Photojournalism is the earliest form of ‘Documentary’ that we have. The use of photos to tell a story or put across a point has long been used in politics throughout history; as a means to sway opinion on anything from the environment to the state of immigrants, from use of propaganda in wars to gaining public vote in elections. The photo, and very much so the photographer taking them, are representatives of truth to which an audience responds. Especially when photographs were first used the public were introduced to a new form of media that captures life still which could not be argued with. Photo Documentaries are supposed to reflect the truth of the topic it is covering as absolute evidence. So the notion of falsehood and the doctoring of photographs has long been debated; perhaps to a greater extent than accepted photo practitioners and their work. The manipulation of photos has led to a change in what we believe to be true and increasing doubt amongst modern society. Has this manipulation tarnished the good name of photojournalism or breathed new life into it? Decisive moment versus staged events creates very different outcomes, with very different ethical issues but both very powerful in evoking reactions.

“The average person believes implicitly that the photograph cannot falsify. Of course, you and I know that this unbounded faith in the integrity of the photograph is often rudely shaken, for, while photographs may not lie, liars may photograph.” Lewis Hine.

1890 to 1960’s

Lewis Hine-(1874-1940)

Lewis Hine’s approach to photojournalism was to give a fair representation of lower class civilians in a human respect. He tried to capture members of the public stuck in sweatshops and child labour and portray them in a real way so they were no longer viewed as products doing a job and instead as people trying to live. A pioneer of the Expository Mode Hine wanted to directly address the public in an emotive way so they understood the hardships of these people making it a social issue that had to be assessed. A student of sociology Hine understood the values that differed between the classes and knew how to represent the Proletariat in a way that would gain them sympathy. Working during WW1, the economic boom and the subsequent Great Depression that followed Lewis Hine had a great source of inspiration and case studies to draw from.

Jacob Riis-(1849-1914)

Jacob Riis wanted to show directly the troubles that faced the lower class citizens of America in the early 1900’s to the previously unaware middle and upper classes. Unlike Lewis Hine after him, who concentrated on specific sectors of the poor, Riis tried to cover lower class, suffering people as a whole and looked into slums of New York the supposed financial hub of America. A man who wanted to push for reforms for those less fortunate in regards of housing, sanitation and conditioning among others he used his photography to back up his statements and to shock the upper class philanthropists he rubbed shoulders with into helping him. As the photograph camera was still a fairly new device the shots Riis took of the slums came as a surprise to most of the public as this issue they had never heard of was now metaphorically shoved in their face.

This was reflected in his photographs. He realised the potential that flash photography had in replicating the image of the slums in their dark and dank surroundings. Using flash Riis could now fully explore the poor areas and the people that had to live there and use it to back up the idea that reforms were needed. That being said it should be noted that due to the bright over exposure of the flash that a lot of the subjects in his photos were often wincing at the light or hiding their faces which gives the somewhat false impression of their plight and struggle. Also due to the technology of the time Riis would have to get his subjects to be still so that the picture not blur or become unfocused thus giving an unrealistic shot.

Through his work Riis established a new means in persuasion in society to help benefit the public. He is arguably the father of social photo documenting.

 Magnum Agency

"Magnum is a community of thought, a shared human quality, a curiosity about what is going on in the world, a respect for what is going on and a desire to transcribe it visually." Henri Cartier-Bresson

The photography company known as the Magnum Agency was set up in 1947 by Robert Capa, Henri Cartier-Bresson, David Seymour, George Rodger and William Vandivert with the sole purpose of remaining unbiased, independent from politics and to have no agendas in their photo taking. Whilst the various photographers’ styles differed they all agreed that Magnum represent a fair and honest account of what was being documented. Believers in the Observational Mode the members of Magnum wanted their photographs to be less intrusive and giving the subjects a chance to act free and natural, as if their movements were to be watched from a far, rather than instructed as was the case prior in Lewis Hine’s work.

Henri Cartier-Bresson (1908-2004)

Founding member of Magnum and the father of ‘The Decisive Moment’ Cartier-Bresson’s work has been regarded as some of the best to come out of the photo-documentary genre. A student of art and painting Cartier-Bresson had an understanding of how to capture a moment and give it life yet his interests quickly turned to photography when he realised the potential in capturing ‘eternity in an instant’. Due to advancements in photo technology it was possible to capture photos within a fraction of a second and create crisp, exact photographs. Cartier-Bresson used this knowledge to create ‘The Decisive Moment’ in which he would get free and natural looking photos of his subjects without them knowing so it was as true and real as possible.

