Lee Friedlander is my favorite photograph... So glad that you are presenting him. His work is not easy to get into, I remember. I have bought his latest book "Signs" and was amazed by his sense of humour ! A photographic humour that makes photography singularly interesting and creative; that's perhaps why I was driven to photograph too. Looking forward for your next presentation. I never related him to abstract expressionist painting and that's a good point you mentioned it. As far as I'm concerned I find that many of his photographs have a psychological twist underneath, something about the human condition in modern society. Sorry if this is not clear. To me neither ! Keep on the good work and thanks for your video, you are the one who talks about photography the way I like to hear about it.
Thank you for this discussion of Lee Friedlander. I have long been fascinated by trying to understand what he saw and I probably struggle more with Mr. Friedlander than any other photographer. Like other great modern artists, he wasn't trying to seduce the viewer with some easily accessible idea of beauty. He's often challenging the viewer to find something hidden...something personal. At least that's what I understand. Others milage may vary. This video does a terrific job at shedding light on this inigmatic artist.
Thank you once again for an illuminating piece on a rather complex artists. Your comments, which are essays on art, are one of my favorite ones on the TH-cam platform.
Early in his career Friedlander was employed to take photos for the covers of jazz albums. The experimental nature of jazz in the age of Bebop and the Beats may also have shaped Friedlander’s sensibility.
I like your references to Pollack and Motherwell. People who don't like abstract art are likely also those who can't relate to Freidlander, or for that matter, modern jazz. The structure evades them because they're bound to the problem of identifying a clear subject. Phillip Glass said that if something is boring, give it 10 seconds, if it's still boring, give it 20 seconds, etc. It just takes more than a few seconds to appreciate a good photo.
“… shape and line… Yes, but that comes not from any art inspiration but from his (early) understanding that Americans view the world mainly through television and through car windows. Plus, as you pointed out, his grappling with the nature of the camera and of photography itself.
Graeme, you are brilliant. Friedlander has long been a favourite of mine. His compositions are clearly always considered (like those of William Klein). They have vastly expanded our notions of complex, spontaneous… photographic… composition. Leading away from domination by the tradition of easel painting. Friedlander is an inspiration to me, also in his choice of subject matter: “Sticks and Stones”, “Stems”! I love the man.
@@PhotoConversations , Friedlander got wiser and more creative as he aged. Winogrand clearly hit some kind of brick wall and, for reasons no-one understands, stopped even developing his thousands of rolls of film. Perhaps if he had had a supportive family such as the one Friedlander lovingly documented or shown an interest in trees, leaves, stems, olive trees (featured in many of Friedlander’s different books) and so on.
@@PhotoConversations, the only one of his books I am not impressed by is the very late book on “Mannequins”. Seems hurried and superficial. My own photos of mannequins (taken over a lifetime and inspired by an early interest in Atget and Man Ray) are stronger and more diverse. The ‘behind-the-scenes’ at the fashion week is good but several other photographers, including Lars Tunbjörk and Larry Fink, had done it better.
Thank you for this. Already looking forward to Part 2. I regret not buying his Chain Link when I had the chance. Will look out for more his work from now on.
I know I haven't commented for a while but with this how could I not? Extraordinarily interesting. Never really knew anything about Friedlander, but this analysis is riveting Thank you Graeme Noe here I go to part 2😎
I was going to say, reminds me of Alex Webb, one of my favorite photographers. I love how their images are so complicated and detailed. I hadn't heard of Friedlander, at least that I remember. But I admire how he can frame the shot in a way that I wouldn't feel right to do, and that helps make it interesting and different. Opposite of what I seem to do, take pictures that are framed nicely but I feel aren't very interesting. I'd like to work on taking photos, seeing, like this.
Thank you Graeme, this is one of your best! I am eagerly awaiting part 2! An interesting fact you may not be aware of, both Friedlander & Motherwell were born in Aberdeen, WA.
He has a wicked sense of humor and absurdity and sort of proves a realization about my own work-no I'm not famous-. that the eye has a mind of its own and that some people see most strongly out of their peripheral vision. By the way, his son Erik is a world class jazz cellist.
Thank you for bringing Friedlander photos to our attention. Insightful analysis you provide for a photographer I did not have an accurate opinion(thought he was just a street photogrpaher). My shortcoming for I like FAS people from 1030s, New Topographic photographers ,Robert Frank, Robert Adams, Lewis Baltz, Andre Kertesz, Paul Strand, Walker Evans, Bill Brandt, etc, etc. I do like your overall approach with these series focusing on landscape, urban landscape, and here social landscape. It is like you are outlining an anthropology of photography, including elements of culture, societal relationships and various landscapes. Again thanks for the insightful work here.
