Check out Video for DSLR and Point and Shoot Cameras section of our forum.
Digital Adams?
Feb 24, 2015 16:15:18 #
A couple of fellow UHHers challenged me on a couple of matters. First, I stated that Ansel Adams would probably use digital photography and post processing if he were around today. I was rightfully challenged since AA is no longer around to agree or disagree. Then I came across a book by one Michael Frye entitled Digital Landscape Photography: In the Footsteps of Ansel Adams and the Great Masters. In that book he quotes Adams as saying, "I am sure the next step will be the electronic image and I hope I shall live to see it. I trust that the creative eye will continue to function, whatever technological innovations may develop." The body of the book applies the principles developed by Adams, Weston, and others to the digital process.
The second challenge concerned a photograph I "enhanced" by increasing the contrast to the point where the details in the shadow areas were obliterated (see my avatar). One of my fellow UHHers termed it "phony." Well. In the Introduction to his book Frye speaks of how Adams did much the same in his most famous, iconic photo: Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico: "Adams intensified its foreground to increase contrast, and used extensive dodging and burning during printing. In the early prints he left the sky light. He gradually darkened it over the years until it became nearly black, enhancing the stark drama of the scene." The 1948 print (some 7 years after the picture was taken) shows this -- and it became the most viewed and most expensive of his prints. The link below show this progression:
http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/grant/ansel-adams-moonrise-hernandez-8-31-11.asp
Now I am no Ansel Adams!!!! :roll: But if he could do it, so can I.
I do appreciate responses. Even negative one. They make me THINK! Nothing could be better.
The second challenge concerned a photograph I "enhanced" by increasing the contrast to the point where the details in the shadow areas were obliterated (see my avatar). One of my fellow UHHers termed it "phony." Well. In the Introduction to his book Frye speaks of how Adams did much the same in his most famous, iconic photo: Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico: "Adams intensified its foreground to increase contrast, and used extensive dodging and burning during printing. In the early prints he left the sky light. He gradually darkened it over the years until it became nearly black, enhancing the stark drama of the scene." The 1948 print (some 7 years after the picture was taken) shows this -- and it became the most viewed and most expensive of his prints. The link below show this progression:
http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/grant/ansel-adams-moonrise-hernandez-8-31-11.asp
Now I am no Ansel Adams!!!! :roll: But if he could do it, so can I.
I do appreciate responses. Even negative one. They make me THINK! Nothing could be better.
Feb 24, 2015 16:22:29 #
Feb 24, 2015 16:34:21 #
revhen wrote:
A couple of fellow UHHers challenged me on a coupl... (show quote)
I was lucky enough to live in SIlicon Valley and study Photography at Foothill College in the mid Nineties (yeah LAST Century). Two of my instructors. Assistants were former Darkroom assistants for Ansel Adams. Digital photography was just dawning with small sensors and limited quality. However, our neighbors Apple COmputer and Adobe Software already had image processing software that these guys said would have given Ansel a happy dream!
His skills with capture, exposure and film development were sensational. His Darkroom skills re-defined the art. The Ol' Artful DOdger would have come out of his seat with what we can do with PS and LR or Corel or many more tool like Nik and the rest.
The world loves what he delivered in his special prints, I only wish that we could experience what he'd do with electrons!
C
Check out The Dynamics of Photographic Lighting section of our forum.
Feb 24, 2015 18:15:10 #
Feb 24, 2015 18:59:19 #
warrior wrote:
maybe darken the yellow a tad :thumbup: :)
I came to see the picture as an expression of the biblical quote, "The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it." So it's the contrast between dark darks and bright brights. I originally thought the bright area was blown out but printing showed that there was plenty of color in the bright area.
Feb 24, 2015 20:33:10 #
revhen wrote:
A couple of fellow UHHers challenged me on a coupl... (show quote)
Of course you can do it! It's is your image. I happen to like it, but even if I didn't, it is still your image and I would forever defend your right to create and present it in whatever way you like. You bought the camera, software and computer, got yourself to the location where you took the photo, did your own processing work. Phony? Not unless you misrepresented the circumstances of its capture or enhancement. Others can like or dislike the result, but to question your right to do what you want with it is silly. If you paint your house blue, is it then "phony" because it used to be white? It is your house, your paint and your time spent. No phonies here.
Michael Frye is an amazing photographer, an excellent teacher of all things photographic, and a very humble and likable guy. He, like many successful pro landscape photographers, has made the transition from film to digital capture and processing without whining about the good old days, and without denigrating those who work differently. His work is sold in the Ansel Adams gallery and I suspect his ideas about Adams are on target. We could all learn much from his work.
I suspect that some of the harsher complaint we hear about film vs digital, post processing vs SOC, etc come from people who have not transitioned well, or are early on their journey and still learning the complexities of the art.
Feb 25, 2015 06:20:46 #
revhen wrote:
A couple of fellow UHHers challenged me on a coupl... (show quote)
It all comes back to the old saying " Those that can will, and those that can't wont" I believe the last part of the saying should be changed to " Those that can't will condem"
Feb 25, 2015 07:00:17 #
ottopj
Loc: Annapolis, MD USA
tusketwedge wrote:
It all comes back to the old saying " Those that can will, and those that can't wont" I believe the last part of the saying should be changed to " Those that can't will condem"
No, those that can't administrate.
