Skip to main content

Bill Cunnngham New York

The film is titled simply, Bill Cunningham New York. My wife and I wanted to see this when it was here in the theaters, but that was around the time I was getting quite sick and we missed it. I finally got around to seeing it this weekend, courtesy of Netflix and Roku. I might add that, quite by accident, we saw, just a few days earlier, The September Issue, about the making of, um, the September issue of Vogue in 2008 (at the same time this film was being put together). The September Issue is also an interesting film. But it is a perfect warm-up for the movie about Bill Cunningham, and if you haven't seen either, I recommend you try watching them both, in that order.

Anyway, we loved the film. I loved it. I mean, I loved it, or more accurately, the film made me love Bill Cunningham and his work.

Cunningham is, of course, a famous photographer, but that says almost nothing. I knew his name and a little about him and his work.

But, as the movie shows, he's a very special case. He's not famous for a one master photograph, or a handful of master photographs. You can't get any idea of Cunningham's work as a photographer at all without seeing dozens and dozens of his photographs. It's easy to do now. (Check out the recent piece titled "Flirty," about shoes.)

As he himself puts it, he photographs clothes, what people are wearing. Not celebrities. He doesn't go to movies, watch television, listen to the radio or read the news, so he admits, he doesn't know who the celebs are, at least not the ones outside the world of fashion. "I'm not interested in the celebrities with their free clothing," he jokes as he's being given an award by the French Ministry of Culture. He's just interested in the clothing. And it's not any one photo of his that matters, it's the collection — tens of thousands of photos, surely — and the ways that they illuminate one another. The point isn't one photo of a woman wearing purple scarves: it's two dozen photos of women wearing purple scarves.

He's sometimes called a street photographer, because so much of his work has been done on the streets of New York. But he's not a street photographer. He's a clothing photographer. He stands on the street because that's the best place to catch a lot of interesting people wearing clothes. He's like a grizzly bear looking for fish. The bear isn't interested in the river or the rapids. The bear stands where he stands because he's interested in catching fish.

Cunningham transcends technique or perhaps it would be better to say that he finesses it. He's a photographer not because he loves photography, but because he loves something else.  He's not trying to say something with his camera. The camera to him is just a tool. Nothing in the film gave me the impression that he cares very much about the craft of photography. I don't mean that in a critical way at all. On the contrary, I say it with great admiration and even a bit of envy. I don't mean that he's not a good photographer; that would be worse than absurd, it would be untrue. It's just that he seems to take photos the way Mozart wrote notes, in a hurry and with the guidance of genius.

Cunningham gets around on a bike and shoots on the move, so he travels light: a simple camera, a single lens, and, when he's shooting indoors, a single flash (hot-shoe mounted or more often held in his left hand while he shoots). That's it. He started his career in "social photography" covering a "be-in" ("What's a be-in?" he asked his editor as he got the assignment.) Relating the story later, he jokes that, although the visual appeal of the hippies was all about color, his photos are all black and white because he couldn't afford color film or processing. (I can relate. I didn't start doing color myself until the 1980s.)

Personally, the man is very impressive. Aside from the fact that he doesn't live in a monastery, it's almost literally true to say that he lives like a monk. For decades he lived and slept in his tiny office above Carnegie Hall: nothing but filing cabinets for photos, and a mattress on the floor. No kitchen, no bathroom. ("Who wants a kitchen and a bathroom?")  No wife or partner or children, and apparently very few close friends — just work. But he isn't lonely, as far as I could tell.

And his life is not empty. He lives to work, every day, all day. It's all he does, all he has done for decades, and it's all he wants to do. His energy is unbelievable. Watching him work wore me out. He's a good man. Nobody doesn't like him. He goes to church every week. He comments on how difficult it is to be an honest man in New York City: "like being Don Quixote."

