n d M a r i u s de Zayas, w h o h a d come i n t o my life, were
t h e two great co-workers with m e at the time, f r o m t h e time t h e new
gallery o p e n e d u n t i l H a v i l a n d h a d to leave for F r a n c e i n 1915 be-
cause of the war, a n d de Zayas in t h e a u t u m n of 1916 o p e n e d his
Modern Gallery as an art dealer. As a m a t t e r of fact, I was so disgusted
w i t h the t u r n affairs h a d taken at "291," p r i n c i p a l l y because of the
war, t h a t I h a d a n n o u n c e d at this time t h a t I was going to q u i t . A n d I
w o u l d h a v e q u i t in 1916 if de Zayas, in o p e n i n g t h e Modern Gallery
w i t h the h e l p of Picabia a n d Agnes Meyer, h a d n o t given me to
u n d e r s t a n d t h a t t h e Modern Gallery was to be d e d i c a t e d exclusively
to abstract art—which m e a n t t h a t only t h e abstract p a i n t i n g s of
M a r i n w o u l d be acceptable. All of t h e o t h e r M a r i n s w o u l d h a v e to
find a place elsewhere. W a l k o w i t z , H a r t l e y a n d Dove were n o t to be
acceptable either. C e r t a i n of my p h o t o g r a p h s w o u l d be acceptable.
Realizing t h e s i t u a t i o n I was n o t g o i n g to desert M a r i n a n d Walko-
witz a n d Dove a n d H a r t l e y . So I h a d n o choice b u t to c o n t i n u e "291"
at 291 F i f t h A v e n u e .
W h e n we h a d first o p e n e d t h e new gallery, I h a d said to H a v i l a n d
o n e day, "Photo-Secession w o n ' t d o any more. Let's speak of t h e
gallery as '291'."
H a v i l a n d h a d looked at m e a n d seemed to u n d e r s t a n d .
W h a t was "291"? W h e r e d i d it come from?
T h e original Photo-Secession Gallery was in 291 F i f t h Avenue—
t h e new gallery was in 293. T h e wall between 291 a n d 293 h a d been
taken o u t so t h a t one elevator could feed b o t h houses a n d a tiny
elevator it was, so "291" s h o u l d really have been 293, b u t s o m e h o w
"291" s o u n d e d m o r e e u p h o n i o u s to m e t h a n 293, so "291" it h a d
come to be.
I spoke of it as "291" perfectly n a t u r a l l y . So d i d H a v i l a n d a n d with-
in a week—this is no exaggeration—"291" was c o m m o n p l a c e amongst
the f r e q u e n t e r s of t h e place a n d "291" still lives—for, in spite of t h e
i n t e r i m between t h e place "291" a n d t h e Intimate Gallery a n d An
American Place, it is t h e spirit of "291" t h a t is alive a n d f u n c t i o n i n g .
T h a t is the spirit t h a t manifests itself at An American Place still. W h o -
ever was of t h e spirit of "291" at any time is still f u n c t i o n i n g in
An American Place—whether he is a w a r e of it or not.
T h a t is my way of seeing. A n d in my way of seeing lies my way
of action. U n d e r l y i n g all is a n a t u r a l law a n d o n this n a t u r a l law
rests t h e h o p e of m a n k i n d .
III. H O W THE STEERAGE HAPPENED
Early in J u n e , 1907, my small family a n d I sailed for E u r o p e . My
wife insisted u p o n g o i n g on t h e Kaiser Wilhelm II— the f a s h i o n a b l e
ship of t h e N o r t h G e r m a n L l o y d at the time. O u r first d e s t i n a t i o n
was Paris. H o w I h a t e d the a t m o s p h e r e of t h e first class o n t h a t ship.
O n e c o u l d n ' t escape t h e nouveaux riches.
I sat m u c h in my steamer chair the first days out—sat w i t h closed
eyes. In this way I avoided seeing faces t h a t w o u l d give m e t h e cold
shivers, yet those voices a n d t h a t English—ye gods!
O n the t h i r d day o u t I finally c o u l d n ' t s t a n d it any longer. I h a d
to get away f r o m t h a t c o m p a n y . I w e n t as far f o r w a r d o n deck as I
could. T h e sea wasn't p a r t i c u l a r l y r o u g h . T h e sky was clear. T h e
ship was d r i v i n g i n t o the wind—a r a t h e r brisk w i n d .
As I c a m e to t h e e n d of t h e deck I stood alone, l o o k i n g d o w n . T h e r e
were m e n a n d w o m e n a n d c h i l d r e n o n the lower deck of t h e steerage.
T h e r e was a n a r r o w stairway leading u p to the u p p e r deck of t h e
steerage, a small deck r i g h t at t h e bow of t h e steamer.
T o the left was a n inclining f u n n e l a n d f r o m t h e u p p e r steerage
deck t h e r e was fastened a gangway b r i d g e which was glistening in
its freshly p a i n t e d state. It was r a t h e r long, white, a n d d u r i n g t h e t r i p
r e m a i n e d u n t o u c h e d by anyone.
O n t h e u p p e r deck, looking over t h e railing, there was a y o u n g
m a n w i t h a straw hat. T h e shape of t h e h a t was r o u n d . H e was
w a t c h i n g t h e m e n a n d w o m e n a n d c h i l d r e n o n t h e lower steerage
deck. O n l y m e n were o n the u p p e r deck. T h e whole scene fascinated
me. I longed to escape f r o m my s u r r o u n d i n g s a n d j o i n these people.
A r o u n d straw hat, the f u n n e l l e a n i n g left, the stairway l e a n i n g
right, t h e w h i t e draw-bridge with its railings m a d e of circular chains
—white suspenders crossing o n t h e back of a m a n in the steerage
below, r o u n d shapes of iron m a c h i n e r y , a mast c u t t i n g i n t o t h e sky,
m a k i n g a t r i a n g u l a r shape. I stood s p e l l b o u n d for a while, looking
and looking. C o u l d I p h o t o g r a p h w h a t I felt, looking a n d looking
and still looking? I saw shapes related to each other. I saw a p i c t u r e
of shapes a n d u n d e r l y i n g t h a t the feeling I h a d a b o u t life. A n d as I
was deciding, s h o u l d I try to p u t d o w n this seemingly new vision
that held me—people, the c o m m o n people, the feeling of ship a n d
ocean a n d sky a n d t h e feeling of release t h a t I was away f r o m the m o b
called t h e r i c h — R e m b r a n d t came i n t o my m i n d a n d I w o n d e r e d
would he have felt as I was feeling.
Spontaneously I raced to the m a i n stairway of t h e steamer, chased
down to my cabin, got my Graflex, raced back again all o u t of b r e a t h ,
w o n d e r i n g w h e t h e r t h e m a n w i t h t h e straw h a t h a d moved or not.
If he h a d , t h e p i c t u r e I h a d seen w o u l d no longer be. T h e relation-
ship of shapes as I w a n t e d t h e m w o u l d have been d i s t u r b e d a n d the
picture lost.
But there was t h e m a n w i t h the straw hat. H e h a d n ' t moved. T h e
man with the crossed w h i t e suspenders showing his back, he too,
talking to a m a n , h a d n ' t moved, a n d the w o m a n w i t h the child on
her lap, sitting o n t h e floor, h a d n ' t moved. Seemingly n o one h a d
c h a n g e d position.
I h a d b u t one p l a t e h o l d e r w i t h one u n e x p o s e d plate. W o u l d I get
w h a t I saw, w h a t I felt? Finally I released t h e s h u t t e r . M y h e a r t
t h u m p i n g . I h a d never h e a r d my h e a r t t h u m p before. H a d I gotten
my picture? I knew if I h a d , a n o t h e r milestone in p h o t o g r a p h y
w o u l d h a v e been reached, related to t h e milestone of my " C a r Horses"
m a d e i n 1892, a n d my " H a n d of M a n " m a d e in 1902, w h i c h h a d
o p e n e d u p a new era of p h o t o g r a p h y , of seeing. In a sense it w o u l d go
b e y o n d them, for h e r e w o u l d be a p i c t u r e based on related shapes a n d
o n the deepest h u m a n feeling, a step in my o w n evolution, a spon-
t a n e o u s discovery.
I took my c a m e r a to my stateroom a n d as I r e t u r n e d to my steamer
c h a i r my wife said, "I h a d sent a steward to look for you. I won-
d e r e d where you were. I was nervous w h e n he c a m e back a n d said he
c o u l d n ' t find you." I told her where I h a d been.
She said, "You speak as if you were far away in a d i s t a n t w o r l d , "
a n d I said I was.
" H o w you seem to h a t e these p e o p l e i n t h e first class." No, I d i d n ' t
h a t e them, b u t I merely felt completely o u t of place.
As soon as we were installed in Paris I w e n t to t h e E a s t m a n Kodak
C o m p a n y to find o u t w h e t h e r they h a d a d a r k r o o m in w h i c h I could
develop my plate. T h e y h a d none. T h e y gave m e a n address of a
p h o t o g r a p h e r . I w e n t there. T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r led m e to a huge
d a r k r o o m , m a n y feet long a n d m a n y feet wide, perfectly a p p o i n t e d .
H e said, " M a k e yourself at h o m e . H a v e you developer? H e r e ' s a
fixing bath—it's f r e s h . "
I h a d b r o u g h t a bottle of my own developer. I started developing.
W h a t tense m i n u t e s ! H a d I succeeded, h a d I failed? T h a t is, was the
e x p o s u r e correct? H a d I moved while exposing? If the negative t u r n e d
o u t to be a n y t h i n g b u t perfect, my p i c t u r e w o u l d be a failure.
Finally I h a d developed a n d washed a n d rinsed t h e plate. I n look-
ing at it, h o l d i n g it u p to the r e d light it seemed all right, a n d yet
I w o u l d n ' t k n o w u n t i l the p l a t e h a d been completely fixed.
T h e m i n u t e s seemed like hours. Finally t h e fixing was c o m p l e t e d .
I could t u r n o n the w h i t e light. T h e negative was p e r f e c t in every
p a r t i c u l a r . W o u l d a n y t h i n g h a p p e n to it before I got to N e w York?
I washed it. N o negative could ever receive m o r e care, a n d w h e n
the w a s h i n g was finished, I d r i e d the negative w i t h t h e h e l p of an
electric fan. I w a i t e d u n t i l it was b o n e dry, a n d w h e n it was com-
pletely dry I p u t t h e glass p l a t e i n t o the plate h o l d e r w h i c h originally
held it. In that way I felt it was best protected. I w o u l d n o t remove
it f r o m t h a t place till I h a d r e t u r n e d to N e w York. I h a d sufficient
plate holders w i t h me to p e r m i t myself that luxury—or, should I say,
t h a t insurance?
I w a n t e d to pay t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r for the use of his d a r k room,
b u t h e said, " I c a n ' t accept money f r o m you. I know w h o you are.
It's an h o n o r for m e to know you have used my d a r k r o o m . "
H o w he h a p p e n e d to k n o w m e I c o u l d n ' t u n d e r s t a n d . L a t e r o n
I discovered t h a t my n a m e was w r i t t e n o n a package w h i c h I h a d left
in his office while in the d a r k r o o m .
A n d w h e n I got to N e w York f o u r m o n t h s later I was too nervous
to m a k e a proof of the negative. In m a k i n g the negative I h a d in m i n d
e n l a r g i n g it for Camera Work, also e n l a r g i n g it to eleven by f o u r t e e n
a n d m a k i n g a p h o t o g r a v u r e of it.
Finally this h a p p e n e d . T w o b e a u t i f u l plates were m a d e u n d e r my
direction, u n d e r my supervision, a n d proofs were p u l l e d o n papers
t h a t I h a d selected. I was completely satisfied. S o m e t h i n g I n o t o f t e n
was, or am.
T h e first person to w h o m I showed " T h e Steerage" was my f r i e n d
a n d co-worker J o s e p h T . Keiley, " B u t you have two pictures there,
Stieglitz, a n u p p e r o n e a n d a lower o n e , " he said.
I said n o t h i n g . I realized he d i d n ' t see t h e p i c t u r e I h a d m a d e .
T h e n c e f o r t h I hesitated to show the proofs to anyone, b u t finally in
1910 I showed t h e m to H a v i l a n d a n d M a x W e b e r a n d de Zayas a n d
o t h e r artists of t h a t type. T h e y truly saw t h e picture, a n d w h e n it
a p p e a r e d in Camera Work it created a stir wherever seen, a n d the
eleven by f o u r t e e n g r a v u r e created still a greater stir.
I said o n e day, "If all my p h o t o g r a p h s were lost a n d I ' d be rep-
resented by just one, The Steerage, I ' d be satisfied."
I ' m n o t so sure t h a t I d o n ' t feel m u c h t h e same way today.
IV. T H E MAGAZINE 291 AND THE STEERAGE
1
In J a n u a r y , 1915, P a u l H a v i l a n d a n d de Zayas came i n t o "291" a n d
said, "Stieglitz, we a n d Agnes Meyer feel that "291" is in a r u t . T h e
war has p u t a d a m p e r on everything. W e m u s t do something. W e
have the idea t h a t "291" s h o u l d p u b l i s h a m o n t h l y magazine devoted
to t h e most m o d e r n art a n d to satire, presented in a spirit related to
some of t h e most m o d e r n p u b l i c a t i o n s in France."
I'd always been h o p i n g t h a t t h e r e w o u l d be a magazine in this
country devoted to real satire. T h e A m e r i c a n is a f r a i d of satire.
A f r a i d of t r u e caricature. H e enjoys cartoons. T h o s e everlasting car-
toons. W a s there a place for t r u e c a r i c a t u r e in t h e U n i t e d States?
H a d not M a r i u s de Zayas m a d e some g r a n d caricatures a n d were
they n o t shown at "291"? T h e y h a d met with little response.
So this proposition t h a t "291" p u b l i s h a sheet devoted to satire a n d
caricature m e t w i t h my fullest a p p r o v a l . M a y b e such a p u b l i c a t i o n
might b r i n g some new life i n t o "291."
H a v i l a n d a n d de Zayas were ready to act at once. It was really
their idea. T h e y h a d in m i n d a m o n t h l y p u b l i c a t i o n that w o u l d cost
a h u n d r e d dollars a m o n t h . T h e n u m b e r s were to be sold at ten cents
a piece, the subscription price to be a d o l l a r a year.
 W o u l d I sanction t h e use of t h e n a m e "291" as the n a m e of the
magazine a n d w o u l d I be o n e of the three g u a r a n t o r s assuming re-
sponsibility f o r the p a y i n g of bills—the two o t h e r g u a r a n t o r s to be
P a u l H a v i l a n d a n d Agnes Meyer?
I assented.
Of course I realized t h a t by the e n d of t h e year each of us would
p r o b a b l y have to foot a liability of at least fifty percent m o r e t h a n
t h e original estimates.
My interest in the m a g a z i n e was p r i m a r i l y based o n the fact t h a t
I felt it w o u l d give de Zayas a free o p p o r t u n i t y to use his genius as
a caricaturist a n d satirist, a n d t h a t it w o u l d give Agnes Meyer a n d
P a u l H a v i l a n d a n d K a t h a r i n e N. R h o a d e s o p p o r t u n i t i e s w h i c h I felt
they s h o u l d have.
Agnes Ernst Meyer's d r e a m h a d been, b e f o r e she was m a r r i e d a n d
w h e n she was w o r k i n g o n the Morning Sim as a r e p o r t e r , to write o n
art matters, to become an a u t h o r i t y on the history of a r t a n d o n the
creative arts of the day. B u t h a v i n g m a r r i e d a rich m a n a n d h a v i n g
become a m o t h e r , she was p r e v e n t e d f r o m d e v o t i n g m u c h t i m e to her
original a m b i t i o u s aspirations. M a y b e a "291" magazine w o u l d give
her a chance to d o some Agnes Ernst work, f o r it was Agnes Ernst
I originally was interested in.
P a u l H a v i l a n d was in a position to afford t h e risk a n d w o u l d be
h e a r t a n d soul a real worker.
K a t h a r i n e R h o a d e s w r o t e a n d p a i n t e d . I n her, too, I was deeply
interested. H e r e was a possible o u t l e t for her.
T h e n , also, there were M a r i n , H a r t l e y , W a l k o w i t z , Dove a n d m a n y
others I h o p e d m i g h t find an a d d e d outlet. In short, "291," the maga-
zine, I saw as a real i n s t r u m e n t of expression of t h e time.
O n e Sunday m o r n i n g Agnes Meyer, living at t h e St. Regis H o t e l ,
invited de Zayas, H a v i l a n d a n d myself to come to see her a n d talk
over t h e magazine p r o p o s i t i o n .
Agnes Meyer asked how we were to d e t e r m i n e w h a t should be
p u b l i s h e d in "291"—what was t h e policy to be—was the m a j o r i t y to
rule? As we were tour, I asked her w h a t w o u l d h a p p e n in case of a tie.
I p o i n t e d o u t to her a n d the m e n t h a t "291" was f o u n d e d o n a new
idea, so why t h i n k of obsolete methods. I suggested that a n y t h i n g that
m i g h t be t h o u g h t worthy of p u b l i c a t i o n by any one of the f o u r of us
s h o u l d be sufficient reason to i n c o r p o r a t e it i n the new p u b l i c a t i o n .
If we d i d n ' t h a v e t h a t m u c h f a i t h in each other, why begin?
Meetings a n d m i n u t e s a n d endless discussions were really anti-
"291." Agnes Meyer was elated with t h e idea, as were de Zayas a n d
Haviland.
T h e difficult p r o b l e m of m a j o r i t i e s a n d discussions h a d been
simply solved. O u r m e e t i n g lasted less t h a n ten m i n u t e s .
De Zayas a n d H a v i l a n d i m m e d i a t e l y set to work on the first issue.
So d i d Agnes Meyer.
 Soon t h e r e a f t e r I was told t h a t E u g e n e Meyer, Jr., the h u s b a n d of
Agnes Meyer, t h o u g h t t h a t too m u c h satire, too m u c h t r u t h telling
a b o u t h o w the g a m e of a r t a n d its business were played, s h o u l d n o t
a p p e a r in "291." Meyer t h o u g h t it w o u l d be a very b a d policy.
Of course, I disagreed for I felt t h a t t h e youngsters—for as such I
looked u p o n them—should h a v e their way. I n a sense I was m o r e or
less a n onlooker, b u t fully aware. I was curious to see w h a t the y o u n g
ones w o u l d d o if left to themselves, how they w o u l d r e p r e s e n t t h e
spirit of "291."
T h e magazine 291 quickly came i n t o being. It created great excite-
ment. It was truly a n eye-opener, n o t only for the U n i t e d States, b u t
for E u r o p e . I n s t e a d of its b e i n g the sheet originally c o n t e m p l a t e d ,
it became m o r e or less a de l u x e affair as H a v i l a n d , de Zayas, a n d
myself h a d r a t h e r expensive tastes—that is, we w a n t e d good p a p e r ,
good ink, c a r e f u l p r i n t i n g , careful mailing—that m e a n t the cost
would be greater t h a n originally figured on. Regardless, we w e n t
ahead. T h e result was w h a t c o u n t e d w i t h us.
291, t h e magazine, was l a u n c h e d . T h e r e were eight single issues
a n d two d o u b l e issues. T h e s e soon were to play a role in t h e develop-
ment of h a p p e n i n g s in France. T h i s , because Picabia arrived f r o m
France in June, 1915, directly f r o m the war. W h e n he saw w h a t we
were d o i n g at 291, in magazine f o r m , he i m m e d i a t e l y became an
active factor. Several of t h e issues became p r i m a r i l y Picabia issues.
W e sent i n n u m e r a b l e copies to France. It was these copies t h a t
helped crystallize the original D a d a M o v e m e n t w h e n Picabia re-
t u r n e d to F r a n c e some m o n t h s later.
H a v i l a n d was called to France. De Zayas eventually w e n t i n t o the
art business, so split f r o m 291. Agnes Meyer h a d become a " F r e e r i t e "
with passionate Chinese art aspirations. B u t before t h e final disinte-
gration of the g r o u p , H a v i l a n d a n d de Zayas c a m e to me one day
a n d said, "Stieglitz, we feel t h a t a d o u b l e n u m b e r of 291 s h o u l d be
devoted to p h o t o g r a p h y , w i t h ' T h e Steerage' as a basis." " T h e Steer-
age" was considered by m a n y t h e most significant p h o t o g r a p h I h a d
ever m a d e . It h a d even attracted the a t t e n t i o n of Picasso in 1912. De
Zayas h a d taken a p r i n t to Paris to show it to Picasso. Picasso was
reported to have said, " T h i s p h o t o g r a p h e r is w o r k i n g in the same
spirit as I a m . "
T h e p r i n t shown to Picasso was an eleven by f o u r t e e n photo-
gravure proof of " T h e Steerage" m a d e u n d e r my supervision.
A similar proof Dr. Jessen of the Berlin M u s e u m h a d b o u g h t for
his m u s e u m f o r a h u n d r e d dollars. T h e r e were n i n e o t h e r photo-
gravures for which he also h a d p a i d a h u n d r e d dollars each. Several
of the proofs were also b o u g h t by o t h e r collectors for a h u n d r e d
dollars apiece. W h e n e v e r I have received money for any of my work
I have t u r n e d it over to artists of one k i n d or a n o t h e r . I never have
kept any of such money for myself.
 H a v i l a n d a n d de Zayas claimed t h a t for t h e sake of p h o t o g r a p h y ,
for the sake of t h e idea we were all w o r k i n g for, it w o u l d be a great
t h i n g if I were to have five h u n d r e d proofs of t h e p h o t o g r a v u r e plate
p u l l e d o n I m p e r i a l J a p a n p a p e r for a small special " d e l u x e " edition
on t h i n J a p a n tissue.
H a v i l a n d a n d de Zayas each wrote a n essay o n p h o t o g r a p h y for
this n u m b e r t a k i n g " T h e Steerage" as a basis. I h a d t h e editions
p r i n t e d u n d e r my direction a n d p a i d for the cost. It was a special
c o n t r i b u t i o n of m i n e .
T h e d o u b l e n u m b e r c o n t a i n i n g t h e I m p e r i a l J a p a n proofs was
sold to subscribers for twenty cents each. T h e t h i n J a p a n ones for
a d o l l a r each. H u n d r e d s of people, rich a n d poor, h a d been clamor-
ing for "Steerage" p r i n t s . T h e poor could n o t afford the h u n d r e d dol-
lars a n d t h e rich could n o t afford the h u n d r e d dollars. I was in no posi-
tion to give away the few proofs I h a d , b e f o r e p r i n t i n g this edition
for 291.
I really p r i n t e d t h e e d i t i o n for 291 to see w h a t w o u l d h a p p e n .
T h e subscribers to 291—there were a b o u t a h u n d r e d to t h e o r d i n a r y
edition—duly received their copies. T h e r e were eight subscribers to
t h e de l u x e e d i t i o n a n d they received their copies. T h e s e eight sub-
scribers p a i d one dollar for their copies. T h e two e d i t i o n s called
f o r t h great a d m i r a t i o n f r o m all classes of people. N o a t t e m p t was
m a d e to solicit subscribers or to sell t h e magazine. W h a t interested
me most was to see w h a t the A m e r i c a n p e o p l e w o u l d d o if left to
themselves. T h a t has been a n u n d e r l y i n g p r i n c i p l e in everything
I've t o u c h e d for all these years.
W h e n , in 1917, t h e place "291" h a d come to an end, a n d I h a d lost
practically all of my friends—certainly those identified with the maga-
zine 297—1 d i d n ' t k n o w w h a t to d o w i t h the u p w a r d of eight thou-
sand copies of t h e magazine 291. I called a rag picker. It was war
time. T h e cost of p a p e r was high. I h a d never d o n e a n y t h i n g like
this before. M a y b e t h e gesture was a satirical one. T h e rag picker
offered five dollars a n d eighty cents for the lot. T h i s included the
w o n d e r f u l I m p e r i a l J a p a n "Steerage" prints.
I h a n d e d the five dollars a n d eighty cents to the girl w h o h a d been
part-time secretary to m e a n d said to her, " H e r e , Marie, this may
buy you a p a i r of gloves, m a y b e two pairs."
I h a d no feeling whatsoever a b o u t this transaction—this act of
mine. It was merely a n o t h e r lesson to me.
I kept most of the d e l u x e edition b u t even in time I destroyed
most of t h a t .
A n d now I asked myself why was a Dr. Jessen, director of the
Berlin M u s e u m , willing to pay a h u n d r e d dollars for a copy of " T h e
Steerage," which my A m e r i c a n f r i e n d s d i d not seem to w a n t even for
one dollar, t h o u g h for years they h a d been at m e to give t h e m a
chance to a c q u i r e a p r i n t ? N o w that it was possible to get a p r i n t for
a d o l l a r they w o n d e r e d why I d i d n ' t give t h e m prints. As a m a t t e r
of fact wasn't I "giving t h e m away" at a dollar?
O u t s i d e of the h u n d r e d subscriptions to t h e r e g u l a r e d i t i o n of the
magazine 291 a n d t h e eight subscriptions to t h e de luxe edition, how
m a n y single copies of either e d i t i o n d o you t h i n k were b o u g h t ? M a k e
your estimate as low as your i m a g i n a t i o n will permit—not a single
one. T h i s is America.

2
THE STEERAGE AT WEYHE'S

Mr. W e y h e , a n d Carl Zigrosser w o r k i n g w i t h h i m , are two h u m a n

beings. Somehow they h a d salvaged some copies of Camera Work.
T h e y also salvaged a few n u m b e r s of t h e heavy J a p a n "Steerage."
N o t so m a n y years later w h e n I came i n t o their s h o p o n L e x i n g t o n
A v e n u e one day I saw my "Steerage" f r a m e d a n d h a n g i n g o n the wall
amongst etchings a n d lithographs—some very good etchings a n d
lithographs.
" W h a t ' s t h e price of ' T h e Steerage'?" I asked.
" F o u r dollars."
I was t e m p t e d to buy it. It looked so h a n d s o m e , a n d how ridicu-
lously low the price. I r e m e m b e r e d t h a t I was living o n fifty cents a
day for food a n d t h a t f o u r dollars m e a n t eight days' food. Did I have
a r i g h t to b u y my o w n pictures u n d e r such conditions?
F o r at least t h r e e or f o u r years this p r i n t h u n g o n the walls of
Weyhe's. I o f t e n f r e q u e n t e d t h a t s h o p as it seemed one of the few
h u m a n places in N e w York.
O n e day while I was visiting the W e y h e shop, Zigrosser said, while
talking a b o u t p h o t o g r a p h y , "Stieglitz, a m a n t h e o t h e r day, a collector
of L e o n a r d o d a Vincis, a m a n for w h o m L e o n a r d o was t h e only thing
in the world, saw ' T h e Steerage.' H e asked w h a t it was a n d where it
came f r o m . 'A p h o t o g r a p h , ' I told h i m . H e looked at it again, asked
the price—four dollars—and took it."
" W e l l , " I t h o u g h t , "it's in good c o m p a n y a n d m a y b e if L e o n a r d o
knew he w o u l d n ' t m i n d . "
I was glad t h a t I h a d n o t s u c c u m b e d to the t e m p t a t i o n a n d t h a t
I h a d h a d food for eight days—once in my life at least I h a d been
wise. I h a d n o t s u c c u m b e d to the t e m p t a t i o n of b u y i n g a picture,
even t h o u g h the p i c t u r e was my own.

PAUL STRAND (1890-) It has always been my belief that the true artist, like
the true scientist, is a researcher using materials and techniques to dig into the
truth and meaning of the world in which he himself lives; and what he creates,
or better perhaps, brings back, are the objective results of his explorations.
The measure of his talent—of his genius, if you will—is the richness he finds
in such a life's voyage of discovery and the effectiveness with which he is able
to embody it through his chosen medium, L E T T E R TO T H E EDITOR, Photographic
Journal, Vol. 103, No. 7, 1963, p. 216.
PHOTOGRAPHY 1917
Seven Arts, August, pp. 524-26.

P h o t o g r a p h y , w h i c h is the first a n d only i m p o r t a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n

t h u s far, of science to the arts, finds its raison d'etre, like all m e d i a ,
i n a c o m p l e t e u n i q u e n e s s of means. T h i s is an a b s o l u t e u n q u a l i f i e d
o b j e c t i v i t y . U n l i k e t h e o t h e r arts w h i c h are really a n t i - p h o t o g r a p h i c ,
this o b j e c t i v i t y is of the very essence of p h o t o g r a p h y , its c o n t r i b u t i o n
a n d at the same time its l i m i t a t i o n . A n d just as the m a j o r i t y of work-
ers in o t h e r m e d i a h a v e c o m p l e t e l y m i s u n d e r s t o o d t h e i n h e r e n t
q u a l i t i e s of t h e i r respective m e a n s , so p h o t o g r a p h e r s , w i t h the pos-
sible e x c e p t i o n of two o r three, h a v e h a d n o c o n c e p t i o n of t h e photo-
g r a p h i c means. T h e f u l l p o t e n t i a l p o w e r of every m e d i u m is de-
p e n d e n t u p o n t h e p u r i t y of its use, a n d all a t t e m p t s at m i x t u r e e n d
in such d e a d t h i n g s as the color-etching, t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c p a i n t i n g
a n d in p h o t o g r a p h y , t h e g u m - p r i n t , o i l - p r i n t , etc., in w h i c h t h e intro-
d u c t i o n of h a n d w o r k a n d m a n i p u l a t i o n is merely t h e expression of
an i m p o t e n t desire to p a i n t . It is this very lack of u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d
respect for t h e i r m a t e r i a l , o n the p a r t of p h o t o g r a p h e r s themselves
w h i c h directly a c c o u n t s for the c o n s e q u e n t lack of respect on the
p a r t of the i n t e l l i g e n t p u b l i c a n d t h e n o t i o n t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y is b u t
a p o o r excuse for a n i n a b i l i t y to d o a n y t h i n g else.
T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s p r o b l e m t h e r e f o r e , is to see clearly t h e limita-
tions a n d at t h e s a m e time t h e p o t e n t i a l q u a l i t i e s of his m e d i u m , for
it is precisely h e r e t h a t honesty, n o less t h a n intensity of vision, is the
p r e r e q u i s i t e of a living expression. T h i s m e a n s a real respect for the
t h i n g in f r o n t of h i m , e x p r e s s e d in t e r m s of c h i a r o s c u r o (color a n d
p h o t o g r a p h y h a v i n g n o t h i n g in c o m m o n ) t h r o u g h a r a n g e of almost
infinite t o n a l values w h i c h lie b e y o n d t h e skill of h u m a n h a n d . T h e
fullest r e a l i z a t i o n of this is a c c o m p l i s h e d w i t h o u t tricks of process
or m a n i p u l a t i o n , t h r o u g h the use of s t r a i g h t p h o t o g r a p h i c m e t h o d s .
It is in the o r g a n i z a t i o n of this o b j e c t i v i t y t h a t the p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s
p o i n t of view t o w a r d Life e n t e r s in, a n d w h e r e a f o r m a l c o n c e p t i o n
b o r n of the e m o t i o n s , the intellect, or of b o t h , is as inevitably neces-
sary for h i m , b e f o r e an e x p o s u r e is m a d e , as for t h e p a i n t e r , b e f o r e
h e p u t s b r u s h to canvas. T h e objects m a y be o r g a n i z e d to express the
causes of w h i c h they are the effects, or they may be used as abstract
forms, to c r e a t e an e m o t i o n u n r e l a t e d to the o b j e c t i v i t y as such. T h i s
o r g a n i z a t i o n is evolved e i t h e r by m o v e m e n t of the c a m e r a in r e l a t i o n
to the o b j e c t s themselves o r t h r o u g h t h e i r a c t u a l a r r a n g e m e n t , but
here, as in e v e r y t h i n g , the expression is s i m p l y the m e a s u r e of a vision,
s h a l l o w or p r o f o u n d as t h e case may be. P h o t o g r a p h y is only a new
road from a different direction but moving toward the common
goal, w h i c h is Life.
N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g the fact t h a t the w h o l e d e v e l o p m e n t of photog-
r a p h y has been given to the w o r l d t h r o u g h Camera Work in a
f o r m u n i q u e l y b e a u t i f u l as well as perfect in conception a n d pre-
sentation, there is n o real consciousness, even a m o n g p h o t o g r a p h e r s ,
of w h a t has actually h a p p e n e d : namely, t h a t A m e r i c a has really been
expressed in terms of America w i t h o u t the outside influence of Paris
art-schools or their d i l u t e offspring here. T h i s d e v e l o p m e n t extends
over t h e comparatively short period of sixty years, a n d there was no
real m o v e m e n t until t h e years between 1895 a n d 1910, at which time
an intense r e b i r t h of e n t h u s i a s m a n d energy m a n i f e s t e d itself all
over the world. Moreover, this renaissance f o u n d its highest aesthetic
achievement in America, where a small g r o u p of m e n a n d w o m e n
worked w i t h honest a n d sincere purpose, some instinctively a n d few
consciously, b u t w i t h o u t any b a c k g r o u n d of p h o t o g r a p h i c or g r a p h i c
f o r m u l a e m u c h less any cut a n d d r i e d ideas of w h a t is Art a n d w h a t
isn't; this innocence was their real strength. E v e r y t h i n g they w a n t e d
to say h a d to be worked o u t by their own e x p e r i m e n t s : it was b o r n
of actual living. In the same way t h e creators of o u r skyscrapers h a d
to face the similar circumstance of no precedent, a n d it was t h r o u g h
that very necessity of evolving a new form, both in a r c h i t e c t u r e a n d
p h o t o g r a p h y t h a t the resulting expression was vitalized. W h e r e in
any m e d i u m has the t r e m e n d o u s energy a n d p o t e n t i a l p o w e r of
New York been m o r e fully realized t h a n in t h e purely direct photo-
g r a p h s of Stieglitz? W h e r e a m o r e subtle feeling which is the reverse
of all this, the q u i e t simplicity of life in the A m e r i c a n small town,
so sensitively suggested in the early work of Clarence W h i t e ? W h e r e
in p a i n t i n g , m o r e originality a n d p e n e t r a t i o n of vision t h a n in t h e
portraits of Steichen, Kasebier a n d Frank Eugene? Others, too, have
given beauty to the world b u t these workers, together w i t h t h e great
Scotchman, David Octavius Hill, whose p o r t r a i t s m a d e in 1840 have
never been surpassed, are the i m p o r t a n t creators of a living photo-
g r a p h i c t r a d i t i o n . T h e y will be the masters no less for E u r o p e t h a n
for America because by an intense interest in t h e life of which they
were really a p a r t , they reached t h r o u g h a n a t i o n a l , to a universal
expression. In spite of indifference, c o n t e m p t a n d t h e assurance of
little or n o r e m u n e r a t i o n they w e n t on, as others will do, evert t h o u g h
their work seems d o o m e d to a t e m p o r a r y obscurity. T h e t h i n g they
do r e m a i n s the same; it is a witness to the motive force that drives.
T h e existence of a m e d i u m , a f t e r all, is its absolute justification,
if as so m a n y seem to t h i n k , it needs o n e a n d all, comparison of
potentialities is useless a n d irrelevant. W h e t h e r a water-color is
inferior to an oil, or w h e t h e r a d r a w i n g , an etching, or a p h o t o g r a p h
is not as i m p o r t a n t as either, is i n c o n s e q u e n t . T o have to despise
s o m e t h i n g in order to respect s o m e t h i n g else is a t h i n g of impotence.
Let us r a t h e r accept joyously a n d with g r a t i t u d e everything t h r o u g h
which the spirit of m a n seeks to an ever fuller a n d m o r e intense
self-realization.
PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE NEW GOD 1922
Broom, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 252-58.

