This is a wonderful collection of images, and your commentary does a masterful job of expanding on the photographs and helping to explain their history, the man behind them, and his connection to other photographers. It's a perfect combination of pure visual enjoyment and valuable education... as it always is on your impressive channel. I love the title as well. Thank you!
It’s interesting that a photographer from the same era - Saul Leiter also had similar hallmarks - pioneered colour photography, impressionistic style… Sometimes they both can be confused with each other. 4:30 The galloping horses photograph reminded me of the prehistoric Lascaux cave paintings. THANKS FOR YET ANOTHER WONDERFUL VIDEO ON PHOTOGRAPHY!
Thanks again for your insightful impressions of great photographers. Hass is among several influences in my own work, and is always first in mind when asked who my favorite is. Often, when I look at Hass' work it can bring tears to my eyes.
Not having a consistent theme throughout his work is why Ernst Haas was the first one that made me say "Now that's what I love about photography". He's sees photographs within a subject over seeing a subject to photograph. Having a theme or as most people say developing a style is useful but is something I've never believe was necessary. Or was really something that was more than taking pictures of the same thing or in the same way. Which most people that I've come across when referring to themselves as having a style, what they're really talking about is a repetition of subject.
Hi Gregory Mmm not sure. I think it is a repetition of approach to how one photographs. Look at Nikita Teryoshin's work (this weeks video) and let me know what you think.
@@PhotoConversations I actually just finished watching that. Another good video. As for Teryoshiri's work and style (or theme), yes he has a style or developed a theme that ran through his work. And yes, it was effective. Not showing faces in the context of the subject matter, it does lead you to think about things beyond photography such as the reasons why conflicts arise, along with the people involved in that area of that world not only remain perpetually anonymous, but are hardly ever though of as existing. People mostly credit their part as being done by the government in abstract way people credit "society" as the motivation for people's behaviors and actions. Nobody thinks about arms dealers are having expos, conventions, business trips, the same as people employed in the residential construction and improvement business. But in relation to Teryoshiri to what I said about Ernst Haas and being drawn to Haas because of not having a theme, is that I consider Teryoshiri as exploring an idea about a subject matter. Which bled over to his photos of zoos because I see similarities. Even in arms expos/fairs, a pleasing presentation is a big consideration just like cereal boxes. And with zoos, the animals are revered for their exoticness and beauty, but being put in a zoo is not actually fitting for that reverence. Plus most zoos aren't even designed with any appearance of an acknowledgement of any reverence. They're more fitting of an expression of disdain. Both worlds are supposed to a pleasant experience. But at the core of each is a bad experience. And Teryoshiri may have explored the same idea with other subjects, or may do that in the future. But I would say that there would be some commonality of traits between subjects that would be there first that would lead to that. And Ernst Haas to me is about what you see and what else do you see. And his work also is refuting the idea some people believe that you need to develop a style. Whatever idea he gets, he explores. This was long, but I do love photography.
@@gregorylagrange I actually think that style/approach is just another tool, like favouring a long lens or a wide angle...or film vs digital. it is the concentration span of viewers/curators that is too short to explore the 'individual response'. It is not so easy to package for an audience and therefore less easy to sell...so I think we are in agreement.
@@PhotoConversations We are. Like I said before, style is useful. But how the term is used is often an expression of a limitation of a viewer (or curator), or when it's used by a photographer describing themselves, they are conflating the subject as a style. To take your lens choice example, lens choice can play a significant role in something like getting across a feeling of intimacy. That can be a style because you can use that through various subject matter to explore an idea. Best of luck. Enjoying your videos and enjoyed the discussion.
Thank you Greame for a very interesting look at Ernst Haas' body of work. I had never reviewed his work in the context of an innovator, I will go back and look again now, from this different perspective.
I don't believe I'll ever understand the art world, that's why I photograph what I want, what I see at the time. I'd never fit in to the pigeon hole mold if you will, I've got to be open and phtograph what I see, whimsical? I met Mr. Haas at an early 80"s weekend workshop in Alabama sponsored through a university. I even got an impromptu portrait of him sitting in a rocking chair. Looking at his prints that weekend was special. And he didn't bash my Kodachrome slides!
Great video, interesting that curators had a tricky time keeping up with his changing style. Did he ever reach a moment where he was content or was he constantly looking for it?
The duty of art is to elevate the mundane to sublime. As such Hass was a true photographic artist. Speaking for myself, I prefer not to over analyse photographs that have no obvious message , those who fall in the category of " the subject within the subject " genre . I just look at them, digest as much as my primitive mind allows move on and enjoy the memory.
