Wallen Loc: Middle Earth

It seems some fail to understand or don't want to understand the gist of the post.

Although there is no right or wrong answer to the question, I see some answer not in response to the question but aimed at mis-aligning the essence of the thought and even some that is targeted to demerit me personally.

I urge everyone, let us stay in the train of thought. This is a good subject for discussion and learning if we keep on point.

Thanks.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I rather think you have given us an impossible assignment. Contests are normally anonymous. Even then, the comments reflect the biases of the judges. Once we know who the photographer is, our comments will include not only our biases toward the phitograph, but also our biases toward the photographer. I see it here in responses to posted images all the time.

The public has already spoken about this image. Interestingly, one of my art history friends is familiar with it and likes it. Her comments on the composition, tonality, and story were very interesting. She's about 25 years old. The other is not familiar with it. We'll talk about it later, after she has had a chance to study it. She's a few years older.

As for me, I appreciate that some don't like Moonrise. If everyone likes a photograph, it is probably empty-headed or simply just too bland and ordinary.

Wallen Loc: Middle Earth

Thanks. I really appreciate the reply, you've hit the nail on the head.

I would not say impossible, but rather difficult to be unbiased. The very reason I asked to forget the artist and whatever previous information one have on the subject and to focus just on the presented image itself.

The assignment is to view what maybe considered "cast in stone" in a new angle, new light, new approach.
To look, see & judge with one's own eyes and heart, not affected nor forced by the crowd or popularity.

The main purpose of which, is to train ourselves to be able to deliberately see a blank slate in which all possibilities can begin from.

The capacity to analyze and approach objectively or subjectively as needed or by choice is directly applicable to improving our photography.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Not absolute in the sense of being quantifiable. Absolute in the sense that it exists regardless of whether there's anybody there to call it beauty or to perceive it as beauty. The suggestion is that beauty is independent of anybody's opinion or assessment. Personal opinion is therefore irrelevant when it comes to determining what is beautiful and what isn't (according to that school of thought). In fact beauty doesn't need any kind of determining. It just is, whether anybody sees it as beauty or not.

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

Try posting images on this website with no title or explanation and see what type of responses you get. 😊

elee950021 Loc: New York, NY

Getting the shooting and technical details of this photograph from the horse's mouth! An earlier post here shows a copy of Ansel Adams's response(1981) to a buyer of his print: < https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-736656-1.html >.

Be well! Ed

Photec

1. Would you consider it a good photo? Why?
Yes, I did. I was able to see this Print in the mid 70s. The large print shows excellent detail and tonal range that you just don't see on the monitor.
2. If otherwise, why not?
NA
3. Any room for improvement? or
I don't think that would be possible for that scene ever again. That hamlet and sky is gone forever.
4. If it was your photo, how would you take it?
I would set up a similar scene on my D850 somewhat the same as he did, with the camera set to NEF, ISO 200, sharpest lens, at sharpest aperture, expose the black point to be Zone 0 and the darkest desired detail to recorded in Zones I&II. Then in post processing I would bring the whitest points to be between Zone VIII & IX, keeping in mind there may be some tonal values that would need to be dodged and burned accordingly. After obtaining the tonal rage I like, I would then run the image thru On1 Photo Raw No Noise AI to remove any possible noise that may exist.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Yes. There are other accounts, also recorded by Mr. Adams, which differ somewhat, but the one in this letter agrees with the one that seems to have been printed most often. I think the truth is that no one probably knows with absolute certainty what the actual values were. It had been a difficult and frustrating day of searching and shooting, without much fruit, and the hectic response needed to capture even the singe negative probably had everyone in the group pretty frazzled.

MJPerini

Adams based the exposure on what he knew to be the luminance of the moon (because if the Moon was burned out there is no picture) That made everything else under exposed, and is very difficult to print.
MOMA had a show where several versions were shown together.
Personally,I think is is a masterpiece

lowkick Loc: Connecticut

I want to point out that what made this photo different from most of Adams's famous pictures. Most of his well known works were set up by Adams. He would find a scene and return to the location day after day, waiting for the weather and lighting to be perfect to achieve the end result he wanted. Moonrise is different in that it was a spur of the moment "find". The story was that he and his assistant(s) were driving along when Ansel saw the scene. He yelled for them to stop the car and grab his camera and tripod while he was visualizing how to take the shot. The fact that there was evidence of human life in it was was just coincidental. The real subject was the unusual sky with the moon. I've seen this photo before, but I've never seen a large print and I doubt that what I have seen on a computer screen matches the depth and richness of the shading or the grandeur of the overall shot in the original photo. Just seeing this representation, I think I would just say, "nice shot" and move on, but if I saw a really good (and large) print, I think it would catch my attention for a long look. One thing that is unusual, other than the sky and moon, is the number of layers in the picture. I count 6 layers, but you could argue 7 if you include the darker upper portion of the sky above the moon as separate from the lighter middle area of the sky that contains the moon.

Donald McGavin Loc: Tennessee

Thank you. That was a very interesting observation about the lack of an exposure meter. I had read elsewhere that he took preliminary photographs with a Polaroid Camera for a variety of reasons, including calculation of the exposure.

JohnnyFry

He did use Polaroid type 45PN, a special 4X5 Polaroid product that yielded both a Positive print and a Negative. However, considering the fact that the Moonrise photo was made in 1941, long before the advent of any Polaroid product, that is irrelevant in this case.

wrangler5 Loc: Missouri

Apart from old photos of ancestors, I think Moonrise is the only photograph displayed in my house that was not taken by me or a family member. I have been a fan of Adams since at least the 1980s, and Moonrise is one of my favorites. But I have to say, I didn't really appreciate what he could do until I saw an exhibit at the St. Louis Art Museum 15-20 years ago. For me, his actual photographs in large size and properly lit were simply stunning.

jburlinson Loc: Austin, TX

It's been said before, but the problem with focusing on the "presented image itself" is that the image in the OP is not an adequate realization of Adams' creation. It's like asking for a critique of the Mona Lisa based on a black&white cartoon of the original.

Bret Perry

Nice photo! I love the moody, desolate atmosphere.
Could use some cropping, too much sky.
I think you over-processed it, too dark, you might try making the curve straighter in Photoshop.
I looked at your other uploads on uhh, and I like the Yosemite shots the better.
Too bad they are not in color, read the manual, and next time take your camera out of BW mode ...

But I have seen this darker image as "the" real gelatin-silver print.
There is nothing like a silver print for BW.
That was striking. The way the moon shimmers all alone in the vast sky. And the graveyard sparkles.
You are a very good and patient photographer.
You are a genius in the darkroom.