M a n h a v i n g created t h e c o n c e p t of G o d T h e C r e a t o r , f o u n d h i m -
self unsatisfied. F o r d e s p i t e the p r o v e n p r a g m a t i c v a l u e of this image,
t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e fine arts of m u s i c a n d l i t e r a t u r e , of a r c h i t e c t u r e ,
p a i n t i n g , a n d s c u l p t u r e , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e less fine arts of m u r d e r ,
thievery a n d g e n e r a l h u m a n e x p l o i t a t i o n , h a d been c a r r i e d to g r e a t
h e i g h t s , t h e r e was still s o m e t h i n g u n f u l f i l l e d : t h e i m p u l s e of curiosity
in m a n was still h u n g r y .
I n all ages t h e r e f o r e , we find t h e e m p i r i c a l t h i n k e r , t h e alchemist
a n d astrologer, m a t h e m a t i c i a n a n d p h i l o s o p h i c e x p e r i m e n t e r , at
w o r k , f r e q u e n t l y , as in t h e early C h r i s t i a n w o r l d , at c o n s i d e r a b l e risk
of his life, liberty a n d p u r s u i t of h a p p i n e s s . T h e n , it was t h e artist
a l o n e w h o was a b l e to i n d u l g e in t h e l u x u r y of e m p i r i c a l t h o u g h t
u n d e r the c a m o u f l a g e of s u b j e c t m a t t e r . I n every o t h e r field of re-
search, the scientific m e t h o d was seen t o be a n d n o d o u b t was,
i n i m i c a l to all f o r m s of C h u r c h i a n i t y ; the scientist was t h e n , as his
fellow-worker t h e artist is to-day, persona non grata.
B u t t h r o u g h t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n of t h e p o w e r of the C h r i s t i a n
C h u r c h f o l l o w i n g t h e R e f o r m a t i o n , scientific e m p i r i c a l t h o u g h t f o u n d
its o p p o r t u n i t y of expression. M e n ' s i m a g i n a t i o n s , weary of sectarian
i n t r i g u e a n d of H o l y W a r s , k i n d l e d at the t h o u g h t of the u n k n o w n
in the f o r m of u n e x p l o r e d t r a d e r o u t e s a n d new sources of m a t e r i a l
w e a l t h ; a n d t h r o u g h t h e m d r e a m e d of a p o w e r over t h e i r fellows as
p o t e n t as any w h i c h c o u l d be d e r i v e d f r o m a vested interest in G o d .
W i t h this c h a n g e in the d i r e c t i o n of t h o u g h t , t h e scientist b e c a m e
i n d i s p e n s a b l e , h e b e g a n to f u n c t i o n in society. F o r w h e n it b e c a m e
a p p a r e n t t h a t c r a f t s m a n s h i p as a m e a n s to t r a d e g r o w t h was insuf-
ficient, t h a t q u a n t i t y a n d n o t q u a l i t y of p r o d u c t i o n was t h e essential
p r o b l e m in t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of w e a l t h , it was the scientist a n d his inter-
p r e t e r , t h e i n v e n t o r w h o j u m p e d i n t o the b r e a c h .
O u t of w o o d a n d m e t a l s h e m a d e h a n d s t h a t c o u l d d o t h e w o r k of
a t h o u s a n d m e n ; h e m a d e backs t h a t c o u l d carry the b u r d e n of a
t h o u s a n d beasts a n d c h a i n e d t h e p o w e r w h i c h was in t h e e a r t h a n d
waters to m a k e t h e m w o r k . T h r o u g h h i m , m e n c o n s u m m a t e d a new
creative act, a n e w T r i n i t y : G o d t h e M a c h i n e , M a t e r i a l i s t i c E m p i r i -
cism the Son, a n d Science the H o l y G h o s t .
A n d in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n of this m o d e r n C h u r c h ,
the v e r i t a b l e artist, c o m p o s e r or poet, architect, p a i n t e r o r s c u l p t o r ,
has p l a y e d n o g r e a t p a r t . H i s f o r m of creativity based u p o n w h a t
Croce calls i n t u i t i v e r a t h e r t h a n i n t e l l e c t u a l k n o w l e d g e , was clearly
of n o v a l u e in a fairly u n s c r u p u l o u s struggle f o r the possession of
n a t u r a l resources, for the e x p l o i t a t i o n of all m a t e r i a l s , h u m a n a n d
o t h e r w i s e . As a c o n s e q u e n c e the artist has fallen c o n s i d e r a b l y f r o m
his place of h i g h seriousness as a n i n t e g r a l a n d respected e l e m e n t in
society, to t h a t of a tolerated m o u n t e b a n k e n t e r t a i n e r merely. W i t h
n e i t h e r Popes, Princes n o r any e q u i v a l e n t of t h e Rockefeller Foun-
d a t i o n to s u p p o r t his e x p e r i m e n t a l work, he is today in a position
similar to t h a t w h i c h t h e scientist occupied in the m i d d l e ages; t h a t
of heretic to existing values. T h a t k i n d of life which has its b e i n g
in t h e extension a n d p r o j e c t i o n of knowledge t h r o u g h the syntheses
of i n t u i t i v e spiritual activity, a n d its c o n c o m i t a n t t h e vita contem-
plativa, is seen to be a n d no d o u b t is, a m e n a c e to a society b u i l t
u p o n w h a t has become t h e religious concept of possessiveness. It is
n a t u r a l t h e r e f o r e t h a t the artist finds himself looked u p o n with a new
sort of hostility w h i c h expresses itself, d u e possibly to the benign
influence of civilization, in the f o r m of indifference or c o n t e m p t , a n d
e x t e n d s to h i m t h e privilege of starving to d e a t h . At t h e j u d g m e n t
seat of the new T r i n i t y he has been f o u n d w a n t i n g as a waster a n d
a non-producer.
W i t h this increasing isolation of t h e seeker a f t e r i n t u i t i v e knowl-
edge, the scientist, w o r k i n g not so m u c h in the field of philosophy as
in those m o r e " p r a c t i c a l " expressions of c o n c e p t u a l knowledge, t h e
n a t u r a l sciences, has become m o r e a n d m o r e a p a r t of this industrial
society, nay, is largely responsible for it. H a v i n g created the new
God, he has p e r m i t t e d himself to be used at every step a n d for every
p u r p o s e by its interested devotees. P r i n t i n g presses or poison gas, he
has been equally b l i n d or i n d i f f e r e n t to the i m p l i c a t i o n s in t h e use
or misuse of either, with the result t h a t the social s t r u c t u r e w h i c h he
has so irresponsibly h e l p e d to rear, is today fast b e i n g destroyed by
t h e perversion of the very k n o w l e d g e c o n t r i b u t e d by h i m . Virtually
yanked o u t of c o m p a r a t i v e obscurity by the forces of evolutionary
circumstance, a n d considerably over-inflated by his H o l y Ghostship,
he has m a d e possible the p r e s e n t critical c o n d i t i o n of W e s t e r n Civili-
zation, faced as it is with the alternatives of b e i n g quickly g r o u n d to
pieces u n d e r t h e heel of the new G o d or w i t h the t r e m e n d o u s task
of c o n t r o l l i n g the heel.
Signs of this i m p e r a t i v e r e v a l u a t i o n of the idea of t h e m a c h i n e are
b e g i n n i n g to m a n i f e s t themselves. A n d significantly, o n e m i g h t almost
say ironically e n o u g h , n o t a m o n g t h e least i m p o r t a n t is the emerg-
ing d e m o n s t r a t i o n o n the p a r t of the artist of the immense possibili-
ties in the creative control of one form of the m a c h i n e , t h e camera.
For he it is who, despite his social m a l a d j u s t m e n t , has taken to him-
self with love a d e a d t h i n g u n w i t t i n g l y c o n t r i b u t e d by the scientist,
a n d t h r o u g h its conscious use, is revealing a new a n d living act of
vision.
I n o r d e r to m a k e this clear it is necessary to record briefly the
d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e use of t h e camera by t h e seeker a f t e r intuitive
knowledge. T h e first of these to become interested in the m e c h a n i s m
a n d materials of p h o t o g r a p h y was David Octavius Hill, a p a i n t e r ,
a n d m e m b e r of the Royal Scottish Academy. Hill came u p o n pho-
 t o g r a p h y a b o u t 1842 in the f o l l o w i n g way: he h a d received a com-
mission to p a i n t a large canvas o n w h i c h were to a p p e a r the recog-
nizable p o r t r a i t s of a h u n d r e d or m o r e of t h e well-known p e o p l e of
t h e time. Faced w i t h this difficult task a n d h a v i n g h e a r d of t h e t h e n
recently i n v e n t e d process of p h o t o g r a p h y , he t u r n e d to it as a h e l p
to his p a i n t i n g . T h r e e years of e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n followed a n d it is
interesting to learn t h a t he became so fascinated by t h e new m e d i u m
t h a t h e seriously neglected his p a i n t i n g . So m u c h so in fact, t h a t his
wife a n d f r i e n d s f o u n d it necessary to r e m i n d h i m t h a t he was an
"artist." T h e y c h i d e d h i m a b o u t wasting his t i m e a n d finally suc-
ceeded in giving h i m such a b a d conscience t h a t he never photo-
g r a p h e d again. Yet t h e results of H i l l ' s e x p e r i m e n t i n g h a v e given us
a series of amazing p o r t r a i t s w h i c h h a v e n o t u n t i l recently been
surpassed. T h e y are b u i l t w i t h the u t m o s t simplicity u p o n large
masses of light a n d d a r k , b u t u n q u e s t i o n a b l y t h e e l e m e n t w h i c h
makes these p o r t r a i t s live is t h e naivete a n d f r e e d o m f r o m all theory
w i t h w h i c h H i l l a p p r o a c h e d his new m e d i u m . H e was n o t concerned
or h a m p e r e d in his p h o t o g r a p h i n g by t h e a c a d e m i c s t a n d a r d s of the
time as he m u s t have been in his p a i n t i n g , for as a p a i n t e r he is of
slight i m p o r t a n c e . Despite t h e p r i m i t i v e m a c h i n e a n d materials w i t h
which he was compelled to work, t h e exposures of five to fifteen
m i n u t e s in b r i g h t sunlight, this series of p h o t o g r a p h s has victoriously
stood the test of c o m p a r i s o n w i t h nearly e v e r y t h i n g d o n e in photog-
r a p h y since 1845. T h e y r e m a i n t h e most e x t r a o r d i n a r y assertion of
t h e possibility of the utterly personal control of a m a c h i n e , t h e camera.
A g a p t h e n of nearly forty years i n t e r v e n e d d u r i n g w h i c h these
p h o t o g r a p h s m a d e by H i l l passed i n t o obscurity a n d practically no
similar e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n was done. However, some time b e f o r e their
rediscovery p h o t o g r a p h y h a d , a b o u t t h e year 1880, started u p o n a
renascent a n d w i d e s p r e a d d e v e l o p m e n t all over the world. W i t h the
i n v e n t i o n of t h e dry plate, the i m p r o v e m e n t s in lenses a n d p r i n t i n g
papers, the process h a d been b r o u g h t w i t h i n t h e r e a l m of greater
certainty a n d ease of m a n i p u l a t i o n . A n d w i t h this p e r i o d begins t h a t
curious m i s c o n c e p t i o n of the i n h e r e n t qualities of a new m e d i u m ,
o n t h e p a r t of almost everyone w h o has a t t e m p t e d to express himself
t h r o u g h it. W i t h o u t the slightest realization t h a t in this m a c h i n e ,
the camera, a new a n d u n i q u e i n s t r u m e n t h a d been placed in their
hands, p h o t o g r a p h e r s have in almost every instance, been trying to
use it as a short cut to a n accepted m e d i u m , p a i n t i n g . T h i s miscon-
ception still persists today t h r o u g h o u t E u r o p e a n d to a large degree
even h e r e in America.
As a consequence the d e v e l o p m e n t of p h o t o g r a p h y so b e a u t i f u l l y
a n d completely recorded in t h e n u m b e r s of Camera Work, is inter-
esting n o t so m u c h in the aesthetically expressive as in an historical
sense. W e find all t h r o u g h the work d o n e in G e r m a n y , F r a n c e a n d
Italy, in E n g l a n d a n d m u c h in A m e r i c a , the s u p r e m e altar of t h e new
God, a singular lack of p e r c e p t i o n a n d respect for t h e basic n a t u r e
of t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c machine. At every t u r n t h e a t t e m p t is m a d e to
t u r n the camera i n t o a brush, to make a p h o t o g r a p h look like a paint-
ing, a n etching, a charcoal d r a w i n g or w h a t n o t , like a n y t h i n g b u t a
p h o t o g r a p h ; a n d always in i m i t a t i o n of the work of i n f e r i o r painters.
Moreover, w i t h t h e p r o d u c t i o n of this very considerable n u m b e r of
b a s t a r d p h o t o g r a p h s , interesting t h o u g h they were temporarily, w e n t
a n equally vast a n d foolish discussion as to w h e t h e r p h o t o g r a p h y was
or was n o t a n A r t . Needless to say this discussion was usually as
thoughtless a n d as uncritical of its terminology a n d of its s t a n d a r d s as
were t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s of theirs. B u t partly t h r o u g h this evolution
we are now f o r t u n a t e l y b e c o m i n g a w a r e of the fact t h a t nobody knows
exactly w h a t A r t is; the w o r d does not slip q u i t e so glibly off t h e
tongues of t h e serious-minded. A n d f o r t u n a t e l y as well, a few photog-
r a p h e r s are d e m o n s t r a t i n g in their work t h a t t h e camera is a m a c h i n e
a n d a very w o n d e r f u l one. T h e y a r e p r o v i n g t h a t in its p u r e a n d
intelligent use it may become a n i n s t r u m e n t of a new k i n d of vision,
of u n t o u c h e d possibilities, related to b u t n o t in any way e n c r o a c h i n g
u p o n p a i n t i n g or the o t h e r plastic arts. It has t a k e n nearly eighty
years f o r this clarification of the actual m e a n i n g of p h o t o g r a p h y to
reach f r o m the r e m a r k a b l y t r u e b u t instinctive a p p r o a c h of David
O c t a v i u s Hill, to t h e conscious control e m b o d i e d in t h e recent work
of A l f r e d Stieglitz.
For it is in t h e later work of Stieglitz, a n A m e r i c a n in America, t h a t
we find a highly evolved crystallization of the p h o t o g r a p h i c principle,
the u n q u a l i f i e d s u b j u g a t i o n of a m a c h i n e to the single p u r p o s e of
expression. It is significant a n d interesting to n o t e t h a t this m a n is
n o t a p a i n t e r a n d has never felt any impulse to be one. F r o m t h e very
i n c e p t i o n of his p h o t o g r a p h i c work which covers a p e r i o d of thirty-
five years, he like Hill, was fascinated by t h e m a c h i n e as a t h i n g
a p a r t . I n fact, Stieglitz knewf n o t h i n g a b o u t p a i n t i n g u n t i l , as the
g u i d i n g spirit in t h a t little e x p e r i m e n t a l laboratory k n o w n as "291
he gave A m e r i c a n s their first o p p o r t u n i t y of seeing t h e d e v e l o p m e n t
of m o d e r n p a i n t i n g together w i t h t h a t of p h o t o g r a p h y . Yet w i t h all
this he has m a i n t a i n e d in his own p h o t o g r a p h i c work a u n i t y of feel-
ing u n c o n t a m i n a t e d by alien influences; in his own words, " n o me-
chanicalization b u t always p h o t o g r a p h y . " I n his later work, consist-
ing almost exclusively of a series of p o r t r a i t s m a d e d u r i n g the past
f o u r years, the achievements possible to t h e c a m e r a pass o u t of the
realm of theory a n d become objective realities in which certain
affirmations emerge. For the first time we are given an o p p o r t u n i t y
of e x a m i n i n g a n d of d r a w i n g some conclusions c o n c e r n i n g the means
of p h o t o g r a p h i c expressiveness, an expressiveness t h e actual n a t u r e of
which, together with t h a t of o t h e r media, may be safely left to the
aestheticians to fight a b o u t a m o n g themselves.
W e find first of all in this m a n ' s work a space-filling a n d formal
sense which, in m a n y instances, achieves as p u r e a synthesis of objec-
tivity as can be f o u n d in any m e d i u m . W e perceive u p o n the loveli-
ness of p a p e r a registration in m o n o c h r o m e of tonal a n d tactile values
far m o r e subtle t h a n any w h i c h the h u m a n h a n d can record. W e
discover as well, t h e actuality of a new sensitivity of line as finely
expressive as any t h e h u m a n h a n d can draw. A n d we n o t e t h a t all
these e l e m e n t s take f o r m t h r o u g h the m a c h i n e , the camera, w i t h o u t
resort to t h e imbecilic use of soft focus or u n c o r r e c t e d lenses, or to
processes in w h i c h m a n u a l m a n i p u l a t i o n may be i n t r o d u c e d . N a y
more, we see t h a t t h e use of such lenses or processes weakens or
destroys entirely the very elements which distinguish p h o t o g r a p h y
a n d may m a k e it a n expression. I n t h e work of Stieglitz there is
always a full acceptance of the t h i n g in f r o n t of h i m , t h e objectivity
w h i c h t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t control a n d can never evade.
B u t above all, we become aware in these p h o t o g r a p h s of his, of a
new factor w h i c h the m a c h i n e has a d d e d to plastic expression, t h e
e l e m e n t of d i f f e r e n t i a t e d time. T h e camera can h o l d in a u n i q u e
way, a m o m e n t . If t h e m o m e n t be a living o n e for t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r ,
t h a t is, if it be significantly related to o t h e r m o m e n t s in his experi-
ence, a n d he knows how to p u t that relativity i n t o f o r m , he may d o
w i t h a m a c h i n e w h a t t h e h u m a n b r a i n a n d h a n d , t h r o u g h t h e act of
m e m o r y c a n n o t do. So perceived, t h e whole concept of a p o r t r a i t
takes o n a new m e a n i n g , t h a t of a record of i n n u m e r a b l e elusive a n d
constantly c h a n g i n g states of being, m a n i f e s t e d physically. T h i s is as
t r u e of all objects as of the h u m a n object. W i t h the eye of the
m a c h i n e , Stieglitz has recorded just that, has shown t h a t the p o r t r a i t
of a n i n d i v i d u a l is really t h e s u m of a h u n d r e d or m o r e p h o t o g r a p h s .
H e has looked w i t h t h r e e eyes a n d has been able to hold, by purely
p h o t o g r a p h i c means, space-filling, tonality a n d tactility, line a n d
form, that m o m e n t w h e n the forces at work in a h u m a n being become
most intensely physical a n d objective. In t h u s revealing the spirit of
the i n d i v i d u a l he has d o c u m e n t e d t h e world of t h a t i n d i v i d u a l , which
is today. In this sense p o r t r a i t p a i n t i n g , already nearly a corpse,
becomes a n a b s u r d i t y .
N o w in all of this it s h o u l d be well u n d e r s t o o d , t h a t the m a c h i n e is
a passive a n d an i n n o c e n t party. T h e control of its m e c h a n i s m a n d
materials, the fineness a n d sensitivity of its a c c o m p l i s h m e n t are those
of m a n . T h e new G o d shorn of its G o d - h o o d becomes an i n s t r u m e n t
of i n t u i t i v e knowledge. W h e t h e r the results of its use will c o n t i n u e to
live in the m i n d a n d spirit of t h e f u t u r e , only time will tell. W h e t h e r
or not these results come u n d e r the category of Art is irrelevant. T h e
i m p o r t a n t fact to be n o t e d is t h a t today, painters, writers a n d musi-
cians, even the scientists a n d sensitive p e o p l e in every o c c u p a t i o n , are
reacting as p r o f o u n d l y before p h o t o g r a p h s , these u n t o u c h e d p r o d u c t s
of an intelligence a n d spirit c h a n n e l l i n g t h r o u g h a m a c h i n e , as before
any of the accepted forms of expression. So t h a t w h e n Croce in his
 "Aesthetic" writes: " A n d if p h o t o g r a p h y be not q u i t e an Art, t h a t is
precisely because t h e e l e m e n t of n a t u r e in it r e m a i n s m o r e or less
u n c o n q u e r e d a n d ineradicable." W h e n he asks: " D o we ever feel
c o m p l e t e satisfaction before even t h e best of photographs? W o u l d n o t
a n artist vary a n d touch u p m u c h or little, remove or a d d s o m e t h i n g
to t h e best of p h o t o g r a p h s ? " t h e conclusion a n d answer are obvious.
Signor Croce is speaking of the shortcomings of photographers and
n o t of p h o t o g r a p h y . H e has n o t seen, for t h e simple reason t h a t it d i d
not exist w h e n he wrote his book, fully achieved p h o t o g r a p h i c expres-
sion. I n the m e a n t i m e t h e t w a d d l e a b o u t t h e limitations of photog-
r a p h y has been answered by Stieglitz a n d a few others of us h e r e in
America, by work done. G r a n t i n g t h e l i m i t a t i o n s which all m e d i a
h a v e in c o m m o n , it is only w h e n the l i m i t a t i o n s of photographers are
u n d e r e x a m i n a t i o n , that t h e discussion becomes realistic.
T h u s t h e deeper significance of a m a c h i n e , t h e camera, has emerged
h e r e in America, the s u p r e m e altar of t h e new G o d . If this be ironical
it may also be m e a n i n g f u l . For despite o u r seeming w e l l b e i n g we are,
p e r h a p s m o r e t h a n any o t h e r people, b e i n g g r o u n d u n d e r the heel of
t h e new G o d , destroyed by it. W e a r e not, as N a t a l i e Curtis recently
p o i n t e d o u t in The Freeman, p a r t i c u l a r l y s y m p a t h e t i c to the some-
w h a t hysterical a t t i t u d e of t h e Futurists toward the m a c h i n e . W e in
America are not fighting, as it may be n a t u r a l to d o in Italy, away
f r o m the tentacles of a medieval t r a d i t i o n towards a n e u r a s t h e n i c
e m b r a c e of the new G o d . W e have it w i t h us a n d u p o n us with a
vengeance, a n d we will have to d o s o m e t h i n g a b o u t it eventually.
N o t only the new G o d b u t t h e whole T r i n i t y m u s t be h u m a n i z e d lest
it in t u r n d e h u m a n i z e us. W e are b e g i n n i n g p e r h a p s to perceive that.
A n d so it is again t h e vision of the artist, of the i n t u i t i v e seeker
a f t e r knowledge, which, in this m o d e r n world, has seized u p o n the
m e c h a n i s m a n d materials of a m a c h i n e , a n d is p o i n t i n g t h e way. H e
it is w h o is again insisting, t h r o u g h the science of optics a n d the
chemistry of light a n d metals a n d p a p e r , u p o n t h e eternal value of
the concept of c r a f t s m a n s h i p , because that is the only way in which
he can satisfy himself a n d because he knows t h a t q u a l i t y in work is
p r e r e q u i s i t e to q u a l i t y in living. H e has evolved t h r o u g h the con-
scious creative control of this p a r t i c u l a r phase of the m a c h i n e a new
m e t h o d of perceiving t h e life of objectivity a n d of recording it. A n d
he has d o n e so in spite of the usual opposition a n d c o n t e m p t w i t h
which t h e Accepted always greets the New, in spite of the actual
d e t e r i o r a t i o n of materials a n d in t h e face of a total absence of those
m o n e t a r y r e t u r n s which work in o t h e r m e d i a occasionally brings.
In thus disinterestedly e x p e r i m e n t i n g , the p h o t o g r a p h e r has j o i n e d
the ranks of all t r u e seekers a f t e r knowledge, be it intuitive a n d
aesthetic or conceptual a n d scientific. H e has moreover, in establish-
ing his own spiritual control over a m a c h i n e , the camera, revealed
the destructive a n d wholly fictitious wall of a n t a g o n i s m which these
two g r o u p s h a v e b u i l t u p b e t w e e n themselves. R e j e c t i n g all T r i n i t i e s
a n d all G o d s he p u t s t o his fellow w o r k e r s this q u e s t i o n s q u a r e l y :
W h a t is t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n science a n d expression? A r e they not
b o t h vital m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of energy, whose r e c i p r o c a l hostility t u r n s
t h e o n e i n t o the d e s t r u c t i v e tool of m a t e r i a l i s m , t h e o t h e r i n t o a n e m i c
p h a n t a s y , whose c o m i n g t o g e t h e r m i g h t i n t e g r a t e a new religious
impulse? M u s t n o t these two f o r m s of e n e r g y converge b e f o r e a living
f u t u r e can be b o r n of b o t h ?