This built on from Magnums original idea of remaining inconspicuous and letting subjects act naturally. However ‘Decisive Moment’ isn’t always a means of the Observational Mode: some might consider it to lend itself to Participatory Mode. In regards of war photography the subjects are not staged and are in a very natural and realistic manner yet the photographer themselves are also part of the situation and not just watching from afar. The photo is blurred due to the fear of the photographer as his hands are shaking because they are there in the moment with their subjects and they feed off them.

‘Decisive Moment’ is the perfect tool for unbiased and agenda-free photography but it isn’t without its ethical issues. The subject hasn’t given consent to being photographed, especially if they are being shown in a sorry state, yet the majority of decisive photos would probably never been possible if it was asked for.
Bresson is one of my favourite photojournalists of the ones I have researched. His approach with the use of Decisive Moment is truly the most natural and real representation a photographer can produce and he practically birthed this method. His photos are quite literally eternal shots of regular people living out their regular lives and, regardless which of the many countries he’s shot in, his style is recognisable. His work is somewhat simple in the manner he takes and the ‘point, click’ style but the results are social reflections of the time and country he’s in; creating masterpieces with his intuitive nature and great eye for moments.

Robert Capa (1913-1954)-Spanish Civil War

Robert Capa has been considered the ‘greatest war photographer of all time’. His work during the Spanish Civil War and ‘the Magnificent Eleven’ photographs from the American invasion on Omaha Beach earned him international acclaim. A founding member of Magnum Agency, Capa shared Henri Cartier-Bresson’s ideology on ‘The Decisive Moment’ and had used it in his war photography producing truly brilliant and real takes of war.

His most famous (or infamous) photograph was one during the Spanish Civil War of a soldier dying. The photo shows the soldier as he has just been shot and falling to the ground, thus being dubbed ‘The Falling Soldier’. Initially this photo showed the intensity and loss of war and was seen to be a symbol of the Spanish Civil War as well as propelling Capa toward the top of the list in terms of photography. The photo was accepted and revered internationally as people couldn’t comprehend the prospect of falsehood and staging something as delicate as death. Yet in recent years the truth behind the photo has been constantly debated. Some suggest it was staged and in fact taken quite a distance away from where it was said to be taken. If the photo was a fake then it would contradict everything Capa built years later at Magnum and his belief in true and realistic photos. Others suggest he asked the soldier to pose as he took a photo and then a sniper shot him down. Regardless of the nature of the photo itself it is the first greatly debated photo and can be considered the birth of manipulation through photography.

I am personally unsure of the authenticity of this photograph like many others that have viewed it. If it were a genuine capture of such a symbolic moment then it is, without question, one of the greatest photographs, if not the greatest war photograph, ever taken. The soldier is immortalised in his death which is quite poetic in a way. Yet if the photo has been staged or set up then it’s the first in a long line of ‘fake photography’ that has left many of us wondering the truth behind it. I hope that it is real because as a Magnum Photographer, even the founding member, it would contradict their code of ethics and approach to photography which would smear Capa’s career. And I think regardless of the questionability of this one photograph Capa’s career is one to be celebrated. His war photographer is magnificent and second to none and his work with famous people of the time, such as Pablo Picasso and Ernest Hemingway, paved the way for photojournalists such as Eve Arnold and their nature approach to celebrity photography.

Dorothea Lange (1895-1965)-Migrant Mother

Dorothea Lange’s work much shadowed and built upon the work from Jacob Riis and Lewis Hine and their use of photos to show the state and welfare of working class people. Asked, along with Margaret Bourke-White (1904-71), to document the travels of poorer people as they struggled to earn a living and fought for food her photos were used as an early form of propaganda against a failing system. Used as a means of undermining the apparent flawless ideals of the American Dream hers were the first photos that used connotations to suggest wider social implications.

The Migrant Mother photo for which she is famed is her most popular photograph which became a symbol and icon for the movement and struggles of the working classes during the Great Depression. It brought other meanings that the audience deciphered and was used to reflect the lies of the government and their incorrect representation of poor people. The photo itself is very striking and evokes all kinds of reactions from those viewing it. The imagery of a single mother fighting not only for her survival but for those of her children was played upon with the fact she looks in pain and far older than she should due to the difficulties she faced. Alongside that, and slightly out of context, the woman is showing a bit of cleavage in the photo. At the time this was unheard of in photography and shocked and appalled many members of the public yet ultimately raised the profile of the picture and therefore its original intent. This particular photo was a spearhead in photojournalism being used as a means of propaganda used to change social, cultural and political opinions.

