Do you see something that I can't see?

**Lowell Goudge** · 07-11-2019, 03:19 AM

Originally posted by clackers

Sure, Lowell, but somebody has to establish that, persuade us with evidence.

Clement Greenberg did that to the world for Jackson Pollock.

Ok , I have a simple question.

How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died?

**clackers** · 07-11-2019, 05:27 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Ok , I have a simple question.

How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died?

Vermeer and Van Gogh are obvious examples of artists recognized for their value after they died, but the majority of The Canon earned a living and were appreciated during their lifetime.

And the number of genuinely worthless painters, photographers and poets through the ages?

Btw, I think Pollock's wife Lee Krasner was a very underrated painter of her own accord, but didn't get the kind of writeups Jackson did.

Wheatfield · 07-11-2019, 07:11 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Ok , I have a simple question.

How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died?

The vast majority have been successful and recognized during their lives. The whole not becoming successful until after death is almost a meme. Renaissance painters are the origin of this particular meme. It's hard to get widespread recognition when no one outside of the castle that you work for gets to see your work.

**luftfluss** · 07-11-2019, 07:19 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Ok , I have a simple question.

How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died?

I think many of the artists who are most commonly known around the world were successful in that they made a living from their work, had patrons and followers, that sort of thing. Most did not become legends until after they died.

**jacamar** · 07-11-2019, 07:22 AM

Among photographers, Vivian Maier.

http://www.vivianmaier.com/about-vivian-maier/

swanlefitte · 07-11-2019, 08:10 AM

Originally posted by jacamar

Among photographers, Vivian Maier.

http://www.vivianmaier.com/about-vivian-maier/

Literally no one was allowed to see her work until after she died. So yeah she wasn't appreciated in her life time.

R. Wethereyet · 07-11-2019, 10:37 AM - **3 Likes**

Originally posted by micromacro

Long story short, I expressed my opinion about one of the famous photographer's work, that his images are like white noise to me, and got the response from another well known photographer that he feels sorry for me.
Then I posted the screenshot of one of his images telling that I usually delete all images like this one. And got the advise to keep something like that instead of deleting it.
I asked why? What's exactly so special about this image? Did not get the answer yet.

What do you think guys? Is it about "nothing", or I really can't see how special this image is? Should I develop my artistic vision somehow?

Lana,
DON'T YOU SEE IT??!! The play of light and shadow, the repeating patterns, the leading lines along the left side of the frame!! WOW!

.... nah, me neither [DELETE] :-D

texandrews · 07-11-2019, 10:54 AM - **2 Likes**

As people have noted above, "most" were at least somewhat successful in their own day. But this grossly oversimplifies the question and answer.

I would like to point out here that internet forums are possibly not the best places to learn and understand matters of art and art history. Jus' sort of a feeling I have, after devoting my entire life to the arts as a professor, gallery director ,alternative space programs director, curator, artist, and now museum installations specialist and photographer.

So, yes, so many of the artists we see enshrined for good damn reasons in our museums were successful in their lifetimes. And the ones who aren't? There would be a fair number of women in that group, although some were moderately successful during their lives, only to be ignored afterwards. It's generally better for women artists today than before, in terms of parity of success and acknowledgement---although for legions of artists things are a soul crushing grind. For people of color? getting better but not there yet.

But then one has to remember that so many of the makers of works that take our breath away today are and were in their lifetimes essentially anonymous. Most of their success was just having a roof over their heads and bread in their mouths. A great many may have been slaves or indentured.

And what is success, again? Hals and Rembrandt died destitute /bankrupt, and so did others. So, the question is more complex and nuanced than I think the poster realizes, and the answers the same. And to me, all of it evinces a lack of deeper knowledge and understanding and education in the arts----something shared by such a huge majority of people it actually makes me want to just drink myself to oblivion. But it's still a little early for me today, and I've got a conference call in a few minutes I need to be sober for.

swanlefitte · 07-11-2019, 11:19 AM

I will drink for ya. It's called hurricane prep here in the city, New Orleans, not the train, pronounced orlins. The parish is pronounced orleens.

**david94903** · 07-11-2019, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Ok , I have a simple question. How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died?

I'd say not many became recognized in their own time, if ever at all.

Eugene Atget, a great example of someone who wasn't recognized in his time, nor did he see photography as an art form; he considered himself a "collector of documents." He is now considered to be one of the "founding fathers" of modern photography. "He was a pioneer of documentary photography, noted for his determination to document all of the architecture and street scenes of Paris before their disappearance to modernization. Most of his photographs were first published by Berenice Abbott after his death. An inspiration for the surrealists and other artists, his genius was only recognized by a handful of young artists in the last two years of his life, and he did not live to see the wide acclaim his work would eventually receive." (quote from Wikipidia)

**Lowell Goudge** · 07-11-2019, 01:57 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by david94903

Snip..........(quote from Wikipidia)

Ahhhhh. The source of ultimate knowledge, the internet

Actually though I did like the rest of your post.