@@PhotoConversations Absolutely. A good photograph is like a good story book. You can read it, but in your imagination you can form the characters as you like. The same goes for photography, photography of beyond the obvious.
Nice video. For me it raises the question of whether visually alluring images on their own suffice in the contemporary world if photographers built on Haas’ work by including narrative. I feel these type of images do, because A, there are tons of them on IG and other content driven platforms and B because Harry Gruyaert’s work from yesteryear is as popular as ever - he first was published in his older days and Thames and Hudson still publish new books of his older work . What do you think?
Haas seems to be feral amongst many professional photographers, which maybe bad for the studio system; he may lack an overarching (postmodernist) standpoint but he has a damned good eye, so surely, if he were a painter that would be enough? He would be seen as a Picasso? Maybe the vague ambivalence towards him is more due to photography lowering the technical barriers to producing art and so blurring the distinction between Pro and amateur? Or a kid with a camera and pro?
Look, we can't see the images except on this tiny video screen: limited color, definition, so why do you insist on degrading an already third-rate art experience (nobody thinks video can ever do much for photography, surely your overarching job is to figure out what is needed and then get out of the way, and stop cribbing from monographs - you sound like you being forced to read the liner notes for a misc compendia of odd pianists
![John Berger ve Susan Sontag, "How to Tell a Story" (Voices, 1983), 3. Bölüm [Çeviri: Özge Çelik]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/PDAvxeCLGB0/mqdefault.jpg)
This is a wonderful collection of images, and your commentary does a masterful job of expanding on the photographs and helping to explain their history, the man behind them, and his connection to other photographers. It's a perfect combination of pure visual enjoyment and valuable education... as it always is on your impressive channel. I love the title as well.
Thank you!
Thanks Rob
It’s interesting that a photographer from the same era - Saul Leiter also had similar hallmarks - pioneered colour photography, impressionistic style… Sometimes they both can be confused with each other. 4:30 The galloping horses photograph reminded me of the prehistoric Lascaux cave paintings. THANKS FOR YET ANOTHER WONDERFUL VIDEO ON PHOTOGRAPHY!
Thanks Slava
Thanks for the time and effort you put into your weekly posts. Always interesting and educational.
Much appreciated!
Thank you Mr. Williams.
Thanks again for your insightful impressions of great photographers. Hass is among several influences in my own work, and is always first in mind when asked who my favorite is. Often, when I look at Hass' work it can bring tears to my eyes.
He has never been a direct influence, but I can see that his innovations made their way down to me.
Excellent as Always...Thank You
Excellent, intelligent presentation. I'll watch again. Thank you.
Not having a consistent theme throughout his work is why Ernst Haas was the first one that made me say "Now that's what I love about photography". He's sees photographs within a subject over seeing a subject to photograph.
Having a theme or as most people say developing a style is useful but is something I've never believe was necessary. Or was really something that was more than taking pictures of the same thing or in the same way.
Which most people that I've come across when referring to themselves as having a style, what they're really talking about is a repetition of subject.
Hi Gregory Mmm not sure. I think it is a repetition of approach to how one photographs. Look at Nikita Teryoshin's work (this weeks video) and let me know what you think.
@@PhotoConversations I actually just finished watching that. Another good video.
As for Teryoshiri's work and style (or theme), yes he has a style or developed a theme that ran through his work.
And yes, it was effective. Not showing faces in the context of the subject matter, it does lead you to think about things beyond photography such as the reasons why conflicts arise, along with the people involved in that area of that world not only remain perpetually anonymous, but are hardly ever though of as existing.
People mostly credit their part as being done by the government in abstract way people credit "society" as the motivation for people's behaviors and actions.
Nobody thinks about arms dealers are having expos, conventions, business trips, the same as people employed in the residential construction and improvement business.
But in relation to Teryoshiri to what I said about Ernst Haas and being drawn to Haas because of not having a theme, is that I consider Teryoshiri as exploring an idea about a subject matter. Which bled over to his photos of zoos because I see similarities.
Even in arms expos/fairs, a pleasing presentation is a big consideration just like cereal boxes. And with zoos, the animals are revered for their exoticness and beauty, but being put in a zoo is not actually fitting for that reverence. Plus most zoos aren't even designed with any appearance of an acknowledgement of any reverence.
They're more fitting of an expression of disdain.
Both worlds are supposed to a pleasant experience. But at the core of each is a bad experience.
And Teryoshiri may have explored the same idea with other subjects, or may do that in the future. But I would say that there would be some commonality of traits between subjects that would be there first that would lead to that.
