‘I slipped the camera through [the railings] bit I couldn’t see, that’s why it’s a bit blurry… I couldn’t see a thing through the viewer’.
‘You couldn’t see the man leaping?’
‘that was lucky’.
‘It’s always luck. it’s luck that matters, you have to be receptive, that’s all. Like the realtionship between things, it’s a matter of chance, that’s all. If you want it, you get nothing. Just be receptive and it happens’.
(Henri Cartier-Bresson, ‘L’amour tout court’, Dir. Raphaël O’Byrne, 2001)
Quite incredible, isn’t it that one of the most iconic photographs of the twentieth century was down to luck? Luck, chance, ‘hazard’ – whatever it may be, the influence of Cartier-Bresson has been profound, both in photojournalism through the Magnum agency, which he co-founded, and in street photography generally.
Henri Cartier Bresson (1908-2004) discovered another of the possibilities of 35mm cameras and high-speed film which he descibed as the ‘decisive moment’ : ‘moment at which the elements in motion are in balance’.
Today the decisive moment is often criticised for having become something of a stylistic cliché. In the decades after the 1930s, the most creative phase of Cartier-Bresson’s street photography, thousands of photographers learned the tecniques of the ‘moment décisif’ – leading, inevitably perhaps, to derivative work.
In ‘Photography: A Critical Introduction’ Liz Wells observes that fragmentary moments can be ‘dislocated’ from a greater context that might give them meaning:
‘Increasingly, documentary turned away from attempting to record what would formerly have been seen as its major subjects. The endeavour to make great statements gave way to the recording of little dislocated moments which merely insinuated that some greater meaning might be at stake’.
(Wells, 2009, p.73)
Another criticism of the decisive moment is that it somehow just misses the point of our cotemporary situation. Reviewing Paul Graham’s photobook The Present, Colin Pantall writes:
‘…what he [Graham] wants us to see is the antithesis of the decisive moment and the spectacle of the urban experience. Instead we get a very contemporary contingency, a street with moments so decisively indecisive that we don’t really know what we are looking for’.
http://www.photoeye.com/magazine/reviews/2012/05_17_The_Present.cfm [accessed 19/01/18]
Zouhair Ghazzal agrees that the decisive moment has become more of a cliché than a reality, although he believes it can contain something essential in photography. ‘Observational skills’ are mentioned in the assessment criteria but unfortunately there are no sure methods available to learn how to look. As with composition, it would seem to be something that is just discovered (or re-discovered?) for oneself.
Project Three
‘What matters is to look‘
Bresson
From my personal understanding I am journeying, touched by visuals. I am curious and want to understand what I am viewing, what is the story that the photographer is communicating with the viewer.
Characteristically, artwork of many famous works for the artist in terms of what they may wish to communicate. Their art exchanges messages to perhaps implicate. The artist wants us the viewer to interpret and understand, their aim is often to visually action and profound us. To impart us to then do what we will with that knowledge. They can manipulate the viewer. This is often the deliberate quintessential nature of an artist, the photographer too. Although, for some like Henri Cartier-Bresson it was as he put it ‘luck’. The photographer captures the fate fortuitously unlike most artist’s, they paint more consciously. The artist often creates, concealed connotations to encourage one to really study the art and that is powerful. Henri Cartier-Bresson‘s image above was powerful with vehemence of intuitiveness.
‘What matters is to look’
Henri Cartier-Bresson
Images of artists such as Spanish painter Salvador Dali probe one (the viewer) to analyse his paintings such as ‘Persistence of Memory’.
I enjoyed the visual image below of this unconventional character as it provides viewers with thought provoking considerations.
I certainly question this painting and wonder what the artist wished to convey to his viewer. Unlike the image which Henri Cartier-Bresson captured, whom captured visual elements which happen to be a spontaneous and significant, with visual value of emphatic essence which I feel is down to ‘luck’ but also feel Henri obviously set out to capture a moment, and used his skill of aspect elements. I perceive that Henri is a natural empath.