Thanks for this, as I simply don't know enough about Friedlander; some theming might help me to get an angle on it. I find his images fascinating. I instinctively get that he isn't shooting randomly, although I probably wouldn't shoot anything like it myself. Interesting point made about shooting with closed down apertures flattening perspective, never thought about it like that, I understand what you mean, although I'm not 100% in agreement, depends about what's in frame and chosen angle.
Another fabulously interesting video Graeme, thank you. I am fascinated to know if you do all of your own research and writing, and how long these thoughtful pieces take you to compile? There hasn't been one that hasn't provoked some introspection and evaluation of my deeper motives for wanting to take photographs and further consideration about what I want to photograph. Thank you
Hi Yes, they take four days to produce if I'm lucky. One day research, one day writing and editing, 2 days picture/video research/music and video editing. It has become a full-time job, because my photography work has stopped due to the economy and ....other factors.
@@PhotoConversations notwithstanding I really do enjoy (and learn from) your Photographic Conversations Graeme, I hope that your own photography work picks up again soon, I'm sure you would rather be taking photos than (just) talking about other photographers 🙂 Thanks again for your hard work on these videos
I think a lot of artists dissemble when asked about artistic intent and meaning. I hate when they do that. It always seems like either a cop out or maybe hiding behind the fact that most of the meaning found in their work comes from outside of their intent, their ability or the even the nature piece itself. And to me that is indeed not art. That is pop. At best. But maybe we should take him at his word regarding art and meaning in his images? I don't mean this as an insult. Seems refreshing to me. A lot of his images are pun-like, plays on words, obvious paradoxes, faces found in inanimate structures and patterns etc. And while I would agree that many of the images you showed do seem banal and rather boring, I really like a good many of them. I often gauge what I see by whether or not I feel like I wish that I had (or could) take a photo like that. Many of his strike me that way. They draw me in. The complexity holds me there. They make me want to take pictures. Friedlander is new to me. Thank you for this video, I'm looking forward to part 2.
I like the Robert Frost quote...often re-quoted by Robert Adams -n when someone asked him to explain a poem, he answered, 'Do you want me to say it worse!'
I view all I can of Friedlander's snapshots in a sincere attempt to understand and appreciate their qualities. After serious viewing them and reading about him, I remain underwhelmed. I find them to be boring and humorless (with a handful of exceptions) and even annoying. I try looking at them to uncover meaning or discover why he isn't, in my opinion, overrated. I like most of the street photographers of his era, but not Friedlander. It's fine that he shoots what he likes. Please point out 7 photos of his that are funny. Identify 5 photos that are definitely original and innovative, and why. Maybe for your second video. Btw, you are by far my favorite YT photography channel, so please keep making these.
Many of the "influential" photographers of the last 50 years achieved their status because they were willing to kiss John Szarkowski's a$$, rather than because they deserved it.
JS was a king-maker...and it also depended who he hung out with and drank whiskeys. I wish we had a Szarkowski around now...just to bring back a meritocracy of some form.
Lee Friedlander is my favorite photograph... So glad that you are presenting him. His work is not easy to get into, I remember. I have bought his latest book "Signs" and was amazed by his sense of humour ! A photographic humour that makes photography singularly interesting and creative; that's perhaps why I was driven to photograph too. Looking forward for your next presentation. I never related him to abstract expressionist painting and that's a good point you mentioned it. As far as I'm concerned I find that many of his photographs have a psychological twist underneath, something about the human condition in modern society. Sorry if this is not clear. To me neither ! Keep on the good work and thanks for your video, you are the one who talks about photography the way I like to hear about it.
Thank you for this discussion of Lee Friedlander. I have long been fascinated by trying to understand what he saw and I probably struggle more with Mr. Friedlander than any other photographer. Like other great modern artists, he wasn't trying to seduce the viewer with some easily accessible idea of beauty. He's often challenging the viewer to find something hidden...something personal. At least that's what I understand. Others milage may vary.
This video does a terrific job at shedding light on this inigmatic artist.
Yes, he isn't an easy photographer to get, but once one gets his intent, it becomes a lot more interesting.
Thank you for this video. Very informative and insightful.