THE ART MOTIVE IN PHOTOGRAPHY 1923

The British Journal of Photography, Vol. 70, pp. 612-15.
A discussion of all t h e r a m i f i c a t i o n s of p h o t o g r a p h i c m e t h o d s in
m o d e r n life w o u l d r e q u i r e m o r e t i m e a n d special k n o w l e d g e t h a n I
h a v e at m y disposal. It w o u l d i n c l u d e all the diverse uses t o w h i c h
p h o t o g r a p h y is b e i n g p u t in an essentially i n d u s t r i a l a n d scientific
civilization. Some of these a p p l i c a t i o n s of the m a c h i n e , t h e c a m e r a ,
a n d the m a t e r i a l s w h i c h go w i t h it, are very w o n d e r f u l . I n e e d only
m e n t i o n as a few e x a m p l e s the X-ray, m i c r o - p h o t o g r a p h y , photog-
r a p h y in a s t r o n o m y as well as the v a r i o u s p h o t o - m e c h a n i c a l proc-
esses w h i c h h a v e so a m a z i n g l y given the w o r l d access to pictorial
c o m m u n i c a t i o n in m u c h t h e same r e v o l u t i o n a r y way t h a t t h e inven-
t i o n of t h e p r i n t i n g press m a d e extensive v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n
possible a n d easy.
Of m u c h less past i m p o r t a n c e t h a n these in its r e l a t i o n s h i p to life,
because m u c h less clearly u n d e r s t o o d , is t h a t o t h e r p h a s e of photog-
r a p h y w h i c h I h a v e p a r t i c u l a r l y s t u d i e d a n d w o r k e d w i t h , a n d to
w h i c h I will confine myself. I refer to t h e use of t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c
m e a n s as a m e d i u m of expression in t h e sense t h a t p a i n t , stone, words,
a n d s o u n d are used for s u c h p u r p o s e . I n short, as a n o t h e r set of ma-
terials w h i c h , in t h e h a n d s of a few i n d i v i d u a l s a n d w h e n u n d e r the
c o n t r o l of the m o s t i n t e n s e i n n e r necessity c o m b i n e d w i t h k n o w l e d g e ,
m a y b e c o m e an o r g a n i s m w i t h a life of its o w n , as a tree or a m o u n -
t a i n has a life of its o w n . I say a few i n d i v i d u a l s because they, t h e t r u e
artists, are a l m o s t as r a r e a p h e n o m e n o n a m o n g p a i n t e r s , sculptors,
composers as a m o n g p h o t o g r a p h e r s .
N o w the p r o d u c t i o n of such living o r g a n i s m s in t e r m s of a n y ma-
terial is the result of t h e m e e t i n g of two t h i n g s in t h e w o r k e r . It
involves, first a n d f o r e m o s t , a t h o r o u g h respect a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g
for the p a r t i c u l a r m a t e r i a l s w i t h w h i c h h e o r she is i m p e l l e d to work,
a n d a degree of m a s t e r y o v e r t h e m , w h i c h is c r a f t s m a n s h i p . A n d
secondly, t h a t i n d e f i n a b l e s o m e t h i n g , the living e l e m e n t w h i c h fuses
w i t h c r a f t s m a n s h i p , t h e e l e m e n t w h i c h relates t h e p r o d u c t to life
a n d m u s t t h e r e f o r e be t h e result of a p r o f o u n d feeling a n d e x p e r i e n c e
of life. C r a f t s m a n s h i p is the f u n d a m e n t a l basis w h i c h you can learn
a n d d e v e l o p p r o v i d e d you start w i t h a b s o l u t e respect for y o u r ma-
terials, w h i c h , as s t u d e n t s of p h o t o g r a p h y , are a m a c h i n e called cam-
era a n d the chemistry of light a n d o t h e r agents u p o n metals. T h e
living element, the plus, you can also develop if it is p o t e n t i a l l y there.
It c a n n o t be t a u g h t or given you. Its d e v e l o p m e n t is c o n d i t i o n e d by
your own feeling which m u s t be a free way of living. By a f r e e way of
living I m e a n the difficult process of f i n d i n g o u t w h a t your o w n feel-
ing a b o u t the world is, d i s e n t a n g l i n g it f r o m o t h e r people's feelings
a n d ideas. In o t h e r words, this w a n t i n g to be w h a t may t r u t h f u l l y be
called a n artist is the last t h i n g in t h e world to worry a b o u t . You
either are t h a t t h i n g or you are not.
N o w the general n o t i o n of artist is q u i t e a different m a t t e r . T h i s
n o t i o n uses the w o r d to describe a n y o n e w h o has a little talent a n d
ability, p a r t i c u l a r l y in t h e use of p a i n t , a n d confuses this talent, the
c o m m o n e s t t h i n g in t h e world, w i t h the exceedingly rare ability to
use it creatively. T h u s everybody w h o slings a little p a i n t is an artist,
a n d the word, like m a n y o t h e r words w h i c h have been used uncriti-
cally, ceases to have any m e a n i n g as a symbol of c o m m u n i c a t i o n .
However, w h e n you look back over the d e v e l o p m e n t of photog-
r a p h y , w h e n you look at w h a t is being d o n e today still in the n a m e of
p h o t o g r a p h y in Photograms of the Year in t h e year book of the
pictorial p h o t o g r a p h e r s , it is a p p a r e n t t h a t this generally erroneous
n o t i o n of artist has been a n d is the chief worry of p h o t o g r a p h e r s a n d
their u n d o i n g . T h e y , too, w o u l d like to be accepted in polite so-
ciety as artists, as a n y o n e w h o paints is accepted, a n d so they try to
t u r n p h o t o g r a p h y i n t o s o m e t h i n g which it is not; they i n t r o d u c e a
p a i n t feeling. I n fact, I k n o w of very few p h o t o g r a p h e r s whose work
is n o t evidence t h a t at b o t t o m they would p r e f e r to p a i n t if they
knew how. O f t e n , perhaps, they are n o t conscious of their subjuga-
tion to t h e idea of p a i n t i n g , of the absence of all respect a n d under-
s t a n d i n g of t h e i r o w n m e d i u m which this implies a n d which sterilizes
their work. But, nevertheless, either in their p o i n t of view toward
the things they p h o t o g r a p h , or m o r e o f t e n in the h a n d l i n g of certain
u n p h o t o g r a p h i c materials, they betray their indebtedness to p a i n t i n g ,
usually second-rate p a i n t i n g . For t h e p a t h e t i c p a r t is t h a t the idea
which p h o t o g r a p h e r s h a v e h a d of p a i n t i n g is just as uncritical a n d
r u d i m e n t a r y as this p o p u l a r n o t i o n of the artist. T h e r e is every
evidence in their work t h a t they have n o t followed the whole develop-
m e n t of p a i n t i n g as they have not perceived t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of
t h e i r own m e d i u m .
You need n o t take my w o r d for this. T h e record is there. You can
see f o r yourself the whole p h o t o g r a p h i c past, its t r a d i t i o n , in t h a t
e x t r a o r d i n a r y p u b l i c a t i o n , Camera Work. For p h o t o g r a p h y has a
t r a d i t i o n , a l t h o u g h most of those w h o are p h o t o g r a p h i n g today seem
to be u n a w a r e of the fact. T h a t is at least o n e of the reasons why
they are prey to t h e weaknesses a n d misconceptions of t h a t tradition
a n d are u n a b l e to clarify or to a d d one iota to its d e v e l o p m e n t . So if
you w a n t to p h o t o g r a p h , a n d if you are not living on a desert island,
look at this t r a d i t i o n critically, find o u t w h a t p h o t o g r a p h y has m e a n t
to o t h e r people, w h e r e i n their work succeeds or fails to satisfy, w h e t h e r
you t h i n k you could h a n g it o n t h e same wall w i t h a Diirer woodcut,
a p a i n t i n g by R u b e n s or even Corot, w i t h o u t the p h o t o g r a p h falling
to pieces. For this is, a f t e r all, the test, not of Art, b u t of livingness.
In my own e x a m i n a t i o n of the p h o t o g r a p h i c t r a d i t i o n I h a v e f o u n d
o u t for myself, a n d I t h i n k it can be d e m o n s t r a t e d , t h a t there are very
few p h o t o g r a p h s w h i c h will meet this test. A n d they will n o t because,
a l t h o u g h m u c h of the work is the result of a sensitive feeling for life,
it is based, nevertheless, o n t h a t f u n d a m e n t a l misconception t h a t the
p h o t o g r a p h i c m e a n s is a short cut to p a i n t i n g . B u t f r o m t h e p o i n t of
view of g e n u i n e a n d e n t h u s i a s t i c e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n , however it may
have been o n t h e w r o n g track, this work will always have great
historical i m p o r t a n c e , will be i n v a l u a b l e to t h e s t u d e n t . T h e g u m
prints of t h e G e r m a n s , H e n n e b e r g , Watzek, t h e H o f m e i s t e r s a n d
Kiihn, those of Steichen, will never h a p p e n again. N o b o d y will be
willing to s p e n d t h e time a n d energy or h a v e the conviction necessary
to t h e p r o d u c t i o n of these things. A n d it is w h e n o n e finds, as one
does today, p h o t o g r a p h e r s all over the world, in E n g l a n d , Belgium,
G e r m a n y , in this c o u n t r y , g o i n g r i g h t a h e a d as t h o u g h n o t h i n g h a d
ever h a p p e n e d , using this a n d o t h e r m a n i p u l a t i v e processes w i t h o u t
one o n e - t h o u s a n d t h of the intensity or ability w i t h w h i c h their
predecessors worked, that such work ceases to h a v e any m e a n i n g a n d
becomes merely a b s u r d .
Let us stop for a m o m e n t before discussing f u r t h e r t h e photo-
g r a p h i c past a n d present, to d e t e r m i n e w h a t the m a t e r i a l s of photog-
r a p h y really are; w h a t , w h e n they a r e not perverted, they can do. W e
have a camera, a m a c h i n e w h i c h has been p u t i n t o o u r h a n d s by
science. W i t h its so-called d e a d eye, t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of objects may
be recorded u p o n a sensitive emulsion. F r o m this negative a positive
p r i n t can be m a d e w h i c h w i t h o u t any extrinsic m a n u a l interference
will register a scale of t o n a l values in black a n d w h i t e far b e y o n d the
power of the h u m a n h a n d or eye. It can also record the d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n
of the textures of objects as the h u m a n h a n d c a n n o t . Moreover, a
lens optically corrected can d r a w a line which, a l t h o u g h different
f r o m t h e line d r a w n by h a n d , let us say t h e line of Ingres, f o r example,
may nevertheless be equally subtle a n d compelling. T h e s e , the forms
of objects, their relative colour values, textures, a n d line, are the
i n s t r u m e n t s , strictly p h o t o g r a p h i c , of your orchestra. T h e s e t h e pho-
t o g r a p h e r must learn to u n d e r s t a n d a n d control, h a r m o n i z e . But the
camera m a c h i n e c a n n o t evade the objects which are in f r o n t of it.
N o m o r e can the p h o t o g r a p h e r . H e can choose these objects, arrange,
a n d exclude, before exposure, b u t not afterwards. T h a t is his prob-
lem, these the expressive i n s t r u m e n t s w i t h which he can solve it.
But w h e n he does select the m o m e n t , t h e light, the objects, he m u s t be
t r u e to t h e m . If he includes in his space a strip of grass, it m u s t be felt
as the living d i f f e r e n t i a t e d t h i n g it is, a n d so recorded. It m u s t take
its p r o p e r b u t no less i m p o r t a n t place as a shape a n d a texture, in
r e l a t i o n s h i p to the m o u n t a i n , tree, or w h a t n o t , w h i c h are included.
You m u s t use a n d control objectivity t h r o u g h p h o t o g r a p h y because
you c a n n o t evade or gloss over by the use of u n p h o t o g r a p h i c methods.
P h o t o g r a p h y so u n d e r s t o o d a n d conceived is just b e g i n n i n g to
emerge, to be used consciously as a m e d i u m of expression. I n those
o t h e r phases of p h o t o g r a p h i c m e t h o d which I m e n t i o n e d , that is,
in scientific a n d o t h e r record making, there has been at least, p e r h a p s
of necessity, a m o d i c u m of t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d control of purely
p h o t o g r a p h i c qualities. T h a t is why I said these o t h e r phases were
nearer to a t r u t h t h a n all the so-called pictorialism, especially the
u n o r i g i n a l , u n e x p e r i m e n t a l pictorialism which today fills salons a n d
year-books. C o m p a r e d w i t h this so-called pictorial p h o t o g r a p h y ,
which is n o t h i n g b u t an evasion of everything truly p h o t o g r a p h i c ,
all d o n e in the n a m e of art a n d G o d knows w h a t , a simple record in
t h e National Geographic Magazine, a D r u e t r e p r o d u c t i o n of a paint-
ing or a n aerial p h o t o g r a p h i c record is a n u n m i x e d relief. T h e y are
honest, direct, a n d sometimes i n f o r m e d w i t h beauty, however unin-
tentional. I said a simple record. Well, they are not so simple to make,
as most of the pictorial p h o t o g r a p h e r s would find o u t if they threw
away their oil p i g m e n t s a n d their soft-focus lenses, both of which
cover a m u l t i t u d e of sins, m u c h absence of knowledge, m u c h sloppy
w o r k m a n s h i p . I n reality they do n o t cover t h e m for a n y o n e w h o sees.
Gums, oils, soft-focus lenses, these are the worst enemies, n o t of
p h o t o g r a p h y , which can vindicate itself easily a n d naturally, b u t of
p h o t o g r a p h e r s . T h e whole p h o t o g r a p h i c past a n d present, with few
exceptions, has been w e a k e n e d a n d sterilized by the use of these
things. Between t h e past a n d the present, however, r e m e m b e r t h a t
there is this distinction—that in t h e past these extrinsic m e t h o d s were
p e r h a p s necessary as a p a r t of p h o t o g r a p h i c e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n a n d
clarification. B u t there is no such excuse for their c o n t i n u e d use
today. M e n like Kiihn a n d Steichen, w h o were masters of m a n i p u l a -
tion a n d diffusion, have themselves a b a n d o n e d this interference
because they f o u n d the result was a meaningless m i x t u r e , not paint-
ing, a n d certainly not p h o t o g r a p h y . A n d yet p h o t o g r a p h e r s go right
o n today g u m m i n g a n d oiling a n d soft-focussing w i t h o u t a trace of
that skill a n d conviction which these two men possessed, who have
a b a n d o n e d it. Of course, there is n o t h i n g i m m o r a l in it. A n d there
is no reason why they should not a m u s e themselves. It merely has
n o t h i n g to do with p h o t o g r a p h y , n o t h i n g to d o with p a i n t i n g , a n d
is a p r o d u c t of a misconception of both. For this is w h a t these proc-
esses a n d materials do—your oil a n d your g u m i n t r o d u c e a p a i n t feel-
ing, a t h i n g even m o r e alien to p h o t o g r a p h y t h a n colour is in an
etching, a n d L o r d knows a coloured e t c h i n g is e n o u g h of an abomina-
tion. By i n t r o d u c i n g p i g m e n t t e x t u r e you kill t h e e x t r a o r d i n a r y
d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of textures possible only to p h o t o g r a p h y . A n d you
destroy the subtlety of tonalities. W i t h your soft-focus lens you
destroy the solidity of your forms, likewise all d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of tex-
tures, a n d the line diffused is no longer a line, for a significant line,
t h a t is, one t h a t really has a r h y t h m i c e m o t i o n a l intensity does not
vibrate laterally b u t back, in a t h i r d d i m e n s i o n . You see, it is n o t a
q u e s t i o n of p u r e or straight p h o t o g r a p h y f r o m a m o r a l p o i n t of view.
It is simply t h a t the physical, d e m o n s t r a b l e results f r o m the use of
u n p h o t o g r a p h i c methods, do n o t satisfy, d o n o t live, f o r t h e reasons
I have m e n t i o n e d . T h e formless h a l a t e d quality of light which you
get at such cost with a soft-focus lens will n o t satisfy. T h e simplifica-
tion so easily achieved w i t h it, a n d with these m a n i p u l a t i v e proc-
esses will not satisfy. It is all m u c h too easy, as I know, because I have
been t h r o u g h t h e mill myself. I h a v e m a d e g u m prints, five print-
ings, a n d I have W h i s t l e r e d w i t h a soft-focus lens. It is n o t h i n g to be
a s h a m e d of. I h a d to go t h r o u g h this experience for myself at a time
when t h e t r u e m e a n i n g of p h o t o g r a p h y h a d not crystallized, was n o t
so s h a r p l y defined as it is today, a crystallization, by the way, which
is the result not of talk a n d theorizing, b u t of work actually d o n e .
P h o t o g r a p h y , its philosophy, so to speak, is just b e g i n n i n g to emerge
t h r o u g h t h e work of one m a n , A l f r e d Stieglitz, of w h i c h I will speak
later.
In short, p h o t o g r a p h e r s h a v e destroyed'by the use of these extrinsic
m e t h o d s a n d materials, the expressiveness of those i n s t r u m e n t s of
form, t e x t u r e a n d line possible a n d i n h e r e n t in strictly p h o t o g r a p h i c
processes. A n d these i n s t r u m e n t s , a l t h o u g h they are d i f f e r e n t in t h e
source a n d m a n n e r of p r o d u c t i o n , therefore d i f f e r e n t in t h e character
of their expressiveness, f r o m those of any o t h e r plastic m e t h o d , are
nevertheless related to t h e i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n of t h e veritable p a i n t e r
a n d etcher.
For if p h o t o g r a p h e r s h a d really looked at p a i n t i n g , t h a t is, all
p a i n t i n g , critically as a d e v e l o p m e n t , if they h a d n o t been c o n t e n t to
stop with the superficial aspects of Whistler, Japanese prints, the
inferior work of G e r m a n a n d English landscape painters, Corot, etc.,
they m i g h t have discovered this—that t h e solidity of forms, the dif-
f e r e n t i a t i o n of textures, line, a n d colour are used as significant instru-
m e n t s in all the s u p r e m e achievements of p a i n t i n g . N o n e of the paint-
ing just referred to comes in t h a t category. P h o t o g r a p h e r s , as I have
said before, have been influenced by a n d have sought to i m i t a t e either
consciously or not consciously the work of i n f e r i o r painters. T h e work
of R u b e n s , Michelangelo, El Greco, Cezanne, R e n o i r , M a r i n , Picasso,
or Matisse c a n n o t be so easily translated i n t o p h o t o g r a p h y , for t h e
simple reason that they have used their m e d i u m so purely, have built
so m u c h on its i n h e r e n t qualities that e n c r o a c h m e n t is well-nigh im-
possible. A n d it is being d e m o n s t r a t e d today that a p h o t o g r a p h like-
wise b u i l t u p o n t h e basic qualities of p h o t o g r a p h y c a n n o t be imitated
or e n c r o a c h e d u p o n in any way by p a i n t e r or etcher. It is as m u c h a
t h i n g w i t h its own u n a l i e n a b l e character, w i t h its own special q u a l i t y
of expressiveness, as any fully realized p r o d u c t of o t h e r m e d i a .
T h e u n i n t e l l i g e n c e of present-day p h o t o g r a p h e r s , t h a t is of so-
called pictorial p h o t o g r a p h e r s , lies in the fact t h a t they have n o t
discovered the basic qualities of their m e d i u m , either t h r o u g h the
misconceptions of the past or t h r o u g h working. T h e y d o not see t h e
t h i n g w h i c h is h a p p e n i n g , or which has h a p p e n e d , because they do
n o t k n o w their own t r a d i t i o n . T h i s is p r o v e n by their c o n t i n u e d
p u e r i l e use of t h e u n p h o t o g r a p h i c m e t h o d s just dealt with, evidence
t h a t they are still d o m i n a t e d by a r u d i m e n t a r y , uncritical c o n c e p t i o n
of p a i n t i n g , t h a t they see in a half-baked, s e m i - p h o t o g r a p h i c p r o d u c t ,
a short cut to w h a t they conceive p a i n t i n g to be, a n d to t h e recogni-
tion of themselves as artists. But, above all, t h e lack of k n o w l e d g e of
their own t r a d i t i o n is proved by t h e fact t h a t t h o u s a n d s of n u m b e r s
of Camera Work lie idle today in storage vaults, in cellars, clutter
u p shelves. T h e s e marvellous books w h i c h h a v e no c o u n t e r p a r t or
equal, w h i c h contain t h e only c o m p l e t e record of the d e v e l o p m e n t
of p h o t o g r a p h y a n d its r e l a t i o n s h i p to o t h e r phases of life, to t h e
p u b l i c a t i o n of which Stieglitz devoted years of love a n d e n t h u s i a s m
a n d h a r d work, p h o t o g r a p h e r s h a v e left to rot o n his hands, a constant
weight u p o n h i m , physical a n d financial. T h a t he has not destroyed
every copy is a miracle. But he c o n t i n u e s to preserve t h e m as well as
t h e collection of p h o t o g r a p h s r e p r e s e n t i n g this past d e v e l o p m e n t of
p h o t o g r a p h y , the only collection of its k i n d in existence, a n d most of
w h i c h he purchased—all this he preserves perhaps, because he has
f a i t h in p h o t o g r a p h y , in t h e work he has d o n e , a n d in t h e y o u n g
g e n e r a t i o n s of students, who, he hopes, will seek t h e m o u t a n d use
t h e m ; t h a t is, use all this past e x p e r i m e n t , n o t to imitate, b u t as a
m e a n s of clarifying their own work, of growing, as the p a i n t e r w h o
is also an artist can use his t r a d i t i o n . P h o t o g r a p h e r s have no o t h e r
access to their t r a d i t i o n , to t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l work of t h e past. For
whereas t h e p a i n t e r may a c q u a i n t himself w i t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d
past achievements of his m e d i u m , such is n o t t h e case for t h e student-
worker in p h o t o g r a p h y . T h e r e is n o place where you can see the work
of Hill, W h i t e , K'asebier, Eugene, Stieglitz as well as the work of
E u r o p e , o n p e r m a n e n t e x h i b i t i o n . Yet t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s d o not
seem to be interested. T h e y have d o n e n o t h i n g to h e l p preserve or
use these things. T h i s is in itself a criticism of their intensity, a n d it
shows in t h e quality of their work. All the way t h r o u g h there is this
absence of f a i t h in the dignity a n d w o r t h of their own m e d i u m how-
ever used or misused, a n d , at t h e same time, t h e a b s u r d a t t e m p t to
prove to t h e world t h a t they, too, are artists. T h e two things d o not
jibe. So I say to you again, t h e record is there, accessible to a n y o n e
sufficiently interested. If w h e n you have s t u d i e d it, you still have to
g u m , oil, or soft-focus, t h a t is all r i g h t , that is your experience to go
t h r o u g h with. T h e h u m a n a n i m a l seems u n a b l e for some reason or
o t h e r to learn m u c h f r o m e i t h e r the blunders, or t h e wisdom of the
past. H e n c e t h e war. B u t there are, nevertheless, laws to which he
m u s t u l t i m a t e l y c o n f o r m or be destroyed. P h o t o g r a p h y , being one
m a n i f e s t a t i o n of life, is also subject to such laws. I m e a n by laws
those forces w h i c h control the qualities of things, which m a k e it
impossible for a n o a k tree to b r i n g f o r t h chestnuts. Well, t h a t is w h a t
p h o t o g r a p h e r s h a v e been trying to m a k e p h o t o g r a p h y do—make
chestnuts, a n d usually old chestnuts, grow o n a n oak tree. I w o n ' t say
it can't be done, b u t it certainly has n o t been done. I d o n ' t care how
you p h o t o g r a p h — u s e the kitchen m o p if you must, b u t if the p r o d u c t
is n o t t r u e to the laws of p h o t o g r a p h y , t h a t is, if it is n o t based o n the
i n h e r e n t qualities I h a v e m e n t i o n e d , as it will not, you have pro-
d u c e d s o m e t h i n g which is n e i t h e r a n acorn or a chestnut, s o m e t h i n g
which is d e a d . Of course, it does n o t follow t h a t if you d o m a k e w h a t
has been called a good straight p h o t o g r a p h , you will thereby auto-
matically create a living o r g a n i s m , b u t , at least, you will have d o n e
an honest piece of work, s o m e t h i n g w h i c h may give the p l e a s u r e of
craftsmanship.
A n d if you can find o u t s o m e t h i n g a b o u t the laws of your own
g r o w t h a n d vision as well as those of p h o t o g r a p h y you may be able
to relate the two, create a n object w h i c h has a life of its own, which
transcends c r a f t s m a n s h i p . T h a t is a long road, a n d because it must
be your own r o a d nobody can teach it to you or find it for you. T h e r e
are no short cuts, n o rules.
P e r h a p s you will say: B u t wait, how a b o u t design a n d composition,
or, in p a i n t e r ' s lingo, o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d significant form? My answer
is t h a t these a r e words which, w h e n they become f o r m u l a t e d , signify,
as a rule, perfectly d e a d things. T h a t is to say w h e n a veritable creator
comes along, he finds the only form in which he clothes his feelings
a n d ideas. If he works in a g r a p h i c m e d i u m he m u s t find a way to
simplify the expression a n d e l i m i n a t e e v e r y t h i n g t h a t is irrelevant
to it. Every p a r t of his picture, w h e t h e r a p a i n t i n g , etching, or a
p h o t o g r a p h , m u s t be m e a n i n g f u l , related to every o t h e r p a r t . T h i s he
does n a t u r a l l y a n d inevitably by utilizing the t r u e qualities of his
m e d i u m in its r e l a t i o n to his experience of life. N o w w h e n he has
d o n e this t r a n s c e n d e n t t h i n g , a f t e r m u c h h a r d work, e x p e r i m e n t , a n d
m a n y failures, t h e critic a n d the professors, etc., a p p e a r o n the scene,
usually fifteen or twenty years a f t e r t h e m a n has died, a n d they d e d u c e
f r o m his work rules of composition a n d design. T h e n the school grows
a n d academic i m i t a t i o n , u n t i l finally a n o t h e r m a n comes along, a n d ,
also n a t u r a l l y a n d inevitably, breaks all t h e rules w h i c h the critics
a n d the professors have neatly tied u p w i t h b l u e ribbons. A n d so it
goes. In o t h e r words, composition, design, etc., c a n n o t be fixed by
rules, they are not in themselves a static prescription by which you
can m a k e a p h o t o g r a p h or a n y t h i n g that has m e a n i n g . T h e y signify
merely t h e way of synthesis a n d simplification which creative indi-
viduals have f o u n d for themselves. If you have s o m e t h i n g to say a b o u t
life, you must also find a way of saying it clearly. A n d if you achieve
t h a t clarity of b o t h p e r c e p t i o n a n d the ability to record it, you will
have created your own composition, your own k i n d of design, per-
sonal to you, related to o t h e r people's, yet your o w n . T h e p o i n t I
w a n t to m a k e is t h a t there is no such t h i n g as T H E way; there is only
for each i n d i v i d u a l , his or her way, w h i c h in t h e last analysis, each
one m u s t find for himself in p h o t o g r a p h y a n d in living. As a m a t t e r
of fact, your p h o t o g r a p h y is a record of your living, for anyone w h o
really sees. You may see a n d be affected by o t h e r people's ways, you
may even use t h e m to find your own, b u t you will have eventually to
free yourself of t h e m . T h a t is w h a t Nietsche m e a n t w h e n he said,
"I have just r e a d S c h o p e n h a u e r , now I have to get rid of h i m . " H e
k n e w how insidious o t h e r people's ways could be, particularly those
w h i c h have the forcefulness of p r o f o u n d experience, if you let t h e m
get between you a n d your own vision. So I say to you t h a t composi-
tion a n d design m e a n n o t h i n g unless they are the m o u l d s you your-
selves h a v e m a d e , i n t o w h i c h to p o u r your own content, a n d unless
you can m a k e the m o u l d , w h i c h you c a n n o t if you do n o t respect
your m a t e r i a l s a n d h a v e some mastery over them, you have no chance
to release t h a t c o n t e n t . I n o t h e r words, learn to p h o t o g r a p h first,
learn y o u r craft, a n d in t h e d o i n g of t h a t you will find a way, if you
have a n y t h i n g to say, of saying it. T h e old masters were c r a f t s m e n
first, some of t h e m artists, afterwards. N o w this analysis of photog-
r a p h y a n d p h o t o g r a p h e r s is n o t a theory, b u t derived f r o m my own
experience as a worker, a n d m o r e t h a n t h a t even, is based o n the
concrete achievements of D. O. H i l l , w h o p h o t o g r a p h e d in 1843, a n d
of A l f r e d Stieglitz, whose work today is the result of thirty-five years
of e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n . T h e work of these two m e n : H i l l , the o n e pho-
t o g r a p h i c primitive, Stieglitz, w h o has been t h e leader in the fight
to establish p h o t o g r a p h y , n o t p h o t o g r a p h e r s , stands o u t sharply f r o m
t h a t of all o t h e r p h o t o g r a p h e r s . It embodies, in my o p i n i o n , the only
two fully realized truly p h o t o g r a p h i c expressions, so far, a n d is a
critical c o m m e n t u p o n t h e misconceptions of the i n t e r m e d i a r y past
a n d t h e sterility of t h e present. T h e work of b o t h disclaims any
a t t e m p t to p a i n t , either in feeling or in h a n d l i n g .
T h e psychology of H i l l is interesting. H e himself was a p a i n t e r , a
m e m b e r of the Royal Scotch Academy, a n d one of his commissions
was to p a i n t a p i c t u r e in which were to a p p e a r recognizable portraits
of some one h u n d r e d or m o r e n o t a b l e people of t h e time. H e h a d
h e a r d of t h e lately invented process of p h o t o g r a p h y , a n d it occurred
to h i m t h a t it m i g h t be of considerable assistance in the p a i n t i n g of
his picture. H e began to e x p e r i m e n t w i t h a c r u d e camera a n d lens,
w i t h p a p e r negatives, exposures in the sun five or six minutes, a n d
he became so fascinated by these things that he neglected his p a i n t i n g .
H e worked tor t h r e e years w i t h p h o t o g r a p h y a n d t h e n finally, when
his wife a n d f r i e n d s got at h i m a n d told h i m he was a n artist wasting
his time, in o t h e r words, gave h i m a b a d conscience, he gave it u p
and, as far as we know, never p h o t o g r a p h e d again. In o t h e r words,
w h e n Hill p h o t o g r a p h e d he was not t h i n k i n g of p a i n t i n g . H e was
not trying to t u r n p h o t o g r a p h y i n t o p a i n t or even to m a k e it d o an
e q u i v a l e n t . S t a r t i n g w i t h t h e idea of using p h o t o g r a p h y as a means, it
so fascinated h i m t h a t it soon became a n e n d in itself. T h e results
of his e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n reveal, therefore, a certain directness, a quality
of p e r c e p t i o n which, w i t h Hill's e x t r a o r d i n a r y feeling for the p e o p l e
w h o m he p h o t o g r a p h e d , has m a d e his work stand u n s u r p a s s e d until
today. A n d this, m i n d you, despite the crudity of t h e m a t e r i a l s with
which he h a d to work, the long exposures, etc., a n d in spite of the fact
that George E a s t m a n was n o t there to tell H i l l that all he (Hill) h a d
to do was to press t h e b u t t o n a n d he (Eastman) w o u l d do the rest. H e
was not trying to p a i n t w i t h p h o t o g r a p h y . Moreover, it is interesting
to n o t e t h a t his p a i n t i n g , in w h i c h he was constrained by the academic
s t a n d a r d s of t h e time, has passed i n t o obscurity. His p h o t o g r a p h y , in
which he was really free, lives.
T h e work of Stieglitz, f r o m t h e earliest e x a m p l e s d o n e thirty-five
years ago, to t h e amazing things he is d o i n g today, exhibits to even a
m o r e m a r k e d degree this r e m a r k a b l e absence of all i n t e r f e r e n c e with
the a u t h e n t i c q u a l i t i e s of p h o t o g r a p h y . T h e r e is not the slightest
trace of p a i n t feeling or evidence of a desire to p a i n t . Years ago, w h e n
he was a s t u d e n t in G e r m a n y p a i n t e r s w h o saw his p h o t o g r a p h s o f t e n
said, "Of course, this is n o t Art, b u t we w o u l d like to p a i n t t h e way
you p h o t o g r a p h . " His reply was, " I d o n ' t know a n y t h i n g a b o u t Art,
b u t for some reason or o t h e r I h a v e never w a n t e d to p h o t o g r a p h t h e
way you p a i n t . " T h e r e you have a c o m p l e t e s t a t e m e n t of t h e differ-
ence between the a t t i t u d e of Stieglitz towards p h o t o g r a p h y , a n d
practically every o t h e r p h o t o g r a p h e r . A n d it is t h e r e in his work, f r o m
the earliest to t h e latest. F r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g Stieglitz has accepted
the c a m e r a machine, instinctively f o u n d in it something which was
p a r t of himself, a n d loved it. A n d that is p r e r e q u i s i t e to any living
p h o t o g r a p h i c expression for anyone.
I do not w a n t to discuss in detail this work of Stieglitz, as a n o t h e r
e x h i b i t i o n of his most recent p h o t o g r a p h s o p e n s A p r i l 1 at the Ander-
son Galleries. G o a n d see these things yourselves. If possible, look at
t h e earlier p h o t o g r a p h s in Camera Work, so t h a t you can follow
the d e v e l o p m e n t of his k n o w l e d g e a n d of his perceptions. Stieglitz has
gone m u c h f u r t h e r t h a n Hill. H i s work is m u c h wider in scope, m o r e
conscious, t h e result of m a n y m o r e years of intensive e x p e r i m e n t .
Every i n s t r u m e n t , form, texture, line, a n d even p r i n t colour are
b r o u g h t i n t o play, s u b j u g a t e d t h r o u g h t h e m a c h i n e to the single
p u r p o s e of expression. N o t i c e how every object, every b l a d e of grass,
is felt a n d accounted for, the lull acceptance a n d use of the t h i n g in
f r o n t of it. Note, too, t h a t the size a n d shape of his m o u n t s become
p a r t of t h e expression. H e spends m o n t h s sometimes just trying to
m o u n t a p h o t o g r a p h , so sensitive is t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Observe also
how he has used solarization, really a defect, how he has used it as a
v i r t u e consciously, m a d e t h e negative w i t h t h a t in m i n d . T h a t is
truly creative use of material, perfectly legitimate, perfectly photo-
graphic.
In o t h e r words, go a n d see w h a t p h o t o g r a p h y really is, w h a t it
can record in t h e h a n d s of o n e w h o has w o r k e d w i t h intense respect
a n d intelligence, w h o has lived equally intensely, w i t h o u t theories.
Stieglitz f o u g h t for years to give o t h e r p e o p l e a chance to work a n d
to develop, a n d he is still fighting. T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r s failed. T h e y
d i d not develop, d i d not grow. Stieglitz has d o n e for p h o t o g r a p h y
w h a t they have not been able to do. H e has taken it o u t of the realm
of misconception a n d a promise, a n d m a d e it a f u l f i l m e n t .
In his e x h i b i t i o n two years ago he set aside t h e q u e s t i o n of w h e t h e r
p h o t o g r a p h y is or is not art as of no i m p o r t a n c e to h i m , just as he
d i d thirty-five years ago. Exactly, because nobody knows w h a t art is,
or G o d or all the o t h e r abstractions, p a r t i c u l a r l y those w h o m a k e
claims to such knowledge. T h e r e are a few, however, w h o do k n o w
w h a t p h o t o g r a p h y is a n d w h a t p a i n t i n g is. T h e y k n o w t h a t t h e r e is
as m u c h p a i n t i n g which is b a d p h o t o g r a p h y as most p h o t o g r a p h y is
b a d p a i n t i n g . In short, they have some idea w h e t h e r a t h i n g is g e n u i n e
a n d alive or false a n d dead.
I n closing, I will say this to you as students of p h o t o g r a p h y . D o n ' t
t h i n k w h e n I say students t h a t I am trying to talk d o w n . W e are all
students, i n c l u d i n g Stieglitz. Some a little longer at it t h a n the others,
a little m o r e experienced. W h e n you cease to be a s t u d e n t you m i g h t
as well be d e a d as far as the significance of your work is concerned.
So I am simply t a l k i n g to you as o n e s t u d e n t to others, o u t of my own
experience. A n d I say to you, before you give your time, a n d you will
h a v e to give m u c h , to p h o t o g r a p h y , find o u t in yourselves how m u c h
it m e a n s to you. If you really w a n t to p a i n t , t h e n do not p h o t o g r a p h
except as you may w a n t to a m u s e yourselves along with the rest of
Mr. Eastman's customers. P h o t o g r a p h y is not a short cut to p a i n t i n g ,
being an artist, or a n y t h i n g else. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , if this camera
m a c h i n e w i t h its materials fascinates you, compels your energy a n d
respect, learn to p h o t o g r a p h . Find o u t first w h a t this m a c h i n e a n d
these materials can do w i t h o u t any interference except your own
vision. P h o t o g r a p h a tree, a m a c h i n e , a table, any old thing; do it
over a n d over again u n d e r different c o n d i t i o n s of light. See w h a t
your negative will record. F i n d o u t w h a t your papers, chloride,
b r o m i d e , p a l l a d i u m , the different grades of these, will register. W h a t
differences in colour you can get with different developers, a n d how
these differences affect t h e expression of your p r i n t s . E x p e r i m e n t
w i t h m o u n t s to see w h a t shape a n d size d o to your p h o t o g r a p h . T h e
field is limitless, i n e x h a u s t i b l e , w i t h o u t o n c e s t e p p i n g o u t s i d e the
n a t u r a l b o u n d a r i e s of t h e m e d i u m . I n short, w o r k , e x p e r i m e n t a n d
f o r g e t a b o u t a r t , pictorialisrrt, a n d o t h e r u n i m p o r t a n t m o r e o r less
m e a n i n g l e s s phrases. L o o k at Camera Work. L o o k at it critically,
k n o w at least w h a t p h o t o g r a p h e r s h a v e d o n e . L o o k also j u s t as
critically at w h a t is b e i n g d o n e a n d w h a t you are d o i n g . L o o k at
p a i n t i n g if you will, b u t the w h o l e d e v e l o p m e n t ; d o n ' t s t o p w i t h
W h i s t l e r a n d J a p a n e s e p r i n t s . Some h a v e said t h a t Stieglitz' p o r t r a i t s
were so r e m a r k a b l e b e c a u s e h e h y p n o t i s e d p e o p l e . G o a n d see w h a t
h e has d o n e w i t h clouds; find o u t w h e t h e r his h y p n o t i c p o w e r e x t e n d s
to t h e elements.
L o o k at all these things. G e t at t h e i r m e a n i n g to you; assimilate
w h a t you can, a n d get r i d of t h e rest. A b o v e all, look at the t h i n g s
a r o u n d you, t h e i m m e d i a t e w o r l d a r o u n d you. If you are alive, it will
m e a n s o m e t h i n g to you, a n d if you care e n o u g h a b o u t p h o t o g r a p h y ,
a n d if you k n o w h o w to use i t , . y o u will w a n t to p h o t o g r a p h t h a t
m e a n i n g . If you let o t h e r p e o p l e ' s vision get b e t w e e n t h e w o r l d
a n d your o w n , you will achieve t h a t e x t r e m e l y c o m m o n a n d w o r t h -
less t h i n g , a p i c t o r i a l p h o t o g r a p h . B u t if you k e e p this vision clear
you m a y m a k e s o m e t h i n g w h i c h is at least a p h o t o g r a p h , w h i c h has
a life of its o w n , as a tree o r a m a t c h b o x , if you see it, has a life of its
o w n . A n o r g a n i s m w h i c h refuses t o let you t h i n k a b o u t a r t , pic-
torialism, o r even p h o t o g r a p h y , it simply is. F o r t h e a c h i e v e m e n t of
this t h e r e are n o s h o r t cuts, n o f o r m u l a e , n o rules e x c e p t those of
y o u r o w n living. T h e r e is necessary, h o w e v e r , t h e s h a r p e s t k i n d of
self-criticism, courage, a n d h a r d work. B u t first l e a r n to p h o t o g r a p h .
T h a t a l o n e I find for myself is a p r o b l e m w i t h o u t e n d .

