Talk:Photo-Secession

I think a lot of this article is wrong. I am sure the Photo-Secession did not initially champion "straight photography" at all, that came later, by which time I think the organisation may have fizzled out. It actually championed the manipulated pictorialist approach which by 1917 Stieglitz had come to reject. It was Paul Strand who advocated straight photography and caused Stieglitz to see the light and turn his back on the style he originally championed. Camera Work started by championing one style, that of the Photo-Secession members, and after a muddled period when Stieglitz became disillusioned with photography, it ended up 14 years later championing Paul Strand's work. I'm not sure but I don't think Strand was a member of the Photo-Secession.

The point of the Photo-Secession was, I think, to establish that Photography was an art form and not just a mechanical process. However I am presently unclear as to exactly what actual style of photography was then prevalent which they were reacting against so I'm hesitant about making many changes to the article at the moment. Samatarou (talk) 04:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply


Yeah, I've removed the sentences on straight photography. I'm also still figuring out quite what they were seceding from, although I think it was indeed to establish photography as a fine art, but their aim definitely wasn't straight photography. Kryptothesuperdog (talk) 16:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've made some changes which reflect some of Samatarou's ideas, and added information related to the techniques of pictorialists. I think it still needs more info on how the group evolved away from Pictorialist ideas and the influence of Paul Strand. Monjundi (talk) 20:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.