Eugene Atget Appreciation

[DREW WILEY]

He was more equivalent to what we call a stock photographer today, going out and taking a series of theme shots, then selling these. This gave him
opportunity for personal experimentation using the same locations. But don't confuse Atget's usage of the term "document" with our own pigeonhole
mentality of "documentary photography". Completely different ballgame. Yes, he was livid about Napolen III's renovation of the city, so sought out
what was left of what he considered the remnants of pure Parisian culture, the street corners, architectural details, and quaint trades. This was just
a jumping-off point. In the process, documentation of objects and people increasingly became documents of personal psychological experience. And
this was done in an inherently photographic manner, with almost no direct precedents in drawing or painting. In other words, he didn't study art to
arrive at this. It was a gradual interior evolution, following the breadcrumb trail of interesting quirks in his own voluminous imagery, just like some
great guitarist accidentally stumbling on some interesting unusual chord sequence, then being perceptive enough to develop a personal genre on it.
It can be discussed, but not taught. Each photographer has to somehow actually discover something unique in himself or just become another copycat.
That's a lifelong process. The retrospective pathos and mysticism in Atget's best images could have only been an old man's vision. That kind of thing
doesn't come easily.

 

[removed account4]

hi drew

i am well aware at his selling images to painters as props / stock images but the images of the city
were specifically commissioned by the library. he wasn't making stock images of the city, but documenting it.
or so the hazen book says ( in both french and english )
i'm not sure how his motives can be interpreted a different way but i am sure as you have, others have as well.
that said, i don't believe for a second that the work was for painters .. but for the archives that paid him to make the images.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Late in his life the Surrealist painters latched onto some of his stock images and even published them in their journal. But it's unlikely he was ever
directly influenced by them, because he was making those kinds of images well before that genre itself existed. Otherwise, he obviously had to make
a living and was technically a commercial photographer, into a "cause" so-to-speak, one shared by numerous others nostalgic for the former era. By
far the best analysis of Atget is in M. Hambourg's beautiful four-volume set, which I own. But I don't think anyone has really gotten into his head yet,
even if they are successful at identifying the various visual strategies he used.

 

[cliveh]

This image by Atget has always fascinated me. Why would he take the image with his own camera reflected in the mirror and even bits of his kit on the sofa? The surrealists liked this picture, but even though I appreciate a Zen approach to the subject, this almost seems like a spiritual removal of the photographer’s existence when it is clearly visible. I would be interested in thoughts on this.

 

[removed account4]

clive:

it is the equivilant as his tombstone.
it shows he was there and he existed.
or ... maybe he was just sloppy

 

[DREW WILEY]

His self-reflection also sometimes appears in street windows, though you never clearly see his person, except in one deliberately moving blurred case
that I recall. Later Lee Friedlander deliberately copied this practice and turned it into an artsy cliche.

 

[cliveh]

When looking at the work of many of the great photographers, you can often appreciate their genius in terms of their technique such as composition, timing and printing. But for me Eugene Atget seems to transcend that aspect by complete negation of human interaction with the subject and sheer mundane recording of a scene, but at the same time putting his images in the same league as Van Gough paintings. How does he achieve this with a photomechanical medium?

 

[NedL]

I don't have the right words to say what I mean, but Atget often brilliantly used distant backgrounds to "place" the subject... it makes you see the existence of the subject more starkly when it stands out from the wider world behind it. Even when he didn't use distance, there was often implied "place": an open door (leading to somewhere else, to what is around the subject, showing that the subject exists within a world around it ) or the corner of a building that you can't see around, but still puts in mind that there is something around that corner. Somehow Atget's subjects stand out more because you can see they are somewhere. Not sure if that makes sense....

 

[cliveh]

Thanks Ned, that is an interesting observation.

 

[Arklatexian]

I don't have the right words to say what I mean, but Atget often brilliantly used distant backgrounds to "place" the subject... it makes you see the existence of the subject more starkly when it stands out from the wider world behind it. Even when he didn't use distance, there was often implied "place": an open door (leading to somewhere else, to what is around the subject, showing that the subject exists within a world around it ) or the corner of a building that you can't see around, but still puts in mind that there is something around that corner. Somehow Atget's subjects stand out more because you can see they are somewhere. Not sure if that makes sense....

To me, it is evident that Atget was a "pictorialist", a word condemned by "The Group F64". This group was right about some photography but wrong about "pictoralism" not having a place in photography. Some of Atget's work shows this (to me, at least). I have begun to look at some of the "pictorial" photography done by the much maligned movement in the 1930s and later. Pictorial photography appealed to the "soul", not just to the mechanics of the medium. A few of the F64 types were able to capture this in their photography but most did not. Maybe it is time to return to shooting "pictorials" for some of our work. I think the medium, especially B&W would benefit. Now go look at the Atget pictures some more and others........Regards!

 

[guangong]

What a great discussion. I would like to offer a small tidbit. My friend the late Louie Stettner and I once had a conversation about the impossibility of working like Atget. Photography of the urban landscape and artifacts today merely become pictures of cars parked in every available spot on a street. Atget’s pictures are monuments to a lost world.