And Ernst Haas to me is about what you see and what else do you see. And his work also is refuting the idea some people believe that you need to develop a style.
Whatever idea he gets, he explores.
This was long, but I do love photography.
@@gregorylagrange I actually think that style/approach is just another tool, like favouring a long lens or a wide angle...or film vs digital. it is the concentration span of viewers/curators that is too short to explore the 'individual response'. It is not so easy to package for an audience and therefore less easy to sell...so I think we are in agreement.
@@PhotoConversations We are.
Like I said before, style is useful.
But how the term is used is often an expression of a limitation of a viewer (or curator), or when it's used by a photographer describing themselves, they are conflating the subject as a style.
To take your lens choice example, lens choice can play a significant role in something like getting across a feeling of intimacy.
That can be a style because you can use that through various subject matter to explore an idea.
Best of luck. Enjoying your videos and enjoyed the discussion.
Every time I watch one of your videos I suddenly want to open one of my photobooks 😊
Fantastic, then they are working.
Thanks for your work, awesome insights and thoughts on fotographers, and.phy !
Cheers !
Brilliant
Very thought-provoking video 🙂🙂.
Thanks for this insightful and engaging video! 📷🙂
This is really excellent and a video I would like to come back to and watch a few more times!
Thanks Jane
Thnx for this.Haas inspired me as a young fellow to get into and explore photography.One of the true greats in the world of colour
What a great video and story
Love the sample images, well chosen.
Totally like his photos with movement.
Very inspiring
Thanks so much for sharing
Great presentation: thank you.
Thank you Greame for a very interesting look at Ernst Haas' body of work. I had never reviewed his work in the context of an innovator, I will go back and look again now, from this different perspective.
I don't believe I'll ever understand the art world, that's why I photograph what I want, what I see at the time. I'd never fit in to the pigeon hole mold if you will, I've got to be open and phtograph what I see, whimsical? I met Mr. Haas at an early 80"s weekend workshop in Alabama sponsored through a university. I even got an impromptu portrait of him sitting in a rocking chair. Looking at his prints that weekend was special. And he didn't bash my Kodachrome slides!
Hi Steve I would have liked to be there.
Name 6 top American photographers. Haas will be in the top 3.
Great video, interesting that curators had a tricky time keeping up with his changing style. Did he ever reach a moment where he was content or was he constantly looking for it?
It seems that he was always looking for new ways to photograph what was around him.
The duty of art is to elevate the mundane to sublime. As such Hass was a true photographic artist. Speaking for myself, I prefer not to over analyse photographs that have no obvious message , those who fall in the category of " the subject within the subject " genre . I just look at them, digest as much as my primitive mind allows move on and enjoy the memory.
Some photographs of things are just photographs of those things. But even then they might have some meaning beyond what the photographer intended.
@@PhotoConversations Absolutely. A good photograph is like a good story book. You can read it, but in your imagination you can form the characters as you like. The same goes for photography, photography of beyond the obvious.
Nice video. For me it raises the question of whether visually alluring images on their own suffice in the contemporary world if photographers built on Haas’ work by including narrative. I feel these type of images do, because A, there are tons of them on IG and other content driven platforms and B because Harry Gruyaert’s work from yesteryear is as popular as ever - he first was published in his older days and Thames and Hudson still publish new books of his older work . What do you think?
I think that as stand-alone images, they will only make it to IG, but if packaged right as with HG, then they have legs.
@@PhotoConversationsthanks
Thank you for the Video. I think Haas was important for develop the Norwegian nature photo style.
Hi I'm not sure what defines the Norwegian nature style -let me know
I believe Jay Maisel was influenced by Ernst Haas as well. He mentioned him a lot anyway.
Haas seems to be feral amongst many professional photographers, which maybe bad for the studio system; he may lack an overarching (postmodernist) standpoint but he has a damned good eye, so surely, if he were a painter that would be enough? He would be seen as a Picasso? Maybe the vague ambivalence towards him is more due to photography lowering the technical barriers to producing art and so blurring the distinction between Pro and amateur? Or a kid with a camera and pro?
Yes, I think his way of working just went out of fashion...but the work still stands.
Look, we can't see the images except on this tiny video screen: limited color, definition,
so why do you insist on degrading an already third-rate art experience (nobody thinks video can ever do much for photography, surely your overarching job is to figure out what is needed and then get out of the way, and stop cribbing from monographs - you sound like you being forced to read the liner notes for a misc compendia of odd pianists