EDWARD WESTON (1886-1958) The photographer's power lies in his ability

to re-create his subject in terms of its basic reality, and present this re-creation
in such a form that the spectator feels that he is seeing not just a symbol for
the object, but the thing itself revealed for the first time. Guided by the photog-
rapher's selective understanding, the penetrating power of the camera-eye can
be used to produce a heightened sense of reality—a kind of super realism
that reveals the vital essences of things, W H A T IS P H O T O G R A P H I C B E A U T Y ?
Camera Craft, Vol. 46, 1939, p. 254.

PHOTOGRAPHY—NOT PICTORIAL 1930

Camera Craft, Vol. 37, No. 7, pp. 313-20.

" A r t is a n i n t e r p r e t e r of t h e inexpressible, a n d t h e r e f o r e it seems

a folly to try to convey its m e a n i n g a f r e s h by m e a n s of w o r d s . " T h i s
t h o u g h t f r o m G o e t h e is so t r u e to me, t h a t I hesitate b e f o r e a d d i n g
m o r e w o r d s to t h e v o l u m e s b o t h w r i t t e n a n d s p o k e n by eager parti-
sans—or politicians. I h a v e always h e l d t h a t t h e r e is too m u c h talk
a b o u t art—not e n o u g h w o r k . T h e w o r k e r will n o t h a v e t i m e to talk,
to theorize—he will l e a r n by d o i n g .
B u t I h a v e s t a r t e d w i t h art as s u b j e c t m a t t e r , t h o u g h I h a v e b e e n
asked to w r i t e my v i e w p o i n t o n " P i c t o r i a l P h o t o g r a p h y . " A r e they,
or can they be analagous? I w o u l d say, "Let t h e p e d a n t s decide t h a t ! "
A n d yet—that word " P i c t o r i a l " irritates me: as I u n d e r s t a n d t h e
m a k i n g of pictures. H a v e we not h a d e n o u g h p i c t u r e making—more
or less refined " C a l e n d a r A r t " by h u n d r e d s of t h o u s a n d s of p a i n t e r s
a n d etchers? P h o t o g r a p h y following this line can only be a poor imi-
tation of already bad art. G r e a t painters—and I have h a d f o r t u n a t e
contacts with several of the greatest in this country, or in the w o r l d -
are keenly interested in, a n d have d e e p respect for p h o t o g r a p h y when
it is photography b o t h in t e c h n i q u e a n d viewpoint, w h e n it does
s o m e t h i n g they c a n n o t do; they only have c o n t e m p t , a n d rightly so,
w h e n it is an i m i t a t i o n p a i n t i n g . A n d t h a t is the t r o u b l e w i t h most
photography—just witness ninety per cent of the p r i n t s in i n n u m e r -
able salons—work d o n e by those w h o if they h a d no camera would
be t h i r d rate, or worse, painters. N o p h o t o g r a p h e r can e q u a l emo-
tionally n o r aesthetically t h e work of a fine p a i n t e r , both having the
same end in vieiu—that is, the p a i n t e r ' s viewpoint. N o r can the paint-
er begin to e q u a l the p h o t o g r a p h e r in his particular field.
T h e camera t h e n , used as a m e a n s of expression, m u s t have in-
h e r e n t qualities e i t h e r different or g r e a t e r t h a n those of any o t h e r
m e d i u m , otherwise, it has n o value at all, except for commerce, sci-
ence, or as a weekend h o b b y for weary businessmen—which would
be fine if they did not expose their results to the p u b l i c as art!
W i l l i a m Blake wrote: " M a n is led to believe a lie, w h e n he sees
with, n o t t h r o u g h the eye." A n d the camera—the lens—can d o that
very thing—enable one to see t h r o u g h the eye, a u g m e n t i n g the eye,
seeing m o r e t h a n the eye sees, exaggerating details, r e c o r d i n g surfaces,
textures that t h e h u m a n h a n d could not r e n d e r w i t h the most skill
a n d labor. I n d e e d w h a t p a i n t e r would w a n t to—his work would
become niggling, petty, tight! But in a p h o t o g r a p h this way of seeing
is legitimate, logical.
So t h e camera for me is best in close up, t a k i n g a d v a n t a g e of this
lens power: r e c o r d i n g with its one searching eye the very quintessence
of the t h i n g itself r a t h e r t h a n a mood of that thing—for instance, the
object t r a n s f o r m e d for t h e m o m e n t by c h a r m i n g , u n u s u a l , even
theatrical, b u t always transitory light effects. Instead, the physical
quality of things can be r e n d e r e d with u t m o s t exactness: stone is h a r d ,
bark is r o u g h , flesh is alive, or they can be m a d e h a r d e r , r o u g h e r , or
m o r e alive if desired. In a word, let us have p h o t o g r a p h i c beauty!
Is it art—can it be? W h o knows or cares! It is a vital new way of
seeing, it belongs to o u r day a n d age, its possibilities have only been
touched u p o n . So why b o t h e r a b o u t art—a word so a b u s e d it is almost
obsolete. B u t for the sake of discussion, the difference between good
a n d b a d art lies in the m i n d s t h a t created, r a t h e r t h a n in skill of
h a n d s : a fine technician may be a very b a d artist, b u t a fine artist
usually makes himself a fine technician to better express his t h o u g h t .
A n d the camera n o t only sees differently with each worker using it,
b u t sees differently t h a n the eyes see: it m u s t , w i t h its single eye of
varying focal lengths.
I c a n n o t h e l p feeling—and others have too—that certain great paint-
ers of t h e past actually h a d p h o t o g r a p h i c eyes—born in this age they
m i g h t well h a v e used the camera. For instance, Velazquez. Diego Ri-
vera wrote of h i m : " T h e talent of Velazquez m a n i f e s t i n g itself in
coincidence with t h e image of t h e physical world, his genius would
have led h i m to select t h e t e c h n i q u e most a d e q u a t e for t h e p u r p o s e :
that is to say, p h o t o g r a p h y . "
A n d t h e r e is V i n c e n t V a n G o g h w h o wrote "A feeling for things
in themselves is m u c h m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n a sense of t h e p i c t o r i a l . "
L i v i n g today he m i g h t n o t use a camera, b u t he surely w o u l d be in-
terested in some present day p h o t o g r a p h s .
P h o t o g r a p h y has or will eventually, negate m u c h painting—for
w h i c h the p a i n t e r s h o u l d be deeply g r a t e f u l ; relieving h i m , as it
were f r o m certain p u b l i c d e m a n d s : r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , objective seeing.
Rivera, I o v e r h e a r d in a h e a t e d discussion one day at an e x h i b i t of
p h o t o g r a p h s in Mexico: "I w o u l d r a t h e r have one of these photo-
g r a p h s t h a n any realistic p a i n t i n g : such work makes realistic paint-
ing s u p e r f l u o u s . "
For those w h o h a v e been interested e n o u g h to follow m e so far I
will e x p l a i n my way of working. W i t h over twenty years of experi-
ence, I never try to p l a n in advance. T h o u g h I may f r o m e x p e r i e n c e
k n o w a b o u t w h a t I can d o w i t h a c e r t a i n subject, my o w n eyes are
110 m o r e t h a n scouts 011 a p r e l i m i n a r y search, for the camera's eye
may entirely c h a n g e my o r i g i n a l idea, even switch m e to different
subject m a t t e r . So I start o u t w i t h my m i n d as f r e e f r o m an image as
t h e silver film on w h i c h I am to record, a n d I h o p e as sensitive. T h e n
i n d e e d p u t t i n g o n e ' s h e a d u n d e r the focussing cloth is a thrill, just as
exciting to m e today as it was w h e n I started as a boy. T o pivot the
c a m e r a slowly a r o u n d w a t c h i n g t h e image c h a n g e 011 the g r o u n d glass
is a revelation, o n e becomes a discoverer, seeing a new world t h r o u g h
t h e lens. A n d finally the c o m p l e t e idea is there, a n d completely re-
vealed. One must feel definitely, fully, before the exposure. My fin-
ished p r i n t is t h e r e 011 t h e g r o u n d glass, w i t h all its values, in exact
p r o p o r t i o n s . T h e final result in my work is fixed forever w i t h the
shutter's release. Finishing, developing, a n d p r i n t i n g is no m o r e t h a n
a c a r e f u l carrying 011 of t h e image seen 011 t h e g r o u n d glass. N o a f t e r
consideration such as e n l a r g i n g portions, nor c h a n g i n g values—and
of course 110 retouching—can m a k e u p for a negative exposed with-
o u t a c o m p l e t e realization at the time of t h e exposure.
P h o t o g r a p h y is too honest a m e d i u m , direct a n d u n c o m p r o m i s i n g ,
to allow of s u b t e r f u g e . O n e notes in a flash a posed gesture or assumed
expression in portraiture—or in landscape, a clear day m a d e i n t o a
foggy one by use of a diff used lens, or an u n d e r e x p o s e d sunset labeled
"Moonlight"!
 T h e direct a p p r o a c h to p h o t o g r a p h y is t h e difficult one, because
o n e m u s t be a technical master as well as master of one's m i n d . Clear
t h i n k i n g a n d quick decisions are necessary: t e c h n i q u e m u s t be a p a r t
of one, as a u t o m a t i c as b r e a t h i n g , a n d such t e c h n i q u e is difficult. I
can, a n d h a v e t a u g h t a child of seven to expose, develop, a n d p r i n t
creditably in a few weeks, t h a n k s to t h e great m a n u f a c t u r e r s w h o
h a v e so simplified a n d m a d e fool-proof the various steps in p i c t u r e
m a k i n g : which accounts for the flood of b a d p h o t o g r a p h y by those
w h o t h i n k it a n easy way to "express" themselves. B u t it is n o t easy!
—not easy to see o n t h e g r o u n d glass the finished p r i n t , to mentally
carry t h a t image o n t h r o u g h t h e various processes of finishing to a
final result, a n d w i t h reasonable surety that the result will be exactly
w h a t one originally saw a n d felt. I say mentally carry the image to
stress t h e p o i n t t h a t no m a n u a l i n t e r f e r e n c e is allowed, nor desired
in my way of w o r k i n g . P h o t o g r a p h y so considered becomes a me-
d i u m r e q u i r i n g the greatest accuracy, a n d surest j u d g m e n t . T h e
p a i n t e r can, if he wishes, change his original conception as he works,
at least every detail is n o t conceived b e f o r e h a n d , b u t the photog-
r a p h e r m u s t see t h e veriest detail which can never be changed. O f t e n
a m o m e n t or a second or the fraction of a second of t i m e must be cap-
t u r e d w i t h o u t hesitancy. W h a t a fine t r a i n i n g in seeing, in accuracy,
for anyone—for a child especially. I h a v e started two of my own boys
in p h o t o g r a p h y a n d expect to w i t h the o t h e r two: n o t w a n t i n g nor
even h o p i n g t h a t they will become p h o t o g r a p h e r s , b u t to give t h e m
a v a l u a b l e aid in w h a t e v e r line of work they may choose to follow.
I may be w r i t i n g f o r a very few persons, m a y b e only one, no m o r e
is to be expected. T o t h e few, or t h e one, I w o u l d finally say, learn to
t h i n k p h o t o g r a p h i c a l l y a n d n o t in terms of o t h e r m e d i a , then you
will have s o m e t h i n g to say w h i c h has not been already said. Realize
t h e l i m i t a t i o n s as well as possibilities of p h o t o g r a p h y . T h e artist
u n r e s t r a i n e d by a f o r m , w i t h i n which he m u s t confine his original
emotion, c o u l d n o t create. T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t work o u t his
p r o b l e m , restricted by the size of his camera, the focal length of his
lens, t h e certain g r a d e of dry p l a t e or film, a n d t h e p r i n t i n g process
he is using: w i t h i n these l i m i t a t i o n s e n o u g h can be said, m o r e t h a n
has been so far—for p h o t o g r a p h y is young.
Actually I am n o t a r g u i n g for my way. A n a r g u m e n t indicates a
set f r a m e of m i n d by those w h o participate, a n d to r e m a i n fluid,
ready to change, i n d e e d eager to, is t h e only way to grow. Personal
growth is all t h a t counts. Not, am I greater t h a n a n o t h e r , b u t am I
greater t h a n I was last year or yesterday. Each of us is in a certain
stage of d e v e l o p m e n t a n d it would be a d r a b world if we all t h o u g h t
alike.
Some t h e r e are w h o will r e m e m b e r my work of fifteen years ago,
or less, a n d some will like my past better t h a n my present. T o t h e
latter I have n o t m u c h to say; they are still in a world where lovely
poetic impressions are m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e aesthetic b e a u t y of
t h e t h i n g itself.

A CONTEMPORARY MEANS TO CREATIVE EXPRESSION 1932

The Art of Edward Weston, edited by Merle Armitage, New York,
E. Weyhe, pp. 7-8.
M a n is t h e actual m e d i u m of expression—not t h e tool he elects to
use as a means. Results a l o n e s h o u l d be a p p r a i s e d ; the way in which
these are achieved is of i m p o r t a n c e only to t h e m a k e r . T o t h e e x t e n t
t h a t the c o m p l e t e d work realizes d e p t h of u n d e r s t a n d i n g , u n i q u e -
ness of v i e w p o i n t , a n d vitality of p r e s e n t a t i o n , will the spectator
r e s p o n d a n d p a r t i c i p a t e in the o r i g i n a l experience. T h i s premise,
restricting too p e r s o n a l a n d t h e r e f o r e p r e j u d i c e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ,
leads to revelation—the fusion of an i n n e r a n d o u t e r reality derived
f r o m t h e wholeness of life—sublimating things seen i n t o things
k n o w n . E x p l a n a t o r y s t a t e m e n t s are usually incongruous, since each
expression w i t h exclusive qualities a n d defined objective generates
a special m o r a l e , a n d only exists by reason of t h e fact t h a t it is
i n c o m m u n i c a b l e in any o t h e r way.
D u e to misconceptions a n d to t h e difficulty of a c q u i r i n g a tech-
n i q u e a d e q u a t e to t h e c o n s u m m a t i o n of i n t e n t i o n , t h e r e h a v e been
few historically i m p o r t a n t p h o t o g r a p h e r s ; yet in a u t h e n t i c e x a m p l e s
—for instance t h e p h o t o g r a p h s of Stieglitz, Sheeler, a n d Strand—a
c o r r e l a t i o n between m e a n i n g a n d expression is a t t a i n e d , m o r e vital
t h a n t h a t released in m u c h c o n t e m p o r a r y work p r e s e n t e d as art. In
fact, real p h o t o g r a p h y has a u g m e n t e d knowledge, e x t e n d e d horizons,
manifestly influenced o t h e r creative f o r m s of t h e day. W h e n u n d e r -
stood, t h e i n h e r e n t l i m i t a t i o n s a n d exclusive potentialities of any
m e a n s to expression become equally i m p o r t a n t in c o n d i t i o n i n g the
expression, p r e d e t e r m i n i n g its objective. T h e present status of pho-
tography, recognized as a u n i q u e , u n t r a d i t i o n a l f o r m a n d valued for
exactly w h a t it is, could n o t have been achieved w i t h o u t t h e very
qualities, once d e p r e c i a t e d , seen as a b a r to "self-expression."
B u t self-expression is a n illusion in w h i c h t h e artist imagines t h a t
he can conceive of a n d create non-existent forms. O n t h e contrary,
the most " a b s t r a c t " a r t is derived f r o m f o r m s in n a t u r e ; these, w h e n
" i n t e r p r e t e d " w i t h biased o p i n i o n , c o n c l u d e in meaningless distor-
tion, u n d e r or o v e r s t a t e m e n t . A p h o t o g r a p h may a p p r o x i m a t e reality,
b u t c a n n o t a t t a i n u n q u a l i f i e d realism. By contrast, e x t r e m e d e p a r t u r e
f r o m f a c t u a l r e c o r d i n g is possible a n d relevant to " s t r a i g h t " pho-
tography. T h e camera does n o t r e p r o d u c e n a t u r e , n o t exactly as seen
w i t h o u r eyes, w h i c h are b u t a m e a n s to see t h r o u g h as i m p e r s o n a l as
t h e lens a n d m u s t be directed by t h e same intelligence t h a t in t u r n
guides t h e camera or any tool.
I m a k e b u t o n e reservation in d e t e r m i n i n g t h e objective of pho-
t o g r a p h y : t h a t it s h o u l d n o t be used to create a work in which it is
a p p a r e n t t h a t a clearer c o m m u n i c a t i o n m i g h t h a v e been established
in o t h e r ways. E x c e p t i n g this, I h a v e n o theories w h i c h c o n d i t i o n
my w o r k ; theories follow practice, are never a p a r t of the creative
process. Logic implies r e p e t i t i o n , the dullness of stability; w h i l e life
is fluid, ever c h a n g i n g . U n d e r s t a n d i n g is not r e a c h e d t h r o u g h vicari-
ously a c q u i r e d i n f o r m a t i o n , b u t in living a n d w o r k i n g , fully.

SEEING PHOTOGRAPHICALLY 1943

The Complete Photographer, Vol. 9. No. 49, pp. 3200-3206.
E a c h m e d i u m of expression imposes its own l i m i t a t i o n s on t h e artist
—limitations i n h e r e n t in the tools, materials, or processes he employs.
I n the o l d e r art f o r m s these n a t u r a l confines are so well established
they are t a k e n for g r a n t e d . W e select m u s i c or d a n c i n g , s c u l p t u r e o r
w r i t i n g because we feel t h a t w i t h i n t h e frame of t h a t p a r t i c u l a r
m e d i u m we can best express w h a t e v e r it is we h a v e to say.
THE PHOTO-PAINTING STANDARD

P h o t o g r a p h y , a l t h o u g h it has passed its h u n d r e d t h b i r t h d a y , has

yet to a t t a i n such f a m i l i a r i z a t i o n . I n o r d e r to u n d e r s t a n d why this is
so, we m u s t e x a m i n e briefly the historical b a c k g r o u n d of this young-
est of t h e g r a p h i c arts. Because the early p h o t o g r a p h e r s w h o s o u g h t
to p r o d u c e creative work h a d n o t r a d i t i o n to g u i d e t h e m , they soon
b e g a n to b o r r o w a r e a d y - m a d e o n e f r o m t h e p a i n t e r s . T h e conviction
grew t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y was .just a new k i n d of p a i n t i n g , a n d its ex-
p o n e n t s a t t e m p t e d by every m e a n s possible to m a k e the camera
p r o d u c e p a i n t e r - l i k e results. T h i s m i s c o n c e p t i o n was r e s p o n s i b l e for
a great m a n y h o r r o r s p e r p e t r a t e d in the n a m e of a r t , f r o m allegorical
c o s t u m e pieces to dizzying o u t of locus blurs.
B u t these a l o n e w o u l d not h a v e sufficed to set back t h e p h o t o -
g r a p h i c clock. T h e real h a r m lay in the fact t h a t the false s t a n d a r d
b e c a m e firmly established, so t h a t the goal of artistic e n d e a v o r b e c a m e
p h o t o - p a i n t i n g r a t h e r t h a n p h o t o g r a p h y . T h e a p p r o a c h a d o p t e d was
so at v a r i a n c e w i t h the real n a t u r e of the m e d i u m e m p l o y e d t h a t
each basic i m p r o v e m e n t in the process b e c a m e just o n e m o r e obstacle
for the p h o t o - p a i n t e r s to overcome. T h u s the influence of the paint-
ers' t r a d i t i o n delayed r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e real creative field photog-
r a p h y h a d p r o v i d e d . T h o s e w h o s h o u l d h a v e been m o s t c o n c e r n e d
w i t h discovering a n d e x p l o i t i n g the n e w p i c t o r i a l resources were
i g n o r i n g t h e m entirely, a n d in t h e i r p r e o c c u p a t i o n with p r o d u c i n g
p s e u d o - p a i n t i n g s , d e p a r t i n g m o r e a n d m o r e radically f r o m all pho-
t o g r a p h i c values.
As a consequence, w h e n we a t t e m p t to assemble t h e best work of
the past, we most o f t e n choose e x a m p l e s f r o m the work of those w h o
w e r e n o t p r i m a r i l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h aesthetics. It is in c o m m e r c i a l por-
t r a i t s f r o m the d a g u e r r e o t y p e era, records of the Civil W a r , docu-
m e n t s of the A m e r i c a n f r o n t i e r , the work of a m a t e u r s a n d profes-
sionals w h o p r a c t i c e d p h o t o g r a p h y for its o w n sake w i t h o u t t r o u b l i n g
over w h e t h e r or n o t it was art, t h a t we find p h o t o g r a p h s t h a t will still
s t a n d w i t h the best of c o n t e m p o r a r y w o r k .
B u t in spite of such evidence t h a t can now be a p p r a i s e d w i t h a
calm, historical eye, t h e a p p r o a c h to creative work in p h o t o g r a p h y
today is f r e q u e n t l y just as m u d d l e d as it was eighty years ago, a n d
t h e painters' t r a d i t i o n still persists, as witness t h e use of t e x t u r e
screens, h a n d w o r k o n negatives, a n d ready-made rules of composi-
tion. P e o p l e w h o w o u l d n ' t t h i n k of t a k i n g a sieve to t h e well to d r a w
water fail to see t h e folly in taking a camera to m a k e a p a i n t i n g .
B e h i n d t h e p h o t o - p a i n t e r ' s a p p r o a c h lay t h e fixed idea t h a t a
straight p h o t o g r a p h was p u r e l y t h e p r o d u c t of a m a c h i n e a n d there-
lore n o t art. H e developed special t e c h n i q u e s to c o m b a t t h e mechani-
cal n a t u r e of his process. I n his system t h e negative was taken as a
p o i n t of departure—a first r o u g h impression to be " i m p r o v e d " by
h a n d u n t i l the last traces of its u n a r t i s t i c origin h a d d i s a p p e a r e d .
P e r h a p s if singers b a n d e d together in sufficient n u m b e r s , they could
convince musicians t h a t the sounds they p r o d u c e d t h r o u g h their
machines could not be art because of t h e essentially m e c h a n i c a l
n a t u r e of their i n s t r u m e n t s . T h e n the musician, p r o f i t i n g by the
e x a m p l e of t h e p h o t o - p a i n t e r , w o u l d h a v e his playing r e c o r d e d o n
special discs so that he could u n s c r a m b l e a n d rescramble t h e sounds
u n t i l he h a d t r a n s f o r m e d the p r o d u c t of a good musical i n s t r u m e n t
i n t o a p o o r i m i t a t i o n of the h u m a n voice!
T o u n d e r s t a n d why such a n a p p r o a c h is i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h the
logic of the m e d i u m , we must recognize t h e two basic factors in the
p h o t o g r a p h i c process that set it a p a r t f r o m the o t h e r g r a p h i c arts:
the n a t u r e of the r e c o r d i n g process a n d the n a t u r e of t h e image.
NATURE OF T H E RECORDING PROCESS

A m o n g all t h e arts p h o t o g r a p h y is u n i q u e by reason of its instan-

t a n e o u s recording process. T h e sculptor, the architect, the composer
all have the possibility of m a k i n g changes in, or a d d i t i o n s to, their
original plans w h i l e t h e i r work is in the process of execution. A com-
poser may b u i l d u p a s y m p h o n y over a long period of time; a p a i n t e r
may s p e n d a lifetime w o r k i n g o n o n e p i c t u r e a n d still n o t consider it
finished. B u t the p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s r e c o r d i n g process c a n n o t be d r a w n
o u t . W i t h i n its brief d u r a t i o n , no s t o p p i n g or c h a n g i n g or reconsider-
ing is possible. W h e n he uncovers his lens every detail w i t h i n its field
of vision is registered in far less time t h a n it takes for his own eyes to
t r a n s m i t a similar copy of t h e scene to his b r a i n .
NATURE OF THE IMAGE

T h e image t h a t is thus swiftly recorded possesses certain qualities

t h a t at once distinguish it as p h o t o g r a p h i c . First t h e r e is the amazing
precision of d e f i n i t i o n , especially in the r e c o r d i n g of fine detail; a n d
second, t h e r e is t h e u n b r o k e n sequence of infinitely subtle g r a d a t i o n s
f r o m black to white. T h e s e two characteristics constitute t h e trade-
m a r k of t h e p h o t o g r a p h ; they p e r t a i n to t h e mechanics of t h e process
a n d c a n n o t be d u p l i c a t e d by any work of the h u m a n h a n d .
T h e p h o t o g r a p h i c image partakes m o r e of t h e n a t u r e of a mosaic
t h a n of a d r a w i n g or p a i n t i n g . It contains n o lines in the p a i n t e r ' s
sense, b u t is entirely m a d e u p of tiny particles. T h e e x t r e m e fineness
of these particles gives a special tension to the image, a n d w h e n t h a t
tension is destroyed—by the i n t r u s i o n of h a n d w o r k , by too great
e n l a r g e m e n t , by p r i n t i n g o n a r o u g h surface, etc.—the integrity of the
p h o t o g r a p h is destroyed.
Finally, the image is characterized by lucidity a n d brilliance of
tone, qualities w h i c h c a n n o t be retained if p r i n t s are m a d e o n dull-
surface papers. O n l y a smooth, light-giving surface can r e p r o d u c e
satisfactorily t h e b r i l l i a n t clarity of the p h o t o g r a p h i c image.
RECORDING T H E IMAGE

It is these two properties that d e t e r m i n e the basic p r o c e d u r e in t h e

p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s a p p r o a c h . Since the recording process is instantane-
ous, a n d the n a t u r e of the image such that it c a n n o t survive corrective
h a n d w o r k , it is obvious t h a t the finished print must be created in full
before the film is exposed. U n t i l the p h o t o g r a p h e r has learned to
visualize his final result in advance, a n d to p r e d e t e r m i n e the pro-
cedures necessary to carry o u t t h a t visualization, his finished work
(if it be p h o t o g r a p h y at all) will represent a series of lucky—or un-
lucky—mechanical accidents.
H e n c e t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s most i m p o r t a n t a n d likewise most diffi-
cult task is n o t l e a r n i n g to m a n a g e his camera, or to develop, or to
p r i n t . It is l e a r n i n g to see photographically—that is, l e a r n i n g to see
his subject m a t t e r in terms of the capacities of his tools a n d processes,
so t h a t he can instantaneously translate the elements a n d values in a
scene before h i m i n t o the p h o t o g r a p h he wants to make. T h e photo-
p a i n t e r s used to c o n t e n d t h a t p h o t o g r a p h y could never be an art
because there was in t h e process n o m e a n s for c o n t r o l l i n g the result.
Actually, the p r o b l e m of l e a r n i n g to see p h o t o g r a p h i c a l l y would be
simplified if t h e r e were fewer m e a n s of control t h a n there are.
By varying the position of his camera, his camera angle, or t h e focal
length of his lens, t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r can achieve an infinite n u m b e r of
varied compositions with a single, stationary subject. By c h a n g i n g the
light o n the subject, or by using a color filter, any or all of the values
in the subject can be altered. By varying t h e length of exposure, t h e
k i n d of emulsion, the m e t h o d of developing, the p h o t o g r a p h e r can
vary t h e registering of relative values in the negative. A n d the rela-
tive values as registered in the negative can be f u r t h e r modified by
allowing m o r e or less light to affect certain parts of the image in
p r i n t i n g . T h u s , w i t h i n t h e limits of his m e d i u m , w i t h o u t resorting to
any m e t h o d of control t h a t is n o t p h o t o g r a p h i c (i.e., of an optical or
chemical n a t u r e ) , the p h o t o g r a p h e r can d e p a r t f r o m literal r e c o r d i n g
to whatever e x t e n t he chooses.
T h i s very richness of control facilities o f t e n acts as a b a r r i e r to
creative work. T h e fact is t h a t relatively few p h o t o g r a p h e r s ever
master their m e d i u m . I n s t e a d they allow the m e d i u m to master t h e m
a n d go on a n endless squirrel cage chase f r o m new lens to new p a p e r
to new developer to new gadget, never staying with o n e piece of
e q u i p m e n t long e n o u g h to learn its full capacities, b e c o m i n g lost in
a maze of technical i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t is of little or n o use since they
d o n ' t know w h a t to do w i t h it.
O n l y l o n g e x p e r i e n c e will e n a b l e the p h o t o g r a p h e r to s u b o r d i n a t e
technical considerations to pictorial aims, b u t t h e task can be m a d e
i m m e a s u r a b l y easier by selecting t h e simplest possible e q u i p m e n t a n d
p r o c e d u r e s a n d staying w i t h t h e m . L e a r n i n g to see in terms of the
field of one lens, the scale of one film a n d one p a p e r , will accomplish
a good deal m o r e t h a n g a t h e r i n g a s m a t t e r i n g of knowledge a b o u t
several d i f f e r e n t sets of tools.
T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r m u s t learn f r o m t h e outset to r e g a r d his process
as a whole. H e s h o u l d n o t be concerned w i t h t h e " r i g h t e x p o s u r e , "
t h e "perfect negative," etc. Such n o t i o n s a r e m e r e p r o d u c t s of adver-
tising mythology. R a t h e r he m u s t learn t h e k i n d of negative neces-
sary to p r o d u c e a given k i n d of p r i n t , a n d t h e n t h e k i n d of exposure
a n d d e v e l o p m e n t necessary to p r o d u c e t h a t negative. W h e n he knows
how these needs are fulfilled f o r one k i n d of p r i n t , he m u s t learn h o w
to vary t h e process to p r o d u c e o t h e r kinds of prints. F u r t h e r he m u s t
learn to t r a n s l a t e colors i n t o their m o n o c h r o m e values, a n d learn to
j u d g e t h e s t r e n g t h a n d q u a l i t y of light. W i t h practice this k i n d of
k n o w l e d g e becomes i n t u i t i v e ; t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r learns to see a scene
or object in terms of his finished p r i n t w i t h o u t h a v i n g to give con-
scious t h o u g h t to t h e steps t h a t will be necessary to carry it o u t .
SUBJECT M A T T E R AND COMPOSITION

So far we have been considering t h e mechanics of p h o t o g r a p h i c

seeing. N o w let us see how this camera-vision applies to t h e fields of
subject m a t t e r a n d c o m p o s i t i o n . N o s h a r p line can be d r a w n between
the subject m a t t e r a p p r o p r i a t e to p h o t o g r a p h y a n d t h a t m o r e suit-
able to t h e o t h e r g r a p h i c arts. However, it is possible, o n t h e basis of
a n e x a m i n a t i o n of past work a n d o u r k n o w l e d g e of t h e special pro-
perties of t h e m e d i u m , to suggest certain fields of e n d e a v o r t h a t will
most r e w a r d the p h o t o g r a p h e r , a n d to indicate others t h a t he will
d o well to avoid.
Even if p r o d u c e d w i t h t h e finest p h o t o g r a p h i c t e c h n i q u e , t h e work
of t h e p h o t o - p a i n t e r s referred to could n o t have been successful. Pho-
t o g r a p h y is basically too honest a m e d i u m f o r r e c o r d i n g superficial
aspects of a subject. It searches o u t the actor b e h i n d t h e m a k e - u p a n d
exposes t h e contrived, t h e trivial, the artificial, for w h a t they really
are. B u t t h e camera's i n n a t e honesty can h a r d l y be considered a limi-
t a t i o n of the m e d i u m , since it bars only t h a t k i n d of subject m a t t e r
t h a t properly belongs to the p a i n t e r . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d it provides
t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r w i t h a m e a n s of l o o k i n g deeply i n t o t h e n a t u r e of
things, a n d p r e s e n t i n g his subjects in t e r m s of t h e i r basic reality. It
e n a b l e s h i m to reveal t h e essence of w h a t lies b e f o r e his lens w i t h such
clear insight t h a t the b e h o l d e r may find the r e c r e a t e d image m o r e
real a n d c o m p r e h e n s i b l e t h a n t h e a c t u a l o b j e c t .
I t is u n f o r t u n a t e , to say t h e least, t h a t t h e t r e m e n d o u s capacity
p h o t o g r a p h y has f o r r e v e a l i n g new t h i n g s in n e w ways s h o u l d be
o v e r l o o k e d or i g n o r e d by the m a j o r i t y of its e x p o n e n t s — b u t such is
the case. T o d a y the w a n i n g i n f l u e n c e of the p a i n t e r ' s t r a d i t i o n , has
b e e n r e p l a c e d by w h a t we may call Salon Psychology, a force t h a t is
exercising t h e s a m e r e s t r a i n t over p h o t o g r a p h i c progress by establish-
i n g false s t a n d a r d s a n d d i s c o u r a g i n g any s y m p t o m s of o r i g i n a l crea-
tive vision.
T o d a y ' s p h o t o g r a p h e r n e e d not necessarily m a k e his p i c t u r e re-
s e m b l e a wash d r a w i n g in o r d e r to h a v e it a d m i t t e d as a r t , b u t h e
m u s t a b i d e by " t h e rules of c o m p o s i t i o n . " T h a t is t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y
n o s t r u m . N o w to consult rules of c o m p o s i t i o n b e f o r e m a k i n g a pic-
ture is a little like c o n s u l t i n g the law of g r a v i t a t i o n b e f o r e g o i n g for
a walk. Such rules a n d laws are d e d u c e d f r o m the a c c o m p l i s h e d fact;
they are the p r o d u c t s of reflection a n d a f t e r - e x a m i n a t i o n , a n d are in
n o way a p a r t of the creative i m p e t u s . W h e n s u b j e c t m a t t e r is forced
to fit i n t o p r e c o n c e i v e d p a t t e r n s , t h e r e can be n o freshness of vision.
F o l l o w i n g rules of c o m p o s i t i o n can o n l y lead to a t e d i o u s r e p e t i t i o n
of p i c t o r i a l cliches.
G o o d c o m p o s i t i o n is only t h e strongest way of seeing the subject.
It c a n n o t be t a u g h t because, like all creative effort, it is a m a t t e r of
p e r s o n a l g r o w t h . I n c o m m o n w i t h o t h e r artists the p h o t o g r a p h e r
w a n t s his finished p r i n t to convey to o t h e r s his o w n response to his
s u b j e c t . I n the f u l f i l l m e n t of this aim, his greatest asset is t h e direct-
ness of t h e process h e employs. B u t this a d v a n t a g e c a n only b e re-
t a i n e d if h e simplifies his e q u i p m e n t a n d t e c h n i q u e to t h e m i n i m u m
necessary, a n d keeps his a p p r o a c h f r e e f r o m all f o r m u l a , a r t - d o g m a ,
rules, a n d taboos. O n l y t h e n can h e be f r e e to p u t his p h o t o g r a p h i c
sight to use in discovering a n d r e v e a l i n g t h e n a t u r e of the w o r l d h e
lives in.