When I study, personally I like to conclude, and to try to permanently picture in my mind the imagery and sense what the image communicates to me. Sometimes the power of an image is so accurate at visual narration whilst others are more subtle. The command of Henri Cartier-Bresson’s work is instinctive. The painter Salvador painted dream like images that are unforgettable. Salvador even referred to the painting above as hand painted dreams. In photography we can also capture the subconscious moment like Henri. Was what, was before Henri in the scene above his subconscious mind in tune with what was before him? From studies, experts believe that the dreamer can actually alter the dream if the dream is lucid so the painter can capture imagery in paint and then alter it. Hidden messages are deliberately placed, perhaps blurred out or disguised. Whereas, what Henri captures is the essence of emotional moments in time. Can we recall our dreams clearly, do we remember them like we would a photograph? Recreating optical illusions of simple depictions of greats such as Michel Angelo’s ‘Mona Lisa’are influential to the viewer and of course he was overwhelmingly impressive with a dexterous gift. So both artists and photographers do convey incredible information.
The last supper painting treats the viewers to optical illusions using simple depictions. Photographers can stage an image for visible influence to convey substance. However, Henri Cartier-Bresson said about his image Above ‘Behind the Gare Saint-Lazard‘ Paris, 1932 was captured by chance. Again, I feel he had such a natural talent for reading his fellow humans and with his skill at capturing other elements. So whilst, it was fate. not all of the captured shot was so. It is a successful shot because he recognised peoples body language. I’m not saying he is not being honest when he said it was ‘luck’ but that he can simply read people. He waited for the subjects to do something, unbeknown to him his intuition to stay was ‘luck’.
I am awe of this masterly gentleman. His gut feeling, such intuition and connection to what is before him, his senses almost like a philosopher with technology. He is an amazing storyteller.
I have recently read a article about following one’s intuition; http://Erickimphotography.com. Follow Your Intuition.
I agree that intuition is key but we do need to plan ahead sometimes should we want to get an idea, message across. Presenting messages to use to connect with others. As photographers and the viewer we process A per cent of focus when we take a shot but we usually don’t observe everything before us and like the viewer when the observe the image they don’t take in everything. We want the viewer to study the shot and like Salvador Dali we have to be interested enough in learning more about it, we have to be captured! We simply don’t view the whole picture, the photographer intends us to, but as a successful photographer we need to engage viewers. We viewers remember visuals far more than words that is why when we teach young children we engage them with visually stimulating imagery. Sometimes the power of the visual can trigger emotions. Sometimes they maybe uncomfortable visually but it triggers the senses. Memories are unforgettable and triggered by photography. Like for assignment one, ‘Square Mile’.
Some of the most influential images ever have can be seen here; http://Artfido.com – The Most Powerful Photos Ever Taken That Capture Human Experience.
Photographers such as Henri Cartier-Bresson are such inspiring influences because of the emotional connections. There are several elements that make up the important aspects of photography and this is where the visual images of such distinguished photographers or artists. The photojournalistic approach of particularly Henri, and the likes of Annie Leibovitz, Ansel Adams and Robert Frank are what inspired me to want to pick up the camera. It’s a passion and obsession for many to capture that moment in time that one won’t see again. To be spontaneous and have humane empathy is what we all relate to. We can all learn something about Henri Cartier-Bresson http://Improve photography.com – 7 Things Every Photographer Should Learn From Henri Cartier-Bresson
I feel Cartier-Bresson is easily impressionable because he comes across as open minded and has a natural ability to relate to his chosen subject. The subjects he shots appear to be ordinary And he lets us the viewer experience what he is experiencing and then we establish that connection, we personify. We have compassion towards our fellow human. That’s the skill of such candid shots, capturing someone else’s reality a moment or an illusion. He didn’t manipulate us with illusion but with reality, undoct spontaneous the ‘decisive moment’ the intrinsic nature of what is happening!
http://Project 1 Activity, depth and distance
Claire Clark 