xx

but isn't the reason we have to use filter factors based on the idea

that the filter subtracts that particular color from the scene when

put to film? How could the filter factor always be the same since that

same color is not equally present in every scene.

Most of us today start with 35mm, but what about those who lived in an

earlier time, such as Ansel Adams who started out with much larger

formats and then at one time purchased a 35mm. I wonder how different

the transition was going from large format to 35mm rather than the

other way around?

100's of moonrises printed by ross? where? when? what?

If you have to force yourself to shoot new work then why do it at all?

 

<p>

 

speaking of A. Adams, he was against limited editions-feeling that

this was not true to the medium, I agree.

 

<p>

 

It is hype. and thats the last thing that I would like to introduce to

my work.

its reduced agitation plus a highly dilute developer that is most

useful for extreme compression

oops, sorry Katharine

I agree completly with George,Katerine and Sandy. By the way, thank

you Richard for coming down from on high to educate the common people

and also for telling us about your assignments from "time"

and "Newsweek" (earlier post)....zzzzzzzz and also letting us know

who is worthy of your approval based on.....well not much really.

I believe that I heard that John Sexton still uses tray dev. for

extreme dilute developer work

Mr.Boulware, I find it hard to believe you even read my post

considering your response.

 

<p>

 

I think that your response also proved my point.

 

<p>

 

"personal taste tells me that CCWR, Moody blues, and others are far

superior to "Rap" and hip-hop"

 

<p>

 

now I'm hardly one to defend rap or hip hop, but you put two entire

styles of music up against only one or two bands instead of against

another type of music, hardly fair.

 

<p>

 

my point wasn't about technology or motor drives either.

 

<p>

 

Your view is based on just what I mentioned before, you compare the

cream of the crop of the past, with the unheard of masses of today.

You say that the present generation has lost something along the way,

I didn't know that the entire generation was comprised of large format

photographers, much less photographers in general.

 

<p>

 

your opinions are also heavily swayed by your preference for the type

of photography that would require hand held cameras, why do I need to

hand hold large format when it is not required or possible for the

type of work that I do? Do you lament the fact that we have lost the

ability to use a spear when we go to the grocery to buy some meat?

oh my god! well I guess we better string that worthless scum up on a

tree! god knows we live on this planet all by ourselves!

The big flaw in your logic is common in just about every argument of

this type,"today's music isn't as good as yesterdays", cars aren't as

good as yesterdays", on and on and on. the flaw is that we remember

the fine work, cars or music of long ago simply because they were the

cream of the crop, all of the garbage is long forgotten. In the

present we don't have that advantage, so we must suffer through the

trash that will be long forgotten in the future. there are plenty of

people who don't blaze away with motor drives and savor each and every

shot, but I don't think this automatically makes their work of any

higher quality, anymore than a motor drive makes ones work worthless.

Paul, I would have to disagree with you, clearly the california

poppy, garden anemone, flowers (middle and bottom), and the white

poppy are pressed flat, and to a lesser extent the cosmos and tulips

pics. Looking again, I would guess that perhaps these flowers were

scanned directly on a flat bed scanner???

anyone noticed how many of the flowers look to be pressed against

glass? I say that they were indeed pressed against some type of

difussed glass to achieve this look.

check out these guys in santa barbara

 

<p>

 

www.specialtyphotolab.com/

what differences are there between xtol and tmax rs from those of you

who have used both? i.e., grain size, film speed

I think you're being a bit harsh, I have seen many really nice images

done on digital, more in color than bw because for my tastes digital

bw hasn't yet reached the quality of traditional bw, but still there

is some nice stuff out there. I think you should look around a little

more.

these guys are as good as it gets...

 

<p>

 

www.chromatics.com/ nashville tn

"Ethics are personal. You don't have to share them. "

 

yes, that is true, but we are affected by them.....

group 64 didn't advocate the literal interpretation of a scene, but

creative interpretation through the use of photography without the

need to use another form of expression as a "crutch" to make it seem

more accepted as an art form. of course you have to consider the

attitudes towards photography at the time.

 

<p>

 

as for the question, who is the we you are talking about? the need for

sharpness also depends on the situation, I would hope that we are less

predictable than that.

fyi--west coast imaging has a free Piezography print sample that you

can order, I found it to be way below the quality hype that I had

heard. I don't think I will mind having to go to digital prints, if

ever, however, I am worried that with all the photo papers being

discontinued or reduced in availability, that I will be forced to do

so before the digital quality is up to snuff.

I know someone who has one, he says its a real pain to change, and

real expensive.

I find fatali very illuminating!! :)

I'm not sure about the amount of wildlife there at that time of year, is that all you would use it for? if not then take it with you, the lens can't do you any good if it sits collecting dust.

Hello Again,

 

<p>

 

I know this has gone on and on, and I wouldn't feel hurt if you don't

have time to reply, but I did have a few things to bring up......

 

<p>

 

 

I am sure that Azo is the best paper for you and gives your prints

the look that you desire, whether its best paper or not is not really

the issue, its just a matter of taste. If a paper existed that loaded

itself into stinky chemicals and developed itself I still wouldn't

purchase it if I preferred something else! Like you said, what's on

the wall is what counts, we all must go with the look that pleases us.

