>>3648789>William Eggleston didn't depend on income from his photography.No shit. William Eggleston has been a very controversial and criticised photographer. And not controversial as in too advanced for his time, or having an avant garde style alone.
His photos are unappealing to the general public *and* large swaths of the art world.
It's not the aesthetic in general the art world wouldn't accept. Martin Parr, Robert Frank, Moriyama, even Winongrad, are well received. It's just that Eggleston alone is not well regarded.
Which makes it quite ironic to try to portray, in other posts, Bresson as a hack, by contrasting him to Eggleston which is the definition of a hack for most of the art world. Or try to put down Bresson for shittalking Eggleston's work, when *everyone* at the time was (and most still are) shittalking him.
Personally I like him to an extent and his snapshots were a fresh change. But the prints especially were fantastic and suited his aesthetic.
However trying to portray Bresson as a hack by contrasting him to a much hackier photographer is beyond silly.