MINOR WHITE (1908-) . . . innocence of eye has a quality of its own. It

means to see as a child sees, with freshness and acknowledgment of the
wonder; it also means to see as an adult sees who has gone full circle and
once again sees as a child—with freshness and an even deeper sense of wonder.
L Y R I C A L & ACCURATE. Image, Vol. 5, No. 8, 1956, p. 176.

THE CAMERA MIND AND EYE 1952

Magazine of Art, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 16-19.
If we h a d n o w o r d s p e r h a p s we c o u l d u n d e r s t a n d o n e a n o t h e r
b e t t e r . T h e b u r d e n is ours, however. So in using t h e w o r d " c r e a t i v e "
to r e f e r to a state of m i n d in p h o t o g r a p h e r s , I expect to b e fully
misunderstood.
 It is n o longer news t h a t a c a m e r a m a n is faced w i t h a very different
s i t u a t i o n f r o m t h a t of a p a i n t e r s t a r t i n g a new canvas. T h e latter has
a b a r e surface to s u p p o r t an invented image, or a b l a n k space in
w h i c h to spin i n v e n t e d volumes or, as p r o b a b l y some artists feel, a
free space in w h i c h to live, dance, think—leaving m a r k s where a
t h o u g h t passed or a tactile muscle felt a color. A n d as he is inventive,
he is creative—or so it is p o p u l a r l y t h o u g h t .
T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r starts f r o m an image already whole. Superfi-
cially it looks as whole as a finished p a i n t i n g , a l t h o u g h it is rarely
c o m p l e t e d . T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r completes the whole or total image
by analyzing a variety of whole images. So the p h o t o g r a p h e r invents
n o t h i n g ; e v e r y t h i n g is there a n d visible f r o m the start. H e r e I should,
I suppose, be w o r r i e d to find t h a t I have w r i t t e n t h a t a p h o t o g r a p h e r
invents n o t h i n g , since in the r e c u r r e n t discussions over t h e creative
possibilities of the camera m e d i u m , t h e fact t h a t the p h o t o g r a p h e r
invents little if a n y t h i n g is a p o i n t t h e cons labor a n d t h e pros f u m b l e
trying to c i r c u m v e n t . (Not t h a t it is necessary, of course; t h e photo-
g r a p h s of Stieglitz a n d Weston p r o v i d e all the evidence needed.) How-
ever, still o t h e r evidence has accumulated—the work of t h e great
d o c u m e n t a r y p h o t o g r a p h e r s , for instance—which shows very well
that o u r c o n t i n u a l l i n k i n g of the word " i n v e n t i v e " w i t h "creative-
ness" has kept us f r o m r e m e m b e r i n g that creativeness is expressed
in m a n y ways. It is time t h a t we in aesthetic fields r e m e m b e r e d t h a t
analysis in scientific fields is o f t e n as inspired or creative as a work of
art. W e s h o u l d also r e m e m b e r t h a t t h e c a m e r a is a definite link
between science a n d art, or, if not a link, that it p a r t a k e s of b o t h .
It is time we recalled t h a t " m a n seen" or " m a n f o u n d " is just as
expressive of creativeness as " m a n m a d e . " It is t i m e to r e m e m b e r
(the p e r i o d of discovery is long past) t h a t t h e c a m e r a lures, t h e n
compels, a m a n to create t h r o u g h seeing. It d e m a n d s t h a t he learn to
m a k e t h e r e a l m of his responses to the world the raw m a t e r i a l of his
creative activity. Creative u n d e r s t a n d i n g is m o r e camera-like t h a n
invention.

A y o u n g m a n looking at a p h o t o g r a p h of mine—in t h e midst of

e x p e r i e n c i n g a n d before he could weigh his words, said, " T h i s is like
a p a i n t i n g . " Since this d i d n o t s o u n d very m u c h like w h a t he h a d in
m i n d he tried again. " I t is obviously a p h o t o g r a p h . B u t the place-
ment—looks—as if a man—as if a m a n h a d invented them—things are
w h e r e a m a n w o u l d put—them—it looks man-made—not like nature—
not found."
Yet it h a d been f o u n d , "seen," a n d merely recorded by t h e cam-
era. (Because a m a n trains himself to see like a camera, it is only
m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e t h a t he uses a c a m e r a to record his seeing.) T h a t
this p i c t u r e causes a reaction in a y o u n g p a i n t e r t h a t he can talk
a b o u t only in terms of p a i n t i n g does not m e a n t h a t an "aesthetic reac-
t i o n " is taking place. P e r h a p s it began w i t h little m o r e t h a n an
i m p a c t of recognition of s o m e t h i n g like a p a i n t i n g . W e m u s t r e m e m -
ber, however, t h a t recognition is f r e q u e n t l y the start of the "aesthetic"
chain reaction.
If h e was only surprised at t h e likeness, consider where he f o u n d
t h e likeness: in the perceptive r e a l m of m a n , n o t in the camera's
i m i t a t i o n of some aspect of p a i n t i n g surfaces. H i s reaction is im-
p o r t a n t because it shows t h a t we are so c o n d i t i o n e d to p a i n t i n g as
t h e criterion of the visual aesthetic experience t h a t the possibility of a
p h o t o g r a p h ' s being a n o t h e r p a t h to aesthetic experience, like a piece
of s c u l p t u r e or a poem, has been overlooked or n o t realized—if n o t
actually d e n i e d or p u s h e d o u t of t h e r e a l m of possibilities.
Yet to "see," to " f i n d , " is a h u m a n activity l i n k e d to h u m a n crea-
tiveness. T h e fact t h a t this p a r t i c u l a r y o u n g m a n related a " f o u n d "
p i c t u r e to his experience of the " m a d e " object is a simple d e m o n -
s t r a t i o n of h o w h u m a n the "seeing" of p h o t o g r a p h e r s is. A n d , if o n e
w o u l d stretch t h e d e m o n s t r a t i o n slightly, of how inventive "seeing
camerawise" is.
T h e state of m i n d of the p h o t o g r a p h e r while creating is a blank.
I m i g h t a d d t h a t this c o n d i t i o n exists only at special times, namely
w h e n looking for pictures. (Something keeps h i m f r o m f a l l i n g off
curbs, d o w n o p e n m a n h o l e s or i n t o the b u m p e r s of s k i d d i n g trucks
while he is in this c o n d i t i o n b u t goes off d u t y at all o t h e r times.)
For those w h o w o u l d e q u a t e " b l a n k " w i t h a k i n d of static empti-
ness, I m u s t e x p l a i n t h a t this is a special k i n d of b l a n k . I t is a very
active state of m i n d really, a very receptive state of m i n d , ready at
a n i n s t a n t to grasp a n image, yet w i t h no image pre-formed in it at
any time. W e s h o u l d n o t e t h a t the lack of a pre-formed p a t t e r n or
preconceived idea of how a n y t h i n g o u g h t to look is essential to this
b l a n k c o n d i t i o n . Such a state of m i n d is n o t u n l i k e a sheet of film
itself—seemingly inert, yet so sensitive t h a t a f r a c t i o n of a second's
e x p o s u r e conceives a life in it. (Not just life, b u t a life.)
In a way t h e b l a n k state of m i n d is a little like the b l a n k canvas
of the painter—that is, if we m u s t h a v e an analogy a n d insist t h a t
art m u s t have a p o i n t of d e p a r t u r e f r o m n o t h i n g . (If a b l a n k sheet
of p a p e r can be called nothing.) Poets b u y a r e a m of p a p e r a n d
w o n d e r w h a t obscurity will d a r k e n t h e sheets or w h a t revelation will
i l l u m i n a t e t h e m i n d r e a d i n g his black marks. B u t the p a p e r ' s blank-
ness has little to d o w i t h his creative action. O r to t h e sculptor feel-
ing s o m e h o w the f o r m lying in a block of stone, t h e stone is n o t a
b l a n k so m u c h as a w r a p p i n g t h a t only he can u n w i n d .
T h e p h o t o g r a p h e r is p r o b a b l y m o r e akin to t h e sculptor in wood
or stone t h a n to painters, as far as his m e n t a l creative state goes. T h e
whole visual world, t h e whole world of events are w r a p s a n d cover-
ings he feels a n d believes to be u n d e r n e a t h . O f t e n he passes a corner,
saying to himself, " T h e r e is a p i c t u r e h e r e " ; a n d if he c a n n o t find it,
considers himself the insensitive one. H e can look day a f t e r day—
a n d o n e day t h e p i c t u r e is visible! N o t h i n g has c h a n g e d except him-
self; a l t h o u g h , to be fair, sometimes he h a d to wait till the light per-
f o r m e d t h e magic.
A m i n d specially blank—how can we describe it to one w h o has n o t
e x p e r i e n c e d it? "Sensitive" is o n e w o r d . "Sensitized" is better, be-
cause there is n o t only a sensitive m i n d at work b u t there is effort o n
t h e p a r t of t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r to reach such a c o n d i t i o n . "Sympa-
t h e t i c " is fair, if we m e a n by it a n openness of m i n d w h i c h in t u r n
leads to c o m p r e h e n d i n g , u n d e r s t a n d i n g e v e r y t h i n g seen. T h e photog-
r a p h e r projects himself i n t o e v e r y t h i n g he sees, i d e n t i f y i n g himself
w i t h e v e r y t h i n g in o r d e r to k n o w it a n d feel it better. T o reach such
a b l a n k state of m i n d r e q u i r e s effort, p e r h a p s discipline. O u t of such
a state of m i n d he loves m u c h , hates m u c h a n d is a w a r e of t h e areas
of his indifference. H e p h o t o g r a p h s w h a t he loves because he loves
it, w h a t he hates o u t of protest; t h e i n d i f f e r e n t he can pass over or
p h o t o g r a p h w i t h w h a t e v e r c r a f t s m a n s h i p of t e c h n i q u e a n d composi-
tion he c o m m a n d s .
If he were to w a l k a block in a state of sensitized s y m p a t h y to
e v e r y t h i n g to be seen, he w o u l d be e x h a u s t e d before the block was
u p a n d o u t of film l o n g b e f o r e t h a t .
P e r h a p s t h e b l a n k state of m i n d can be likened to a p o t of water
almost at t h e boiling p o i n t . A little m o r e heat—an image seen—and
the surface breaks i n t o t u r b u l e n c e .
Possibly the creative work of the p h o t o g r a p h e r consists in p a r t of
p u t t i n g himself i n t o this state of m i n d . R e a c h i n g it, at any rate, is
n o t a u t o m a t i c . It can be a i d e d by always u s i n g one's camera for
serious work so t h a t t h e association of t h e camera in one's h a n d s
always leads to t a k i n g pictures. B u t certainly once t h e m o o d is
reached, t h a t w h i c h h a p p e n s can get o u t of control, as it seems it
s h o u l d . W e h a v e h e a r d of inspired singing, of inspired poetry, of
inspired painting—of p r o d u c t i o n d u r i n g m o m e n t s of intensity or
lucidity w h e n o n e feels as if o n e is a n i n s t r u m e n t of transmission like
a n a r r o w c h a n n e l b e t w e e n two oceans. (Do telephones feel this way?)
T h e feeling is a k i n to the mystic a n d to ecstasy; why d e n y it? A n d in
this c o n d i t i o n t h e q u e s t i o n of w h e t h e r p h o t o g r a p h y is or is n o t a r t is
l a u g h a b l e . O n e feels, o n e sees o n the g r o u n d glass i n t o a world be-
yond surfaces. T h e s q u a r e of glass becomes like t h e words of a p r a y e r
or a p o e m , like fingers or rockets i n t o two infinities—one i n t o t h e sub-
conscious a n d the o t h e r i n t o t h e visual-tactile universe.
A f t e r w a r d s o n e can look at t h e p h o t o g r a p h s a n d try to find in
t h e m s o m e t h i n g by w h i c h to e x p l a i n w h a t h a p p e n e d . I n t h e illustra-
tion titled 51-248, I can p o i n t o u t t h a t light seems to come f r o m
inside the p h o t o g r a p h , w h i c h is certainly n o t at all like the c o n d i t i o n
which my reason tells m e prevailed at t h e time, t h o u g h exactly like
w h a t I saw in a m o m e n t of highly charged vision. I can also say this
symbolizes t h e e m o t i o n felt w h i l e m a k i n g it, a n d k n o w only how
little of this vision t h e p i c t u r e m u s t cause in others. Feeling a n d
p h o t o g r a p h i n g w h a t causes feeling is no assurance t h a t others will
feel. B u t a f t e r once discovering w h a t one wants to arouse in o t h e r
people, t h e knowledge t h a t one may f r e q u e n t l y f u m b l e in trying is
only a challenge.
T h e p i c t u r e m e n t i o n e d above c l i m a x e d a n a f t e r n o o n ' s work in
w h i c h I started o u t by saying to myself, " W h a t shall I be given
today?" It progressed by stages of a g r o w i n g awareness of a b s o r p t i o n
i n t o the place. E x p o s u r e a f t e r e x p o s u r e were sketches leading—in n o
very conscious way—towards this final one. T h e same shapes, forms,
designs r e c u r r e d with a g r o w i n g tension. W h e n this was seen o n the
g r o u n d glass, a n y t h i n g s e p a r a t i n g m a n a n d place h a d been dissolved.
T h i s is no isolated experience, o c c u r r i n g only with n a t u r e ; I can
parallel it w i t h m a n y experiences in p h o t o g r a p h i n g people. T h e
d u r a t i o n of a session is one of g r o w i n g rapport, of a d e e p e n i n g f r i e n d -
ship. T h e camera is h a r d l y m o r e t h a n a r e c o r d i n g device for an
experience between two people. T h e y create in o n e another—only the
p h o t o g r a p h e r is c o n d i t i o n e d to see like a camera, so the e n d result
is a p h o t o g r a p h .
T h i s is n o t so m u c h a scholarly discussion of the p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s
creative state of m i n d as it is a first-hand r e p o r t . T h e scientist using
t h e camera as a n i n s t r u m e n t will p r o b a b l y n o t have m u c h idea of
w h a t I a m talking a b o u t ; however, p h o t o g r a p h e r s using the camera
as a deeply expressive m e d i u m or those u s i n g it to d o c u m e n t h u m a n
situations will h a v e experienced the sensation of t h e camera dis-
solving in an accord between subject a n d p h o t o g r a p h e r . A n d w h a t
impresses m e now is t h a t I n o longer care to prove t h a t some photo-
g r a p h s can do t h e same t h i n g for p e o p l e t h a t p a i n t i n g s do. ( T h e y
call it "art.") I merely w a n t to cause in others some degree of experi-
ence: shall we call it spirituality? identification? by using photo-
g r a p h s as t h e excitant. T h e p h o t o g r a p h s , may I add, not the objects
p h o t o g r a p h e d . W h i l e the p h o t o g r a p h e r c a n n o t e l i m i n a t e the object
(nor does he w a n t to destroy t h e e x p e r i e n c e of t h e visual world
t r a n s f o r m i n g i n t o a n unconscious world, t h e very source of his excite-
ment), he still wants t h e p h o t o g r a p h to be t h e m a i n source of t h e
spectator's feeling. W h i l e he c a n n o t erase f r o m t h e viewer's m i n d
the implications of the subject, he prefers to d e p e n d f o r his effect o n
the visual relations t h a t are present in t h e p r i n t itself.
" B l a n k " as t h e creative p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s state of m i n d is, uncritical
as it is w h i l e p h o t o g r a p h i n g , as sensitized, as p r e p a r e d for a n y t h i n g
to h a p p e n , a f t e r w a r d s with the p r i n t s safely in h a n d he needs to
practice t h e most conscious criticism. Is w h a t he saw present in t h e
p h o t o g r a p h ? If not, does t h e p h o t o g r a p h o p e n his eyes to s o m e t h i n g
he could n o t see by himself? If so, will he take the responsibility
for the accident a n d show it as his own, or will he consider it as a
sketch for his subconscious to digest? H e needs to study f u r t h e r the
r e a c t i o n s of the viewers: d o they m a t c h his own? come close? or d e p a r t
in a m a z i n g directions? I n a sense, this is the activity t h a t b r i n g s the
creative state of m i n d n e a r t h e b o i l i n g p o i n t : conscious criticism of
n e w p r i n t s , d i g e s t i o n of w h a t t h e p r i n t s do, as c o m p a r e d to w h a t h e
w a n t e d t h e m to d o . W i t h o u t this siege of a n a l y t i c a l work, t h e state
of s y m p a t h e t i c sensitivity, t h e " b l a n k " state of m i n d will n o t recur.

EQUIVALENCE: THE PERENNIAL TREND 1963

PSA Journal, Vol. 29, No. 7, pp. 17-21.

W h e n we s p e a k of t r e n d s , w e c o n c e r n ourselves w i t h changes, w i t h
shifts in style f r o m h e r e to t h e r e a n d b a c k again. T r e n d s are p e r i p h e r -
al, yet we c a n lose ourselves in too b l i n d a c o n c e r n f o r t h e m . C e n t r a l
to the c h a n g e s is s o m e t h i n g else. If we h a v e to give a n a m e to this
centrality, a n d I guess we do, o n e n a m e is " S p i r i t . " Every f a s h i o n ,
every t r e n d , every style m a y f u n c t i o n as a gateway to the c e n t r a l
significance of t h e a e s t h e t i c e x p e r i e n c e if t h e i n d i v i d u a l persists. T h a t
is, t h o u g h we follow t r e n d s or get o n b a n d w a g o n s we c a n always get
off a n d h e a d t o w a r d s the e t e r n a l significance, Spirit. A t best styles
a n d t r e n d s a n d f a s h i o n s are b u t clothes for t h e raison d'etre of any
art. At t h e worst, fashions, styles a n d t r e n d s f u n c t i o n as t r a p s for the
u n w a r y . I will t r e a t h e r e of a t r a d i t i o n , a c o n c e p t a n d a discipline,
n a m e l y t h e c o n c e p t o r t h e o r y called " E q u i v a l e n c e , " by w h i c h a n y
style, f a s h i o n o r t r e n d m a y be w o r k e d through to s o m e t h i n g b e y o n d
the c o n f o r m i s m of c o m p e t i t i o n .
P r o b a b l y t h e m o s t m a t u r e idea ever p r e s e n t e d to p i c t u r e - m a k i n g
p h o t o g r a p h y was t h e c o n c e p t of E q u i v a l e n c e w h i c h A l f r e d Stieglitz
n a m e d early in the 1920's a n d p r a c t i c e d t h e rest of his life. T h e idea
has b e e n c o n t i n u e d by a few others, n o t a b l y at t h e I n s t i t u t e of
Design in C h i c a g o u n d e r A a r o n Siskind a n d H a r r y C a l l a h a n , a n d
at t h e f o r m e r C a l i f o r n i a School of F i n e A r t s in San Francisco u n d e r
t h e efforts of the p r e s e n t a u t h o r . As a c o n s e q u e n c e t h e theory is in
practice now by a n ever i n c r e a s i n g n u m b e r of d e v o t e d a n d serious
p h o t o g r a p h e r s , b o t h a m a t e u r s a n d professionals. T h e c o n c e p t a n d
discipline of E q u i v a l e n c e in practice is s i m p l y the b a c k b o n e a n d core
of p h o t o g r a p h y as a m e d i u m of expression-creation.
E q u i v a l e n c e is a p r e g n a n t discipline. H e n c e t h e p h o t o g r a p h y t h a t
grows o u t of its practice is b o u n d to d e v e l o p a n d c h a n g e w i t h the
p h o t o g r a p h e r s a n d w r i t e r s o n p h o t o g r a p h i c criticism w h o b e c o m e
m a t u r e e n o u g h to u n d e r s t a n d t h e n a t u r e of the theory o r a p p r o a c h .
T h e E q u i v a l e n t is o n e of those ideas t h a t in practice grows by t h e
efforts a n d a c c o m p l i s h m e n t s of t h e p e o p l e w h o e x p l o r e it.
T o o u t l i n e this t h e o r y (we h a r d l y h a v e space to discuss it), we
will refer to "levels" of E q u i v a l e n c e . T h e t e r m covers too m u c h
g r o u n d for a l i n e a r d e f i n i t i o n . A t o n e level, t h e g r a p h i c level, the
w o r d " E q u i v a l e n c e " p e r t a i n s to the p h o t o g r a p h itself, the visible
f o u n d a t i o n s of any p o t e n t i a l visual e x p e r i e n c e w i t h the p h o t o g r a p h
itself. O d d l y e n o u g h , this does n o t m e a n t h a t a p h o t o g r a p h w h i c h
f u n c t i o n s as a n E q u i v a l e n t has a c e r t a i n a p p e a r a n c e , or style, or
t r e n d , or fashion. E q u i v a l e n c e is a f u n c t i o n , a n experience, n o t a
thing. Any p h o t o g r a p h , regardless of source, m i g h t f u n c t i o n as a n
E q u i v a l e n t to someone, sometime, someplace. If t h e i n d i v i d u a l view-
er realizes t h a t for h i m w h a t he sees in a p i c t u r e corresponds to some-
t h i n g w i t h i n himself—that is, the p h o t o g r a p h m i r r o r s s o m e t h i n g in
himself—then his experience is some degree of Equivalence. (At least
such is a small p a r t of o u r present definition.)
W h i l e we a r e r e l u c t a n t to d i s a p p o i n t t h e r e a d e r by n o t giving
some rules or signposts by w h i c h o n e can spot a n E q u i v a l e n t twenty
feet away, we w o u l d r a t h e r be t r u e to t h e facts of t h e s i t u a t i o n t h a n
distort t h e m . So at this g r a p h i c level of E q u i v a l e n c e n o specifications
will be listed.
At t h e n e x t level the w o r d " E q u i v a l e n c e " relates to w h a t goes o n
in the viewer's m i n d as he looks at a p h o t o g r a p h t h a t arouses i n h i m
a special sense of correspondence to s o m e t h i n g t h a t he knows a b o u t
himself. At a t h i r d level t h e w o r d " E q u i v a l e n c e " refers to t h e i n n e r
experience a person has w h i l e he is r e m e m b e r i n g his m e n t a l image
a f t e r t h e p h o t o g r a p h in q u e s t i o n is n o t in sight. T h e r e m e m b e r e d
image also p e r t a i n s to E q u i v a l e n c e only w h e n a certain feeling of
correspondence is present. W e r e m e m b e r images t h a t we w a n t to
r e m e m b e r . T h e reason why we w a n t to r e m e m b e r an image varies:
because we simply "love it," or dislike it so intensely t h a t it becomes
compulsive, or because it has m a d e us realize s o m e t h i n g a b o u t our-
selves, or has b r o u g h t a b o u t some slight c h a n g e in us. P e r h a p s t h e
r e a d e r can recall some image, a f t e r t h e seeing of which, he has never
b e e n q u i t e the same.
Let us r e t u r n for a m o m e n t to the g r a p h i c level of t h e p h o t o g r a p h i c
e q u i v a l e n t . W h i l e we c a n n o t describe its a p p e a r a n c e , we can define
its f u n c t i o n . W h e n any p h o t o g r a p h f u n c t i o n s for a given person as
a n E q u i v a l e n t we can say t h a t at t h a t m o m e n t a n d for t h a t person
the p h o t o g r a p h acts as a symbol or plays t h e role of a m e t a p h o r f o r
s o m e t h i n g t h a t is b e y o n d t h e subject p h o t o g r a p h e d . W e can say this
in a n o t h e r way; w h e n a p h o t o g r a p h f u n c t i o n s as an E q u i v a l e n t , t h e
p h o t o g r a p h is at once a record of s o m e t h i n g in f r o n t of t h e camera
a n d simultaneously a s p o n t a n e o u s symbol. (A " s p o n t a n e o u s s y m b o l "
is o n e w h i c h develops a u t o m a t i c a l l y to fill t h e n e e d of the m o m e n t .
A p h o t o g r a p h of the bark of a tree, f o r e x a m p l e , may s u d d e n l y t o u c h
off a c o r r e s p o n d i n g feeling of roughness of c h a r a c t e r w i t h i n an in-
dividual.)
W h e n a p h o t o g r a p h e r presents us w i t h w h a t to h i m is a n Equiva-
lent, he is telling us in effect, "I h a d a feeling a b o u t s o m e t h i n g a n d
here is my m e t a p h o r of t h a t feeling." T h e significant difference h e r e
is t h a t w h a t he h a d a feeling a b o u t was n o t for t h e subject he photo-
g r a p h e d , b u t for s o m e t h i n g else. H e may show us a p i c t u r e of a cloud,
the f o r m s of which expressively correspond to his feelings a b o u t a
certain person. As he saw t h e clouds he was somehow r e m i n d e d of
t h e person, a n d p r o b a b l y he hopes t h a t we will catch, in the expres-
sive q u a l i t y of t h e cloud forms, t h e same feeling that he experienced.
If we d o a n d o u r feelings are similar to his, he has aroused in us
w h a t was to h i m a k n o w n feeling. T h i s is n o t exactly an easy distinc-
tion to m a k e so m a y b e we can r e p e a t . W h e n the p h o t o g r a p h e r shows
us w h a t he considers to be a n E q u i v a l e n t , he is showing us a n ex-
pression of a feeling, b u t this feeling is not the feeling he h a d for t h e
object t h a t he p h o t o g r a p h e d . W h a t really h a p p e n e d is t h a t he recog-
nized an object or series of f o r m s that, w h e n p h o t o g r a p h e d , w o u l d
yield a n image w i t h specific suggestive powers t h a t can direct the
viewer i n t o a specific a n d k n o w n feeling, state or place w i t h i n him-
self. W i t h constantly m e t a m o r p h i z i n g m a t e r i a l such as water, or
clouds or ice, or light o n c e l l o p h a n e a n d similar materials, t h e infinity
of f o r m s a n d shapes, reflections a n d colors suggest all sorts a n d m a n -
ners of e m o t i o n s a n d tactile e n c o u n t e r s a n d intellectual speculations
that are s u p p o r t e d by a n d f o r m e d by t h e m a t e r i a l b u t w h i c h main-
tain an i n d e p e n d e n t identity f r o m w h i c h t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r can
choose w h a t he wishes to express.
T h e p o w e r of t h e e q u i v a l e n t , so far as the expressive-creative pho-
t o g r a p h e r is concerned, lies in t h e fact t h a t he can convey a n d evoke
feelings a b o u t things a n d situations a n d events which f o r some reason
or o t h e r are n o t or can n o t be p h o t o g r a p h e d . T h e secret, t h e catch
a n d the p o w e r lies in being a b l e to use the forms a n d shapes of objects
in f r o n t of t h e camera for their expressive-evocative qualities. O r to
say this in a n o t h e r way, in practice Equivalency is the ability to use
t h e visual world as the plastic m a t e r i a l for the p h o t o g r a p h e r ' s expres-
sive purposes. H e may wish to employ t h e r e c o r d i n g power of the
m e d i u m , it is strong in p h o t o g r a p h y , a n d d o c u m e n t . O r he may wish
to emphasize its t r a n s f o r m i n g power, w h i c h is equally strong, a n d
cause the subject to stand for s o m e t h i n g else too. If he uses Equiva-
lency consciously a n d knowingly, aware of w h a t he is doing, a n d
accepts the responsibility for his images, he has as m u c h f r e e d o m of
expression as any of t h e arts.
T o be concrete, a n d leave off theory for a m o m e n t , we can r e t u r n
to the p h o t o g r a p h of a cloud m e n t i o n e d above. If we q u e s t i o n the
p h o t o g r a p h e r , he may tell us t h a t it stands for a certain q u a l i t y t h a t
he finds in a specific w o m a n , n a m e l y her f e m i n i n i t y . T h e p h o t o g r a p h
e x h i b i t s softness, delicacy, r o u n d n e s s , fluffiness a n d so corresponds to
at least o n e feeling or e m o t i o n t h a t he has a b o u t her. If we ask why
he does n o t p h o t o g r a p h t h e w o m a n herself directly, he may answer
t h a t she is h a r d l y p h o t o g e n i c , or that he wishes to establish a certain
aesthetic distance between his direct feeling a n d his o u t w a r d mani-
festation of it via the p h o t o g r a p h . A n d this is pleasant—as we all
know, too i n t i m a t e a p h o t o g r a p h of a person f r e q u e n t l y gets in t h e
way of t h e viewer's e n j o y m e n t .
T h i s p h o t o g r a p h of the cloud at one level is simply a record, b u t
at a n o t h e r level it may f u n c t i o n to arouse certain p l a n n e d sensations
a n d emotions. T h e f a c t u a l side p r o p e r l y belongs to t h e p h o t o g r a p h ;
the a r o u s a b l e implications a r e possible only w h e n someone is l o o k i n g
at it sympathetically. So a n o t h e r aspect of Equivalency is this: Equiv-
alency, while it d e p e n d s entirely o n t h e p h o t o g r a p h itself for t h e
source of s t i m u l a t i o n f u n c t i o n s in t h e m i n d of a viewer. Equivalency
f u n c t i o n s o n t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g e q u a t i o n is f a c t u a l :
P h o t o g r a p h + Person L o o k i n g Mental Image
As we can see f r o m t h e e q u a t i o n , E q u i v a l e n c e is a two-way reac-
tion. Also we can see t h a t only in t h e m e n t a l image h e l d is t h e r e any
possibility of a m e t a p h o r i c a l f u n c t i o n occurring.
T h e m e c h a n i s m s by w h i c h a p h o t o g r a p h f u n c t i o n s as a n Equival-
e n t in a viewer's psyche are t h e f a m i l i a r ones w h i c h the psychologists
call " p r o j e c t i o n " a n d " e m p a t h y . " I n t h e art w o r l d t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g
p h e n o m e n o n is r e f e r r e d to as "expressive f o r m s a n d shapes." I n t h e
world of p h o t o g r a p h y t h e vast m a j o r i t y of viewers r e m a i n so subject-
identification b o u n d t h a t they stay i g n o r a n t of t h e "expressive" quali-
ties of shapes a n d f o r m s or are u n a b l e to overcome their fear of letting
themselves go a n d r e s p o n d i n g to "expressive" shapes or colors, t h a t
is, the design side of the pictorial experience. Yet f o r t u n a t e l y , or
u n f o r t u n a t e l y , as the case may be, the c o n t e m p o r a r y viewer of pho-
t o g r a p h s nearly always r e s p o n d s subconsciously to t h e design em-
b e d d e d in p h o t o g r a p h s . T h i s he can h a r d l y help, as t h e world of
advertising exploits constantly a n d expertly. T h e r e a d e r n o d o u b t
has h e a r d of " h i d d e n p e r s u a d e r s . " If advertisers can use t h e sub-
l i m i n a l effect of design in p h o t o g r a p h y to h e l p sell a p r o d u c t , a
k n o w l e d g e a b l e p h o t o g r a p h e r can use t h e same aspect of design for
m o r e e n l i g h t e n e d aesthetic purposes.
At a d e e p e r level of Equivalence, t h e t e r m refers to t h e specific
effect of a p h o t o g r a p h i n t e n d e d to f u n c t i o n as a n E q u i v a l e n t . So far
in this article it w o u l d seem t h a t any awareness of m i r r o r i n g o n t h e
p a r t of t h e viewer looking at a p h o t o g r a p h is related to Equivalence.
N o w we can r e v a m p the d e f i n i t i o n s o m e w h a t to indicate t h a t t h e
feeling of E q u i v a l e n c e is specific. I n l i t e r a t u r e this specific feeling
associated w i t h E q u i v a l e n c e is called " p o e t i c , " u s i n g this w o r d i n a
very b r o a d a n d universal sense. N o t h a v i n g a n exact e q u i v a l e n t f o r
t h e w o r d " p o e t i c " in p h o t o g r a p h y we will suggest t h e w o r d "vision,"
m e a n i n g n o t only sight, b u t insight. T h e effect t h a t seems to be
associated w i t h E q u i v a l e n c e may be w o r d e d thus: W h e n b o t h subject
m a t t e r a n d m a n n e r of r e n d e r i n g a r e t r a n s c e n d e d , by w h a t e v e r means,
t h a t w h i c h seems to be m a t t e r becomes w h a t seems to be spirit.
A t h i r d level of E q u i v a l e n c e was m e n t i o n e d earlier. T h i s level
revolves a r o u n d the " r e m e m b e r e d image." W h a t a m a n r e m e m b e r s
of vision, is always peculiarly his own because various distortions
occur a n d change his recall image a f t e r t h e o r i g i n a l s t i m u l a t i o n has
gone. T h e s e a l t e r a t i o n s f r o m the original can only come f r o m t h e
i n d i v i d u a l himself. If a viewer h a p p e n s to study in his m i n d a remem- •
b e r e d image, w h o knows w h a t degree or trajectory of E q u i v a l e n c e
he m i g h t reach, or how far he m i g h t walk i n t o his r e m e m b e r e d image?
T h e m o m e n t w h e n a p h o t o g r a p h t r a n s f o r m s i n t o a m i r r o r t h a t can
be walked into, e i t h e r w h e n o n e is l o o k i n g at it, or r e m e m b e r i n g it,
m u s t always r e m a i n secret because t h e experience is entirely w i t h i n
t h e i n d i v i d u a l . It is personal, his own p r i v a t e experience, ineffable,
a n d u n t r a n s l a t a b l e . P e o p l e w h o r e p o r t o n this e x p e r i e n c e tell of
literal t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s b e f o r e t h e i r eyes, for e x a m p l e a p i c t u r e t h a t
they k n o w to be of peeled p a i n t t u r n s i n t o s o m e t h i n g else.
T o select this m o m e n t for w h i c h to m a k e p h o t o g r a p h s h a r d l y
seems a likely area f o r p r o d u c t i v e c a m e r a w o r k , yet secret as this
m o m e n t is, a few p h o t o g r a p h e r s are w o r k i n g today w h o deliberately
try to start f r o m their o w n k n o w n feeling states to m a k e p h o t o g r a p h s
which will arouse or reach similar feeling states in others. T h e y con-
sciously m a k e p h o t o g r a p h s to f u n c t i o n as E q u i v a l e n t s . W e can a d d
t h e n a m e s of a few—Frederick S o m m e r in Arizona, P a u l C a p o n i g r o
in Massachusetts, W a l t e r C h a p p e l l in N e w York, G e r a l d R o b i n s o n
in O r e g o n , A r n o l d Gassan in C o l o r a d o ; t h e r e are others.
T o work in such a m a n n e r , the p h o t o g r a p h e r s m u s t be able to get
their work before those persons in the world w h o are sensitized intel-
lectually, e m o t i o n a l l y , a n d kinesthetically—not a n u m e r o u s a u d i e n c e
to be sure, even if widespread. Universality, t h a t q u a l i t y always
t h o u g h t to be desirable in p h o t o g r a p h s a n d pictures, is not d e n i e d to
such p h o t o g r a p h e r s . It is t h e i r efforts t h a t m a t t e r , to c o m m u n i c a t e -
evoke w i t h i n d i v i d u a l s w h o are in t u n e w i t h t h e central core of uni-
versality c o m m o n to b o t h m a n a n d spirit.
E Q U I V A L E N C E , MIRROR O F T H E PSYCHE

