Jim Plogger Loc: East Tennessee

ecurb1105

So, never say in one sentence what you can say in six paragraphs?

dynaquest1 Loc: Austin, Texas

Didn't/couldn't read....way too long for me. Not sure if there was a purpose to your post other than rambling on.....

joel.photography

I don't usually read long posts, but this was interesting and informative.

The term SOOC is moot and meaningless. It means you'd rather have a Nikon, Canon or Sony engineer style your pics than doing it yourself.

charles tabb Loc: Richmond VA.

I can't agree with your statement more.
Thanks for it.

Charles

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

Well thought out and nicely written. I agree 100%

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I shot Kodachrome; I never entered a DarkRoom - not even the summer I worked for a film processing company {when I emptied the film drier all day}. Everything after I pressed the shutter button was automation by experts - exactly the same as SOOC.

tommystrat Loc: Bigfork, Montana

My mantra is, "This is what I see...do you like it?" From unvarnished straight-out-of-the-camera images to heavily processed artistic interpretations, everything can be a valid expression of the photographer's art. One is not better than the other, they are just different, and each can be magnificent in its own right.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Mark Wallace, a local pro photographer, who also does a lot of tutorial videos for Adorama, opined he felt there is not a photo created that does not need PP. I think his analysis works for me as well.

KHy

This is a topic which triggers examination of assumptions about the medium itself. We live in a Modernist illusion that there is an objective reality and that photography is the medium which can "capture" it. We forget that every image has been composed, selected, framed, and even if we are using pre-set "automatic" functions of aperture and shutter speed, they have been previously decided as well. All of those decisions, and more, influence the image and its meaning as much as any post-production activities or operations. The question is not that photographers influence the images they create, but to what degree, and with what degree of mastery. I say, hurray for straight photography, and for post production as well, just own our intentions and our roles as photographers as being an integral part of the photographic the process. It is simply silly to require ourselves to present images which pretend to be completely "objective."

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

I'm not new to photography but am new to PP. I appreciate the scholarly article for the historic take, though I'm going to go ahead and just do what I want to do. After 60 years of taking photos on vacation or of my kids, I have plenty of mountain, sea, and portrait photos. Now I'm enjoying making my own brand of art using LR. I have found, though, that starting with a good image means I have less to do in PP before I start fiddling with it to make it "art". So getting a good photo straight out of the camera is my first step.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

I was replying to your post about Nick Ut, who didn't shoot exclusively slide film, and certainly did, or had done, lab work on his B&W photographs.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

I do not care whether he copied some or all of this from somewhere else or from his brain. If he got it somewhere else, the citation is probably on part 2--but I see no indication that he did.
And yes, I AM IMPRESSED.

2Much Loc: WA

Do they make browsers without "back" buttons? All that I've used provide an exit much quicker (hopefully!) than the shortest attention span...

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

Just a bit of info on the particular print you are referring to, Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico shot in 1941. This was his most difficult negative to print, "with a contrast range of perhaps a thousand to one." His last print made from this negative was in 1980 when he was 78. From 1979 to 1980 he made over 100 perfect Moonrise prints as museum prints as part of a set. "In all, Ansel produced approximately 1300 orininal prints from this negative during his lifetime, far more than from any of his others."

There was a debate about who owned the negative, as he had taken the shot on a trip financed by the National Park Service, but did not make the shot on behalf of the Park Service. In the end, it was determined that the negative did belong to him.

Ansel's collection of images went to the University of Arizona where they agreed to establish a Center for Creative Photography. No one is allowed to sell prints from the collection. In 1975 the Ansel Adams Publishing Rights Trust was formed and a Board set up and it appears to be that this particular negative is still under control of the Board.

I would be interested to know what publication you read that said Bill Gates owned this negative. All quotes and information came from Ansel Adams: A Biography, Mary Street Alinder, who was his closet and last assistant and wrote or co-wrote much of his biography information included in other publications in addition to the biography she wrote.