When I was first shown this photo I was told that it was in fact staged and the mother and children had been positioned there purposefully to get a reaction from the public. It didn’t take much for me to believe it as it seems to be too good a photo to be one taken naturally. After realising it was in fact a natural photo, taken from a series of similar photos of the same subject, it really cemented the difficulty in distinguishing the reality behind certain photos. Pretty much anything can be considered to be the opposite of what it is: authentic photos could be interpreted as fake and fake photos as authentic. Once the doubt has been placed in your head you can never look at a photo the same without considering the truth.

Walker Evans (1903-1975)

Walker Evans was a freelance photographer who studied and shot anthropology as a means of showing the failing American dream. Concentrating more on social icons than people directly he was able to create photographs that the audience had to explore to decipher; with meanings that were almost metaphorical in their presentation. He shot in Poetic Mode as he took what people knew and accepted, with all the connotations involved, and transformed it into a more abstract picture that challenges the meaning.
For example, looking at his “SHINE” photograph that depicts a shoe rack with clean, white shoes all along until a pair of black ones we are inclined to think this is a subtle hint at racism in America at the time. There is a more artistic approach than Dorothea Lange or Jacob Riis, for example. Evans portrays his subjects in a surreal way as what we are used to expecting has been altered to change our view on it. In his “DAMAGED” photo we see a few men placing a DAMAGED sign onto the back of a truck. This could be seen as ironic as it is suggest the sign itself is damaged and therefore being taken away to be fixed. In a photo he took of a fish store it seems that they only stock fruit. He played on this to give a different but no less powerful view on the supposed American dream.

I enjoy Evans work. The Poetic Mode, for me, is one of the most intriguing and interesting photo modes to look at but also one of the hardest to reproduce. It takes a very certain and keen eye to capture something poetic on camera which could take hours, days or weeks to find a perfect and fitting subject. Then to capture it with precise framing so that everything he wants is shown in a single still is a tough and grinding work which Evans makes seem effortless.

Robert Frank (1924-)-The Americans

Robert Frank is quite similar to Walker Evans in his approach to photography and photojournalism. He uses Poetic mode to give alternate meanings and metaphors to his subjects and his most famous work documented the ‘real’ America. Though Frank was less politically motivated than Evans they both helped bring a different style to photo-documentaries in showing the personal view and representation of their subject. Rather than a collective of political and anti-government propaganda these were more the photographers own opinion which is reflected in their work. Frank would take symbolic images of American culture, such as the flag, and show it in a way that is completely opposite to how we would imagine; creating dark undertones.

Franks’ most popular and ground-breaking work was the book titled ‘The Americans’ which was his 2 year collection of his travels around America. In one photo showing a man walking down a road that has a massive arrow on a wall pointing in the same direction we can interpret it in a number of ways. One may suggest that this shows the American lifestyle to be one that’s preconceived and no matter what you do you are always going to live life how is expected due to fear of disobeying the system. Another may say that it is a sign that the West is not what it perceives and the only choice is to head East. Such is Franks’ subtlety that you can find a variety of meanings in many of his photos. The photo in which a little girl dances around a beach with an American flag as her brother is reading a paper with the heading “MARILYN DEAD” is done as juxtaposition to the happy and patriotic side of America and the tragedy and fall of one of its biggest stars.

War Photography-Vietnam (1965-75)

The Vietnam War was the first war in history to be fully televised. The intention was for the TV crews and the photojournalists to capture the Americans victory and send it back to the US so that the public could support the war and raise morale as a result. But the complete opposite happened when all the footage and photos started coming back showing the Americans, not only in a negative light but failing to win a war they were so certain was easy. The photos in fact were used as anti-war protests and fuelled the riots and demonstrations in America that went against Vietnam. Before Vietnam the world of photography was an open business wherein anyone could take any photo they wanted (within reason) and not worry about it being censored or controlled. There was a certain amount of truth from pre-Nam photography. After Vietnam the government introduced an ‘embed system’ where they would carefully select journalists to go take the photos that they would manipulate to show the war in a certain light. It was orchestrated war photography which gives a false view on what’s actually happening. Needless to say the ethical implications were huge: many felt that now photography, especially war photojournalism, could no longer be true and give a fair representation of events. Photography had lost it’s innocence.