**clackers** · 07-11-2019, 11:22 PM - **1 Like**

All 27 on this list worked and were recognized in their lifetime as excellent artists. You could mount some sort of argument for Kertesz being an exception, except it wouldn't be true. He had a one man exhibition at MOMA twenty years before he died.

27 Most Famous Photographers You Need To Know

So, I don't buy any attempt to say 'genius work goes unrecognized' with respect to the photo Lana posted.

I'm willing to be persuaded, as John Maloof (and to a guarded extent Mary Ellen Mark) has done to us all WRT Vivian Maier, but is anyone actually going to try?

**Rondec** · 07-12-2019, 03:05 AM - **1 Like**

Photography and art have a difficult relationship. I take photos, but don't see them as particularly artistic. They are what is there and yes, I can use compositional techniques to try to enhance them and try to get up early so the light is good, but is a good landscape image art? I guess so, but it does feel as though art needs something to be triggered in the viewer that is deeper than "Oh, you must have a nice camera."

Certainly there are style of art that work better for me than others, but I think it is a lot harder for photography to jump over that bar from "journalism" -- simply documenting the world you live in -- to "art."

**clackers** · 07-12-2019, 05:54 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Photography and art have a difficult relationship. I take photos, but don't see them as particularly artistic. They are what is there and yes, I can use compositional techniques to try to enhance them and try to get up early so the light is good, but is a good landscape image art? I guess so, but it does feel as though art needs something to be triggered in the viewer that is deeper than "Oh, you must have a nice camera."

Certainly there are style of art that work better for me than others, but I think it is a lot harder for photography to jump over that bar from "journalism" -- simply documenting the world you live in -- to "art."

I think you'll find most of the 27 togs in the list weren't photojournalists, Rondec, they took their art very seriously.

IIRC, some of the photojournalists like Doisneau and Cartier-Bresson were into classical painting/sculpture before they became photographers, there is formal composition in what look like candids.

07-11-2019, 05:27 AM	#77
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Ok , I have a simple question. How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died? Vermeer and Van Gogh are obvious examples of artists recognized for their value after they died, but the majority of The Canon earned a living and were appreciated during their lifetime. And the number of genuinely worthless painters, photographers and poets through the ages? Btw, I think Pollock's wife Lee Krasner was a very underrated painter of her own accord, but didn't get the kind of writeups Jackson did. Last edited by clackers; 07-11-2019 at 05:32 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Your vehicle: what do you have, why do you like it, and what do you not like?	Auzzie-Phoenix	General Talk	2980	6 Days Ago 05:06 PM
People Anything you can do I can do better...	Schraubstock	Post Your Photos!	4	02-04-2018 07:01 AM
If you see what looks possibility stolen is there anything you can do?	swanlefitte	General Photography	8	07-23-2017 08:00 PM
Do you test your lenses' IQ or accept them unless you see something obvious?	BigMackCam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	50	11-23-2015 11:06 AM
Something new, something old, something awesome!	RaduA	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	03-06-2008 11:27 AM

07-11-2019, 03:19 AM	#76
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by clackers Sure, Lowell, but somebody has to establish that, persuade us with evidence. Clement Greenberg did that to the world for Jackson Pollock. Ok , I have a simple question. How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died?

07-11-2019, 07:11 AM - 1 Like	#78
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Ok , I have a simple question. How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died? The vast majority have been successful and recognized during their lives. The whole not becoming successful until after death is almost a meme. Renaissance painters are the origin of this particular meme. It's hard to get widespread recognition when no one outside of the castle that you work for gets to see your work.

07-11-2019, 07:19 AM	#79
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Ok , I have a simple question. How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died? I think many of the artists who are most commonly known around the world were successful in that they made a living from their work, had patrons and followers, that sort of thing. Most did not become legends until after they died.

07-11-2019, 07:22 AM	#80
jacamar Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Toronto Photos: Albums Posts: 3,443	Among photographers, Vivian Maier. http://www.vivianmaier.com/about-vivian-maier/

07-11-2019, 08:10 AM	#81
swanlefitte Pentaxian Join Date: May 2015 Location: Minneapolis Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,068	Originally posted by jacamar Among photographers, Vivian Maier. http://www.vivianmaier.com/about-vivian-maier/ Literally no one was allowed to see her work until after she died. So yeah she wasn't appreciated in her life time.

