saulius_eidukas

In case you don't know there is another web page that you can also refer to <a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/">http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/</a>

Go to Q.-Tuan Luongs' <a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/">Large Format Photography Info</a>

Look under Misc and you will find an article on <a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/burke-james/restore8x10.html">Restoring a 8x10 Burke and James.</a>

Contains good information if you want to try to do the repairs yourself. Don't forget to look at the view/add comments link at the end of the article.

Quoted from A World History of Photography by Naomi Rosenblum. In chapater 5 Titled Photography and Art: The First Phase 1839-1890

 

"From the maze of conflicting statements and heated articles on the subject, three main positions about the potential of camera art emerged. The simplest, entertained by many painters and a section of the public, was that photographs should not be considered "art" because they were made with a mechanical device and by physical and chemical phenomena instead of by human hand and spirit; to some, camera images seemed to have more in common with fabric produced by machinery in a mill than with handmade creations fired by inspiration....photographs would be useful to art but should not be considered equal in creativeness to drawing and painting."

 

Sounds a lot like the debate going on here. Of course photography now has a valid place in the art world and the fact that chemical and mechanical processes involved in the process does not necessarily make it non-art. So I believe one day digital photographs will find it's place and exceptance as an artform. History will some day give the final answer.

Ignore the other poster who said to forgo the Going to the Sun Road. This road is one of the most spectacular I've ever been on... and I've driven in most every state in the lower 48. If you are anywhere near Montana Glacier Natl Park it is a must see. If you time it right with weather conditions and lighting just driving this road with its numerous pullouts offers many wonderful photo opportunities for the landscape photographer. And if you want to avoid crowds, this is really a hikers' park over 730 miles! Just park the car and hit a trail for a few hours. You will leave the crowds behind (most people don't wander far from the roads)and have a great experience. Here is one trip I took years ago going from the midwest, Sout Dakota- Badlands Natl Park, Black Hills N.F. (Needles Highway), Bighorn NF in Wyoming, Grand Tetons N.P., I skipped Yellowstone but vowed to go back one day, to Glacier Park in MT. If you go into North Dakota I recommend Theordore Roosevelt N.P. If you wish to see some of the western coastal areas I am most partial to the entire Oregon Coast. I think it has some of the best coastal scenery and the entire coast is public land, accessible by many many state parks and lands. Have fun and most importantly whatever itinerary you make be flexible and go with the moment.

One last place, I really like out east is the Smokey Mountains N.P., fall is a most spectacular time of year.

A big thanks to you Per and Harvey and the other participants. It was an enjoyable get together and I did pick up some good information and ideas to think about from you both. There's nothing like being amongst other LF photographers in a wonderful outdoor setting to rejuvinate the spirit and get the creative juices flowing. Glad to see the next workshop will be for a week, 2-3 days seems too short. For me anyway. I don't know if I'll make Mt. Shasta but maybe the next one. Any chance you might make a trip into my state of Oregon? hint.. hint :)

Thanks again,

Some redwood trees or whatever else I may have an opportunity to photograph at the CA Redwoods Natl Park. I'm heading out (before the crack of dawn) to the free workshop put together by Per Volquartz.

Neal, the sensorship of a photographic display in such a prominent institution as the Smithsonian is relevant to all photographers including the LF forum. If you don't like the subject don't read the thread.

I just came across a forgotten bottle of Kodak Rapid Selenium

Toner. It is quite old, (couple of years?) the solution is about

half finished so there is air inside the bottle. I was wondering if

anyone new the keeping properties of this toner, can it still be

used or better to just discard? Thanks in advance.

Steve, I've thought of doing such a scan technique myself. Can you please explain your process a little more? Specifically what do you mean by

"I make 3 scans per neg using a jig that I crafted out of thin cardboard. The jig ensures that the film maintains alignment with the direction that the film is moved in for the 3 scans."

What is this jig? Thanks.

What size negatives?

For less expensive flat bed scanners that can accomodate 8x10 try looking at Microtek ArtixScan 1800f which was talked about a bit already. See this link

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004N6n

 

Another similiarly priced scanner is the Epson 1680 Pro Flatbed.