Some of the most striking and longest standing photos from Vietnam include the napalm victim, the villagers about to be killed and the bullet to the head. The napalm victim showing a group running from an American napalm attack with a little girl naked is extremely controversial. Least of all the nudity shocked many back in the US but it was the age and the expression of the girl that many found hard to accept. It was becoming clear that this was their doing by fighting this war and the photo itself was used as propaganda against the war. Since its release there have been a few adaptations that reinforce the message of anti-Americanism.
The next shows a group of villagers, men, women and children, being rounded up and shot by America troops. This showed for the first time that war wasn’t just the death of men against men, now innocents had been brought into it. Also the ethical responsibilities of the photographer had been brought into question. Though it is their job to capture and document events as they see it does that make them exempt from being a part of the massacre?
The Bullet in the Head photograph by Eddie Adams was the first photo to be taken and recorded on camera at the same time. The footage, though horrific, is over quickly and the audience sense that his death marks the end. Yet with the photograph we see fear, pain and death captured for eternity. This went some way in proving the power of still images over moving images.

Martin Parr (1952-)

Martin Parr is a modern, British photo-journalist who comments on everything from social to political issues using anthropological study and even satire in his work. His work is almost a ‘mockumentary’ of other forms and has been said to be a user of Reflexive Mode as he ‘engages actively with the issues of realism and representation’. His work is extremely intrusive and invades a lot of people’s personal space as a means of showing the subjects in real surroundings that we can relate to yet knowingly doing so as a comment on society. We are meant to look at these photos of people and society and think “This is me. This is my life” they make use reflect on ourselves. It might not be as true and natural as Henri Cartier-Bresson’s decisive moment photos but Parr understands Bresson’s concepts and, though his photos maybe staged, his work gives perhaps a bigger statement and truer nature in social understanding.

A lot of his photos use irony as a way of making the subject, who we see as ourselves, seem foolish for what they are doing. A photo of a man on a mobile phone in front of a telephone box is probably more accurate than Parr could have imagined. As it was taken in 1999 the mobile phone industry was one that hadn’t completely taken off yet and the use of this image shows Parr’s own opinion on what he sees is the new form of communication against the old traditional way. In the photo of the Leaning Tower of Pisa we are shown what is the most common, and probably lowest, trait of humanity: Tourism. We are shown 3 different people doing the exact same pose for 3 different photographers. This is supposed to comment on how unique and individual we as a race think we are when really we’re more similar than that.

Fashion and Paparazzi:

“Paparazzo… suggests to me a buzzing insect, hovering, darting, stinging.” Federico Fellini.

The rising interest in celebrities and the famous echelon of society gave way to the popularised photography method known as ‘Paparazzi’. These are photographers who operate in an intrusive and forceful manner to capture the best possible shot of their subjects: Celebrities. It’s no secret that the majority of news in the modern age is that of celebrity news and entertainment news. Magazines are now dedicated to the lives and lifestyles of celebrities and countless gossip columns are packed with largely false accusations. These articles are printed next to large, sometimes revealing photographs taken by various Paparazzi. The more shocking the photograph the more likely it will sell for a lot of money. Many paparazzi work freelance and sell their products to the highest bidder.
Celebrities are often critical of paparazzi and insist they hate them. Occasionally some celebrities will take out injunctions against certain paparazzi and sue them on claims of harassment. Yet it could be argued that the constant and sheer amount of photos taken of these celebrities is essential in the rise of their profile. The paparazzi are giving us, the consumers, a reflection of the glamour and style that follows celebrities and is inevitable in the lives of the famous. It’s a reflection of their world that we would otherwise be unaware of.

Although Fashion photography has been around a lot longer than the Celebrity fascination it’s only in modern times that it has become its own art form with a lot of focus being on what Celebrities wear. Fashion photography has become, along with Paparazzi, the most affluent style of photojournalism in modern times. It’s rare to look through any magazine without seeing a photo relating to fashion; new releases, celeb clothing or models on catwalks. Yet whereas Paparazzi is considered a poor job for photographers and looked down on, fashion photography is highly acclaimed and difficult to break into. Fashion Magazines such as Vogue, Glamour and Elle all feature these photos and their sales are huge. Mainly due to their cover stars who are usually Celebrities or Reality TV stars these magazines have a huge impact on the culture of today making the fashion photographers essential part of many peoples day to day life. Although recent statistics show that Fashion Magazines are in decline compared to their regular sales figures, many still manage to break the 100,000 mark every month. http://classic.mediatel.co.uk/abcroundup/2009/08/article01.cfm

