Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/03/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Why 'worry' about it? Because, to some degree, Truth still matters. And by the way - a combat photographer sure as hell knows if he's just shot a guy who's just been shot, or if he posed the guy. And IF Capa posed the guy - and for the Xth time, I believe in the integrity of the photo, that act calls into question the entirity of his body of work as a war photographer. And frankly, I think that that body of work, and the risks he routinely took, which ultimately cost his life, are as close as we will ever come to "proof" that the photo is real. ___ Sent with SnapperMail www.snappermail.com ...... Original Message ....... On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 11:13:48 +0100 PHC <paul@paulhardycarter.com> wrote: "I don't think it's posed either. In fact, I don't really understand why "anyone would think it was posed. If you've spent any time studying the "way people move it is obvious that this guy is falling. Whether he's "been shot or has just lost his footing is a more questionable point - "but the picture is called "Falling Soldier" not "Soldier who has just "been shot". " "I'd also point out that Capa never made any claims about the picture. "It was titled and sold by the agency and he didn't even know about it "until some weeks later. Now he could, of course, have shouted on his "return to Paris "No! It was only the guys clowning about! I'm not the "worlds greatest war photographer!" and terminated his career at that "point, and perhaps that's what some people believe he should have done. "Personally I'm very glad he didn't. " "There wasn't any misrepresentation about the picture - at worst there "was a cock-up. Capa didn't know which pictures had worked on the films "he sent to Paris. Anyone who's ever taken pictures in a shocking, "extreme, and fast moving environment like combat will know that you "don't know what you've got until you see the results [I should perhaps "point out that I've never been a combat photographer, just to save any "misunderstanding]. " "The picture editor in Paris would have looked at that shot and said ""Wow!", or perhaps "Sacre Bleu!", and started trying to sell it. They "couldn't very well check with Capa in Aragon or wherever he was before "captioning it - they would just have to make it up. They sold it, it "became famous, Capa's career was launched, and the rest is history. Why "worry about it now when we'll never know what was happening when he "pressed the shutter 70 years ago? " "P. " "******* "Paul Hardy Carter "www.paulhardycarter.com "www.digitalrailroad.net/phc "+44 (0)20 7871 7553 "******* " "On 21 Mar 2006, at 22:02, B. D. Colen wrote: " "> If a photo is presented as a factual representation of an event, it "> damn "> well better be that; if it's presented as an artistic statement, it's "> factual truth is irrelevant. The photo in question was shot by a photo "> journalist, on assignment, covering a war. It was presented as fact. "> If it "> was posed, it is not art - it is fraud. But I happen to believe that "> it is "> what it purports to be. :-) " " "_______________________________________________ "Leica Users Group. "See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information