Feb 25, 2015 07:31:30 #
I met a guy a couple of years ago at a party we had at my house. He said something that changed my perspective on photography, "All photographs are abstract." There is nothing "real" about our images, they are all abstractions of what we thought we saw when we pressed the button. If they don't live up to our mental image, what harm is there in making them do so? My philosophy on tools is, you don't really know how to use a tool until you know at least three ways to abuse it. There is NOTHING I won't do to a photograph if I think I want to. Some of my most striking images bear little resemblance to the original file from the camera and probably even less resemblance to what another person might have seen when I turned the shutter loose. I guess that defines the departure from snapshots into the realms of art.
Feb 25, 2015 08:30:14 #
revhen wrote:
(snip)... I came across a book by one Michael Frye entitled Digital Landscape Photography: In the Footsteps of Ansel Adams and the Great Masters. In that book he quotes Adams as saying, "I am sure the next step will be the electronic image and I hope I shall live to see it. I trust that the creative eye will continue to function, whatever technological innovations may develop."
Photocraig wrote:
I spent most of my working life in the darkroom. Ansel Adams was a personal hero to me. I knew that he was a great experimenter. The Ansel Adams Gallery website says:I was lucky enough to live in SIlicon Valley and study Photography at Foothill College in the mid Nineties (yeah LAST Century). Two of my instructors. Assistants were former Darkroom assistants for Ansel Adams. Digital photography was just dawning with small sensors and limited quality. However, our neighbors Apple COmputer and Adobe Software already had image processing software that these guys said would have given Ansel a happy dream! ...(snip)
Adamss technical mastery was the stuff of legend. More than any creative photographer, before or since, he reveled in the theory and practice of the medium. Weston and Strand frequently consulted him for technical advice. He served as principal photographic consultant to Polaroid and Hasselblad and, informally, to many other photographic concerns. Adams developed the famous and highly complex zone system of controlling and relating exposure and development, enabling photographers to creatively visualize an image and produce a photograph that matched and expressed that visualization. He produced ten volumes of technical manuals on photography, which are the most influential books ever written on the subject.
I have always been certain that Adams would have gone absolutely gaga over digital, especially post-processing. The man who compared the negative to a musical score and the print to a performance would, I believe anyway, never have been an in-camera purist. He wasn't an in-camera purist. He knew that what he got in the camera was only the beginning of the creative process. I know that a lot of 'Hoggers are get-it-in-the camera folks, but I am personally strongly inclined to think that, while it is important to get it in the camera, it is at best a starting point. Since I started in digital I have never yet seen an image file of my own that couldn't benefit from at least a little tweaking, if only to open some shadow detail.
Feb 25, 2015 08:46:06 #
revhen wrote:
A couple of fellow UHHers challenged me on a coupl... (show quote)
I tend to be somewhat restrictive when doing digital imaging, whether from a digital image camera or a scanned negative. I tend to rely on what I could do in the darkroom, ex. burning, dodging, changing contrast is similar to selecting the grade of paper I'd have used to make a print, etc.
When it comes to restoration, surrealism, etc. I'll use any tool PS has in the box. It certainly beats having numerous enlargers to accomplish what Jerry Uelsmann did. Though I admire him for staying with darkroom work to accomplish his masterpieces.
--Bob
Nothing wrong with your approach at all.
--Bob
Check out Smartphone Photography section of our forum.
Feb 25, 2015 08:47:19 #
revhen...I agree with you. I think Ansel Adams would have loved digital photography had he had a chance to get totally involved with it. I think he did a little of it but it was not like it is now. I've also read what you've read and agree. People seem to think that he didn't manipulate his photos much but of course he did..."dodging and burning" until he got it to look what he wanted to look like, i.e. the zone system and then sold them.
Feb 25, 2015 09:00:06 #
revhen wrote:
A couple of fellow UHHers challenged me on a coupl... (show quote)
Great post!! Thanks for sharing.
Feb 25, 2015 09:27:27 #
revhen wrote:
A couple of fellow UHHers challenged me on a coupl... (show quote)
You should also read "Ansel Adams in Color". Although he was sort of a Kodachrome beta tester and did some very good commercial work on color, he was never willing to present personal color work. The quoted letters and other sources in the book suggest his dissatisfaction with color was the limited range opportunities for self expression in color printing due to the technology. It reads as if Photoshop was made for him.
The quality of the color photos in the book is enlightening
Feb 25, 2015 09:29:46 #
"The man who compared the negative to a musical score and the print to a performance would, I believe anyway, never have been an in-camera purist. He wasn't an in-camera purist."
And we all know that there are an infinite number of ways that a musical score can be performed. The same holds true, I think, for a negative or a digital file.
And we all know that there are an infinite number of ways that a musical score can be performed. The same holds true, I think, for a negative or a digital file.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Travel Photography - Tips and More section of our forum.