|Research and Conservation|
|About the J. Paul Getty Museum|
|Museum Home Past Exhibitions|
March 16–July 25, 2004 at the Getty Center
Posted 07/21/04 by Mike Tiktinsky, in Napa, CA
By including Weston, Stieglitz, Arbus, and Lange, the exhibit left out Ansel Adams, who was a key genius in the development of modern photography. I thought the few images of a number of the photographers failed to show adequately the range of their talent and their contribution. I think the curator either tried to do too much and failed, or has a limited view of photography. This was a true disappointment.
Posted 06/05/04 by Melody Aleene, in Chicago, Il
You could have borrowed a couple of Diane Arbus pieces and made this a killer show. As it is, it is incomplete and seriously chauvinistic.
Diane Arbus is one of the photographers included in this exhibition, which is drawn solely from the Getty's collection of photographs. Arbus is not included in this Web presentation due to electronic media copyright restrictions. See a full list of the artists whose work is included in this exhibition.
Posted 05/02/04 by Philippe Colombel, in Paris
From surprise to surprise, this exhibition dedicated to photographers is just great. You have succeeded in joining in a single time and space some essential reminders in the history of photography. Bravo et merci!
Posted 04/29/04 by Cynthia Parker-Ohene, in CA
I am wondering why photographers of color are not included. In particular, I am thinking of James Van Der Zee.
This exhibition celebrates 20 years of collecting photographs at the Getty and all of the photographers selected for this exhibition have many works in the Getty collection. While James Van Der Zee was an important and influential photographer, the few prints the Getty owns by him do not represent Van Der Zee's genius as well as examples in other collections.
Posted 04/20/04 by Jose, in Delaware
Anna Atkins' photographs are incredible. Her prints are detailed scientific observation and beautifully rendered art at the same time. I wasn't previously aware of her work. Thanks.
Posted 04/20/04 by Vicki, in Los Angeles
I've always wondered how animals with four legs manage. I loved being able to look at Muybridge's famous galloping horse frame by frame. If you look closely, the horse's legs seem to move as two units—front and back—not four. So it's still a kind of binary process.
Imagine when photography was a new technology, and these sorts of investigations became possible for the first time! This exhibition helped me see these famous photographs in a whole new light. Thank you!
Posted 04/19/04 by Sofia, in Santa Ana
Current technology facilitates many resources that were unknown to many photographers back then. It is incredible to see how our contemporaries have revolutionized and evolved. Yet, most of these photographs are incredible, and if it weren't for that "lack of resources" they would have never come about. It is fair to say that many of these photographers still surpass the ability of much current artistry to approach photography in a very unique way.
Posted 04/11/04 by Chris, in Long Beach, California
Wonderful collection of pictures. Great descriptive detail of process, form, and function.
Posted 04/06/04 by Thomas J. Macheski, in Archer, Florida
I viewed the Photographers of Genius exhibition while visiting family in the area. As a professional fine art photographer, the opportunity to study originals of these works is an awesome benefit to my own approach to photography. Add to that the chance to view the recent acquisitions of work by Eugène Atget, Brett Weston, William Garnett, and Milton Rogovin [seen in the exhibition Recent Acquisitions], and I am quite happy to quote, out of context, a famous 20th century American..."I shall return."
Posted 04/02/04 by R. Eickstedt, in Lander, Wyoming
You have started a nice collection of work by important photographers, but I immediately noticed a glaring omission: the historic achievements of Harold Edgerton are missing!
Posted 03/30/04 by Jeffrey, in Santa Barbara
I really like the Muybridge page. I never knew how motion pictures came about, but this gives me a good idea of how it happened.
Posted 03/25/04 by Jenafer, in Las Vegas, Nevada
I really liked to see these old photos. I really liked the one by Lewis Hine—The one with the little girl working in that huge warehouse. It made such a big impact. She looked so grown up, but she couldn't have been older than 10.
Posted 03/16/04 by Charles Hathorn, in London, England
It is fantastic to see the range of the Getty's photos. I thought that the stereoscope was something special.
Posted 03/10/04 by Julie Taylor, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
I was listening to the audio about the Dorothea Lange image, and someone said that the man's arm around the woman looked like an invasion of space.
What??? It looks like lovers sharing an intimate moment to me!
Posted 03/09/04 by Barbara, in Torrance, California
I liked the interactive where you could make your own photogram. And I like the one about stereographs that shows the 3-D effect. Very cool! Thanks so much for this site.
Posted 03/09/04 by Terrence, in Sparks, Nevada
Great stuff! Early photography was really different from the ease of digital photography of today. It's hard to imagine having to use a head clamp for a portrait.
Posted 03/09/04 by Phyllis, in Anaheim, California
Eugène Atget is my favorite photographer. First, the Getty had the exhibition Recent Acquisitions: Eugène Atget, Brett Weston, William Garnett, Milton Rogovin which was great. Now, this exhibition which has more of Atget's photos. Wonderful! I'm so excited.