India is a land of great extremes, in a multiplicity of ways. The extreme polarity of beauty and ugliness, rich and poor, are constantly reoccurring themes. The Taj Mahal vs. the slums of Calcutta. The stunning silk brocades of Varanasi vs. the rags worn by those who weave them. You get the picture.
And so it’s quite interesting to consider how a photographer like David Lazar, best known for his fine art approach to travel photography, will reveal India through his lens. The highly regarded Nat Geo contributor from Brisbane, Australia is fascinated by India. But his fascination, at least in terms of his photography, is focused almost exclusively in its more beautiful expressions. It’s not that he never photographs the grittier side of life, it’s just that his fine art vision doesn’t as easily accommodate it.
The majority of the following 16 images were taken in April, 2017 while researching for a 2018 photo tour workshop. So this is more of a sneak preview of coming attractions than the results of a long term project. As good as these images are, David is just beginning to scratch the surface of this truly incredible photographic destination, and looks forward to sharing them with the readers of Photography Life in the future.
Or alternatively, shout UNSUBSCRIBE randomly on every post. Heaven forbid a person be asked to click on a button and actually DO SOMETHING!!! (Seriously, what is wrong with people?!?!?!?!)
Fantastic images…great connection
This only is not India, And India is much beyond this. I am sorry that the author missed many more other aspects which he could have brought out. This can not be a vision of India. These are few photographs. The diversity – be it cultural, be it biodiversity, be it culinary, is vast and unpredictable. The author could not capture even a fraction of it and hence it is wrong and misleading to title this article ‘vision of India’.
The photos are routine, nothing new. We have seen these photos around us many times in some shops and road side places. It seems to me that the author came unprepared, with a very limited information and with preconceived notion which makes us feel that it was more pre-decided tour than any spontaneous expedition. He has not taken efforts to be aware of India.
I might appear to be harsh, but I sincerely feel that articles which are published on a famous and loved site like photographylife are critically viewed by the concerned before they are cleared for publishing.
I am going to India in October. I am inspired by the images and look forward to seeing a country where I am told that every where you look there are good images, and like in Cuba, there are a few really outstanding images. I expect that I will see lots of interesting things, people and enjoy the vibrance of a very old culture as it experiences the world slowly infiltrating it.
Thanks to lazar. Good click.
Very interesting that pretty much everyone who contributed to the comments, who is from India, and I mean, everyone, criticized the photos. I hope the photographer gets to read these comments and learns from them….
Very interesting that pretty much everyone who contributed to the comments, who is from India, and I mean, everyone, criticized the photos. I hope the photographer gets to read these comments and learns from them….
I hope he does… however negative people have found the comments to be… I feel that one can only learn from criticism and one should be open to it… if I were in his place I would really think about why people are reacting like this…
To Raghav and the rest of the critics – how did you miss the second and third paragraphs, set up by the first? This is obviously NOT an attempt to document or represent the whole of India over a short trip. Rather its aim is quite obviously to show a few of it’s main travel destination highlights. Mr. Lazar is a fine art travel photographer, not a journalist or documentarian. Like it or not, he is showing much of what tourists to India are most interested in seeing. And he does so quite beautifully in my opinion.
I find most all the above criticisms entirely misplaced and off point. Is it true that the opposites of beauty and ugliness exist all over the world? Of course it is. I have been to 37 countries. But this is about India, not the rest of the world. And in India, more than most other places, these extremes are more stark and everpresent. But this too is off point!
The point of Mr. Lazar’s photography is to show the beautiful side of life. If you know his work, this is his clear and often stated (in interviews) intention everywhere he travels.
Perhaps some of you have a shot list to share of places and subjects you would recommend? As a way of offering positive criticism, instead of only negative? As a gesture of goodwill?
Josh, you are in fact missing the point. If the first paragraph specifically mentions, socio-economic diversities in India, then I would accept rich and poor being part of it. But the paragraph attempts to characterize Indian extremities only in terms of socio-economic differences, which according to me is unfair as the geographic and cultural diversities in India is far more unique and significant to the country.
I am not happy with the choice of words to describe the diversities found in India, If the renowned photographer wants to represent India in a set of cliched photographs and tick off India in his project list, who am I to criticize. I am just annoyed with western view of associating diversities in India only with have and have-nots, as this imbalance is observed in enormity all over the world.
Emotional outbursts and getting into self denial does not carry.
To explain about the western view of associating diversities in India only with have and have-nots, we need to understand global economics like GDP & per capita income etc which I would not delve into here, as this is not the right platform to do so.
It’s a fact that west sees that imbalance grossly pronounced in India and hence the mindset, probably so. Maybe a huge correction in GDP & per capita income may do the trick. Probably my comment is out of place,,,,,economics, photography, extremities etc etc,,,
Let’s leave aside all that stuff.
Let’s confine to the technicalities of the photographs.
Lovely pictures.
There is nothing emotional about my comments. It is a well thought out response to the poor representation of a place, that I very well know, that too on a platform like photographylife. It is a pity that even today, photographers want to see only this face of India and even renowned ones cater to their taste.
The main diversities of India include the geography, climate, language, culture food etc which might bore direct effect on any type of photography practiced in India. The mentioned polarities of beauty and ugliness, rich and poor are common all over the world, this is nothing unique to India. Why does it always have to be the Taj Mahal vs the Slums of Calcutta, it could be even the Manhattan skyline vs below poverty streets of Detroit. If you want to shoot socio-economic differences, you could have done it in any country even in your own country. Moreover the photography presented doesn’t seem to be intended that way. This is no way representative of India as a whole or even a part.
This article is a shame to Photographylife. How did the first paragraph escape the editor’s eye. For how many more decades are you going to represent India by the same set of pictures. India is changing more rapid than your mindset.
Hi, these photos are nice, but I agree with somebody, not so original.
But I want to ask: why can not we see the camera, the lenses and the settings it used (in this site I think it’s normal to know at least the camera and the lens)? Do I only see a “soft mode”, soft light and colors in every shot, or do you also notice it?