 

[removed account4]

What a great discussion. I would like to offer a small tidbit. My friend the late Louie Stettner and I once had a conversation about the impossibility of working like Atget. Photography of the urban landscape and artifacts today merely become pictures of cars parked in every available spot on a street. Atget’s pictures are monuments to a lost world.

hi guangong
i documented the city squares of somerville mass for a series of hand stitched books... the trick to working like atget is to get up at like 4am and at dawn to photograph the area
and know when rubbish day is. unfortunately the city ran out of $$ so i have 2 or 3 squares left to document which will just be in limbo .. i believed ploughed / cobble hill and sullivan square were
the last ones ... even paris in 1900 had busy streets at 7am ... he beat the morning rush, even when he photographed the homeless and les petits métiers de Paris...
these days haphazard parked cars, street furniture ( bolted down rubbish bins+recyclers. benches, parking meters, street lights, utility poles, crosswalk/streetlight switches, crosswalks &c )
become part of "now" so for a historic preservation standpoint ( what atget was doing it for ) it would be OK to have them in the view. HABS/HAER doesn't like them either (cars ) but sometimes they
can't be moved ... and its a collective "material culture"

 

[GLS]

I absolutely love Atget's work. I do however find it extremely difficult to articulate precisely why. I just know they affect me deeply.

 

[Besk]

Atget's work has impressed me more than any other single photographer.

 

[chip j]

Atget was at the beginning of the curve of the great film photography era.

 

[cliveh]

Atget’s photographs are also a good example of how the road to perfection can be achieved by doing something again and again and again, without deviating in MO or materials. There is evidence of this in so many other great artists and those who stick at the same thing. Jack of all materials and methods, but master of none.

 

[Arthurwg]

I've been obsessed by Atget for decades. The aesthetic quality of his work is absolutely profound. I see it as the link between the 19th and 20th centuries. I've looked at hundreds, perhaps thousands of his pictures but I still find beautiful new ones. It's said that he made 10,000 pictures.

 

[cliveh]

I know some people don't understand his work, but for me, he is the Vincent Van Gogh of photography. Nobody comes close to his genius.

 

[chip j]

Surely there are better artists than Van Gogh.

 

[removed account4]

it would be great to go to the Bibliothèque historique de la ville de Paris and see his original prints. they are
the institution that commissioned his olde paris collection. not sure if they are the ones who have some of his
negatives, but it would be great just to see his 18x24 dry plates...

the trick to working like atget is to get up at like 4am and at dawn to photograph the area

besides getting up early to beat the morning commute, my guess is he also did it to avoid harsh lighting
something that can cause trouble with dry plates. anyone working with paper negatives and shooting during the daytime
can probably attest to the "contrast issues" that sort of photo emulsion offers to the photographer... so flat light and long exposure were his friends

 

[Alan Johnson]

i documented the city squares of somerville mass for a series of hand stitched books... the trick to working like atget is to get up at like 4am and at dawn to photograph the area
and know when rubbish day is. unfortunately the city ran out of $$ so i have 2 or 3 squares left to document which will just be in limbo .. i believed ploughed / cobble hill and sullivan square were
the last ones ... even paris in 1900 had busy streets at 7am ... he beat the morning rush, even when he photographed the homeless and les petits métiers de Paris...
these days haphazard parked cars, street furniture ( bolted down rubbish bins+recyclers. benches, parking meters, street lights, utility poles, crosswalk/streetlight switches, crosswalks &c )
become part of "now" so for a historic preservation standpoint ( what atget was doing it for ) it would be OK to have them in the view. HABS/HAER doesn't like them either (cars ) but sometimes they
can't be moved ... and its a collective "material culture"

Thanks for this insight, John. These days it appears that all one could do is to find some derelict place out in the sticks that is not fenced off or patrolled by security so as to get Atget style shots.

 

[chip j]

George Tice did very well w/Paterson. NJ over the years.

 

[removed account4]

Thanks for this insight, John. These days it appears that all one could do is to find some derelict place out in the sticks that is not fenced off or patrolled by security so as to get Atget style shots.

hi alan
the way i see it is it is not so much photographing derelict places but photographing an area and documenting a sense of "place".
in cambridge mass there was a section of town called central square. It was in the midst of being revitalized and the city was taking down a large
multi store "block" to put up a new building. there was a HABS documentation done ( i didn't get it ) and the images made were static and dead on documentary photographs of the buildings'
exterior and interior and contextual views to show where it was ... i opted to do a project on my own to document the site not as sculpture but what it was like. early mornings sometimes
( this is a busy street main thoroughfare, central business district ) and sometimes during the morning rush. also photographed the insides of the shops showing what they were like
the people who worked there &c. 99% of the views were 4x5, i took some from the roof of a nearby building with a 35mm camera... all but the birds eye view were contact printed and
given to the city and the public library in a hand made folio. there are ways to show a sense of place without something being off the beaten path, it is just a matter of figuring out
the logistics ( time, how you want to show it, and why ) the rest is pretty easy. i usually tell the po-po what i am up to so when concerned people call, or get in my face the man has my back...
the problem i see about derelict places is usually there is someone nearby who doesn't like trespassers and wants you to talk with his/her friends with mister smith and mister wesson ...
and once you have that conversation.. there is a problem, especially " these days " ..
have fun !

 

[cliveh]

Some years ago I had the opportunity of viewing some original Atget contact prints at the V & A in London. They really were works of magic.

 

[cliveh]