Hardly a day goes by, on this forum when the is not a mention of Ansel Adams. Perhas he is the subject of "idol worship" and perhaps rightly so. He was a grandmaster, an artist, a superb technician and a great teacher. There are endless conversations and arguments about "Moonrise", etc., but how many of you have actually read all of his books. I did, and even, as a young guy, came up withte money, travelled across the country and attend one of his workshops.

I did not want to become an Ansel Adams, and in fact, landscape phototherapy is not my main forte or métier. I was interested in the Zone System so I could take better control over my portrait and commercial photography.

So...was Mr. Adams a "purist" or what we would now call a SOOTC guy? I think not. The Zone System is a perfect marriage of camera work and darkroom technology. Every shot includes a strategy as to how exposure and processing going to achieve the previsualized result.

Long before I know much about Mr. Adams and the Zone System, as an apprentice in a studio, I learned that there were certain film and developer combinations and exposure and development methods that were employed to achieve predictable results. Of course, there were certain printing methods as well - that all factored in.

All the technobabble aside, the computer and post-processg software is the new darkroom. This does not mean that you shod shoot sloppily and result in every image in the computer. The best and most consistent results are achieved through good camera work with attention to exposure, focus, white balance, and composition and in the back of your mind, you may include certain post-process strategies to be employed to complete the image.

Well, the nomenclature has changed. somehow we all got into cinematography production terminology like post-production, editing, etc. We seldom hear the old terms lie dodging, burning, cropping- all routine tweaking procedures which are all available in our latest software.

I am not here to tell anyone how to do their photography. This ongoing argument about post-processing is gettg old if not silly. If any of y'all can figure out a way to produce an image or make a point without ANY processing, have at it- apply for a patent! I any of y'all can produce a PERFECT image or print, all the time, without any post-processing correction, tweaking, or enhancement, 100%- you are a better photograher than I!

Lots of the folks on this forum argue that there should be no "rules" in art. Technology is a bit different. If you can get the technical aspect down pat, design a few routines, kind of second nature and muscle memory, and establish some consistency, you will have more time and head-space to concentrate on the art, the aesthetics, the storytelling and the fun.

Lord, save us from absolutists.

There is more good imagery on the web than in museums. There, I said it. Let the flame war begin.

WHY do I say that? Since 2007, the world has been democratized by the confluence of technologies in the smartphone. Purists will whine on and on about "real" cameras vs "phone" cameras. But the fact is, the world of imaging citizens has never been larger, even as camera sales have shrunk to "ancient" levels. Today's best smartphones are better than most 35mm point-and-shoot cameras of the 1980s. And since there is no film to buy, exposures are FREE. That means infinite practice is possible. That means learning photo composition is easy and quick. BILLIONS of people have these devices, so surely there are images made daily that rival what the so-called old masters (and mistresses) did 50 to 100 years ago.

Quality is about way more than technical image attributes. It is about impact, relevance, and historical significance. You don't need black-and-white film and a view camera to achieve those attributes. You need a camera and a point of view.

I agree with your main comments on the confluence of technologies. However, I will add to the flame war :>)

The web is now the museum. Everything loaded on the web is stored in a multitude of servers worldwide. Most of the major art is on the web. Data on the web is immortal to a certain extent. Unfortunately, everybody now seem to keep their family/travel pictures on their phones, computers, or social media. The problem with the digital world it is not a physical item. Digital albums live only if it is accessible. How many phones with pictures have lost, pictures on a computer destroyed by operator error or computer part failure, or social media/cloud accounts closed with the pictures erased. A lot of history both family and news was captured on film and printed for a album or for display/publication. An old set of pictures is our look to the past. The digital pictures taken now that are not put in the web museum may not exist years from now. Finding a old SD disk in a old coat or table drawer 100years from now will be the old album that gives a glimpse into the past if the curator can find a way to read it. There are billions of digital pictures taken. How many of the good ones will be preserved for future viewing?