T h e p e r e n n i a l t r e n d , as old as m a n in art, seems to h a v e a p p e a r e d

in p h o t o g r a p h y at the b e g i n n i n g of this century. At first it was r a t h e r
vague in the work a n d writings of t h e Photo-Secession g r o u p a r o u n d
Stieglitz a n d E d w a r d Steichen in N e w York; t h e n it was n a m e d , as
was said, by Stieglitz in t h e early twenties. T h e p e r e n n i a l t r e n d is
still n o t generally u n d e r s t o o d by p h o t o g r a p h e r s or their critics.
T h e r e seems to be g r o w i n g f r e q u e n c y o n the p a r t of c o n t e m p o r a r y
thinkers a b o u t p h o t o g r a p h y to p o i n t o u t t h a t p e o p l e see themselves
in p h o t o g r a p h s in spite of themselves. N a t h a n Lyons, Assistant Direc-
tor of E a s t m a n H o u s e , asks the m e m b e r s of his p r i v a t e classes w h e t h e r
they see w h a t they believe, or believe w h a t they see. A n d most of us
see w h a t we wish to see in a p h o t o g r a p h , or a n y t h i n g else—not w h a t
is actually present. C a m e r a s are far m o r e i m p a r t i a l t h a n t h e i r owners
a n d employers. In o t h e r words p r o j e c t i o n a n d e m p a t h y , n a t u r a l attri-
butes in m a n , lead us to see s o m e t h i n g of ourselves almost a u t o m a t i -
cally in a n y t h i n g t h a t we look at l o n g e n o u g h to be a w a r e of it. So we
can say t h a t the p h o t o g r a p h invariably f u n c t i o n s as a m i r r o r of at
least some p a r t of t h e viewer. F r o m extensive researches in a u d i e n c e
responses to p h o t o g r a p h s d o n e at the Rochester I n s t i t u t e of T e c h -
nology, it is evident t h a t m a n y persons looking as a p h o t o g r a p h see
s o m e t h i n g of themselves first, a n d t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r b e h i n d t h e cam-
era second, if at all. T o t h e innocent, well m e a n i n g y o u n g photog-
r a p h e r , a u d i e n c e response to his p h o t o g r a p h s is a d i s h e a r t e n i n g
experience. T h e y see w h a t they wish to see, a n d not w h a t he thinks
t h a t he is showing t h e m .
Some degree of m i r r o r i n g h a p p e n s w i t h any p h o t o g r a p h , b u t it is
especially strong w i t h p h o t o g r a p h s r e n d e r e d in a stylized or non-literal
way. M i r r o r i n g is also strong in p h o t o g r a p h s in w h i c h t h e presence
of design is e q u a l to or supersedes t h e sense of the presence of the
subject in f r o n t of t h e camera. T h i s is t h e usual a p p e a r a n c e of t h e
" p i c t o r i a l " p h o t o g r a p h which includes design a n d its expressive effect
as well as t h e r e c o r d i n g of a n aesthetic object. W h e n the subject m a t t e r
is r e n d e r e d in such a way t h a t it is obscure, a m b i g u o u s , or impossible
to identify, t h e response to the image takes on a completely d i f f e r e n t
aspect. Since most of us have no e x p e r i e n c e of similar images except
w h a t we see in abstract or non-objective p a i n t i n g , we will t e n d to
react to such p h o t o g r a p h s as if they were p a i n t i n g s a n d look for the
same qualities or value relationships a n d all t h e rest of the a t t r i b u t e s
of design long f a m i l i a r to us f r o m t h e world of p a i n t i n g a n d sculp-
ture. W h e n we c a n n o t identify t h e subject, we forget t h a t t h e image
b e f o r e us may be a d o c u m e n t of some p a r t of the world t h a t we h a v e
never seen. Sometimes a r t a n d n a t u r e meet in such p h o t o g r a p h s . W e
call t h e m " a b s t r a c t i o n s " f r e q u e n t l y because they r e m i n d us of similar
p a i n t i n g s . Actually they are " e x t r a c t i o n s " or "isolations" f r o m the
world of appearances, o f t e n literal. T h i s p u t s a different b e a r i n g o n
t h e a m b i g u o u s or u n i d e n t i f i a b l e subject in a p h o t o g r a p h . A n d we
are faced w i t h a different e n c o u n t e r with the world of a p p e a r a n c e s
t h a n w h e n we c o n f r o n t t h e p a i n t e d " a b s t r a c t i o n . " Nevertheless, o u r
usual tendency, if we m a k e the a t t e m p t to engage, r a t h e r t h a n reject,
t h e a m b i g u o u s r e n d e r i n g of a subject in a p h o t o g r a p h , is to invent a
subject for it. W h a t we invent is o u t of the stuff a n d substance of our-
selves. W h e n we invent a subject we t u r n the p h o t o g r a p h i n t o a
m i r r o r of some p a r t of ourselves.
Editors such as R a l p h Hattersley of Infinity Magazine, or myself of
Aperture, w h o p o i n t o u t t h a t people see themselves in p h o t o g r a p h s
in spite of their protests to the contrary, are long f a m i l i a r w i t h the
letters a n d articles of persons w h o insist t h a t they do n o t w a n t to
solve p i c t u r e puzzles. W e w o n d e r if such persons have t h e emotional-
intellectual e q u i p m e n t to solve a n y t h i n g . O r t h e letters of those w h o
insist t h a t they are u p r i g h t , honest m e n or w o m e n a n d so do n o t w a n t
to, or have no need, to i n d u l g e in self-searching. " M o r b i d " is the
word most f r e q u e n t l y a p p l i e d to a k n o w i n g study of a p h o t o g r a p h
for w h a t it m i g h t reveal of t h e t r u e n a t u r e of t h e viewer. It w o u l d
seem t h a t any soul searching, or a t t e m p t to discover w h a t P l a t o
m e a n t by " K n o w T h y s e l f " is considered sickness of some sort by m a n y
c o n t e m p o r a r y Americans. In spite of protests, o u r own psychology
finds a way to see w h a t it wants to see i n t h e world of appearances.
T h i s is a difficult a n d sore p o i n t ; consequently I a n d m a n y of my
s t u d e n t s have observed people's responses to p h o t o g r a p h s , a n d at-
t e m p t e d to e v a l u a t e a n d investigate t h e n a t u r e of things b e h i n d the
responses of m a n y kinds of p e o p l e to m a n y types of p h o t o g r a p h s .
A n d we observe t h a t all too o f t e n the persons w h o cry "Sick, Sick,
Sick" h a v e n o i m a g i n a t i o n . O r , f o r reasons obscure to them, they
deliberately b l i n d themselves to visual experiences t h a t m i g h t d i s t u r b
their basic insecurity. C o n s e q u e n t l y the full r a n g e of p h o t o g r a p h i c
possibilities of c o m m u n i c a t i o n - e v o c a t i o n is a closed world to t h e m .
Sometimes the c o m p l a i n t against a m b i g u o u s p h o t o g r a p h s is stated,
"Art m u s t never be a glorified R o r s c h a c h test!" Suggestibility is p a r t
of t h e f o u n d a t i o n s of h u m a n n a t u r e . Most of o u r lives d e p e n d on
suggestibility, t h e arts especially. T h e d o c u m e n t a r i a n in p h o t o g r a p h y
may c o m m u n i c a t e considerable i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h his camera; t h e
pictorialist conscious of design a n d its p o w e r of suggestion d e p e n d s
heavily o n t h a t q u a l i t y in us t h a t makes the R o r s c h a c h blot useful in
therapy. T h e theory of E q u i v a l e n c e is a way for t h e p h o t o g r a p h e r to
deal w i t h h u m a n suggestibility in a conscious a n d responsible way.
It seems to m e t h a t to t h i n k of p a i n t i n g or p h o t o g r a p h y as some
degree of glorified R o r s c h a c h blots is n o t d e t r i m e n t a l to either medi-
u m because suggestibility is t h e very gate to t h e p e r e n n i a l t r e n d in
art. W e m u s t observe, of course, t h a t a g a t e is n o t q u i t e the same as
a garden.
Some c o n t e m p o r a r y p h o t o g r a p h e r s , such as those already n a m e d ,
willingly acknowledge t h e fact t h a t p h o t o g r a p h s m i r r o r some state
of feeling w i t h i n t h e viewer. T h e y i n c l u d e themselves h e r e as viewers
of their o w n p h o t o g r a p h s a n d viewers of the subjects they select.
T h e y accept t h e t r u t h t h a t p h o t o g r a p h s act as a catalyst, a n d con-
sequently a r e a step in process, n o t an e n d p r o d u c t . T h e y can r e m e m -
ber t h a t t h e m e n t a l image in a viewer's m i n d is m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n
t h e p h o t o g r a p h itself.
T h a t the p h o t o g r a p h is a f u n c t i o n instead of a t h i n g is a most inter-
esting d e v e l o p m e n t in t h e idea of the E q u i v a l e n t ; if i n d e e d this is a
d e v e l o p m e n t a n d n o t a b e l a t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g of w h a t Stieglitz m e a n t
by t h e w o r d . It is interesting because it reflects a c e r t a i n p o t e n t i a l
c h a n g e i n the F r e u d i a n , J u n g i a n a n d A d l e r i a n effect o n t h e p o p u l a r
ideas a b o u t psychology. P r o b a b l y m a n y a lay person still thinks psy-
chology is dirty, has associated the dirty sides of himself with t h a t
w o r d . T r u e e n o u g h the i n n e r w o r k i n g s of m a n are b o t h dirty a n d
clean—as are his o u t e r relations to o t h e r m e n . A r t t r a d i t i o n a l l y claims
a concern w i t h m a n ' s p u r e impulses a n d clean motives, yet m a n y a
c o n t e m p o r a r y psychologist thinks that all this is p u r e h o k u m . So do
some p h o t o g r a p h e r s . A n d in protest a n d in t r u t h , in soul searching
a n d awareness of o u r self-destroying age, m a n y people in contempo-
rary art, notably Frederick S o m m e r in c o n t e m p o r a r y p h o t o g r a p h y ,
present images w h i c h are i n t e n d e d in such a p a r t i c u l a r way t h a t if the
viewer engages the images at all, t h e n the viewer will see s o m e t h i n g
of himself. If w h a t he sees is u n p l e a s a n t , that there may be some t r u t h
in t h a t some p a r t of himself is unpleasant—if dirty, m o r b i d a n d so on.
. . . If he is struck w i t h terror, p e r h a p s he has m e t s o m e t h i n g worthy
of his fear. If he finds s o m e t h i n g magnificent, it is because s o m e t h i n g
b e a u t i f u l in h i m has been magnified.
F o u r p h o t o g r a p h s are p r e s e n t e d h e r e by the a u t h o r . Of t h e m it
may be said that w h a t you get f r o m t h e m is yours. T h e a u t h o r pre-
sents t h e m also as showing s o m e t h i n g of himself. In o t h e r words,
these p h o t o g r a p h s o r i g i n a t e in a k n o w n feeling state. T h e y are n o t
self-expressive, or self-searching; they are self-found. C o m m u n i c a t i o n
is of no i m p o r t a n c e , evocation of little significance, c o m p e t i t i o n non-
existent. T h e y are shown as an event o u t of which E q u i v a l e n c e m i g h t
occur. T h e possibility of the reader's being c o n f r o n t e d w i t h some-
t h i n g of himself is their only reason for being r e p r o d u c e d . T h e y will
f u n c t i o n as mirrors of the viewer, w h e t h e r he a d m i t s it or not. It will
n o t be p o i n t e d o u t which of t h e images knows happiness, the one that
knows anger, or t h e one t h a t knows sadness because viewers of pho-
t o g r a p h s need t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to learn f a i t h in their own feelings.
W i t h the theory of Equivalence, p h o t o g r a p h e r s everywhere are
given a way of l e a r n i n g to use the camera in relation to the m i n d ,
heart, viscera a n d spirit of h u m a n beings. T h e p e r e n n i a l t r e n d has
barely been started in p h o t o g r a p h y .
BERENICE A B B O T T , born Springfield, Ohio,
1898. Studied, Ohio State Univ., 1918-21;
studied sculpture and painting in New
York City. T o Paris and Berlin, continued
studies, 1921-23. Began photography as as-
sistant to Man Ray (portraiture), 1924. Re-
cognized value of work of Eugene Atget,
1925; after his death in 1927, acquired col-
lection of his negatives and prints. Instru-
mental in publication of monograph in
1930, Atget Photographe de Paris. First
exhibition, Paris, (introduction by Jean
Cocteau) 1926. Returned to United States,
1929; hired by Fortune to make series of
portraits of American businessmen, after
which was commissioned by Life to make
series of scientific subjects; began docu-
ment of New York; photographs in Deut-
sche W e r k b u n d exhibition "Film u n d
Foto," Stuttgart. Worked on U.S. Govern-
ment Federal Art Project, " T h e Changing
New York Program." Publication of Chang-
ing New York, 1939, derived from this pro-
ject. 1938, began over 20 years of teaching
at New School for Social Research. Exhibi-
tion at Federal Art Gallery, 1939. Associ-
ated with Physical Science Study Commit-
tee of Educational Services, Inc., 1958-61;
in conjunction with Committee and Smith-
sonian Institution produced " T h e Image of
Physics," exhibition circulated throughout
the country. Author of, The World of At-
get, 1964.
BOOKS & CATALOGUES: Changing New York
(text by Elizabeth McCausland), 1939; The
View Camera Made Simple, Chicago, 1948;
Greenwich Village Today and Yesterday
(text by Henry W. Lanier), 1949; New
Guide to Better Photography, 1953; 20 Pho-
tographs by Eugene Atget (portfolio of
modern prints made by Abbott from Atget's
negatives, with introduction), 1956; Physics,
Boston, 1960; Magnet (text by E. Valens),
Cleveland, 1964.
ARTICLES BY: "Photographer as Artist," Art
Front, Vol. 16, (1936); "Photography 1839-
1937," Art Front, Vol. 17, (1937); "Eugene
Atget," The Complete Photographer, No.
6 (1941; reprinted in Encyclopedia of Pho-
tography, Vol. 2, 1963); "Documenting the
City," The Complete Photographer, No. 22
(1942; reprinted in Encyclopedia of Pho-
tography, Vol. 7, 1963); "Nadar: Master
Portraitist," The Complete Photographer,
No. 51 (1943); "View Cameras," The Com-
plete Photographer, No. 53 (1943; reprinted
in Encyclopedia of Photography, Vol. 20,
1963); "From a Student's Notebook," Popu-
lar Photography, 21:6 (1947); " W h a t the
Camera and I See," Art News, 50:5 (1951);
" T h e Image of Science," Art in America,
47:4 (1959).
ARTICLES ABOUT: Elizabeth McCausland,
" T h e Photography of Berenice Abbott,"
Trend, 3 : 1 ( 1 9 3 5 ) ; Rosa Reilly, "Berenice
Abbott Records Changing New York,"
Popular Photography, 3 : 3 ( 1 9 3 8 ) ; "Some-
thing New Under the Sun," Minicam Pho-
tography, 7 : 5 ( 1 9 4 4 ) ; Elizabeth McCaus-
land, "Berenice Abbott—Realist," Photo
Arts, 2 : 1 (Spring 1 9 4 8 ) ; "Abbott's Non-
Abstract Abstracts," Infinity, 1 1 : 1 ( 1 9 6 2 ) .
ANSEL A D A M S , born San Francisco, Cal.,
1902. Trained as concert pianist. Visited
Yosemite Valley, Cal., 1916, returning often
to photograph. First portfolio, Parmelian
Prints of the High Sierras, for Sierra Club,
beginning long association, 1928. Decided
to become full-time photographer, 1930;
one-man exhibition, M. H. de Young Me-
morial Museum, San Francisco. With Wil-
lard Van Dyke, founded " G r o u p /64," de-
dicated to exploring potentials of straight
photography, 1932. First technical book,
Making a Photograph, 1935. One-man ex-
hibition, An American Place, 1936. Di-
rected exhibition, "A Pageant of Photog-
raphy," Golden Gate Exposition, 1940.
Helped establish Dept. of Photography,
Museum of Modern Art, 1940; served as its
Vice-Chairman. Photographed Japanese-
Americans at Manzanar relocation camp,
1943; published as Born Free and Equal,
1944. Founded the first Dept. of Photog-
raphy at California School of Fine Arts,
1946. Guggenheim Fellowship 1946, (re-
newed 1 9 4 8 ) , 1 9 5 8 . Began Basic Photo Book
Series, 1948. Consultant to Polaroid Corp.,
since 1949. Produced Portfolio One and
Portfolio Two, 1 9 4 8 - 5 0 . Since 1 9 5 5 , annual
workshops in Yosemite Valley. Collaborated
with Nancy Newhall on exhibition "This
is the American Earth," 1955, and " T h e
Eloquent Light " 1963; "A Nation of Na-
tions," for United States Information
Agency, 1957. Awarded honorary degree of
DFA by Univ. of Cal., 1961.
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S : Taos Pueblo, (12
original prints; text by Mary Austin) San
Francisco, 1930; Sierra Nevada: The John
Muir Trail, Berkeley, 1938; My Camera in
Yosemite Valley, Yosemite, 1949; My Cam-
era in the National Parks, Yosemite Nat.
Park, 1950; Death Valley, (text by Nancy
Newhall) San Francisco, 1954; Mission San
Xavier del Bac, (text by Nancy Newhall)
San Francisco, 1954; Yosemite Valley, (ed-
ited by Nancy Newhall) San Francisco,
1959; This is the American Earth, (with
Nancy Newhall) San Francisco, 1960; The
Eloquent Light, Volume I, (by Nancy New-
hall) San Francisco, 1963.
ARTICLES BY: " T h e New Photography,"
Modern Photography Annual, (1934-35);
"A Decade of Photographic Art," Popular
Photography, 22:6 (1948); "Some T h o u g h t s
on Color Photography," Photo Notes,
(Spring 1950); "Contemporary American
Photography," Universal Photo Almanac
(1951); "Creative Photography," Art in
America, 45:4 (1957); "Some Definitions,"
Image, 8:1 (1959); " T h e Idea of the Work-
shop in Photography," Aperture,9:4 (1961);
"Edward Weston," Infinity, 13:2 (1964).
ARTICLES ABOUT: Daniel Masclet, "Ansel
Adams," Le Photographe, 47:880 (1957);
Joe Munroe, "For Adams, Always Tomor-
row," Infinity, 13:2 (1964).
FRANCIS B R U G U I E R E , born San Francisco,
Cal., 1880. Studied painting in Europe. T o
New York, 1905. Met Alfred Stieglitz at
"291"; became member of Photo-Secession;
studied photography with p h o t o g r a p h e r /
painter, Frank Eugene. T o San Francisco
early 1900's; photographs exhibited "In-
ternational Exhibition of Pictorial Photog-
raphy," Albright Art Gallery, Buffalo, 1910.
Began experiments with multiple exposure,
1912. First book published, San Francisco,
1918. Returned to New York, 1919; opened
studio; became renowned for photographs
of T h e a t r e Guild Productions using stage
lighting to photograph scenes of plays as
audience experienced them. Worked in as-
sociation with Lee Simonson and Robert
E d m u n d Jones in production of stage set-
tings in which light played important role
in the drama. Worked in collaboration with
Norman Bel Geddes on his book of stage
design for Dante's Divine Comedy (fore-
word by Max Reinhardt), 1924. Produced
and photographed film, " T h e Way," fea-
turing Rosalinde Fuller and Sebastian Dro-
ste; film unfinished because of death of
Droste, 1925. Began light abstractions, 1926.
Exhibition of photographs and paintings,
Art Center, N. Y., 1927, followed by exhibi-
tions in Europe. T o London; Der Sturm
Galleries, Berlin, exhibited his photographs
along with paintings; following exhibition,
became honorary member, German Seces-
sion Group, 1928. Photographs in Deutsche
Werkbund exhibition, "Film und Foto,"
Stuttgart, 1929. Film, "Light R h y t h m s " in
collaboration with Oswell Blakeston (re-
leased in 1930) designed photographically
using forms created by light. T o London;
worked in advertising with E. McKnight
Kauffer; designed settings for Strindberg's
plays, 1930. Visited New York, winter of
1932; produced series, often multiple ex-
posures, of skyscrapers, while writing a
"Pseudomorphic F i l m " of his impressions
of Manhattan u n d e r Depression and Pro-
hibition for publication in Close Up. Pro-
duced photographic murals for British
Pavilion at Paris Exhibition, 1937. Con-
centrated mainly on painting and sculpture
until his death, 1945. T h e Focal Press of
London produced large memorial exhibi-
tion of photographs, 1949; later shown at
American Embassy. Retrospective exhibi-
tion "A Quest for Light" produced by
George Eastman House, 1959.
BOOKS & San Francisco, San
CATALOGUES:
Francisco, 1918; Photographs and Paintings
by Francis Bruguiere, (Catalogue), 1927;
Beyond This Point (by Lance Sieveking),
London, 1929; Few Are Chosen (by Oswell
Blakeston). London, 1932.
ARTICLEB Y : " W h a t 291 Means to Me,"
Camera Work, No. 47, (1914).
ARTICLES A B O U T : "Bruguiere as Artist in
Lights," Boston Evening Transcript (Apr
9, 1927); Oswell Blakeston, "Five Minutes
with Francis Bruguiere," Close-Up, 4:4
(1929); Harry A. Potamkin, "Francis Bru-
guiere," Transition (Nov 1929); Harry A.
Potamkin, "New Ideas for Animation,"
Movie Makers (Dec 1929); Oswell Blakes-
ton, "Pseudomorphic Film," Close-Up,
10:1 (1933); " T h e Work of Kauffer and
Bruguiere," Commercial Art and Industry
(Feb 1934); Walter Chappell, "Francis
Bruguiere," Art in America, 47:3 (1959).
WYNN BULLOCK, born Chicago, Illinois,
1902. T o California at age five. Pursued
musical education in Berlin, Milan, and
Paris after attending Columbia University
and University of West Virginia. In Europe
became interested in the visual arts, par-
ticularly photography. Returned to United
States, 1929; went into real estate business.
In 1937 decided on photography as career;
studied at Art Center School, Los Angeles,
with Edward Kaminski. First one-man ex-
hibition, Los Angeles County Museum of
photographs using partial-reversal tech-
nique, 1941; work in this field led to basic
patents in United States, Canada and Great
Britain. During war produced illustrated
instruction manuals for Armed Forces.
Since 1949 principal interest has been seri-
ous creative photography, inspired by work
of Moholy-Nagy, Alfred Stieglitz, and Ed-
ward Weston. Has published numerous
articles for scientific journals. Became Head
of Photography Department, San Francisco
State College, 1959. Conducts workshops
and photographic seminars.
The Photograph as
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S :
Poetry, Pasadena, 1960; Three Photograph-
ers, Kalamazoo Art Center Bulletin No. 2,
1961; Encyclopedia of Photography ("Wynn
Bullock"), 1963; The Heritage of Edward
Weston (catalogue). University of Oregon,
1965.
ARTICLES B Y : "Portfolio," Aperture, 2:3
(1953); "Partial Reversal Line," Photo-
graphic Journal, Vol. 9 5 ( 1 9 5 5 ) ; "Partial
Reversal Line Photography," Medical and
Biological Illustration, 7 : 4 ( 1 9 5 7 ) ; " A Lyri-
cal Journey to Big Sur" (with Eric Bark-
er), Carmel Pacific Spectator Journal, 13:6
(1957); "A New Concept in Photography,"
Carmel Pacific Spectator Journal, 15:1
(1958); " T i m e ' s Vital Relationship to Pho-
tography," Contemporary Photographer,
1:1 (1960); " T h e Fourth Dimension," Pho-
tography, 17:9 (1962).
ARTICLES ABOUT: C. Weston Booth, "Pho-
tographic Horizon," U.S. Camera, Vol. 9
(1946); Lew Parrella, " W y n n Bullock,"
U.S. Camera Annual (1956); George Baker,
" W y n n Bullock and the Camera Eye," The
Argonaut Monthly (June 1958); George
Bush, " T h o u g h t s o n W y n n Bullock," In-
ternational Photo Technik, No. 1 (1961);
Nat Herz, " W y n n Bullock: A Critical Ap-
preciation," Infinity, 10:9 (1961); J o n a t h a n
Williams, " T h e Eyes of T h r e e Phantasts:
Laughlin, Sommer, Bullock," Aperture, 9:3
(1961); " N a t u r e Photography," Pacific Dis-
covery, 6:3 (1963); George Bush, " T h e
N u d e in Nature," International Photo
Technik, No. 2 (1963); "Bullock," Photog-
raphy Annual (1965).
HARRY CALLAHAN, born Detroit, Michigan,
1912. Studied engineering, Michigan State
University, two years. Began photograph-
ing, 1938. Strongly impressed by Ansel
Adams, whose lectures he attended, 1941,
and by life and work of Alfred Stieglitz.
Worked as processor, photo lab, General
Motors, 1944-45. Met Moholy-Nagy; began
teaching at Institute of Design of the Illi-
nois Institute of Technology, 1946; became
head of photography d e p a r t m e n t , 1949.
T a u g h t , Black Mountain College, Summer
1951. One-man exhibition, Kansas City Art
Institute; received G r a h a m Foundation
award, 1956. Year's leave to photograph in
France, 1957. One-man exhibition, George
Eastman House, 1958. Became associate pro-
fessor, R h o d e Island School of Design,
1961; appointed professor, 1964. Exhibi-
tion with Robert Frank, Museum of Mod-
ern Art, 1962. "Ideas in Images," Worces-
ter Art Museum, 1962; Hallmark Gallery
exhibition, New York, 1964. Monograph
published. Photographs: Harry Callahan,
1964.
BOOKS & CATALOGUES: On My Eyes (poetry
by Larry Eigner), Highlands, N. C., 1960;
The Multiple Image (introduction by Jon-
a t h a n Williams), Chicago, 1961; Encyclo-
pedia of Photography ("Harry Callahan"),
1963.
ARTICLES B Y : " L e a r n i n g Photography at
the Institute of Design," (with Aaron Sis-
kind) Aperture, 4:4 (1956); " P a t t e r n , "
ASMP Picture Annual (1957).
ARTICLES ABOUT: Edward Steichen, " I n and
Out of Focus," U.S. Camera Annual (1949);
" O n e in a T h o u s a n d , " Newsweek, 37:19
(1951); "10 Photographs by Harry Calla-
h a n , " Gentry, No. 20 (1956); David Ebin,
" H a r r y Callahan: Conventional Subjects
Become Extraordinary Photographs," Mod-
ern Photography, 21:2 (1957); Robert Cree-
ley, " H a r r y Callahan: A Note," Black
Mountain Review, No. 7 (1957); Minor
White, " T h e Photographs of Harry Calla-
han," Aperture, 6:2 (1958); Willy Rotzler,
" H a r r y M. Callahan: 7 F a r b a u f n a h m e n , "
Du, 22:251 (1962); " P h o t o g r a p h s by Harry
Callahan," Choice, No. 2 (1962).
HENRI C A R T I E R - B R E S S O N , born Chanteloup,
France, 1908. Early interest in cinema and
photography. Studied p a i n t i n g with An-
dre Lhote; literature and p a i n t i n g at Cam-
bridge, England, 1928. Early influences,
Man Ray and Atget; began p h o t o g r a p h i n g
seriously, 1930. With Leica camera, tra-
veled Europe, exhibited Madrid, Mexico
City (with Manuel Alvarez Bravo), New
York (with W r alker Evans). R e t u r n e d to
France, 1936; worked with Jean Renoir on
films. Documentary film on medical aid,
Spanish Civil War, 1937. Began reportage
for periodicals and newspapers. Drafted,
outbreak of Second World War; captured
in 1940. T h i r d a t t e m p t to escape from Ger-
m a n prison c a m p successful. Began organiz-
ing French u n d e r g r o u n d photographic
units to document G e r m a n occupation and
retreat. Made film " L e R e t o u r " for U.S.
Office of W a r I n f o r m a t i o n , 1945. Following
one-man exhibition at Museum of Modern
Art, 1946, spent year traveling and pho-
tographing in United States. With Robert
Capa, George Rodger, David Seymour,
founded M a g n u m Photos (international
photographic co-operative), 1947. T o Far
East, 1948-50. Exhibition, Art Institute of
Chicago, 1954. Retrospective exhibition.
Pavilion de Marsan at Louvre, Paris, 1955,
circulated t h r o u g h o u t Europe, J a p a n , Uni-
ted States; now in p e r m a n e n t collection of
Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. Soci£t£ Fran-
caise de Photographie award, 1959. T h i r d
Overseas Press Club award for China cov-
erage, 1960. T o Cuba, 1963. Photo-essay,
"Irish Time," Horizon, A u t u m n , 1965.
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S : The Photographs of
Henri Cartier-Bresson (essays by Lincoln
Kirstein 8c Beaumont Newhall), 1947 (new
edition with different selection of plates
and new essays. Photographs by Cartier-
Bresson, 1963); Les danses a Bali (text by
Antonin Artaud, commentaries by Beryl de
Zoete), Paris, 1954; D'Une Chine a I'Antre
(preface by Jean P. Sartre), Paris, 1954
(N. Y. edition, text by H a n Suyin, 1956);
The Europeans, 1955; The People of Mos-
cow, 1955; Encyclopedia of Photography
("Henri Cartier-Bresson," by A r t h u r Gold-
smith), 1963; China as Photographed by
Henri Cartier-Bresson (text by Cartier-
Bresson & Barbara Brakeley Miller), 1964.
ARTICLES B Y : " T h e Moment of T r u t h , "
Camera, 33:4 (1954); " T h e Deciding Eye,"
Lilliput, 44:3 (1959); "One Man Shows are
Best," Infinity, 8:10 (1959).
ARTICLES A B O U T : James T . Soby, " T h e Art
of Poetic Accident—The Photographs of
Cartier-Bresson & Helen Levitt," Minicam,
6:7 (1943); Lincoln Kirstein, "A Great
Book of Great Photographs," Infinity, 8:11
(1952); Daniel Masclet, "Les maitres de la
camera," Le Photographe, No. 783 (1953);
Nancy Newhall, "Controversy and the Crea-
tive Concepts," Aperture, 2:2 (1953); Beau-
mont Newhall, " T h e Instant Vision of
Henri Cartier-Bresson," Camera, 34:10
(1955); Lucien Lorelle, "Du salon national
a l'exposition de Cartier-Bresson," Le Pho-
tographe, 5:851 (1955); Byron Dobell, "A
Conversation with Henri Cartier-Bresson,"
Popular Photography, 41:3 (1957); Byron
Dobell, " M a g n u m , " Popular Photography,
41:3 (1957); T o m Hopkinson, " H e n r i Car-
tier-Bresson," Photography, (London) 12:1
(1957); " H e n r i Cartier-Bresson," British
Journal of Photography, 104:5044 (1957);
J u d i t h Holden, " T h e Disciplines of Henri
Cartier-Bresson," Infinity, 10:2 (1961); Dor-
othy Norman, "Stieglitz and Cartier-Bres-
son," Saturday Review, 45:38 (1962); Ralph
Hattersley, "Photographs by Cartier-Bres-
son," Infinity, 12:8 (1963).
ALVIN LANGDON COBURN, born Boston,
Mass., 1882. Introduced to photography by
F. Holland Day, his cousin, 1890. First ex-
hibited, Boston, 1898. First one-man exhi-
bition, London Salon, 1900. Founding
member Photo-Secession, 1902. Elected to
"Linked Ring," 1903. Portfolio appeared
in Camera Work; to London; met George
Bernard Shaw, 1904. Illustrated edition of
H. G. Wells' short stories, Door in the Wall,
1905. One-man exhibition, Royal Photo-
graphic Society, (catalogue introduction by
George Bernard Shaw); began collaboration
with Henry James, 1906. Exhibited at "In-
ternational Exhibition of Pictorial Pho-
tography," Albright Gallery, Buffalo, 1910.
T r i p to American West, 1911. Returned to
London, 1912. Met Ezra Pound, 1913. Ex-
hibition of Vortographs, (first intentionally
abstract photographs) 1917. Second one-
man exhibition, Royal Photographic So-
ciety, 1924. Elected Honorary Fellow, Royal
Photographic Society, 1931. Became na-
turalized British subject, 1932. Robert
Louis Stevenson's Edinburgh—Picturesque
Notes published, illustrated with photo-
graphs by Coburn from 1905-50. T h i r d
one-man exhibition, Royal Photographic
Society, 1957. Address "Photographic Ad-
ventures," at Univ. of Reading, 1962. A
Portfolio of Sixteen Photographs by Alvin
Langdon Coburn, with text by Nancy
Newhall, published by George Eastman
House, 1962. Died 1966.
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S : The Novels and Tales
of Henry James (illustrated by Coburn),
1908; London, London, 1909; Mark Twain
(Archibald Henderson), London, 1910;
New York (foreword by H. G. Wells), Lon-
don, 1910; The Cloud (P. B. Shelley), Los
Angeles, 1912; Men of Mark, London, 1913;
Pictures by Alvin Langdon Coburn (cata-
logue with statements by Coburn and W.
Howe Downes), London, 1913; London
(G. K. Chesterton), London, 1914; Moor
Park, Rickmansworth, London, 1914; Vor-
tographs and Paintings by Alvin Langdon
Coburn (catalogue essay by Ezra Pound),
London, 1917; The Book of Harlech, Har-
lech, 1920; More Men of Mark, London,
1922.
ARTICLES BY:"American Photographs in
London," Photo Era, 6:1 (1901); "Modern
Photography at the English Art Club,"
Photographic News, Vol. 51 (1907); Astro-
logical Portraiture," Photographic Jour-
nalVol. 63 (1923); "Photography and the
Quest of Beauty," Photographic Journal,
Vol. 64 (1924); "Bernard Shaw, Photog-
rapher, Photoguide Magazine, (Dec. 1950);
"Frederick H. Evans," Image, Vol. 2 (1953);
"Retrospect," Photographic Journal, Vol.
98 (1958); "Photographic Adventures,"
Photographic Journal, Vol. 102 (1962).
Sidney Allan, " T h e Exhi-
ARTICLES A B O U T :
bition of the Photo-Secession," Photograph-
ic Times-Bulletin, Vol. 36 (1904); Anthony
Guest, "Mr. A. L. Coburn's Vortographs at
the Camera Club," Amateur Photographer,
Vol. 60 (1917); J. Dudley Johnston, "Phases
in the Development of Pictorial Photog-
raphy in Britain and America," Photo-
graphic Journal, Vol. 63 (1923); Norman
Hall, "Alvin Langdon Coburn," Photog-
raphy, 16:10 (1961).
R O B E R T D E M A C H Y , born 1859, Paris banker,
came to photography from drawing. Elected
member Society Francais de Photographie,
1882. Exhibitor and member of jury, 1st
International Exhibition of Photography,
Palais des Beaux-Arts, 1892. Participated
in first Exhibition of Photographic Art,
Photo-Club de Paris; began work with gum
prints, 1894. Exhibition of g u m prints,
Photo-Club de Paris, 1895. Published with
Alfred Maskell,Photo-Aquatint or the Gum
Bichromate Process, London, 1897. First ex-
hibition, Royal Photographic Society, 1901;
member of General Committee of the Pho-
tographic Salon. Commissioned as a mem-
ber of the Advisory Committee for France,
H a m b u r g Jubilee Exhibition, 1903. One-
m a n exhibition, Royal Photographic So-
ciety, 1904. Elected an. Honorary Member,
Royal Photographic Society; elected mem-
ber of "Linked Ring," 1905. First oil prints;
published with C. Puyo, Les Procedes Pho-
tographie d'Argent, Paris, 1906. Exhibited
oil prints. Royal Photographic Society,
1907. Introduced a modern transfer method
for oil printing, 1911. Ceased photographic
activity at outbreak of war, 1914. Retrospec-
tive exhibition of g u m prints with C. Puyo,
1931. Died 1937.
ARTICLES B Y : "A Few Notes on the G u m
Bichromate Process," Photographic Times,
30:4 (1898); " G u m Bichromate Prints at
the Salon," Photographic Times, 30:8
(1898); " W h a t Difference is T h e r e Between
a Good Photograph and an Artistic Photo-
graph?" Camera Notes, 3:2 (1899); "Artistic
Photography in France," Photograms of
the Year (1899-1904); "Monsieur Demachy's
Opening Address," Photographic Journal,
N. S. 25:8 (1901); " T h e American New
School of Photography in Paris," Camera
Notes, 5:1 (1901-2); " T h e T r a i n i n g of the
Photographer in View of Pictorial Results,"
American Annual of Photography and
Photographic Times Almanac for 1901; Ad-
dress in Photographic Journal, 47:7 (1907),
"Demachy and English Photographic Art,"
(with commentaries by G. B. Shaw, F. H.
Evans, F. M. Sutcliffe), Camera Work, No.
18 (1907); " T h r e e Years' Experience with
the Oil Printing Process." Photographic
Journal, 50:7 (1910); " T h e Oil 1'ransfer
Process," Photographic Journal, 51:6 (1911).
A R T I C L E S A B O U T : " T h e Exhibition of Works
of M. Demachy," Photography, 13:655
(1901); "Behind the Scenes/' Photography,
15:756 (1903); Joseph Keiley, "Robert De-
machy," Camera Work, No. 5 (1904); R.
Child Bayley, "Oil Printing," Photography,
23:970 (1907).
P E T E R H. E M E R S O N , born Cuba, 1856, of an
American father and British mother. Spent
youth in Mass. T o England, 1869; studied
medicine. Bought photographic equip-
ment; received instruction from E. Griffiths,
1881-82. Joined Royal Photographic So-
ciety; first photograph exhibited at Pall
Mall, 1882. " A m a t e u r Photographers At
H o m e " competition and first medal at
Bond Street A m a t e u r Photographic exhi-
bition, 1885. Abandoned medical career,
1886. Published Naturalistic Photography,
defending photography as an independent
art, 1889. In the midst of resultant con-
troversy, published The Death of Natural-
istic Photography, d o u b t i n g validity of
photography as an art form, 1890. With-
drew remaining copies of Naturalistic Pho-
tography for revision, 1890. Continued
work; received Royal Photographic Society
Progress Medal for work in artistic photog-
raphy, 1895. Published expurgated and ex-
panded third edition of Naturalistic Pho-
tography, 1899. Retrospective exhibition,
Royal Photographic Society, 1900. Died Fal-
m o u t h , 1936.
BOOKS Sc Life and
CATALOGUES: Landscape
on the Norfolk Broads (with T. F. Good-
all), London, 1886; Idyls of the Norfolk
Broads (portfolio of 12 photogravures),
London, 1886; The Centenary Edition of
Isaac Walton's Complete Angler, London,
1887; Pictures from Life in Field and Fen
(portfolio of 20 photogravures), London,
1888; Pictures of East Anglian Life, Lon-
don, 1888; Wild Life on a Tidal Water
(with T . F. Goodall), London, 1890; On
English Lagoons, London, 1893; Birds,
Beasts, and Fishes of the Norfolk Broad-
land, London, 1895.
ARTICLES B Y : "Photography A Pictorial
Art," Amateur Photographer, Vol. 3 (1886);
"Photography," A mateur Photographer,
Vol. 3 (1886); "Dr. P. H. Emerson's Re-
joinder," The Photographic Art Journal,
N. S. Vol. 3 (1890); " O u r English L e t t e r -
O. G. Rejlander," American Amateur Pho-
tographer, Vol. 2 (1890); "Dr. Emerson's
Latest on Focussing," Photographic Art
Journal, N. S. Vol. 3 (1890); "Mrs. Came-
ron," Sun Artists, No. 5 (1890); " T o n e Re-
production and its Limitations," (a letter),
Photographic Art Journal, Vol. 57 (1917).
ARTICLES ABOUT: Philip Newman, "Im-
agining and Imaging," Photographic Art
Journal, N. S. Vol. 3 (1890); " T h r e e Im-
p o r t a n t Pictures," Photographic Art Jour-
nal, N. S. Vol. 3 (1890); T . R. Dallmeyer,
"Dr. P. H. Emerson," Photogram, 6:72
(1899).
ROBERT FRANK, born Zurich, Switzerland,
1924. Began photography, 1942; appren-
ticeship with H e r m a n n Eidenbenz in Basel
and Michael Wolgansinger in Zurich. Still
p h o t o g r a p h e r for motion picture company,
Zurich. T o United States, 1947; fashion
photographs for Harper's Bazaar; encour-
aged by Alexey Brodovitch. South America
for six months, late 1948; traveled in Peru
and Bolivia. Photographs from trip first
published, Neuf, 1952; later in book form
with additional photographs by W e r n e r
Bischof and Pierre Verger. Free-lance re-
portage; photographs for Fortune, Junior
Bazaar, Life, Look, McCalls. England,
France, Spain, Wales in 1949; photo-
graphed Welsh miners, London business
people and the city. R e t u r n e d , New York,
early 1951; free-lanced again with some
advertising photographs, particularly for
The New York Times. Met Edward Steich-
en, accompanied him to Europe for collec-
tion trip leading to exhibition "Post-War
European Photographers," 1953. First Euro-
pean p h o t o g r a p h e r to receive Guggenheim
Fellowship, 1955. Photographed through-
o u t United States, 1955-56; subsequent p u b -
lication of this work in book, Les Ameri-
cains. Began film making, 1958. "Pull My
Daisy," co-produced and filmed with paint-
er Alfred Leslie, narrated by Jack Kerouac,
1959, won first prize at San Francisco Film
Festival; " T h e Sin of Jesus," story by Isaac
Babel, 1960; request showing at Spoleto
Film Festival. T o Europe briefly, 1961. " O K
End Here," based on original story by Mar-
garet Maggid, 1963. In production, 1965-
66, film based in part o n Allen Ginsberg's
narrative poem, "Kaddish."
BOOKS & CATALOGUES: Les Americans,
(text
by Alain Bosquet) Paris, 1958, (N. Y. edi-
tion, The Americans, text by Jack Kerouac,
1959); Pull My Daisy, (with Jack Kerouac
and Alfred Leslie) 1961.
ARTICLE BY: "Ben James: Story of a Welsh
Miner," (portfolio) U.S. Camera Annual
(1955).
A R T I C L E S A B O U T : " R o b e r t F r a n k , " Camera,
28:12 (1949); G o t t h a r d Schuh, "A Letter
Addressed to Robert F r a n k , " (with port-
folio by Frank) Camera, 36:8 (1957); Walk-
er Evans, " R o b e r t Frank," U.S. Camera An-
nual (1958); Willy Rotzler, " D e r Photo-
graph Robert Frank," Du, 22:251 (1962);
" P h o t o g r a p h s by Robert Frank " Choice,
No. 2 (1962).
DOROTHEA LANGE, born Hoboken, N. J.
1895. Worked briefly for Arnold Genthe,
ca. 1915. Studied u n d e r Clarence H. White,
Columbia University, 1917-18. Opened por-
trait studio, San Francisco, 1919. Became
m e m b e r " G r o u p /64," 1934. Began photo-
g r a p h i n g the jobless d u r i n g Depression.
Made p h o t o g r a p h , " W h i t e Angel Bread-
line," 1933. Met Paul Taylor, University of
California economics professor, who had
been engaged by State of California to re-
port on migrant labor, 1934; became his re-
search assistant, functioning as photograph-
er. Joined R u r a l Resettlement Administra-
tion (later Farm Security Administration)
as p h o t o g r a p h e r u n d e r Roy Stryker, 1935.
W i t h Taylor, worked on and published An
American Exodus: A Record of Human
Erosion. Guggenheim Fellow, 1941; re-
signed fellowship after Pearl Harlx>r to
p h o t o g r a p h i n t e r n m e n t of Japanese-Amer-
icans. D u r i n g war continued to photograph,
working with Ansel Adams and several
government agencies including Office of
W a r Information. Covered initial United
Nations Conference, San Francisco, 1945;
became ill before completion of project.
Health restored, 1951; began again to pho-
tograph. Produced several photo-essays in-
cluding " T h r e e Mormon T o w n s , " 1954;
" T h e Public Defender," 1955; " D e a t h of a
Valley," (with Pirkle Jones), 1956-57; 1958
Asian portfolio published in 1964 Photog-
raphy Annual entitled " R e m e m b r a n c e of
Asia." T o Venezuela, 1960; Egypt, 1963.
Last and one of largest essays, " T h e Ameri-
can Farm W o m a n " completed early in
1965, to be published by Amon Carter Mu-
seum of Western Art. Conducted seminars
and workshops at San Francisco Art Insti-
