Ray

Poor pic of MCB in NY Times

30 posts in this topic

But it's important to remember that this is a newspaper - not a program for a ballet - and the idea is to report a truth, so the guidelines are different.

No one would like it if a review were subject to the same sort of scrutiny and possible retouching - why is photography different? This picture I've posted of Balanchine before is very awkward and breaks lots of rules (even to the vigetting of the frame) but is considered a classic:

http://www.magnumpho...PN=98&CT=Search

& an ungolden Apollo:

http://www.magnumpho...N=835&CT=Search

a poorly composed Nureyev:

http://www.magnumpho...N=960&CT=Search

*

This one also from Magnum has an interesting story with it:

http://www.magnumpho...N=484&CT=Search

Share this post


Link to post

I think there are rules to live photography...well maybe rules isn't quite the word, but guidelines.

The camera shoots fast. You get images, like the one under discussion, where the subject is in motion, moving between positions, and thus what would be fleeting, and seen as a blur of motion up to the finished position, now BECOMES the position. It is not any more true to the event than a "good" photograph. Rather less so. I've seen horrible photographs of performers from what were stunning performances. It is the photographer's job to know what is not a good image (from both the standpoint of photography and the art that he is capturing) and to edit those out.

And I don't think any of the photographs above really are germane to the discussion--they aren't live photographs of dancers dancing. The Mr B one is sort of an action shot, but its staged, its him showing a position beautifully I think anyway.

Nureyev is posing.

Share this post


Link to post

But I think that you would be in the minority with that opinion.

...which is always exciting..! ;-)

Share this post


Link to post

aurora

You get images, like the one under discussion, where the subject is in motion, moving between positions, and thus what would be fleeting, and seen as a blur of motion up to the finished position, now BECOMES the position.

This is a good point. But again the medium is journalism and good journalism - maybe this is my bias - come from an off center point to make the subject more interesting. And I guess it could be compared to the off-balances in Balanchine, especially as discussed earlier in Divertimento N. 15 which is full of unlovely but fascinating stuff - the women look like Rodin sculptures being lifted by Giacometti men. Or the way a singer sings off key then slips into key for a nice contrast. I think the slightly awkward atypicalness allows the viewer of the photo to make the correction themselves.

Share this post


Link to post

Some very generous readings here of what I still take to be a poorly chosen pic for the unfortunate dancer's moment in the spotlight. It doesn't help that, in contrast, the women in the background have straight knees and pointed feet.

Share this post


Link to post