Thank you once again for an illuminating piece on a rather complex artists. Your comments, which are essays on art, are one of my favorite ones on the TH-cam platform.
Much appreciated!
Early in his career Friedlander was employed to take photos for the covers of jazz albums. The experimental nature of jazz in the age of Bebop and the Beats may also have shaped Friedlander’s sensibility.
I like your references to Pollack and Motherwell. People who don't like abstract art are likely also those who can't relate to Freidlander, or for that matter, modern jazz. The structure evades them because they're bound to the problem of identifying a clear subject.
Phillip Glass said that if something is boring, give it 10 seconds, if it's still boring, give it 20 seconds, etc. It just takes more than a few seconds to appreciate a good photo.
Nice quote, thanks Tom
Wonderful video, thank you!
Thanks Jack
Thank you for the lecture
“… shape and line… Yes, but that comes not from any art inspiration but from his (early) understanding that Americans view the world mainly through television and through car windows. Plus, as you pointed out, his grappling with the nature of the camera and of photography itself.
Yes, his eyes were wide open.
Wonderful presentation of a brilliant photographer - love the mix of familiar elements blended into hard to understand photographs. 😊
Great job Graeme, I'm looking forward to part 2.
Friedlander is my favorite. Thanks for this!
Graeme, you are brilliant. Friedlander has long been a favourite of mine. His compositions are clearly always considered (like those of William Klein). They have vastly expanded our notions of complex, spontaneous… photographic… composition. Leading away from domination by the tradition of easel painting. Friedlander is an inspiration to me, also in his choice of subject matter: “Sticks and Stones”, “Stems”! I love the man.
Hey LLoyd Don't make me blush...but thanks. I think I err on the side of Winogrand, but Lee is brilliant!
@@PhotoConversations , Friedlander got wiser and more creative as he aged. Winogrand clearly hit some kind of brick wall and, for reasons no-one understands, stopped even developing his thousands of rolls of film. Perhaps if he had had a supportive family such as the one Friedlander lovingly documented or shown an interest in trees, leaves, stems, olive trees (featured in many of Friedlander’s different books) and so on.
@@PhotoConversations, the only one of his books I am not impressed by is the very late book on “Mannequins”. Seems hurried and superficial. My own photos of mannequins (taken over a lifetime and inspired by an early interest in Atget and Man Ray) are stronger and more diverse.
The ‘behind-the-scenes’ at the fashion week is good but several other photographers, including Lars Tunbjörk and Larry Fink, had done it better.
@@LloydSpencer I haven't seen that one
Thank you Graeme. Love that you're doing two videos on Friedlander thank you!
Thank you for this. Already looking forward to Part 2. I regret not buying his Chain Link when I had the chance. Will look out for more his work from now on.
Great video
I know I haven't commented for a while but with this how could I not? Extraordinarily interesting. Never really knew anything about Friedlander, but this analysis is riveting Thank you Graeme Noe here I go to part 2😎
Glad you are back. Thanks.
Nice video, thanks!
Great vid, thank you!
when i saw his work many years ago what came to me is this guy is up too something.
I was going to say, reminds me of Alex Webb, one of my favorite photographers. I love how their images are so complicated and detailed. I hadn't heard of Friedlander, at least that I remember. But I admire how he can frame the shot in a way that I wouldn't feel right to do, and that helps make it interesting and different. Opposite of what I seem to do, take pictures that are framed nicely but I feel aren't very interesting. I'd like to work on taking photos, seeing, like this.
Friedlander is far more 'in his head', while Webb is far more of a gunslinger...in a good way.
Thank you Graeme, this is one of your best! I am eagerly awaiting part 2! An interesting fact you may not be aware of, both Friedlander & Motherwell were born in Aberdeen, WA.
That is interesting. Motherwell is one of my favourite painters.
@@PhotoConversations mine as well!
Thank you for making these videos! Love your perspective and the directness of approach. Cheers!
Many thanks
He has a wicked sense of humor and absurdity and sort of proves a realization about my own work-no I'm not famous-. that the eye has a mind of its own and that some people see most strongly out of their peripheral vision. By the way, his son Erik is a world class jazz cellist.
Hi Ed the Second That's interesting - a creative gene passed down.