Yet despite the popular nature of fashion photography and the high acclaim it receives it has to be noted that if ever there was a form that crossed the boundaries of truth then it would be this one. Whilst many photojournalists work have had criticisms drawn to the authenticity of their photos or the decisive moment vs staged poses argument, fashion photography nearly always doctors it’s photographs to make them look more glamorous and attractive to the consumer. http://www.fashionising.com/pictures/b--lady-gaga-vogue-cover-photoshop-28762.html Hundreds of thousands of fashion photos have been heavily edited on software like Photoshop to create a glossier feel used to give them higher sales figures and therefore more profit. It is the purest and easiest form of photo manipulation; through this software you can create absolutely anything on top of any image. Soft editing maybe necessary sometimes to accentuate the meaning and emotive approach to a photo but the over edited styles of these photos are, in my opinion, taking away all the work of the photographer. The careful consideration and many, many takes at a photo shoot have largely been removed due to this kind of editing; the end result being the original photo providing the base layer whilst the editing adds more and more falsehood on top with the true and real image remaining hidden somewhere beneath the surface. Perhaps a metaphor for the many celebrities that appear on the covers of such magazines. The benefits of Photoshop done correctly: http://10steps.sg/inspirations/artworks/40-cool-before-and-after-photo-retouching-photos/ 
Sometimes though Photoshop can go wrong, it is an art in itself after all, and the results are both hilarious and creepy: http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/52-worst-photoshop-mistakes-in-magazines/ 

Eve Arnold

Eve Arnold is an American photographer whose range of photographs varied from poverty stricken people in suburbs and famous icons on the sets of movies. Her interests weren’t particular and didn’t focus on a certain topic as her work shows she had a broad view on her work. Yet she most likely became such a renowned photographer from her work with movie star and American Sweetheart ‘Marilyn Monroe’ on the set of her film ‘The Misfits’ shot in 1960. It was these unique photos that opened up a new realm in terms of popular photography. A lot of Arnold’s photos of Monroe show her in a natural way, laughing and joking with her co-stars, which is a juxtaposition to her usual posed photos. This was quite early in a boom of celebrity photos that later followed yet it is really quite different to paparazzi photography: Arnold’s photos have consent from the celebrity and she interacts with her subject to create a good cover photo or she uses Observational Mode to watch from the side unnoticed whereas Paparazzi usually take photos of celebs at award ceremonies where they are already glammed up and posing. 

Yet before she made a name for herself with the ‘Monroe’ shots Arnold made a series of photos in Harlem circa 1950 of a fashion show. The show featured all black models. In 1950’s America times were particularly difficult for the African-American race due to the racism and segregation throughout the country so Arnold’s choice of shooting an all-black model show was unique in itself. Another interesting thing to consider about these photos aren’t just the racial undertones but the (at the time) graphic display of nudity shown. The world wasn’t exposed to this type of risqué photography yet and this would have come as a massive shock to many who viewed it. 

Toscani

“There are no shocking pictures, only shocking reality”

Oliviero Toscani is a controversial fashion photographer who is famed for his provocative images that use shock tactics as a selling point. He set up the image, communications and presence of the brand ‘United Colors of Benetton’ making it a globally recognized brand. Under his guidance the brand used a range of controversial images in its advertising tackling many serious issues such as AIDS, racism and war among many others. The majority of these images had a plain white background with no accompanying text except the ‘United Colors of Benetton’ logo. This was done to make the image itself the focal point and centre of attention and left it to the consumer to decipher it’s meaning; giving them so much time to dwell over it and consider its meaning that the imagery is stuck in their mind.
Of these many images there are some that stick out to me that really capture his style, views and message. The image with the three ‘human’ hearts (actually pig hearts but used to good effect) with the words ‘WHITE’ ‘BLACK’ ‘YELLOW’ on them show Toscani’s hatred toward racism and his belief in equality. The picture itself is saying that regardless of our colour we are all the same on the inside. Obviously the imagery of three hearts (human or not) is quite shocking to see, especially on a billboard, and really captures people’s attention and draws them in. Also the photo that has AIDS activist David Kirby lying, dying of AIDS in a hospital bed surrounded by his family is a powerful image. The photo has been slightly altered to look like a biblical painting. This was perhaps done to draw in the religious people, especially as AIDS was seen as a ‘homosexual’ disease, this would cause even more controversy amongst the public.