 

<p>

 

Fine-tuning with or without the Zone system is identical. I don't

doubt for a minute that when working with a never before used

developer and/or film, I can attain working times/temps much faster

with zone style testing than without. The fine-tuning however is

identical to what you describe. Adams himself said that regardless of

what the tests show, you must go out and shoot to really see if what

your getting is what's right for you.

 

<p>

 

I still feel that you are exaggerating a bit when discussing the

Adams "pre-planning" of shots, I don't really think that he did it as

often as you suggest. I think that the manual you were talking about

was probably a guide for the amateur, whom I am sure you know would

be written in an entirely different mindset altogether. The person

you spoke of who sat for three hours...that would drive me crazy to

do that too! again, that's this one person, not all zone users. and

yes, I do put my camera over my shoulder on the tripod. I agree, the

camera is just a tool. I also can't understand people who will not

sacrifice a piece of equipment if it means getting the "ultimate"

shot, the image is once in a lifetime, there are whole rows of

lenses, etc. stacked up that I can replace mine with.

 

<p>

 

I have no problem with Adams knowledge of the Alabama hill lighting

situation, how could you drive by such places and not notice. Yes the

horse being there to give a size perspective was indeed lucky, even

luckier was the fact that the horse turned sideways to the camera

just in time to take the picture and not lose the light,(Adams said

otherwise that the horse would have looked like a stump) A beautiful

image I think.

 

<p>

 

I also find it hard to believe that Adams did too much waiting around

due to the fact that 40,000 plus negative wouldn't allow for much

waiting around!

 

<p>

 

I've had fun, hope to hear more from you in the forum in the future,

 

<p>

 

thanks,

 

<p>

 

Mark Lindsey

Mr. Smith,

 

<p>

 

First let me apologize, I did say "dishonest" and actually meant

"respectful".

 

<p>

 

I didn�t intend to insult you with the quote about creativity as it

referred to negative dev./exposure or printing. I certainly don�t

think of you as "stupid". I personally think it would be great if I

could do everything on the negative without requiring any additional

manipulation when printing, it certainly would make things easier. But

film just can�t handle that amount of manipulation. I read you

perfectly well, but took my interpretation of it to an extreme in

trying to get my point across.

 

<p>

 

Everybody sees the subject differently, and therefore each person will

require a different amount of manipulation (exposure, development or

printing). You and I could print from the same negative and both of us

would come up with a different interpretation, and not all

interpretations take the same amount of time. Some are longer, some

shorter, and neither is better than the other�.simply different. So to

sum it up, I think it is each persons own vision that dictates why

they need more or less time in the darkroom. I personally have some

negatives that I feel meet my expectations with minimal darkroom

manipulation, still others need much more�.not because the negative

was incorrectly exposed or developed, only because my idea of what the

image should be is beyond what the film and minimal printing

techniques can accomplish, again, not better or worse, just different.

 

<p>

 

What�s wrong with workshops devoted to the zone system? Is that any

different than workshops devoted to specific printing or developing

techniques? They are all tools for the photographer. Yes I agree, the

guy who spent a whole year testing wasted at least 363 days that he

could have been out shooting or at least seeing the light of day.

That�s not me, it wasn�t Adams and I am sure that isn�t the case for

many more people besides.

 

<p>

 

I agree that photographers tend to become obsessed with the technical

aspects, hell as much as I admire Adams he was still a bit too

technical for me, I just don�t have that kind of energy for that kind

of organization. But on the other hand I think Weston�s obsessive

avoidance of technology was much more of a detriment than an

advantage. It goes both ways.

 

<p>

 

I agree totally with you on your next point, craft and vision must

keep up with each other. If not, then what�s the point? And yes, most

pictures made with ANY camera are uninteresting and repetitive. I

agree wholeheartedly.

 

<p>

 

I don�t see anything wrong with planning ahead for a future image, and

you didn�t mention specific instances, only that he knew when the

light was optimal for a particular place, so this tells me nothing of

a specific instance. Is this any worse than the shell shots on the

beach that Weston set up to look natural, they certainly weren�t the

found object. Neither bothers me, although the set up shell shots

were greatly lacking I thought. I still cannot believe that Weston

never scoped out shots. He was human you know!

 

<p>

 

Actually the "St Ansel" title has been used on this and other forums

just as much or more as a denigration of Adams than as a title of

dignity, in fact, I cannot recall a comment made with this connotation

at any time in the forums that was positive. Certainly there are those

who put him on an unobtainable pedestal, this happens with many famous

people/photographers. There are many people who contribute to the

forums who emulate Weston amongst many other photographers who have

celebrity or "cult" status.

 

<p>

 

You yourself claim that Weston greatly influenced your work, technique

and choice of materials, should I say that the influence Weston had on

you is a hindrance to our medium? What is the actual count of how many

photographers are influenced by Weston, is there some magical number

between him and Adams that is ok and then not ok? Everyone has their

preferences for which photographers they admire, emulate or simply

agree with when it comes to their own belief systems.

 

<p>

 

I like many images made by both men, they also made images that I

don�t care for. It just doesn�t have to be that black and white�.

 

<p>

 

 

its Lindsey by the way, not Lindsay...