07-11-2019, 10:37 AM - 3 Likes	#82
R. Wethereyet Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 126	Originally posted by micromacro Long story short, I expressed my opinion about one of the famous photographer's work, that his images are like white noise to me, and got the response from another well known photographer that he feels sorry for me. Then I posted the screenshot of one of his images telling that I usually delete all images like this one. And got the advise to keep something like that instead of deleting it. I asked why? What's exactly so special about this image? Did not get the answer yet. What do you think guys? Is it about "nothing", or I really can't see how special this image is? Should I develop my artistic vision somehow? Lana, DON'T YOU SEE IT??!! The play of light and shadow, the repeating patterns, the leading lines along the left side of the frame!! WOW! .... nah, me neither [DELETE] :-D

07-11-2019, 10:54 AM - 2 Likes	#83
texandrews Moderator Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Baltimore Photos: Albums Posts: 3,390	As people have noted above, "most" were at least somewhat successful in their own day. But this grossly oversimplifies the question and answer. I would like to point out here that internet forums are possibly not the best places to learn and understand matters of art and art history. Jus' sort of a feeling I have, after devoting my entire life to the arts as a professor, gallery director ,alternative space programs director, curator, artist, and now museum installations specialist and photographer. So, yes, so many of the artists we see enshrined for good damn reasons in our museums were successful in their lifetimes. And the ones who aren't? There would be a fair number of women in that group, although some were moderately successful during their lives, only to be ignored afterwards. It's generally better for women artists today than before, in terms of parity of success and acknowledgement---although for legions of artists things are a soul crushing grind. For people of color? getting better but not there yet. But then one has to remember that so many of the makers of works that take our breath away today are and were in their lifetimes essentially anonymous. Most of their success was just having a roof over their heads and bread in their mouths. A great many may have been slaves or indentured. And what is success, again? Hals and Rembrandt died destitute /bankrupt, and so did others. So, the question is more complex and nuanced than I think the poster realizes, and the answers the same. And to me, all of it evinces a lack of deeper knowledge and understanding and education in the arts----something shared by such a huge majority of people it actually makes me want to just drink myself to oblivion. But it's still a little early for me today, and I've got a conference call in a few minutes I need to be sober for.

07-11-2019, 11:19 AM	#84
swanlefitte Pentaxian Join Date: May 2015 Location: Minneapolis Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,068	I will drink for ya. It's called hurricane prep here in the city, New Orleans, not the train, pronounced orlins. The parish is pronounced orleens.

07-11-2019, 12:37 PM	#85
david94903 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: San Rafael, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 806	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Ok , I have a simple question. How many artists were successful during their own life, and how many became recognized after they died? I'd say not many became recognized in their own time, if ever at all. Eugene Atget, a great example of someone who wasn't recognized in his time, nor did he see photography as an art form; he considered himself a "collector of documents." He is now considered to be one of the "founding fathers" of modern photography. "He was a pioneer of documentary photography, noted for his determination to document all of the architecture and street scenes of Paris before their disappearance to modernization. Most of his photographs were first published by Berenice Abbott after his death. An inspiration for the surrealists and other artists, his genius was only recognized by a handful of young artists in the last two years of his life, and he did not live to see the wide acclaim his work would eventually receive." (quote from Wikipidia)

07-11-2019, 01:57 PM - 1 Like	#86
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by david94903 Snip..........(quote from Wikipidia) Ahhhhh. The source of ultimate knowledge, the internet Actually though I did like the rest of your post.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-11-2019, 11:22 PM - 1 Like	#87
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	All 27 on this list worked and were recognized in their lifetime as excellent artists. You could mount some sort of argument for Kertesz being an exception, except it wouldn't be true. He had a one man exhibition at MOMA twenty years before he died. 27 Most Famous Photographers You Need To Know So, I don't buy any attempt to say 'genius work goes unrecognized' with respect to the photo Lana posted. I'm willing to be persuaded, as John Maloof (and to a guarded extent Mary Ellen Mark) has done to us all WRT Vivian Maier, but is anyone actually going to try?

07-12-2019, 03:05 AM - 1 Like	#88
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	Photography and art have a difficult relationship. I take photos, but don't see them as particularly artistic. They are what is there and yes, I can use compositional techniques to try to enhance them and try to get up early so the light is good, but is a good landscape image art? I guess so, but it does feel as though art needs something to be triggered in the viewer that is deeper than "Oh, you must have a nice camera." Certainly there are style of art that work better for me than others, but I think it is a lot harder for photography to jump over that bar from "journalism" -- simply documenting the world you live in -- to "art."

07-12-2019, 05:54 AM	#89
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by Rondec Photography and art have a difficult relationship. I take photos, but don't see them as particularly artistic. They are what is there and yes, I can use compositional techniques to try to enhance them and try to get up early so the light is good, but is a good landscape image art? I guess so, but it does feel as though art needs something to be triggered in the viewer that is deeper than "Oh, you must have a nice camera." Certainly there are style of art that work better for me than others, but I think it is a lot harder for photography to jump over that bar from "journalism" -- simply documenting the world you live in -- to "art." I think you'll find most of the 27 togs in the list weren't photojournalists, Rondec, they took their art very seriously. IIRC, some of the photojournalists like Doisneau and Cartier-Bresson were into classical painting/sculpture before they became photographers, there is formal composition in what look like candids.