When I edited these images, I wanted to make sure I didn’t detract from the vibrancy of the colour in a lot of them. For these images, I mostly increased contrast and made them brighter. For the images that didn’t have this level of vibrancy, (due to overexposure, underexposure, etc.) I made them black and white and increased contrast to make them more dramatic. See below for an example of one of the colourful images vs a less colourful one.
This was the original image. I wanted to preserve the lovely colours in the train and so increased contrast and decreased exposure just a little.
I like how this highlighted the rays of sunlight by adding contrast between light and shade.
This image was clearly overexposed and needed to be made black and white as it lacked the colour I wanted.
So, I increased contrast, decreased exposure, increased shadows, and decreased highlights. I also added the slightest vignette that is only a little noticeable.
I like the way these turned out and this is why I continued relatively the same pattern throughout all of my edits.
I have begun to make selections across my photoshoots to find the ones that are worth editing, as I have nearly 2,000 images and cannot possibly edit them all.
Using the ‘Flag as picked’ and ‘Flag as rejected’ tools in Lightroom, I am able to pick out the images I would like to edit, which I can then filter later on. I am choosing the best images based on their aesthetic quality and their relevance to my overall intentions.
For Amsterdam, I picked a total of 54 images for editing.
For Athens, I picked a total of 80 images for editing.
For Edinburgh, I picked a total of 21 images for editing.
For London, I picked a total of 16 images for editing.
For New York, I picked a total of 59 images for editing.
For Paris, I picked a total of 32 images for editing.
From the plane journeys, I picked a total of 24 images for editing.
For St Malo, I picked a total of 43 images for editing.
For York, I picked a total of 30 images for editing.
My two artists are similar in some ways yet extremely different in others. Cartier-Bresson is self-proclaimed as someone who wishes to remain invisible to his subjects – a faceless camera in the crowds which takes candid pictures. Klein, on the other hand, is far more direct with his camera, choosing to be upfront and in the faces of his subjects. He enjoyed the reactions of his subjects, finding that these made his images far more successful, and also staged some images. In the article I read to find criticism of his work, the author suggests that Cartier-Bresson’s images were in fact staged, but that he never actually stated this. He suggests that Cartier-Bresson’s images ‘aren’t Street Photographs anymore and shouldn’t be coined as that’ due to the possibility that they were taken when ‘you already have found the right background and are just waiting for the person to enter the frame.’ Therefore, the key distinction between these two photographers is that; one (Klein) was an openly staged photographer who enjoyed being both in the faces of unsuspecting subjects and a puppeteer of more theatrical images which he manually staged; the other (Cartier-Bresson), however, prefers to be invisible and has the philosophy of ‘the Decisive Moment’, suggesting complete candidness in each of his images, but is debated to have actually staged his images and not mentioned this. Cartier-Bresson is more highly regarded than Klein, perhaps because he came before him, but it is also clear that their styles differ quite widely. Klein, when photographing his hometown for his photobook New York, wanted to present it as gritty and loud, just as he saw it himself.
The publication is, in many ways, a projection of Klein’s dislike for the city, but is, in others, a sort of love letter to New York. Either way, the publication had been commissioned by Vogue who ultimately rejected it because of its harshness and unconventionality (he included images which were blurred, distorted, or unfocused). They wanted a romanticism where Klein preferred a realism. The publication later became renowned after being published in Paris and it is now a famous staple. Cartier-Bresson, on the other hand, was more focused on creating an aesthetically pleasing vision of whatever he was photographing, no matter how harsh it may have been in actuality. He, like so many consumers of his photography, enjoyed the harmony of form, line, and shape to create a perfect composition. His fame arguably derives from this love for aesthetics.
A key difference between the two artists is their subject matter and specialisation. Whilst Cartier-Bresson is regarded as, first and foremost, a street photographer, his work also focused on geo-political and social issues across the world, often dealing with far more stirring situations than that which occurs on the streets of most cities. The time in which he operated created a multitude of subject matter for him, meaning that his work is some of the most prominent and important of many historical events across the 20th Century, such as the Chinese Civil War of 1949, the partition of India in 1947, the Second World War of 1939-1945, and the Cold War’s effects in Eastern Europe which spanned the second half of the century. Klein however, did not branch from street photography, except to become a fashion photographer for Vogue. His work is more ‘fun’ than Cartier-Bresson’s, arguably, as it is either based on the aesthetics of fashion or the day-to-day life of various city dwellers, whilst Cartier-Bresson was commissioned to travel all over to be the key documenter of important historical events, placing him in higher regard because of his more dangerous working conditions and, as one may argue, more ‘serious’ work ethic. Both artists paid specific attention to aesthetics, but in different manners.
Conclusion
Overall, the two artists are not fundamentally similar when delved into, despite the immediate appearance that they may be. Their intentions differed, which resulted in different styles, subject matter, and outcomes, and is perhaps why they are so often compared alongside each other; they compliment each other.
These images were taken in the centre of York and picture the streets and York Minster in the early morning. I unfortunately did not get many pictures at all and due to the time at which they were taken, I feel that a lot of them aren’t as exciting as they could be. Arguably, however, this may offer an interesting contrast to my other city images where there is more life.
I took these images in and around the centre of Edinburgh as well as tourist attractions and heritage sights such as Edinburgh Castle, the National Monument of Scotland, and the old buildings of Edinburgh University I think a lot of these images are strong, but I definitely didn’t get as many as I would have liked.
I also took some images from the plane on the way there and back, and I think these would be useful at times to establish the change of scenery.
These photos were taken across Paris, but mostly in the centre. I photographed tourist areas, such as the Pantheon and the Eiffel Tower, and the Sacre-Couer, as well as various metro stations.
These images were taken mostly in central Manhattan, with some in Central Park, and some taken from the Hudson River. I am happy with a lot of these images and I think the lighting managed to work really well for me, considering the time of year.