The most famous definition of the orator in the ancient Roman world came from Cato the Elder. An orator, Cato said, is vir bonus, dicendi perĂ­tus, "A good man, skilled at speaking." It's a richer definition than it sounds like us today, perhaps because we know so little about either goodness or oratory that it's difficult for us to see what they have to do with one another. Well, Cunningham is a vir bonus, spectandi perĂ­tus, "A good man, skilled at looking." That's what he does with his camera. He looks—constantly, intensely, and with focus and interest and love. And what is he looking for, I mean, besides interesting clothing? He is shy about it, but it's clear what it is. It's beauty. And his example is inspirational. Receiving that award in Paris in 2008, he said (with a catch in his throat), "It's as true today as it ever was: He who seeks beauty, will find it."

What higher aspiration can there be? Watching him work, and learning about his religious dedication, I was reminded of the famous monastic saying, laborare est orare, "To work is to pray." For Cunningham, that seems to be the case. And if photography had saints... Well, Cunningham's still alive, so I won't canonize him just yet. Deo gratias.


  1. Street photography is an art. It commendable that so much of his work has been done on the streets of New York. Even though he's not a street photographer, I can imagine him standing on the street to catch people wearing interesting clothes.
    Photographer Port Macquarie


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wireless control of Olympus OM-D E-M1 with OI.Share app

The Olympus Image Share or "OI.Share" app for smartphones allows you to do some very neat things with the Olympus OM-D E-M1 camera, like control focus, shutter and other settings, download photos to your phone, and geo-tag your photos. The only problem with this partnership between camera and phone — at least for me as a micro-four-thirds and Olympus novice — was getting it to work.

The documentation provided in the app and in the user manual for the camera is typically bad. I wrote this blog article from the notes I started making as I was trying to sort this out for myself. I hope I save somebody else an hour and some worry.

Ingredients To get started you'll need to have an EM-1 and a smart phone with the OI.Share app installed. I'm using an iPhone 5 running iOS 7 and version 2.1.1 of the OI.Share app. I downloaded the app from the App Store.

Addendum 7 January 2015: This article was first published a little over a year ago, in December 2013. I just went through the…

Why DxO Optics Pro 10 stays in my toolbox

You can read this post here, or read my reposted version over over at Medium.

I've used over a dozen apps in the last decade to convert my raw files and process my digital images. Today I rely on four main tools to process my images: Lightroom 5.7, the Nik suite of apps (now owned and published by Google), onOne Software's Perfect Photo Suite 9 — and DxO Optics Pro 10. I want to talk about Perfect Photo Suite some other time; it's my replacement for Photoshop and I really like it. But today, I want to say nice things about Optics Pro 10.

Might seem an odd thing to admit, but I don't really want to use Optics Pro. It can't hold a candle to Lightroom for browsing and managing images. And it doesn't support layers (like Perfect Photo Suite) or much in the way of selective editing (like Lightroom, Nik and Perfect Photo Suite do). I'm able to get what I want from most of my images using Lightroom, or Nik or Perfect Photo. So most of the time, I don't need Op…

Why I switched from Lightroom to Aperture

Read today an excellent article, "Why I use Aperture instead of Lightroom," by Mel Ashar; it's posted at the Aperture Expert blog edited by Joseph Linaschke. Ashar, a landscape and architectural photographer, provides a useful catalog of some of the reasons Aperture is a strong choice for photographers who use Macs. He focuses on the file-management advantages of Aperture that arise from the fact that Apple controls an entire file ecosystem, comprised not just of Aperture, but of iCloud and the file systems on both Macs and iOS devices (iPhone, iPad).

Now, notwithstanding the advantages Ashar enumerates, the consensus seems to be that, Aperture as a photo processing app lags way behind Lightroom. I disagree with the consensus. In fact, shortly after the public beta of Lightroom 5 became available, I started looking again at Aperture and this time I really gave it the old college try. To my surprise, I discovered that I liked it. I liked it a lot. So, instead of upgrading…