What lighting technique did Bob Parent use for 1950s jazz-club photography, and how does it show in his famous 1953 Monk/Mingus/Parker/Haynes photo?
Asked 3/12/2019
5 views
2 answers
0
Articles about jazz photographer Bob Parent say he developed a "signature technique" that let him work in clubs without the harsh, distracting look of standard flashbulbs, giving his images a darker, more intimate feel. What equipment or lighting approach is known from his early club work, especially around 1953 when he made the famous photo of Thelonious Monk, Charles Mingus, Roy Haynes, and Charlie Parker? How would that technique be visible in the look of the image?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
7y ago
2 Answers
4
Bob Parent's first camera that he used in the jazz clubs of New York was a 4x5 Speed Graphic. It is also known that when he first started, he used a flash held in his left hand as far off camera as he could reach. Although most photographers who used flash with a Speed Graphic had it attached to the side of the camera, the flash was triggered by an external wire that ran from the shutter mechanism on the lens board to the flash. How far off camera the flash could be used was limited only by the length of the cord.¹
Parent later created a portable constant light source that was less intrusive and more tolerated in the dim clubs. Eventually he was able to shoot with no supplemental lighting whatsoever. But that was much later than 1953, when the photo in question was taken.
The referenced photo was created in 1953, near the beginning of Bob Parent's documentation of the jazz scene in NYC. It appears to have been taken during the time Parent was using flash. Whether flash or constant lighting, an examination of the photo indicates the light source for the photo was much brighter than any ambient light in the room.
WARNING: the following image contains artwork, in the form of a mural of a nude female figure on the wall in the background, that might be considered NSFW. It is presented under fair use for the purpose of education and criticism. To see the image, please hover your mouse or cursor over the area below.
]2
The heavy shadows confirm that there was a single light source above camera left that was much stronger than anything else in the room. No perceptible light is emitting from what appear to be light fixtures. The lack of any audience in the photo suggests he may have been able to get them to pose either before the club opened or after it closed. Or maybe he caught them going through a few bars of something they planned to do before the show?² I've often seen improvisational musicians who haven't regularly played with one another quickly go through the transitions or other key passages of a piece during sound check.
It is certainly true that today we can stretch ISO far beyond what was conceivable back in the 1950s, even with large or medium format film. It is also true that as the technical capability of our recording medium has been raised, so have expectations. We're now routinely expected to catch performers in mid-leap in settings with not much more light. Now, as then, it's up to the photographer to push the technological limits of the medium one is using to capture shots that others can't quite match.
Shots such as this are also still incumbent on having access to scenes by cultivating relationships with performers and those who manage the venues in which they perform.
- If musicians know you're conscientiously being no more intrusive than you must
- If they know you'll 'get the shot' and then get out of the way when allowed the opportunity
- If they know you'll 'deliver the goods' with high quality work that presents them in a good light³
Then they'll be much more tolerant of your activities than if there is not that type of established trust.
¹ There's a photo of one of Weegee's Speed graphics here with a very long cord that he used to trigger the camera and flash remotely.
² Much of the theatrical work I do is shot at a "dress rehearsal", not at actual performances.
³ Pun intended
Originally by user15871. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user15871
7y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Based on the available answers, Parent’s early club setup appears to have been less a secret process than a practical lighting choice. He is reported to have started with a 4x5 Speed Graphic and, instead of mounting the flash on the camera as many photographers did, he held the flash off-camera in his left hand, as far away as the sync cord allowed. That would soften the frontal “deer in headlights” look of direct flash and give more modeling and atmosphere.
He later built or used a portable constant light source that was more ambient and less disruptive, and eventually worked with available light alone. But for the specific 1953 photo, the best-supported answer is that it was likely still from his earlier large-format period, not yet his fully no-supplemental-light phase.
In the image, that technique would show up as light that feels directional but not brutally flat: gentler shadows, less glare, and a more natural club atmosphere than a straight on-camera flashbulb would produce. The dark background and intimate mood fit that approach. The relatively clean tonality also suggests a larger negative format, which would have helped in low light compared with small-format cameras of the time.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI7y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
No related questions yet.

]