tute. Died Oct. 11, 1965. Retrospective ex-
hibition, Museum of Modern Art, January
25-March 22, 1966.
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S : Land of the Free (by
Archibald Macleish), 1938; Encyclopedia of
Photography ("Dorothea L a n g e " by Wil-
lard Morgan), 1963; A Piece of Lettuce (by
George P. Elliott), 1964; Dorothea Lange
(catalogue, essay by George P. Elliott) 1966.
The American Country Woman, 1967.
A R T I C L E S B Y : "Fortune's Wheel," (with An-
sel Adams) Fortune, 31:2 (1945); "Miss
Lange's Counsel: P h o t o g r a p h e r Advises
Use of Picture T h e m e s , " New York Times,
(Dec 7, 1952); " T h e Assignment I'll Never
Forget: Migrant M o t h e r , " Popular Pho-
tography, 46:2 (1960); " T h e American
Farm W o m a n , " Haiuester World, 51:11
(1960); Postscript o n Stryker by Lange and
others in "Focus on Stryker," Popular Pho-
tography, 51:3 (1962); " R e m e m b r a n c e of
Asia," Photography Annual (1964).
ARTICLES A B O U T : Willard Van Dyke, " T h e
Photographs of Dorothea Lange," Camera
Craft, 41:10 (1934); "Lucretia Penny: Pea-
picker's Child," Survey Graphic, 24:7
(1935); Pare Lorentz, "Camera W i t h a Pur-
pose," U.S. Camera Annual (1941); Daniel
Dixon, "Dorothea Lange," Modern Photog-
raphy 16:12 (1952); H e r m Lenz, "Interview
with T h r e e Greats," U.S. Camera, 18:8
(1955); H e n r y Holmes Smith, "Image, Ob-
scurity Sc I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , " Aperture, 5:4
(1957); Nat Herz, "Dorothea Lange in Per-
spective," Infinity, 12:4 (1963); W. Eugene
Smith, " O n e W h o m I Admire, Dorothea
Lange 1895-1965," Popular Photography,
58:2 (1966).
LASZLO M O H O L Y - N A G Y , born Barsebarsod,
H u n g a r y , 1895; law studies to 1915; inter-
r u p t e d by service in H u n g a r i a n army, 1st
World War. D u r i n g recovery from wounds,
1917, began drawing; joined " M A " group
in Budapest; helped f o u n d review "Jelen-
kor." Left army and finished law studies;
began painting, studied old masters, 1918.
Increasingly sympathetic to work of Ger-
m a n Expressionists and Russian avant-
garde; to Vienna, then Berlin, 1920. First
exhibition, 1921. First photograms, 1922.
Joined Bauhaus, W e i m a r (later Dessau),
1923; head of metal workshop; later head
of preparatory course. Collaborated with
Bauhaus faculty on murals, ballet and stage
design, light and color experiments, typog-
raphy and layout. W i t h Walter Gropius
planned, edited, designed " B a u h a u s Biich-
er," including two of his own books stating
visual and pedagogical principles. Re-
signed f r o m Bauhaus, 1928. Collaborator
on Deutsche W e r k b u n d exhibition "Film
und Foto," Stuttgart, 1929. Stage designer,
Berlin; continued film experiments, photo-
grams and sound-film combinations includ-
ing "Light Display, Black, W h i t e and
Grey," 1931. T o London after year in Paris
and Amsterdam; created effects for H. G.
Wells' film " T h i n g s to Come," 1935. One-
man photographic exhibition, Delphic Stu-
dios, N. Y., 1931. Exhibition, Royal Pho-
tographic Society, London, 1936. Became
first director of New Bauhaus, Chicago,
later Institute of Design, 1937. Died 1946.
BOOKS 8C C A T A L O G U E S : Horizont, Vienna,
1921; Buch Neuer Kunstler, (with L. Kas-
sak) Vienna, 1922; Die Buhne in Bauhaus,
(with O. Schlemmer) Munich, 1925; Ma-
lerei, Photographic, Film, Munich, 1925;
Von Material zu Architektur, Munich, 1928
(revised English edition, The New Vision,
1928, revised and enlarged, 1946); 60 Fotos,
(edited by Franz Roh) Berlin, 1930; The
Street Markets of London (Mary Benedet-
ta), London, 1936; " P h o t o g r a p h y " in A
Pageant of Photography, San Francisco,
1940; " P h o t o g r a p h y " in Encyclopedia of
the Arts, 1946; Moholy-Nagy's Experiment
in Totality (S. Moholy-Nagy), 1950; Vision
in Motion, Chicago, 1947 (revised 1961).
ARTICLES BY: "La Photographie ce qu'elle
etait ce qu'elle devra etre," Cahiers d'Art,
4:1 (1929); "Now Photography Revolu-
tionizes Vision," The Listener, Nov. 8,
1933; "Photographers of T o d a y , " Modern
Photography Annual (1935/36); "New Ap-
proach to Fundamentals of Design," More
Business, 3:11 (1938); "Surrealism and the
P h o t o g r a p h e r , " The Complete Photograph-
er, No. 52 (1943); "Space-Time and the
P h o t o g r a p h e r , " American Annual of Pho-
tography (1943); " T h e Coming World of
Photography," Popular Photography, 14:2
(1944); "Photography in the Study of De-
sign," American Annual of Photography,
(1945); " I n Defense of Abstract Art," jour-
nal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 4:2
(1945).
ARTICLES ABOUT: Beaumont Newhall, " T h e
Photographs of Moholy-Nagy," Kenyon
Review, 3:3 (1941); " R e u n i o n in Chicago:
An Investigation into the Work of Moholy-
Nagy," Minicam Photography, 8:4 (1945);
"Message in a Bottle," Time, 47:7 (1946);
T h o m a s B. Hess, "Moholy-Nagy," Art News,
46:4 (1947).
MAN RAY, born Philadelphia, Pennsyl-
vania, 1890; settled with family in New
York, 1897. Completed formal education,
high school, 1909; courses in architectural
drawing and engineering. Began variety of
jobs in layout, lettering, typography; paint-
ing and drawing independently. Studied
drawing informally, Freer Center, New
York. Met Alfred Stieglitz, became frequent
visitor at "291," 1910. First exhibition
paintings, 1912. First one-man exhibition,
paintings, Daniel Gallery, New York, 1915;
met Marcel Duchamp; began work in col-
lage, constructions. Participated in quasi-
Dadaist group in New York with D u c h a m p ,
Francis Picabia and others, 1916-17. Began
photography in 1920. T o Paris, 1921; first
"Rayograph." 1922, published 12 Rayo-
graphs, Champs Delicieux, preface by Tris-
tan Tzara. Member of Paris Dadaist group.
Professional photographer; fashion illustra-
tion and portraiture. First Paris exhibition
of paintings and photographs, Libraire Six,
1922. Filmed: "Le R e t o u r a la Raison,"
1923, "Emak Bakia," 1926, "L'Etoile de 1850. Exhibited paintings at Royal Acad-
Mer," 1926, "Les Mysteres d u Chateau de emy, 1852. Opened studio at Leamington;
D£," 1929. Member of Surrealist group, exhibited three photographs, "Mr. Werner
1924; first exhibition Gallerie Surr^aliste, as Richelieu," (first effort at pictorial pho-
1926. Began solarization techniques, 1929. tography) at Manchester Art Treasures ex-
T o New York, for p h o t o g r a p h i c commis- hibition; elected m e m b e r Photographic
sion, 1936. R e t u r n e d to United States, 1940; Society of London, 1857. Advertised his
active as painter-photographer, exhibited business for sale; " F a d i n g Away" m a d e in
and lectured, California, 1940-50. R e t u r n e d April 1858, (from five separate negatives,
to Paris. Concentrates o n painting, con- first of long series of composite photo-
tinues personal p h o t o g r a p h i c work. Exhibi- graphs shown at Crystal Palace; m a d e series
tion, "L'Oeuvre P h o t o g r a p h i q u e , " Biblio- of photographs of story " R e d R i d i n g
thfcque Nationale, Paris, 1962. G r o u p ex- H o o d , " 1858. First photographic exhibition
hibition, " P o p Por Pop Corn Corny," Jean
medal, 1860. Elected m e m b e r Council of
Larcade Art Contemporain, Paris, 1965.
the Royal Photographic Society; first ap-
pearance of "Bringing H o m e the May,"
Les champs
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S : delicieux 1862. Sold business, 1864. Built new studio
(preface by T r i s t a n Tzara), Paris, 1922; G. i n T u n b r i d g e W e l l s w i t h N e l s o n K.
Ribemont-Dessaignes, Man Ray, Paris, Cherrill, 1868. Became a m a j o r spokesman
1924; Revolving Doors, 1916-1917, Paris, for pictorial tradition with publication of
1926; Souvenirs de Kiki, Paris, 1929; Elec- Picture Making by Photography, 1884,
tricite, Paris, 1931; Photographs by Man based heavily on Burnet's Treatise on
Ray, 1920-1934 (edited by James T h r a l l Painting and Ruskin's Modern Painters.
Soby), H a r t f o r d , 1934; Facile (with Paul Vice-President, Royal Photographic Society.
Eluard), Paris, 1935; Les Mains libres (with 1887. Died 1901.
Paul Eluard), Paris, 1937; La photographie
n'est pas I'art (preface by Andr6 Breton), BOOKS & CATALOGUES: Warwickshire Illus-
Paris, 1937; To Be Continued Unnoticed, trated, A History* of Remarkable Places in
Beverly Hills, 1948; Alphabet for Adults, the County of Warwick, London, 1857;
Beverly Hills, 1948; Man Ray: Voeuvre pho- Pictorial Effect in Photography, London,
tographique (catalogue with introduction 1869; The Art and Practice of Silver Print-
by Jean Adh£mar), Paris, 1962; Portraits ing (with Capt. William Abney), London,
(introduction by L. Fritz Gruber) Guters- 3881; Picture Making by Photography,
loh, 1963; Self Portrait, Boston, 1963; Man 1884; Letters on Landscape Photography,
Ray: 12 Photographs 1921-1928, Stuttgart, London, 1888.
1963. ARTICLES B Y : " R e t o u c h i n g and Exhibi-
ARTICLES BY: "A l'heure de l'observatoire tions," Photographic News, 16:699 (1872);
. . . les a m o u r e u x , " Cahiers d'Art, 10:5/6 "Naturalism and Photography," Philadel-
(1935); " O n Photography," Commercial phia Photographer, No. 286 (1886); " A r t
Art, Vol. 18 (1935); "Sur le r & l i s m e photo- or Accident," International Annual of An-
g r a p h i q u e , " Cahiers d'Art, 10:5/6 (1935) thony's Photographic Bulletin, Vol. 1
"Picasso, p h o t o g r a p h e , " Cahiers d'Art 12: (1888); "Fog or Focus," International An-
6 / 7 (1937); "Is Photography Necessary?" nual of Anthony's Photographic Bulletin,
Modern Photography, 21:11 (1957). Vol. 2 (1889); "Impossible Photography,"
Photographic Quarterly, 3:9 (1891); "Mus-
ARTICLES ABOUT: R o b e r t Desnos, " T h e ings on Some Recent Mistakes," Photog-
Work of Man Ray," Transition, No. 15 raphy Annual (1891); " T h e Study of Na-
(1929); C. Bauer, " P h o t o g r a p h y : Man Ray ture," Photography, 3:113 (1891); " T h e
and Paul Strand," Arts Weekly, (May T r a n s i t i o n Period," Photographic Quar-
1932); Andr£ T h e v e n e t , " M a n Ray," Cam- terly, 3:9 (1891); "Individuality in Photog-
era, 31:10 (1952); R o b e r t Melville, " M a n raphy," Anthony's Photographic Bulletin,
Ray in L o n d o n , " Arts, ( J u n e 1959); Mor- 23:17 (1892); " T h e Application of Art
ris Gordon, " M a n Ray, T h e Fiery Elf," In- to Photography," Anthony's Photographic
finity, 11:11 (1962); William Copley, " M a n Bulletin, 2 3 : 3 + (1892); "Expression in
Ray: T h e Dada of Us All," Portfolio, No. 7 Landscape," American Annual of Photog-
(1963); Carl Belz, " M a n Ray and New raphy and Photographic Times Almanac
York D a d a " Art Journal, 23:3 (1964). (1895); "Autobiographical Sketches," Pho-
tographic Times, 2 9 : 2 + (1897-98).
HENRY PEACH born Ludlow, in
ROBINSON,
Shropshire, England, 1830. First discovered ARTICLES ABOUT: T h o m a s Sutton, " O n
photography through advertisement for Some of the Uses and Abuses of Photog-
Talbot's Pencil of Nature, 1844. T r a i n e d as raphy," Photographic Notes, Vol. 8 (1863);
a painter; learned daguerreotype process, George Bruce, " R e t o u c h i n g the Negative,"
 (letter). Photographic News, 16:700 (1872);
" T h e Late H. P. Robinson," Photogram,
8:88 (1901); Charles Hastings, " H . P. Rob-
inson and His Work," Focus, 2:31 (1904).
ARTHUR SIEGEL, born Detroit, Mich., 1913.
Began p h o t o g r a p h i n g , 1927. Majored in
Sociology at University of Mich., and
Wayne State Univ. Experimental, docu-
mentary photography in the 1930's; schol-
arship to the New Bauhaus. Early 1940's,
Office of W a r I n f o r m a t i o n ; 3i/2 years in Air
Force. Invited to organize four-year course
and graduate photography d e p a r t m e n t at
New Bauhaus, 1946. Subsequent courses
widely influenced photography and photo-
graphic education. Since 1950 has written,
lectured, and taught; working p h o t o j o u r -
nalist for many national publications; con-
t i n u i n g work in experimental still and mo-
tion picture photography. One-man exhi-
bition, Art Institute of Chicago, 1954;
George Eastman House, 1955. Edited, Chi-
cago's Famous Buildings, 1965.
CATALOGUE: Six States Photography (exhi-
bition at Milwaukee Art Inst., critique by
iSiegel) Milwaukee, 1950.
ARTICLES BY: Statement in U.S. Camera An-
nual (1941); Statement in U.S. Camera An-
nual (1951); "Creative Color Photography,"
Modern Photography, 16:1, 2, 3 (1952);
"Anonymous Art and Choice: T h e Photog-
rapher's W o r l d " Aperture, 11:2 (1964);
"Basic Approaches to the Education of a
Photographer," (paper presented at Sym-
posium on the T e a c h i n g of Photography,
Society for Photographic Education, Chi-
cago 1965.)
ARTICLE ABOUT: " E x p e r i m e n t in Color,"
American Annual of Photography (1952).
A A R O N SISKIND, born New York City, 1903.
Received BSS, College of the City of N. Y.,
1926; began teaching English in NYC p u b -
lic schools. First experience with camera on
trip to B e r m u d a , 1930. Active interest in
photography; joined Film 8c Photo League;
began work o n " T a b e r n a c l e City" docu-
ment, 1932. Left Photo League; "Architec-
ture of Bucks C o u n t y " document, 1935. Re-
joined Photo League; organized Feature
G r o u p that produced " H a r l e m Document,"
"Dead End: the Bowery," "Portrait of a
T e n e m e n t , " "St. Joseph's House: the Cath-
olic Worker Movement," 1936. Exhibited
" T a b e r n a c l e City" at Photo League, 1941;
left the League shortly thereafter; first ex-
hibited at Museum of Modern Art. Sum-
mer on Martha's Vineyard; began to work
on flat plane with organic objects in geo-
metrical setting, 1943. Summer in Glou-
cester; subject m a t t e r as such ceased to be
of primary importance, 1944. First exhibi-
tion at Egan Gallery, 1947; broadened ac-
quaintance with N. Y. painters and their
work. Visited Chicago, met H a r r y Calla-
h a n , 1948. Sabbatical leave f r o m teaching,
1949; went West; spent some time with
Frederick Sommer in Arizona; resigned
teaching position. T a u g h t photography at
Black M o u n t a i n College with Callahan,
1951. Directed advanced students at Insti-
tute of Design, Illinois Inst, of Tech., in
development of definitive study of architec-
ture of Adler and Sullivan, 1952. Summer
in Mexico, 1955. Publication of first book,
Aaron Siskind: Photographs, New York,
1959. Appointed Head of Photography, In-
stitute of Design; s u m m e r in Mexico, 1961.
Co-editor of Choice, (magazine of poetry
and photography) 1962. Four months in
Italy, seven weeks in France; f o u n d i n g
m e m b e r of Society for Photographic Edu-
cation, 1963. Member of the Board of
Trustees of the Gallery of Contemporary
Art, Chicago, 1964. Comprehensive exhibi-
tion (200 photographs) George Eastman
House; m o n o g r a p h published, Aaron Sis-
kind Photographer, George Eastman House,
1965. Guggenheim Fellowship, 1966.
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S : Photographs by Pro-
fessors (catalogue, notes by Lew Parella),
1960; Spring of the Thief (by J o h n Logan),
1963.
A R T I C L E S B Y : " W h a t is Modern Photog-
r a p h y ? " American Photography, 45:3
(1951); Review of The Decisive Moment
by H. Car tier-Bresson, Saturday Review
(Dec 20, 1952); "Accidents of T i m e . . ."
Art Photography (June 1954); " T h e Essen-
tial Photographic Act," Art News, 54:8
(1955); " L e a r n i n g Photography at the In-
stitute of Design," (with Harry Callahan)
Aperture, 4:4 (1956); "Notes on the Pho-
tographic Act," Spectrum, 6:2 (1956); "It
Makes No Difference . . ." Modern Photog-
raphy, 22:2 (1958).
ARTICLES ABOUT: Beaumont Newhall, "Dual
Focus," Art News, 45:4 (1946); Hilda L.
Wilson, " T h e Camera's New Eye," Made-
moiselle (Dec 1947); Minna L i p p m a n n ,
"Chilmark Summer Visitor Expresses Ab-
stract in his Unusual Photographs," New
Bedford Standard Times (Sept 4, 1948);
Elizabeth T i m b e r m a n , "Aaron Siskind,"
Photo Notes (ca. J u n e 1948); Hilda L. Wil-
son, "Aaron Siskind," (typescript intro-
duction to 1948 exhibition, Egan Gallery,
N. Y.); Elaine de Kooning, " T h e Photo-
graphs of Aaron Siskind," (typescript in-
troduction to 1951 exhibition, Egan Gal-
lery); Jacob Deschin, " T w o Ways of See-
ing," Modern Photography, 15:5 (1951);
Bruce Downes, "Let's Talk Photography,"
Popular Photography, 29:1 (1951); Jacob
Deschin, "Siskind's World: Strange Pictures
Found on Decayed Surfaces," New York
Times (Feb 11, 1951); Georgine Oeri,
"Aaron Siskind: 'Abstract' Photography,"
Graphis, 7:3 (1951) Fritz Neugass, "Aaron
Siskind," Camera, 32:1 (1955); Beaumont
Newhall, " P h o t o g r a p h i n g the Reality of
the Abstract," New Directions, No. 15
(1955); J o n a t h a n Williams, "Aaron Sis-
k i n d / E i g h t Signs," Black Mountain Re-
view, No. 5 (1955); Minor White, review
of Aaron Siskind: Photographs, Aperture,
7:3 (1959); Walter Chappell, review of
Aaron Siskind: Photographs, Image, 9:2
(1960); Bill Coss, "Aaron Siskind: Hu-
manity in Abstraction," Metronome, 78:1
(1961); "Aaron Siskind," Foto, 28:2 (1966).
HENRY H O L M E S S M I T H , born Bloomington,
Illinois, 1909. Attended Illinois State Uni-
versity, 1927-29, 1930-32; School of the Art
Institute, Chicago, 1929-30; received BS
degree, Ohio State Univ., 1933. Attended
the New Bauhaus, Chicago; met and
was strongly influenced by Moholy-Nagy;
taught photography workshop with Gyorgy
Kepes, 1937-38. Wrote article for Minicam,
"Solarization Process," at suggestion of
Moholy-Nagy, 1939. Offered position as as-
sociate editor, Minicam, 1940. Served with
Air Service Groups, United States Army,
1942-45. Returned to Bloomington, Indi-
ana, 1946; in collaboration with Nathan
Lerner began experimentation with light
interceptors and photographic possibilities
of color synthesis without reference to na-
tural or local color of objects, experiments
which have continued to the present. T o
support this experimentation, took newspa-
per editorial position, Feb. 1947. Instructor
in photography, Dept. of Fine Arts and
Audio-Visual Center, Indiana University,
Sept. 1947. Associate editor, College Art
Journal, 1955-64. Founding member of So-
ciety for Photographic Education, 1963.
Promoted to full professor, 1965. Has or-
ganized several workshops on interpreta-
tion of photographs and the teaching of
photography.
BOOKS & CATALOGUES: Photographer's
Choice, ( " T h e Unseen Photographer")
B l o o m i n g t o n , I n d . , 1959; Invitational
Teaching Conference at the George East-
man House 1962 ("A Pilot Regional Work-
shop and Conference on Photography In-
struction") Rochester, N. Y., 1962; Aaron
Siskind Photographer (with essays by H.
H. Smith and T . B. Hess, edited with in-
troduction by N. Lyons), Rochester, N. Y.,
1965.
ARTICLES B Y : "Photographs and Public,"
Aperture, 2:3 (1953); " T h e First Indiana
University Photography Workshop," Aper-
ture, 5:1 (1957); " T w o for the Photojour-
nalism" Aperture, 8:4 (1960); " T h e Photog-
raphy of Jerry N. Uelsmann," Contempo-
rary Photographer, 5:1 (1964).
W. E U G E N E S M I T H , born Wichita, Kansas,
1918. News photographer at fifteen; pho-
tographic scholarship to Notre Dame Uni-
versity, 1936, left early in 1937. Photog-
rapher for Newsweek, 1937-38. Joined
Black Star Agency, did first stories for
American Magazine, Colliers, Harper's Ba-
zaar, and Life. Retainer contract with Life,
1939-41. War correspondent for Popular
Photography and other Ziff-Davis publica-
tions, 1942-44; for Life, 1944-45. Covered
thirteen invasions, made twenty-three com-
bat air missions, was wounded at Okinawa,
1945. Returned to photojournalism, and
to Life, 1947; produced a n u m b e r of photo-
essays including "Country Doctor," 1948;
"Spanish Village," 1951; "Man of Mercy,"
(Albert Schweitzer in Africa) 1954. Re-
signed from Life and joined Magnum Pho-
tos, 1955. Began photo-essay, "Pittsburgh"
which was completed with assistance of
two Guggenheim Fellowships, 1956 and
1957. Commissioned to photograph in col-
or, contemporary American architecture
by American Institute of Architects, 1956.
Resigned from Magnum Photos; appeared
with Dan Weiner on television program,
" T h e Press and the People," produced na-
tionally by W G B H - T V , Boston, 1959. Com-
missioned by Japanese industrial firm, Hi-
tachi, Ltd., to photograph its operations,
1961; again contributed to Life with Hi-
tachi photo-essay, "Colossus of the Orient,"
1963.
ARTICLES B Y : "W. Eugene Smith Talks
About Lighting," Popular Photography,
39:5 (1956); " T h e Walk to Paradise Gar-
den!" Croton-Harmon News (Mar 31,
1955; republished in Gentry, No. 22, 1957);
Statement in "Photographs and T r u t h , "
Infinity, 7:4 (1958); Statement in "How
T h e y T h i n k About the Picture Story,"
Popular Photography, 44:6 (1959); " T h e
Photojournalism" Infinity, 8:5 (1959); Re-
view of Images of War, Infinity, 13:7 (1964).
ARTICLES A B O U T : Peter Martin, " T h e Kid
Who Lives Photography," Popular Photog-
raphy, 13:1 (1943); John Whiting, "Cam-
era on a Carrier," Popular Photography,
14:6 (1944); Notes on the W. E. Smith meet-
ing at the Photo League, Photo Notes (Nov
1947); Jacquelyn J u d g e , " W . Eugene Smith's
Spain," Modern Photography, 15:12 (1951);
"A Spanish Village," (portfolio) U.S. Cam-
era Annual (1952); Fritz Neugass, "W. Eu-
gene Smith," Camera, 31:6/7 (1952); "W.
Eugene Smith: an Exclusive Portfolio of
His Unpublished Photographs," Popular
Photography, 31:4 (1952); "W. Eugene
Smith," Camera, 33:4 (1954); "Portfolio by
W. Eugene Smith," Popular Photography
Annual (1954); "W. Eugene S m i t h - A Port-
folio," Photography, 10:6 (1955); Lew Par-
rella, "W. Eugene Smith," U.S. Camera
Annual (1956); "Pittsburgh," (portfolio),
Photography Annual (1959); Emily A.
Mack, " T h e Myth Named Smith," Camera
35 (Dec/Jan 1960); Bill Pierce, "W. Eugene
Smith Teaches Photographic Responsibil-
ity," Popular Photography, 49:5 (1961);
"Gene Smith in J a p a n , " Popular Photog-
raphy, 51:5 (1962); " W . Eugene Smith: 12
Unpublished Photographs," Photography
Annual (1962); Jean Lattes, "W. Eugene
Smith," Techniques Graphiques, No. 59
(1965).
EDWARD STEICHEN, born Luxembourg, 1 8 7 9 .
Family settled in United States, 1881. Edu-
cated in Milwaukee, Wis.; studied art while
apprentice to lithographic company there.
First photographs, 1896. First exhibition,
2nd Philadelphia Salon, 1899. Participated
in exhibition, " T h e New School of Ameri-
can Photography," Royal Photographic
Society, London, 1900. Elected member of
"Linked Ring," 1901. First one-man ex-
hibition, La Maison des Artistes, Paris,
1902, included paintings as well as photo-
graphs. Founding member of Photo-Seces-
sion, 1902. Collaborated with Stieglitz in
establishing " T h e Little Galleries of the
Photo-Secession," (later known as "291")
New York, 1905. Until First World War
assisted in gathering work by modern
European artists for exhibitions in the
gallery. Joined U.S. Army, 1917; became
Commander, Photographic Division, Air
Service, Army Expeditionary Forces; re-
tired with rank of Lieutenant Colonel,
1919. Gave up painting to concentrate on
photography, 1920. Maintained studio, New
York .City, advertising and illustration;
chief photographer for Cond£-Nast Publi-
cations, 1 9 2 3 - 3 8 . Organized, with Edward
Weston, American Section of Deutsche
Werkbund exhibition, "Film u n d Foto,"
Stuttgart, 1929. One-man exhibition, Bal-
timore Museum of Art, 1938. Joined U.S.
Naval Reserve, 1942; Commanding Officer,
Naval Aviation Photographic Unit; retired
with rank of Captain, 1946. Directed exhi-
bitions " R o a d to Victory," 1942, and "Pow-
er in the Pacific," 1945, for Museum of
Modern Art. Appointed Director, Depart-
ment of Photography, Museum of Modern
Art, 1947. Retrospective exhibition, Amer-
ican Institute of Architects, 1950. Organ-
ized numerous exhibitions, notably " T h e
Family of Man," 1955. Retrospective exhi-
bition, Museum of Modern Art, 1961. Re-
tired, Museum of Modern Art, 1962.
Awarded Medal of Freedom by President-
of United States, 1963. Retrospective ex-
hibition, Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris,
1965. Award of Commandeur de l'Ordre
de Merite of Grand Duchy of Luxembourg,
1966.
The Steichen
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S : Book,
1906; Steichen The Photographer (Carl
Sandburg), 1929; Walden or Life in the
Woods (Henry David Thoreau), Boston,
1936; The Blue Ghost, 1947; The Family
of Man (prologue by Carl Sandburg),
1955; Steichen the Photographer (fore-
word by Rene d'Harnoncourt), 1961; A Life
in Photography, 1963.
ARTICLES "British Photography from
BY:
an American Point of View," Amateur
Photographer, 32:839 (1900; reprinted in
Camera Notes, 4:3, 1901); "Ye Fakers,"
Camera Work, No. 1 (1903); "Color Pho-
tography," Camera Work, No. 22 (1908);
" T h e Fighting Photo-Secession," Vogue,
(June 15, 1941); " T h e Living Joy of Pic-
tures," Holiday, Vol. 19 (1956); "Photog-
raphy, Witness and Recorder of H u m a n -
ity," Wisconsin Magazine of History,
(Spring 1958); "Problems of Portraiture:
Photography," Art in America, (Winter
1958); "My Half-Century of Delphinium
Breeding," The Delphinium Society's Year
Book for 1959.
ARTICLES ABOUT: Sidney Allen, " E d u a r d J.
Steichen, Painter-Photographer," Camera
Notes, 6:1 (1902); Christian Brinton, "Four
Portrait-Photographs by Eduard Steichen,"
The Critic, Vol. 42 (1903); Roland Rood,
"Eduard J. Steichen . . ." American Ama-
teur Photographer, 18:4 (1906); Charles H.
Caffin, "Progress in Photography . . ." Cen-
tury Magazine, Vol. 75 (1908); Clare Boothe
Brokaw, "Edward Steichen, Photograph-
er," Vanity Fair, 38:4 (1932); Matthew
Josephson, "Commander With a Camera,"
New Yorker, 20: 16/17 (1944); Beaumont
Newhall, "Photography as Art in America,"
Perspectives USA, No. 15 (1956); Lenore
Cisney and John Reddy, "Edward Steichen:
Dissatisfied Genius," Saturday Review, Vol.
40 (Dec 14, 1957); Gilbert Millstein, " 'De
Lawd' of Modern Photography," New York
Times Magazine, (Mar 22, 1959).
ALFRED STIEGLITZ, born Hoboken, N. J.,
1864. Family moved to New York, 1871. En-
rolled at Berlin Polytechnic Inst, to study
mechanical engineering, 1882. First photo-
graphs, 1883. Transferred to course in pho-
to-chemistry with H. W. Vogel until 1886.
First photographs sent to competitions,
1886. C o n t i n u e d scientific studies at Univ.
of Berlin until 1890. First prize for photo-
graphs awarded by P. H . Emerson, Ama-
teur Photographer (London) competition,
1887. R e t u r n e d to New York, 1890; entered
photo-engraving business, 1890-95. Joined
Society of A m a t e u r Photographers of New
York, 1890; began to f u r t h e r cause of crea-
tive photography; first extensive use of
hand camera for serious photographic
work. Began editorial work, American
Amateur Photographer, 1893-96. Summer
in Europe, 1894; first American elected to
"Linked Ring." Following merger of So-
ciety of A m a t e u r Photographers with N.Y.
Camera Club, founded and edited club or-
gan, Camera Notes, 1897-1902. One-man
exhibition, Camera Club of N. Y., 1899.
Organized exhibition of pictorial photog-
raphy at National Arts Club, N. Y., 1902, of
group he n a m e d " T h e Photo-Secession."
Founded, edited, and published fifty n u m -
bers of quarterly, Camera Work, 1903-17.
Elected Honorary Fellow of Royal Photo-
graphic Society, 1905. O p e n e d , with Ed-
ward Steichen, " T h e Little Galleries of
the Photo Secession," (later known as
"291") 1905. Showed drawings of Pamela
Coleman Smith, 1907. Began to show work
of modern E u r o p e a n artists, 1908. Organ-
ized " I n t e r n a t i o n a l Exhibition of Pic-
torial Photography," Albright Art Gallery,
Buffalo, with o t h e r members of Photo-
Secession, 1910. One-man exhibition at
"291," 1913. "291" closed, 1917. O n e - m a n
exhibition, Anderson Galleries, 1923. First
cloud photographs ("equivalents"), 1923,
exhibited at Anderson Galleries, 1924. Mar-
ried Georgia O'Keeffe, 1924; received Pro-
gress Medal f r o m Royal Photographic So-
ciety. Director, I n t i m a t e Gallery, 1925-29;
An American Place, 1929-46. O n e - m a n ex-
hibition, An American Place, 1934. Last
photographs, 1937. Died New York, 1946.
B O O K S 8C CATALOGUES: Picturesque Bits of
New York and Other Studies (portfolio of
twelve photogravures, introduction by Wal-
ter Woodbury), 1897; The Camera Club
(catalogue of retrospective exhibition),
1899; Photography As a Fine Art, Charles
H. Caffin, 1901; Exhibition of American
Pictorial Photography at the National Arts
C l u b , (arranged by the Photo-Secession),
1902; Photo-Secessionism and Its Oppo-
nents, 1910; Anderson Galleries, N.Y. (cata-
logues of four exhibitions with statements,
1921, 1923, 1924, 1925); Intimate Gallery,
N. Y. (catalogues, 1925-1929); America and
Alfred Stieglitz, A Collective Portrait,
(edited by Waldo Frank, et al.) 1934; Alfred
Stieglitz: Photographer (Doris Bry), Wash-
ington, D. C., 1958; The American Earth-
quake ( E d m u n d Wilson), 1958; Alfred
Stieglitz (Dorothy Norman), 1960; Pioneers
of Modern Art in America, The Decade of
the Armory Show, 1910-1920 (Lloyd Good-
rich), 1963; Alms for Oblivion (Edward
Dahlberg),Minneapolis, 1964; Alfred Stieg-
litz: Photographer (Doris Bry), Boston,
1965.
ARTICLES B Y : "A Natural Background for
Out-of-Door Portraiture," and "Night Pho-
tography with the I n t r o d u c t i o n of Life,"
American Annual of Photography and
Photographic Times Almanac, (1898); " T h e
Photo-Secession—Its Objects," Camera Craft,
(Aug 1903); " T h e Fiasco at St. Louis,"
Photographer, (Aug 1904); "Simplicity in
Composition," The Modern Way in Picture
Making, Rochester, (1905).
ARTICLES A B O U T : Clarence Moore, "Lead-
ing Amateurs in Photography," Cosmopoli-
tan, (Feb 1892); T h e o d o r e Dreiser, "A Mas-
ter of Photography . . ." Success, (June 10,
1899); Sadakichi H a r t m a n n , "Gessler's
H a t , " The Camera, (Nov 1904); "Camera
Club Ousts Alfred Stieglitz," New York
Times, (Feb 14, 1908); "Alfred Stieglitz,
Artist, and his Search for the H u m a n
Soul," New York Herald, (Mar 8, 1908);
D j u n a Barnes, "Giving Advice on Life and
Pictures . . . " Morning Telegraph, (Feb
25, 1917); Guido Bruno, " T h e Passing of
'291'," Pearsons Magazine, (Mar 1918);
A n a n d a Coomaraswamy, "A Gift f r o m
Mr. Alfred Stieglitz," Museum of Fine Arts
Bulletin, Boston, (April 1924); Elizabeth
McCausland, "Stieglitz's 50-Year Fight for
Photography T r i u m p h a n t , " Springfield
Sunday Union and Republican, Spring-
field, (May 14, 1933); Lewis M u m f o r d , "A
Camera and Alfred Stieglitz," New Yorker,
(Dec 22, 1934); Edward Alden Jewell, "Al-
fred Stieglitz," New York Times, (July 14,
1946); Georgia Englehard, " T h e Face of
Alfred Stieglitz," Popular Photography,
19:3 (1946); Georgia O'Keeffe, "Stieglitz:
His Pictures Collected H i m , " New York
Times Magazine, (Dec 11, 1949); Doris Bry,
" T h e Stieglitz Archive at Yale University,"
Yale University Library Gazette, (April
1951).
P A U L STRAND, born New York City, 1890.
Began photography, 1907. Studied under
Lewis W. Hine at Ethical Culture School.
T h r o u g h H i n e met Alfred Stieglitz, who
first encouraged him to consider photog-
raphy seriously, later gave him his first
one-man exhibition at "291," 1916. First
abstract photographs, 1915; published in
Camera Work, 1915-16. First close-up pho-
tographs of machine forms, 1917. X-ray
technician with U.S. Army, 1918-19. T o
Nova Scotia, made first landscapes, 1919.
Cameraman with group making medical
films; made film " M a n a h a t t a " with Charles
Sheeler (text from Walt Whitman), 1921.
Stieglitz exhibited work again, Intimate
Gallery, 1929. Photographed architecture,
landscapes, portraits in New Mexico, 1930-
32. One-man exhibition, An American
Place, 1932. Appointed Chief of Photog-
raphy and Cinematography, Dept. of Fine
Arts, Secretariat of Education, Mexico,
1933-34; photographed and supervised pro-
duction of film "Redes," released in U.S. as
" T h e Wave." T r i p to Moscow; met Eisen-
stein and Dovzhenko, 1935. On return to
U.S., associate cameraman, U.S. documen-
tary film " T h e Plow that Broke the Plains"
(directed by Pare Lorentz), 1935; " H e a r t of
Spain," 1937. President of Frontier Films,
1937-42. Co-directed "Native L a n d " with
Leo Hurwitz, 1942. Returned to still pho-
tography, 1943-44. One-man exhibition,
Museum of Modern Art, 1945. T o France
to reside, began work on book subsequently
published as La France de Profil, 1950-51;
this project and all f u t u r e projects made
with the help of Hazel Kingsbury Strand.
Continued work in Italy, 1952-53; Outer
Hebrides, 1954; Egypt, 1959; R o u m a n i a ,
1960; Morocco, 1962; Ghana, 1963-64.
B O O K S 8C CATALOGUES: America and Alfred
Stieglitz (edited by Waldo Frank, et al.),
1934; Paul Strand: Photographs, 1915-1945
(with Nancy Newhall), 1945; Mexico (fore-
word by Leo Hurwitz, portfolio of 20
gravures), 1940; Time in New England
(with Nancy Newhall), 1950; La France de
Profil (text by Claude Roy), Lausanne,
1952; Un Paese (text by Cesare Zavattini),
Milan, 1955; Paul Strand (Frantisek Vrba),
Bratislava, 1961; Tir A' Mhurain: Outer
Hebrides (text by Basil Davidson), Lon-
don, 1962.
ARTICLES BY:"Photography," Seven Arts,
(Aug 1917); "Steichen and Commercial
Art," New Republic, (Feb 1930); "Dorothea
Lange and Paul Taylor An American
Exodus," Photo Notes, ( M a r / A p r 1940);
"Photography to Me," Minicam Photog-
raphy, 8:8 (1945); "Stieglitz: an Appraisal,"
Popular Photography, 21:1 (1947); "Ad-
dress by Paul Strand," Photo Notes, (Jan
1948); "Paul Strand Writes to a Young
Photographer," Photo Notes, (Fall 1948);
"A Platform for Artists," Photo Notes,
(Fall 1948); "Report of International Con-
gress of Cinema, Perugia, Sept 24-27, 1949,"
Photo Notes, (Spring 1950); "Letters from
France and Italy," Aperture, 2:2 (1953);
"Painting and Photography," (letter), Pho-
tographic Journal, 103:7 (1963).
ARTICLES ABOUT: Alfred Stieglitz, "Photo-
graphs by Paul Strand," Camera Work, No.
48 (1916); Harold C l u r m a n , "Photographs
by Paul Strand," Creative Art, 5:4 (1929);
Lola Ridge, "Paul Strand," Creative Art,
9:4 (1931); C. Bauer, "Photography: Man
Ray and Paul Strand," Arts Weekly, (May
7, 1932); Elizabeth McCausland, "Paul
Strand," U.S. Camera, 1:8 (1940); Walter
Rosenblum, "Paul Strand," American An-
nual of Photography, (1952); Nancy New-
hall, "Paul S t r a n d / M o d e r n Photography,
17:9 (1953); James Thrall Soby, " T w o Con-
temporary Photographers," Saturday Re-
view, (Nov 5, 1955); Beaumont Newhall,
"Paul Strand, Traveling Photographer,"
Art In America, 50:4 (1962); Milton Brown,
"Paul Strand Portfolio," Photography Year
Book (1963).
born Highland Park, Illi-
EDWARD W F S T O N ,
nois, 1886. Made first photographs, 1902.
T o Tropico, Cal., 1906. Attended Illinois
College of Photography, 1908. Opened
portrait studio, Tropico, Cal., 1911. Soft
focus pictorial photographs receive awards
and honors, many one-man exhibitions,
1914-17. Around 1920 re-examined prior
work, experimented with semi-abstractions.
First used 8 x 1 0 view camera; met Stieg-
litz, Strand, Sheeler in N. Y. T o Mexico,
opened portrait studio with T i n a Modotti;
met Rivera, Siqueiros, Orozco, Chariot,
1923. Opened studio with son, Brett, San
Francisco, 1928. Contributed foreword, and
with Steichen, organized American section
of Deutsche W e r k b u n d exhibition "Film
und Foto," Stuttgart, 1929. Member " G r o u p
/64," 1932. First photographer awarded
Guggenheim Fellowship, 1937; extended,
1938; traveled throughout California and
Western states making some 1500 negatives.
T r i p through Southern and Eastern states,
to photograph for special edition of Whit-
man's Leaves of Grass, terminated by war;
returned to Carmel. Major retrospective
exhibition, Museum of Modern Art, with
monograph The Photographs of Edward
Weston by Nancy Newhall, 1946. " T h e Pho-
tographer," film photographed and directed
by Willard Van Dyke, 1948. Stricken with
Parkinson's Disease, 1948; m a d e last pho-
tographs at Point Lobos. Retrospective ex-
hibition, Paris, 1950. W i t h aid of Brett,
issued Fiftieth Anniversary Portfolio, 1952.
Died o n New Year's Day, 1958, Wildcat
Hill, Carmel, Cal. Daybooks of Edward
Weston, Volume I, Mexico, edited by Nancy
Newhall, published by George Eastman
House, 1961.
BOOKS 8C C A T A L O G U E S : Edward Weston,
(edited by Merle Armitage), 1932; Photog-
raphy (pamphlet), Pasadena, 1934; Mak-
ing a Photograph (by Ansel Adams, pre-
face by Weston), London, 1935; California
and the West (with Charis Wilson Wes-
ton), 1940; The Cats of Wildcat Hill (with
Charis Wilson Weston), 1947; Edward Wes-
ton: Fifty Photographs (edited by Merle
Armitage), 1947; My Camera on Point Lo-
bos, Yosemite, 1950; The Heritage of Ed-
ward Weston (catalogue), Eugene, Oregon,
1965; The Day Books of Edward Weston,
Vol. II, California, George Eastman House,
1966.
ARTICLES BY: Statement in Experimental
Cinema, 1:3 (1931); " W h a t is a Purist?"
Camera Craft, 46:1 (1939); "Light vs. Light-
ing," Camera Craft, 46:5 (1939); " W h a t is
Photographic Beauty?" Camera Craft, 46:6
(1939); "Photographic Art," Encyclopedia
Britannica, Vol. 17 (1941); "A Letter by
Edward Weston," U.S. Camera, 1:14 (1941);
"Portrait Photography," The Complete
Photographer, 8:45 (1942).
ARTICLES AND FILMS ABOUT: "An Artist
Photographer," The Camera, (June 1916);
Diego Rivera, "Edward Weston y T i n a
Modotti," Mexican Folkways, Vol. 2 (1926);
A r t h u r Miller, "Some Photographs by Ed-
ward Weston," Los Angeles Sunday Times,
(Jan 2, 1927); Ira Martin, " W h a t are the
Moderns T h i n k i n g About?" Light and
Shade, (June 1931); Beaumont Newhall,
"Edward Weston in Retrospect," Popular
Photography, 18:3 (1946); Louis Stoumen,
" T h e Naked Eye," (film featuring Wes-
ton's work, 1957); Ansel Adams. "Edward
Weston," Infinity, 13:2 (1964); "Edward
Weston, P h o t o g r a p h e r , " Aperture, 12:1/2
(1965).
MINOR W H I T E , born Minneapolis, Minn.,
1908. G r a d u a t e d , Univ. of Minn., 1933;
m a j o r in botany, minor in English. Began
graduate work in botany; did not complete
studies, turned instead to odd jobs and
writing poetry. Developed initial under-
standing of photography making micro-
scope slides in college. T o Portland, Ore-
gon; WPA Project p h o t o g r a p h e r , 1938. Ap-
pointed director. La G r a n d e Art Center;
began teaching photography, 1940. Drafted
1941; served in South Pacific. Discharged;
a t t e n d e d Columbia Univ., courses in art
history, 1945. Thesis u n d e r Meyer Schapiro
on application of Wolfflin's aesthetic con-
cepts to photographs. Served as trainee
u n d e r B e a u m o n t Newhall at Museum of
Modern Art; met Harry Callahan, Alfred
Stieglitz, Paul Strand, Edward and Brett
W e s t o n . Began t e a c h i n g at C a l i f o r n i a
School of Fine Arts; first of several extended
visits with Edward Weston at Point Lobos,
1946. Began to produce series of original
p r i n t portfolios entitled, "sequences," 1947.
Editor and publisher of Aperture magazine,
1952-65; currently editor. T o Rochester,
N. Y.; became assistant to curator, George
Eastman House and editor of Image, 1953-
57. Appointed lecturer, Rochester Inst, of
Tech., 1955-64. T e a c h i n g activity also in-
cludes private and group workshops con-
ducted t h r o u g h o u t United States. Retro-
spective exhibition, "Sequence 13: R e t u r n
to the Bud," George Eastman House, 1959.
F o u n d i n g m e m b e r , Society for Photo-
graphic Education, 1963. Began teaching
photography at Mass. Inst, of Tech., 1965.
B O O K S 8C C A T A L O G U E S : Exposure with the
Zone System, 1956; (revised: Zone System
Manual, 1963); The Encyclopedia of Pho-
tography, ("Pictorial Photography"), 1964.
A R T I C L E S BY: " P h o t o g r a p h y is an Art," De-
sign, 49:4 (1947); " P h o t o g r a p h y in an Art
School," U.S. Camera, 12:7 (1949); " W h a t is
Photography?" Photo Notes (Spring 1950);
Statement in U.S. Camera Annual (1950);
" T h e Right Instant," American Annual of
Photography (1951); "Your Concepts are
Showing," American Photography, 45:5
(1951); " H o w to Find Your Own Approach
to Photography," American Photography,
45:7 (1951); " H o w Concepts Differ for Two
Cameras," American Photography, 45:9
(1951); "Are Your Prints T r a n s p a r e n t ? "
American Photography, 45:11 (1951);
"Analysis of Five Prints," Universal Photo
Almanac (1951); " T h e Use of Space in
Designing Pictures," American Annual of
Photography (1952); " T o w a r d s Camera,"
Photography 10:10 (1955); " H a p p e n s t a n c e
and How It Involves the Photographer,"
Photography 11:10 (1956); "Ansel Adams:
Musician to P h o t o g r a p h e r , " Image, 6:2
(1957); " O n the Strength of a Mirage," Art
in America, 46:1 (1958); " T h e Craftsman-
ship of Feeling," Infinity, 9:2 (1960); "Call
for Critics," Infinity, 9:9 (1960).
ARTICLE ABOUT: "Minor White," Camera,
38:8 (1959).
 9

