Yes, it is a business as well as an art. I lived for years in Tucson,
Arizona which houses the Center for Creative Photography on the University
of Arizona campus. I attended countless mini seminars by photographers
who gave talks on their careers. By far the best attended was one given by
Ansel Adams, who was a real charmer. The consummate businessman was
William Wegman who obviously had made big bucks from his "dogs dressed as
humans" images. He didn't give any verbal presentation but rather showed
badly filmed black and white videos of his dog "Fay Wray" as she played
with a ball. He opened the room to questions. The first one was by a
young woman who asked if he was rich. He quickly answered that he owned a
Mercedes in Manhattan. The true artist was W. Eugene Smith. To me, he was
the consummate printer of black and white 35mm negatives. I got to know
Gene quite well when I attended his documentary photography as art seminars.
I could go on for hours on Gene, but won't here. He was the stiff necked
artist who refused to bend to anyone, wife/family, magazine/book editors,
etc. He didn't give a damn about the business of art photography. (He was
even reluctant to call photography an art, which smacked of pompous
elitism.) He died with $13 in the bank. I greatly enjoy this group, but
have been consumed with building a web site to sell my black and white, and
color digital images of the American West taken over the past 40 years.
David Lee Guss aka orson85 Yes, I am also very much into films,
including Orson Welles. PS. I would venture to say that Gene Smith's
masterful photo essays will be long remembered after Wegman's cutesy dog
photos are relegated to the dustbin of history.Message
Business of art photography
2005-07-19 by DAVID GUSS
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.