 

Has anyone had any experience with the Epson 1680 and willing to share their experiences? Better yet anyone out there have first hand knowledge of comapring both of these scanners?

Wim,

Thank you for sharing your thoughtfully written article. Another book I will mention (I didn�t notice anyone mentioning it) is called The Idea of Wilderness �From Prehistory to the Age of Ecology by Max Oelschlaeger. From the backcover �Oelschlaeger�s monumental book is an historical survey of man�s relationship with nature and, in particular, with his thinking about that relationship��

 

 

Jay,

your comment �that I don't understand the appeal of landscape photography, either as a viewer or a photographer� is something I sometimes think about. Not for myself, but the possible viewer of any landscape image I make. How can I attempt to capture a landscape image and make it interesting, relevant to the viewer who may not relate to the subject matter. How to expand on the landscapes interpretation photographically and how to keep it a serious subject matter which I think it is and really deserves.

 

 

Roy,

I did post the question to this forum some time ago - Why take landscape photographs? Here is the link-

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0034U2

 

 

Saulius

If XTOL is really going out of production for those who like to use it try making your own. See the following article at http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/VitC/vitc.html

It's cheap to make, works well and you don't have to worry about it going out of production. You can also do a search on photo.net to find mor information.

Q.-Tuan Luong, As a frequent reader but not so frequent poster I'd like to take this opportunity to send my gratitude for all your efforts and hard work. I am pleased that you are trying to maintain the site as a non commercial entity which in the long run will keep the many contributors coming back to your site, which is what has made it so special and useful. If I was a computer programmer I'd lend you a hand, since not then please except this humble thank you.

I did a search at the www.kodak.com and came up with with the

following:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/environment/kes/pubs/pubsList.jhtml

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/environment/kes/pubs/pdfs/j300.pdf

If I'd mention a Natl. Park one that maybe is somewhat overlooked but

I've always thouroughly enjoyed whenever there is the Badlands of

South Dakota.

Well, when you ask of lesser known parks I won't mention any National

Parks in the US. They are all pretty well documented and information

about them is fairly accessible. If you are looking for new places

to discover try looking at state parks, national forests, wilderness

areas and just try going to any green spaces you see on a map. When

I lived in Chicago Illinois I frequented the waterfront of Lake

Michigan, you could be surprised what you may find where urban areas

border natural ones. Some other specific areas in that region are

Starved Rock State Park that borders a river I think the fox river

and I loved going there for some fall colors and Matthiesson State

Park which had some small but interesting cavernlike features about

90 miles southwest of Chicago. The Indiana Dunes area in Indiana and

the Sleeping Bear Dunes in Michigan. The obvious attractions are

sand dunes and water with forests and some marshlands. In my present

state of Oregon, most any place along the Oregon coast, the Columbia

River Gorge and a favorite spot I'm just begining to try and

photograph is Smith Rock State Park in central Oregon.

Whether you choose to photograph in digital or traditional, color or

black and white, 35mm or 8x10, shoot portraits or street photography,

etc etc is not so important as the end result. When someone is moved

by an image or piece of art it's not because they are thinking about

how it was made, what tools or techniques they employed but the end

result. Is it successful? That's what mattters. I find this

continuing mode of discussion of digital vs traditional tiresome and

unproductive. Digital is here to stay so just get used to it. There

is a place for all modes and styles of photography.

Chris,

I feel you were trying to bring forth a sincere discussion in regards

to the landscape as art and subject matter in photography. I will

try to keep my comments brief as I could ramble on and on about this

since it is a topic close to my heart.

Firstly, you seem to have come to the conclusion (if I understand

your statements correctly) that many individuals are photographing

pristine landscapes in a similar fashion, style, technique etc.

Because so many are out there doing it, and have done it for years

and years it should no longer be considered as an artistic subject.

