Alfred Gescheidt is a professional photographer born in Queens, New York on December 19, 1926. He won a scholarship to the Art Students’ League and studied with Will Barnet and Harry Sternberg. He served briefly in the Navy during World War II, then went to the University of New Mexico and studied with Raymond Johnson. He decided to become a photographer and transferred to the Los Angeles Art Center School and here studied with George Hoyningen-Huene. In the 1950s he documented life on city streets and beaches of America. (Escape Into Life: Alfred Geischeidt)

Previously on Skandalon

Previously on Skandalon

In the 50s and 60s, as the whole ‘Mad Men’ advertising agency era was booming, no one came close to Gescheidt for innovative photography, and he created numerous campaigns, magazine, book, and album covers. His images often both flattered and mocked American sensibilities, and his ’30 Ways To Stop Smoking’ series from 1964 remains a landmark in satirical conceptual photography. (Field Of Vision: Alfred Gescheidt)

Previously on Skandalon

Higher Pictures: “Untitled” by Alfred Gescheidt, vintage gelatin silver print, 1961

In an age when Photoshop seems to be a de facto part of nearly every photographer’s creative process, the ways of in-camera and darkroom trickery - montage, collage, double exposure, hand-retouching and re-photographing - are in danger of becoming a lost art. Alfred Gescheidt was a master of all these techniques and more, although his name has, rather unjustly, become largely unknown in recent years.

Once described by former New York Times photo editor John Durniak as “the Charlie Chaplin of the camera”, Geischeidt amassed a rich body of photographic work that was unique, satirical, idiosyncratic and at times even hallucinogenic. (Field of Vision: Alfred Gescheidt)

From the book: “The photographic lens is an instrument of great precision, but it does not discriminate between the essential and the unessential, and so when the lens is used un such a way as to give clear definition of detail where it is wanted, there is often equally claer definition of detail where it is not wanted. The lens does not create lines and wrinkles and blemishes on the face, but it merely reproduces them when they are and makes these unimportant details just as prominent as the important ones. Therefore it is sometimes necessary to subdue such imperfections or to remove them entirely by means of the knife or the pencil.”

This book is freely available online via the Internet Archive

It made me think about many comments I read lately related to a photo by Richard Avedon showing numerous and detailed instructions to his printer (follow this link to see both the original and the instructions). Similar comments can be found on Errol Morris’ blog (see for example his seven-part series about The Case of the Inappropriate Alarm Clock and, more recently, his two-part series It Was All Started by a Mouse; Errol Morris’ analyses are a must read). They all revolved around the same topic : the truthfullness or honesty of the photographic medium (and, by extension, of the photographer’s work). On the same subject, Eva Baines wrote a short piece on “An Abbreviated History of Photo-Manipulation” (Jan. 24th, 2009) reminding the reader about Dorothea Lange’s manipulation of “The Migrant Mother” (1936).

Conscientious is Jörg Colberg’s weblog about fine-art photography (and more).

”Question: What is the difference among these three photographs?

I invite the Times readership to respond. Is it photojournalism, propaganda or art, and why?

Answer: There is no difference. The photographs are the same. (Although the three captions are different.)”

It reminded me of the famous “Kuleshov Effect”.