Toscani, for me, is one of the most revolutionary photographers of modern times. What I like most about him is his lack of fear when tackling serious subjects. He is a man who is not afraid to approach something head on and shove it down the throats of the consumers so he is certain to get his message across. I personally agree with a lot of his views on these topics and think his method of raising awareness and trying to stamp out various issues is as effective as it is shocking. Provocation is his weapon and he wields it to try and benefit those suffering and raise awareness where we as an audience would otherwise be none the wiser. The simplicity in his photos are another thing that stands out to me; sometimes we don’t need to say so much to explain something so basic. His opinion on the way advertisers operate is largely correct; they concentrate on economy and profit whereas he wishes they would use their campaigns to make a change. He even undermines the motives of the organizations he works for, saying that they need to do more: http://www.dw.de/bringing-aids-awareness-back-into-fashion/a-590961-1. This interview epitomises Toscani’s character and approach to his work.
Yet not everybody is a fan of Toscani and some consider the provocative nature of his photos to be purely to gain media attention. It could be argued that his work has become lacklustre and is a shadow of its former, questionable, self. http://www.i-italy.org/16526/when-provocations-become-stale. That being said I believe that to think like this is to completely ignore the courage and great intentions of Toscani. A man who’s not afraid to get his hands dirty so the world knows about its own dirty little secrets.

William Klein

William Klein was born in America in 1928 and grew up in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. He has been cited as an ‘anti-photographer’ due to his unusual photography techniques and unconventional photo essays that largely upset the world of photography when he first published it. His work included shots that used motion blur and natural lightning which was not accepted by the more established photojournalists of the time. He was hired by Vogue art director Alexander Liberman who was intrigued by a small exhibit that Klein had put on. Liberman hired Klein as a fashion photographer, much to Kleins surprise, and he went about his fashion shoots in an innovative and abstract way. He took photos of the models in the street, concentrating on the person rather than the clothing. He wanted to get a natural representation of his subject so that the functionality of the clothing was shown. Klein did this by taking un-posed photos using blur and Bresson’s theory of Decisive Moment rather than set up a photo shoot and tell the model how to pose. His intention was not to get the glamour and style that is synonymous with fashion photography. This obviously shocked the world of fashion and photography as he had completely disregarded the ‘rules’ that were set in stone by that point. In a recent interview (http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2012/apr/28/william-klein-interview-sony-photography) Klein was quoted as saying, “"They were probably the most unpopular fashion photographs Vogue ever published," he says proudly.” Proving how this is exactly what he wanted to do.

Following the publication of these photos Liberman agreed to finance a bigger project that Klein was interested in. He wanted to document the urban lifestyle of New York rather than the glitz and glamour representation that Vogue readers and many people in the world were used to. Having lived in Paris for so long following his service in the US Military he said that New York was now foreign to him. “He also described himself as "a make-believe ethnographer, treating New Yorkers like an explorer would treat Zulus"”. The resulting book Life is Good & Good For You In New York was a collection of photographs showing a completely different image of America’s most famous city. The high contrast snaps of urban New Yorkers dancing and pulling faces in front of the camera and pretending to shoot each other was a gritty and arguably more real look into American life. On the whole the snaps seem to show a happy underbelly of American culture but the book was received with such distain that Klein couldn’t get it published in the country and instead had to go to his now ‘official home’ in Paris. Again it broke all the rules and conventions of photojournalism of the time and was not initially accepted by anyone in the industry. Asked about his approach and his thoughts on people disliking the book when first released he says, “I was showing what they didn't want to see. I was reacting against this romantic idea of New York – the Big Apple and all that. See, for me, New York was like a big shithouse." This view on America may stem from his upbringing as a Jewish boy in an Irish neighbourhood, being subjected to a lot of anti-Semitism, or him now viewing it through his ‘European Eye.’ This book has been likened to Robert Frank’s-The Americans as it shows a different type of America yet they differ as Frank uses Poetic mode and his photography is very ‘Practitioner-Driven’ whereas Klein is an observational photographer who uses decisive moment and is ‘Event-driven’.

Klein was a photographer that used methods and techniques that weren’t understood or appreciated during the era in which he took his photos. He was, in many ways, a man before his time. It goes to show just how revolutionary he was by the awards that have flooded his way since his work become respected and acknowledged as important and defining in the industry. What I like most about Klein’s work and as a photographer is his attitude and bravery. Though he was trained in the skills of art and paintings he was a self-taught photographer and therefore was probably unaware on the ‘rules’ he should have been following. But this didn’t stop him from going out and making a statement and give his own interpretation on things despite being told by everyone that he was wrong. It is this kind of outlook that I find commendable.