Magnum Photos was founded by Robert Capa and Henri Cartier-Bresson, among several others, and that ought to give you a sense of the pedigree involved here. The images in Magnum's library are some of the biggest-hitting photojournalistic shots ever captured by some of the greatest to ever pick up a camera. But what separates these photographers from us mere mortals?
Well, in this excellent video by Hunter Creates Things, that very question is unpacked. In doing so, you have some actionable advice on how to improve, and one is a favorite tip of mine: projects. When you're somebody who loves photography or works in several areas, you can shoot a lot of disparate work. By taking on a project, you have to shoot with the consideration of unity and the intention of creating a cohesive collection which, while difficult, can dramatically improve you as a photographer.
What do you think the best Magnum photographers did differently that made their work so special?
“How Magnum Photographers Are Better Than You.” – Maybe they’re not.
“And What You Can Do About It.” – I don’t care.
Maybe membership in Magnum is as much about who you know, as what you know. Maybe the large majority of photographers have never heard of it. After all, stuffy cliquish organizations seem to have lost their influence, and appeal, if they ever had much to begin with since the organization was started in 1947. The Magnum organization preserves historically significant photographic work. It says very little though about who is, and who is not, a better photographer. Back in the 1980s, the epitome of success was employment as a National Geographic photographer. That sort of skill was in short supply. Nowadays there’s a great photographer on every street corner… so many that National Geographic can now outsource the work without even hiring staff photographers. “Better” photography is everywhere. And most publications want the story written in words too, not just pictures. So much for images telling a story by themselves.
On a more practical level, most photographers used to believe that acceptance in a gallery was proof that you had “made it” as a professional artist. That your work was exceptionally good. You were much better than the average amateur with a camera. Exhibiting in a gallery boils down to the same thing as this video speaks to: creating a cohesive body of work with social or cultural implications, plus having a good story about you, the photographer, too… something the gallery can use to stir up some enthusiasm for selling over-priced art. So to the point of the video: How many photographers focus on the story-telling aspects of a picture? And is it really that important? First of all, I fail to see the story-telling elements of a landscape or nature photograph. I believe a good story needs a human element. Attempting to pretend otherwise makes for a convincing YouTube video, but I’m pretty sure there’s no story to tell in my photography. Secondly, I strongly believe I can be a better photographer on that level alone. Times are no longer what they were. I can sell my photography without a gallery, without a story, and I certainly don’t need to compare my work to that of the Magnum photographers. Most of it, in my opinion, is historically important but not that great.
Sorry. Did Magnum turn down your application?
Ha... funny guy.
--- "What do you think the best Magnum photographers did differently that made their work so special?"
Right place, right era. Personally, most of their photos are just random snapshots. They may have some interesting shots, but, they are few and far between.
"What do you think the best Magnum photographers did differently that made their work so special?"
Special and better are two different things. I think it was the word "better" in the title that pissed me off... as if I should lie prostrate at the feet of Magnum photographers, holding their images in such reverence that us mere mortals could never expect to produce such extraordinary work. Okay... maybe an overreaction, but the idea that their images are better than any number of a million other photographers is nonsense.
Magnum photographers are admittedly special because of their recognized place in history. The photographic work of many in the early to mid 1900s charted new territory. It was much harder. It was, indeed, the right place and the right time for many. The concept of using photography to persuade public opinion was new. Ansel Adams got recognition because of his efforts to promote land conservation to Congress, otherwise he'd probably have been hawking posters at the Yosemite visitor center his whole life.