Thank you for bringing Friedlander photos to our attention. Insightful analysis you provide for a photographer I did not have an accurate opinion(thought he was just a street photogrpaher). My shortcoming for I like FAS people from 1030s, New Topographic photographers ,Robert Frank, Robert Adams, Lewis Baltz, Andre Kertesz, Paul Strand, Walker Evans, Bill Brandt, etc, etc. I do like your overall approach with these series focusing on landscape, urban landscape, and here social landscape.
It is like you are outlining an anthropology of photography, including elements of culture, societal relationships and various landscapes. Again thanks for the insightful work here.
Many thanks.
Just discovered your channel via this series on Lee. Well done and inspiring for my own photography practice.
Hi Welcome!
Thanks for this, as I simply don't know enough about Friedlander; some theming might help me to get an angle on it. I find his images fascinating. I instinctively get that he isn't shooting randomly, although I probably wouldn't shoot anything like it myself. Interesting point made about shooting with closed down apertures flattening perspective, never thought about it like that, I understand what you mean, although I'm not 100% in agreement, depends about what's in frame and chosen angle.
His work is specifically interesting to where photography was at that particular time. His approach wouldn't have the same impact now.
Probably my favourite photographer.
Another fabulously interesting video Graeme, thank you. I am fascinated to know if you do all of your own research and writing, and how long these thoughtful pieces take you to compile? There hasn't been one that hasn't provoked some introspection and evaluation of my deeper motives for wanting to take photographs and further consideration about what I want to photograph. Thank you
Hi Yes, they take four days to produce if I'm lucky. One day research, one day writing and editing, 2 days picture/video research/music and video editing. It has become a full-time job, because my photography work has stopped due to the economy and ....other factors.
@@PhotoConversations notwithstanding I really do enjoy (and learn from) your Photographic Conversations Graeme, I hope that your own photography work picks up again soon, I'm sure you would rather be taking photos than (just) talking about other photographers 🙂 Thanks again for your hard work on these videos
Thank you. What format was employed in his work? Some appear to be 35 mm, maybe some with medium format?
As far as I remember he used 35mm and Hasselblad., but can't be sure.
I think a lot of artists dissemble when asked about artistic intent and meaning. I hate when they do that. It always seems like either a cop out or maybe hiding behind the fact that most of the meaning found in their work comes from outside of their intent, their ability or the even the nature piece itself. And to me that is indeed not art. That is pop. At best.
But maybe we should take him at his word regarding art and meaning in his images? I don't mean this as an insult. Seems refreshing to me. A lot of his images are pun-like, plays on words, obvious paradoxes, faces found in inanimate structures and patterns etc. And while I would agree that many of the images you showed do seem banal and rather boring, I really like a good many of them. I often gauge what I see by whether or not I feel like I wish that I had (or could) take a photo like that. Many of his strike me that way. They draw me in. The complexity holds me there. They make me want to take pictures.
Friedlander is new to me. Thank you for this video, I'm looking forward to part 2.
I like the Robert Frost quote...often re-quoted by Robert Adams -n when someone asked him to explain a poem, he answered, 'Do you want me to say it worse!'
Fabuous
This is like trying to make sense of Andy Warhol art work😮
Hey Graeme- after five or six of your passive clip job voice overs, I had to look you up-- oh,
South Africa- no wonder you are so inadequate-
I view all I can of Friedlander's snapshots in a sincere attempt to understand and appreciate their qualities. After serious viewing them and reading about him, I remain underwhelmed. I find them to be boring and humorless (with a handful of exceptions) and even annoying. I try looking at them to uncover meaning or discover why he isn't, in my opinion, overrated. I like most of the street photographers of his era, but not Friedlander. It's fine that he shoots what he likes. Please point out 7 photos of his that are funny. Identify 5 photos that are definitely original and innovative, and why. Maybe for your second video. Btw, you are by far my favorite YT photography channel, so please keep making these.
He doesn't have the same type of sense of humour as Garry Winogrand, but he is making more intellectual/observance-type responses to society.
Many of the "influential" photographers of the last 50 years achieved their status because they were willing to kiss John Szarkowski's a$$, rather than because they deserved it.
Interesting comment - it can look a bit that way as we take in reviews of the period.
@@grahamrichards8531 My comment was not meant to denigrate any individual ... it is just the way of the art world.
@@randallpage8402 While watching this I was wondering, how many great photographers were there who were never widely known.
@@L.Spencer Particularly outside of USA!
JS was a king-maker...and it also depended who he hung out with and drank whiskeys. I wish we had a Szarkowski around now...just to bring back a meritocracy of some form.