Maybe this has come up before but at least I couldn't easily find it in the history folders.

I found a book 'Shooting Stars' by the Zeitlins in our friendly local library. I have seen it in Borders too, but wanted to spend the money on film instead.

It is a book about celebrities and the photographs they have taken, mostly elderly Hollywood movie stars with some singers, sports people and army generals thrown in. There is, for example, a delightful picture of Elvis kneeling in front of a woman with a Rolleiflex in his hand and two Leicas slung over his shoulder. The book mentions about their equipment and there are quite a few Leica photographers, including: -Dean Martin -Helen Hayes -Sammy Davis Jr. -Bobby Jones -Jerome Robbins -Gloria Vanderbilt -Gregory Peck -Burl Ives -James Stewart

I enjoyed glancing through the book. You might too.

Regards, Ilkka

-- Ilkka Kuusisto (ikuu65@hotmail.com), February 06, 2002

Answers

There is also a series of volumes called "Double Exposure" featuring celebs who have photographed each other. Paul Newman by Joanne Woodward; Fed Astaire by Mikhail Baryshnikov; Bette Midler by Laurance Olivier. Must be about a hundred and fifty of them. But I bought volume 2 for the photo of Audrey Hepburn by Gregory Peck.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 06, 2002.

My local "Buck a Book" has that 'Double Exposure' book for sale, if anyone is looking for it... probably alot cheaper than retail, maybe 50% or so... Phillip

-- Phillip Silitschanu (speedin_saab@hotmail.com), February 06, 2002.

Celebrity books have been a major contributor to the death of high- quality photography publishing. I think it's worth looking at what gets easily published and what doesn't, and then making a decision on what books to buy or take out of the library.

-- Jeff Spirer (spearhead@yahoo.com), February 06, 2002.

Oh boy, a book about celebrities and their photographs, wasting valuable retail space. Meanwhile photographers with real talent go unnoticed by the publishing world. You did a good thing by spending the money on film instead.

-- Richard (rvle@yahoo.com), February 06, 2002.

Personally I think there is a little jealousy or such going on here. I picked up 'Shooting Stars' because it was in the bargin bin and thought it had some interesting photos in it. Where is it written that if you're famous (celebrity) and talented (by the way - quite a few actors have gone on to become directors - where having an 'eye' is extremely important). There are just as many good photos in this book as in a lot of books I've seen by 'photographers'. From the comments that keep cropping up on this website about National Geo of late, I'd say the photos are better in Shooting Stars.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), February 07, 2002.

Well said Bob! Just because someone is famous does not mean they are devoid of talent. They might be but not necessarily. Also many of greatest photos are that way because of historical or other associations not necessarily directly connected with "quality", so if a famous person takes a photo of something important to them it might well be more interesting to many than that taken by a struggling unknown. I understand this.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

Bob, Robin: Point taken. I'm sure there are some interesting photos in the book, both from historical and aesthetic stand points. But c'mon, do we really need to have a book of photos by Burt Ives and Gloria Vanderbilt, et al? Meanwhile, a photographer such as Paul Fusco shops around his photos for "RFK Funeral Train" for over 30 years before finally getting it published (to use an example). The cult of personality around celebrities is tiring. Sure, some of them are talented and multi-faceted, but I get the feeling that so many actors just use their fame to weasel their way into other fields. Look now I'm a photographer! Look now I'm a writer! Look now I'm a stage actor!

-- Richard (rvle@yahoo.com), February 07, 2002.

Richard

Interesting point about the RFK funeral train. Such an interesting set of photos. One cannot imagine that at the time people did not want to publish them in some way. It seems such a no-brainer today - but this in itself tells us something about the state of photography back then too - perhaps it was not a golden age in the 60s either.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 12, 2002.

I thought the funeral train stuff was pretty boring myself. So many pictures of people waving from the side of the tracks. But maybe there was more to it than what I saw, I don't know.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 12, 2002.