By the late 1920s, conventions about how to
depict modern architecture had spread throughout
Europe. These conventions included depicting the
building through an axial or diagonal (45) orienta-
tion on the selected facade, generally in bright early
morning or late afternoon sunlight with long and
strong shadows that emphasized cubic volumes, or
setting the building against a sky dark with cumu-
lus clouds, and presenting the image in a crisp clear
print with an overall depth of field and a glossy
surface. Another convention was that except for
the inclusion of one or two individuals in order to
convey the scale of the structure, the pictures were
empty of life. Motorcars were banned except when
the architect had also designed an automobile, as in
the case of Gropius and Le Corbusier. Trees were
only allowed without leaves. Preeminent among the
architectural photographers of this style were
Claude Gravot and Andre ́ Kerte ́sz in France,
John Havinden, Francis Yerbury, and the German
emigree Walter Nurnberg in the United Kingdom,
the Studio Vasari in Italy, the Koester brothers in
Berlin, Werner Mantz and Hugo Schmoelz in
Cologne, Eduard Wasow in Munich, Otto Lossen
in Stuttgart, Albert Renger-Patzsch in Essen, and
especially Lucia Moholy in Dessau who, with her
series on the new buildings of the Bauhaus, lay
down the rules for a strict documentary approach
to modern architecture. This modernist convention
was propagated in illustrated papers, magazines,
books, and most of all, on picture postcards.
Modernism became the global style in architec-
ture, immensely aided by the exhibition, The Inter-
national Style, at the newly founded Museum of
Modern Art in New York in 1932. Organized by
the art historian Henry-Russell Hitchcock and the
architect Philip Johnson, the exhibition and its
accompanying book drew from a wealth of photo-
graphic material that showed architecture from all
over the world. This new international convention
of Architectural Photography was quickly adapted
by commercial photography studios, most notably
companies such as Hedrich & Blessing in Chicago,
Nyholm & Lincoln in New York, and Dell &
Wainwright in London. These studios and others
presented modern architecture in elegant, techni-
cally perfect images ready for publication in the
glossy magazines of the day. Modern architecture
was the rising star of lifestyle, and Architectural
Photography was its medium. Individuals such as
Sigurd Fischer and Ralph Steiner in the United
States, Roger Schall and Maurice Tabard in
France, or Hans Spies, Werner Mantz (both emi-
grated from Germany), and Jaap d’Oliveira in The
Netherlands contributed to this mainstream report-
ing on quality design and photographic art. And
there was Margaret Bourke-White with her huge
series on the construction of Rockefeller Center
and the Chrysler building in New York as well as
the industrial photographs from the Soviet Union
where photographers like Alexandr Rodchenko
tried to integrate Architectural Photography into
their Agitprop work.
The rise of power of the Nazi party in Germany
saw the usurping of Modernism and its depiction of
architecture as a propaganda tool. The Nazi stylis-
tic approach, best described as an uncanny mixture
of classicism and romanticism, saw a number of
photographers profiting from their alliance with
the regime. Walter Hege and Helga Glassner served
as de facto reporters of Germany’s historic archi-
tectural and social greatness; Otto Eisenschink.,
Max Krajewski (not to be misindentified as the Bau-
haus student of the same name) and Hugo Schmoelz
were namedFotografen der Bewegung(Photogra-
phers of the [Nazi-]Movement). Schmoelz’ son
Karl-Hugo at the age of 22 received the commission
to photograph Nazi architect Albert Speer’s gigantic
model of Berlin’s sweeping transformation. Some
photographers were able to continue to integrate
modern strategies into their architectural propa-
ganda: Heinrich Heidersberger with his use of
infra-red photography to create black skies over
industrial buildings and small houses in Northern
Germany (which influenced others across Europe)
as well as in the work of Jonathan Jonals (Jonals
Company) from Denmark and in the night journeys
through Paris by Brassaı ̈.
The end of World War II saw numerous new
commissions for Architectural Photography in
Europe and Japan to document the widespread
destruction. Although it was forbidden in several
countries—notably the United Kingdom and Ger-
many—amateur photographers even during the
war years had documented the substantial losses
of their home cities and areas. As well, the Allied
forces employed photographic surveillance units to
record the damage of structures in detail, both in
aerial and in ground-based films and still images.
The reaction to these photographs was profound
and nongovernmental organizations such as
C.A.R.E. were founded to aid the devastated Eur-
opean populations. The destruction of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki by atomic bombs dropped by Amer-
ican forces was first captured in aerial photo-
graphs. When blow-ups were printed in magazines
and newspapers, people had difficulty believing
what they saw—a particularly striking example of
the power of Architectural Photography to stir
individuals to political or social activism. This useARCHITECTURAL PHOTOGRAPHY