PRENTICE-HALL
FOUNDATIONS OF MODERN PHOTOGRAPHY SERIES
EDITED BY NATHAN LYONS

P H O T O G R A P H E R S ON P H O T O G R A P H Y is the first critical source book to be p u b -

lished in the field of p h o t o g r a p h y . Of the thirty-nine essays by leading pho-
tographers covering the period of 1886 to the present, many have been
relatively inaccessible. T h e articles have been selected to best represent each
p h o t o g r a p h e r s individual philosophy a n d c o n t r i b u t i o n to the d e v e l o p m e n t
of c o n t e m p o r a r y p h o t o g r a p h i c expression. T h e book contains biographical
notes and a selected bibliography on each of the twenty-three p h o t o g r a p h e r s
represented.

W i t h this first volume, Prentice-Hall begins its F O U N D A T I O N S O F M O D E R N

P H O T O G R A P H Y Series, edited by N a t h a n Lyons, Associate Director a n d C u r a t o r

of P h o t o g r a p h y of T h e George Eastman House. L e a d i n g c o n t r i b u t o r s to

the field are p r e p a r i n g critical, historical, visual, a n d technical source books
for this series.

A second volume, S E E I N G P H O T O G R A P H I C A L L Y , to be p u b l i s h e d in the Fall of

1966, explores visual problems presented to students to heighten awareness
by calling a t t e n t i o n to picture structure, light, m o v e m e n t , etc., in a d d i t i o n
to thematic considerations and sequential d e v e l o p m e n t of p i c t u r e statements.
It is b e i n g p r e p a r e d in collaboration with teachers of p h o t o g r a p h y through-
o u t the U n i t e d States. T h e book will contain forty problems a n d will be
illustrated by two h u n d r e d photographs.