>>3800982>You do realise that a famous photographer can still take a shit photograph, right? Or do you genuinely believe "I have heard this name, therefore every time they release the shutter it is pure gold"?Do *you* realise that when someone is presenting a body of work, it doesn't make sense to dismember it and isolate single photos to be judged on their own?
Every photo makes a contribution to the whole, it doesn't have to be complete and self contained itself.
There is a reason nobody's presenting a single photograph on exhibitions. This idea of the great, singular photograph that is a masterpiece and will bring you all the fame and money in the world, is an american thing first, and a 5-second attention span zoomer thing secondarily: an easily digestible hero, with his heroic feat, easily consumed and able to fit in a news soundbite or twitter/instagram post.
Any photo in this thread you deem as mistake, is not one. Of course he and everybody else made tons of mistakes and took tons of failed photos. But you don't see those - probably never will - as they didn't make the cut. What you're seeing is a carefully curated, concise collection.
To think a "mistake" would slip up and accidentally make its way to this collection is absurd.
You may not like it or agree with its message, but there is no chance in hell there's a "mistake" here. Simple as.
