Having seen preview of Feb, National Geographic,the photos by DAH are really lousy!I do weddings and love doing them.The bridal shot is one of those that I throw away!Last time I defended his work. I obtained his "Spain" and "Naples".DAH seems happier elsewhere than the US of A. "Cuba" is perfect.This is really poor,both by David and NGS.We all have bad days...but that is what makes pros and esp Magnum people different! It seems not.

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), January 28, 2002

Answers

I wonder if people in Cuba look at the "CUBA" book and say..."Yeah, so what?" Maybe we are just jaded by the familiar. I live in Florida, and we have millions of people coming here every year and shooting away with both video and still cameras, but I can't remember the last time I pulled out my cameras to shoot a palm tree.

I'll give Harvey the benefit of the doubt on this photo feature. It is obvious that he is more at home doing essays on those foreign cultures, and his work show that. I wonder why the "NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC" thought the story was worthy of being done? N.G. Editor: "Damn, we have four more pages to fill! Harvey get up to Elkton and shoot the wedding industry there... and we need the shots in 6 hours!"

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), January 28, 2002.

I once read that DAH was a specialist in portrayal of the Spanish culture. Really though! Do you think that Mike Nicols or David Doubilette could do DAH's work? DAH was once quoted as saying that the staff photographers at the NGS are players on a team. Everyone contributes his/her own special thing to the team. I still think that 's true.

DAH was just out of his element in Feb. National Geographic.

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 28, 2002.

Speaking of Elkton -- I live ~20min from there and my boss used to live there. It is a real hole in the map. In four years that I live around here I never even stopped there. I imagine it would be a tough place to return with a good photo story from, even for Dave Harvey...

-- Alexander Grekhov (grekhov@wgukraine.com), January 28, 2002.

I'm just the opposite of Al. For the 9 years I've lived in Florida and the 6 before that I was a seasonal "snowbird" I have been snapping away at the birds, palms, sunsets, sunrises and a host of other subjects including classic cars and motorcycles...and I shoot all over the the globe frequently. When I go back up north where I lived before, though, I always come home with nothing but unexposed film. On topic, I will have to pick up an NG, but I've been unimpressed with the quality of their photography for some years now. Though I wouldn't blame Mr. Harvey unless I was certain he had full editorial control. If not, he might be just as upset with what shots were chosen for publication, you never know.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), January 28, 2002.

excuse me, Jason, but could you explain to me why the bridal shot was a throw-away photo?

-- Dexter Legaspi (dalegaspi@hotmail.com), January 28, 2002.

I haven't seen the wedding stuff, but your post triggered me to have another look at the DAH pictures of Cuba in N.G. for June '99. At the time I first saw them I'd never heard of Harvey, and remember saying to myself that I wished they'd sent Bill Allard instead to make the photographs. Without their captions they are really nothing more interesting than routine travel brochure pictures.

-- (bmitch@home.com), January 28, 2002.

Again, Isn't this horse already dead TOO?

For the record, I live about 15 minutes from Elkton and it's really not that bad, especially if you have to go to Walmart.

-- Tom Nutter (tmnphotos@erols.com), January 28, 2002.

Jason:

I just got the Feb issue of NG today. FWIW, what I saw were not traditional wedding shots, but street shots of differing aspects of different wedings in progress. Weddings from a decidedly different point of view from that of a hired wedding photographer. A slice of "life in action" somewhere in Zip@USA... Additionally, I suspect DAH sent 100 or so rolls of film from that shoot into NG, and what we're seeing are the 8 or 10 that some photo editor selected.

To a certain degree I think this is a case where the photographic appreciation is in the eye of the beholder -- and no doubt your eye sees with a critical filter when it comes to wedding photos! Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending DAH as a photographer, because as a rule I don't think his stuff is very good anyway. In fact, I think this was one of his better efforts... While OTOH if you take "CUBA" as an example, you apparently liked it, while all I saw were a bunch of underexposed images.

;-) Cheers,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), January 29, 2002.

maybe irrelevant, but I hear NG's circulation is down 50% to 5 million copies.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 29, 2002.

What I liked was that the Elkton historian they interviewed for the piece was Mike Dixon. Maybe he should have taken the pictures....

-- John Morris (jtmorris@slb.com), January 29, 2002.

I find it really funny that everyone is harping on these images of Harvey's when it is obvious that they are OUTTAKES and not the final edit. Usually, the only image from these web preview galleries that actually runs is the one that serves as the main graphic for the webpage devoted to each photographer. Anyone here who can't at least appreciate Harvey's talent has got a screw loose. The guy is a serious talent stacked up against anyone. Even if you don't agree with my summation of his abilities, the fact remains that the stuff posted was probably selected by some ding dong at NG who had a deadline to meet and just grabbed a few shots out of the stacks and made DAH write up some incorrect notes for. Judge the man by what you see running in the final edit, not his "sketches".

-- Jason Guyer (jasonwguyer@hotmail.com), January 29, 2002.

You are free to tell us that you don't like the said photographs, and we are free to judge you on your opinion of those photographs. DAH doesn't DO WEDDINGS. He PHOTOGRAPHS people in their surroundings, and does it superbly. May be this particular portfolio of his was a bit too sophisticated for some. How about showing us one of your favourites. Regards, Sait

-- sait (akkirman@clear.net.nz), January 29, 2002.

That would explain it - they were too sophisticated!

Oldest trick in the book, Sait - "if you disagree with me, then you didn't understand what I was saying".

Doesn't work, sorry.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 29, 2002.

Sorry Rob, I was actually responding to the original submission. Having now read your submission, it is sad for the National Geographic I suppose. But I stick with my original submission. I suppose we can now expect a few architectural photographers to write as well and say that DAH is a lousy architectural photographer too. Regards Sait.

-- sait (akkirman@clear.net.nz), January 29, 2002.

There was a thread on this earlier. My comment was then that his shots are fine, but certainly not thrilling. I could probably have done this too. My interpretation of this is that Elkton would probably test anyone's ability to take a really interesting picture. I am not sure we can blame really blame him. As someone else pointed out he was not taking wedding shots but candid, street scenes so I think we cannot expect him to have produced images the bride and groom would want. If that was his brief he would have brought lights and 'blad etc. The shots are dull, but I suspect that Elkton is probably dull too.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), January 29, 2002.

IMO i guess i first owe apology to a previous question.I did't realize the postings were about Elkhorn.I thought of something similar also Zip USA.The readers and response were right. True these are"outakes".Still a wedding photo,that the photographer records and I would say he "posed" it...Eyes closed,lousy depth of field.The technical data is a waste of time!Either all my lenses are rejects as they do not have this depth of field at f2.o never mind f1.4!! I noticed that the photos lately are sort of shoved and image size adjusted for layout,the WORDS being more important! DAH is a people photographer.I couldnt care less what he does with buildings. I think the lowered subscription of NGS may in fact be due to some of the poor issues lately.The internet the biggest factor. I still beleive it is the best magazine in the world! But ya gotta see the pimples and flaws too...

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), January 30, 2002.