By Heinz Richter
Almost three years ago the rank of Leica photographers lost one of its most accomplished members on March 18, 2021. Even today, almost 31 years after the reunification of Germany, relatively little is known about photographers who worked in the former East Germany. Klaus Ender was one of those photographers.
Almost three years ago the rank of Leica photographers lost one of its most accomplished members on March 18, 2021. Even today, almost 31 years after the reunification of Germany, relatively little is known about photographers who worked in the former East Germany. Klaus Ender was one of those photographers.
He was born in Berlin in 1939. In 1962 he moved to the island of Rügen in the Baltic Sea and fell in love with it. He was a passionate amateur photographer and was the only East German amateur who managed to publish in major journals such as Das Magazin (The Magazine) and Eulenspiegel and then turn his hobby into a profession. On 10 May 1966 he began his work as a freelance nude and landscape photographer. After only a few years he became one of the top East German photographers and published with more than 50 publishers. In 1972 he left Rügen, because of political pressures and moved to Potsdam.
He became a commercial photographer and used his free time to pursue his artistic photography. In 1981 he left the GDR and moved to Austria, where he started over again, penniless and at ground zero. After only a few years, in 1989, he finally became known internationally.
Companies like Leica, Minox, Zeiss, Hama, B + W, Metz, among others used his photographs for their advertising.
Klaus Ender with Leica R8
It wasn’t until 1996, after the reunification of Germany in 1990, that he was able to return to the island of Rügen where he started his career and where he celebrated his 45th anniversary as a professional photographer.
Klaus Ender is one of the few East German photographers who also had an impressive international career.
For more on Klaus Ender go to: http://www.klaus-ender.de
For other articles on this blog please click on Blog Archive in the column to the right
For other articles on this blog please click on Blog Archive in the column to the right
To comment or to read comments please scroll past the ads below.
All ads present items of interest to Leica owners.
_______________________________________________________________________
To comment or to read comments please scroll past the ads below.
All ads present items of interest to Leica owners.
_______________________________________________________________________
Buy vintage Leica cameras from America's premier Leica specialist
Buy vintage Leica cameras from
America's premier Leica specialist
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
Click on image to enlarge
It seems that a photographer can't get any notoriety without shooting nudes.
ReplyDeleteWith all due respect, that is a rather silly statement. Apparently you are unaware of the numerous photographers that have never published a nude image. Do you have any objections to photographing a nude human body?
DeleteThis post should have a warning that its content is NSFW and also potentially harmful to children.
DeleteWhy is it potentially harmful to children? Besides, isn't the headline warning enough?
DeleteChildren should not be exposed to nudity.
DeleteThat does not answer the question, but I am not surprised. I have had the same experience numerous times in the past. People are very quick to point to nude images being harmful to children, but then fail to come up with a valid answer.
DeleteIf any of these posts are not safe for work (NSFW) depends on the attitude of the workplace in regard to art. I definitely reject the assertion that any of these images are potentially harmful for children. We are talking about the human form here, not some pornographic distortion of it. Why is it that photography is always handled differently in this regard than other forms of art. Is anybody requesting museums to post warning signs for their exhibit’s that show images or statues depicting the human form? Are such sculptures in public places required to do the same? I am a member of MIA, the Minneapolis Institute of Arts. I regularly see groups of school children visit the place, as a matter of fact, they regularly have a special children’s day. There are no restrictions as to which areas of the museum are open to the children, including the photography exhibits. Apparently there is no potential harm to children in a museum or in public places, why should this blog be any different?
Are you denying that nude images are harmful to children?
DeleteI usually don't answer a question as an answer to a question, but you still owe all the readers here an answer to my question as to why you think this is the case.
DeleteChildren are easily exposed to pornography and other deviant depictions of the human body.
DeleteAre you suggesting that any of the work shown in this article is pornographic in nature?
DeleteI never said that.
DeleteThen why do you want a warning on this site because the content might be harmful to children?
DeleteAnd are you asking for the same warnings at museums and other places that depict the human form by way of paintings, sculptures...?
(From another reader) Heinz, why waste time on this useless discussion? This individual obviously is incapable to distinguishing between art and porn. If this person has any kids, I actually feel quite sorry for them, because they obviously are growing up with some very twisted ideas about what is acceptable art and what is not. I also wonder why this person even looked at this site, the headline should have put all kinds of red flags up for him or her.
Delete(From another reader) It is obvious that segments of the US population are still mired in their puritanical past. I for one think the pictures in this article are works of art, not unlike what we see in books and other publications from famous photographers the world over. I hope that the nay sayers will answer your question of why such photographs are supposedly harmful and why other works of nude art, as displayed in museums all over the world are not.
DeleteI have asked this question on many occasions and, so far, have never received a valid answer.
DeleteI am sure you won't, especially in view of the fact that one of the major proponents of this nonsense, the Catholic church, is also one of the main culprits of actual sexual abuses. Not only that, but they continue to sweep this under the rug in most cases. Their filthy abuses make the publication of art, like on these pages, even more of a non-issue, because it begs the question of what is more harmful, pedophiles in positions of authority in a church, or the publication of art?.
ReplyDeleteMan, if you consider anything here to be porn, there is something wrong with you.
DeleteIt's not the photographs here, or elsewhere that are harmful to children, it is the puritanical, out of touch with this world attitude of some individuals and parents that puts children into a utopian environment that has little connection to reality. Then, when these children enter the real world, they often have difficulties to cope with reality.
Delete