You seem to think this somehow invalidates such images as having

artistic value and can only be thought of as "pretty" pictures. I

do agree with you that there are many seemingly similar and

repetitive images of landscapes, but the same can be said of most any

photographic subject, be it portraits, still life, nudes, street

photography etc. I personally don't seek out the exact same places

other photographers have been to but even if I do wind up in

Yosemite, which is A. Adams territory it does not mean I can not and

should not photograph there. Chris, you state that people are

missing the whole point of art but I disagree. Just because a

photographic image does not break some new ground showing us the

world in a new light in which hasn't been done before does not

invalidate it as art. Personally, I do differentiate the various

landscape images out there, for I don't view everyone as a successful

one. But when I see landscape images which employ good composition,

interesting lighting, color if not b/w and is skillfully crafted I am

often finding myself drawn into it. Part of the reason is because I

think art is in the eye of the beholder. What one sees as art,

another may see as garbage. Art can be pretty or gritty, it can be

of familiar subjects or seldom seen ones, it can come in all sorts of

shapes and forms. If you find these landscape images as inartistic,

it might be because you just don't relate to the subject. When I

lived in the city of Chicago and attended college there I took some

photography courses and found my choice of subject matter, the

landscape, in the minority. I felt I wasn't taken seriously because

I wasn't trying to "push the envelope" in my choice of subject. I

truly believe these individuals who looked down on me simply couldn�t

relate to the images I took because they were so distant from the

subject. They were city dwellers who were only interested in the

doings of other people in the city. This is fine, but it doesn't

mean anything outside that couldn't and shouldn't be considered as

art. The natural landscape has become a lifelong love for me. I

found myself taking vacations to various national parks and

wilderness areas, going to state parks and driving for hours on the

weekends trying to find places that haven't become farmland or paved

over with most of the natural processes and other living things being

wiped out. (Although I did and do at times photograph such things.)

This love of the natural world has brought me to the Pacific

Northwest so I can live closer to such places and have more access to

them. I did try photographing in my "back yard", for Chicago is a

large city with much to offer. But over and over I found myself

going back to the more natural landscape as subject matter. I can't

speak for other photographers but for me it is simply a love of the

land and a connection I feel in my inner core to the land when out

there photographing away from the noise and fast pace of urban life.

It satisfies a yearn to try to be more in tune with this planet we

call home.

Chris, instead of telling people that they should abandon landscapes

as subject matter, maybe start a discussion on how to make it more

relevant to others, how to expand on it's interpretation

photographically and how to keep it a serious subject matter which I

think it is and really deserves. And for those interested in this

one place to start, if you can find a copy is with a book called

Between Home and Heaven. Contemporary American Landscape

Photography. published in 1992.

Best regards,

Saulius Eidukas (Portland, OR)

 

Ooops, a correction on my previous post. The article - Getting

Serious: The One Hundred Prints Project is found in Lenwork issue 21

not 33 according to their web site.

Stephen,

When out in the field taking landscape photogrpahs I carry my 35mm

camera with several lenses as well as my 8x10. Upon seeing an

enticing composition I first pull out my 35mm with a lens combination

that closely matches what I forsee using with the LF camera and

lens. What I then do is walk around looking through the 35mm to get

a better sense of where to first place my tripod and LF camera and to

see if the composition will work. It saves me some time in moving my

big heavy LF camera around on tripod from spot to spot until I find

the right vantage point. This doesn't always work but seems to help

me. Another thought is to become very familiar and proficient at

setting up your camera. It may be the difference between catching or

missing a scene in which the lighting is quickly changing or fading.

I've missed a few at being too slow and clumsy with my camera. Lastly

if you can get your hands on the publication LENSWORK issues 33 and

34 there may be something of interest to you. In issue 33 the editor

talked about a 100 prints project in six weeks and follows it up with

some observations in issue 34 "The Importance of Structure". Some

tidbits from issue 34 "I can be much more productive when I define a

project and then set about the task of executing it. When the

definition is missing, the execution tends to be random, unfinsihed,

inconsistent and mostly theoretical. One of the keys to success is

to frankly face our limitations and work within them." You can buy

back issues on line at http://www.lenswork.com/ These ideas may

help you be more productive, which may or may not help in getting you

more exhibition quality prints. Best of luck.

Steve,

As a long time subscriber whose indulgence in LF photography is

strictly on a personal level, not commercial, what I like most about

your magazine is when you share information on a broad range of

topics. When your primary focus for an issue is on one subject, like

digital in the last publication, you risk having many disgruntled

readers who feel they get nothing out of it because it's not

necessarily something they are intersted in. I am interested in

digital output possibilities as long as they are within the financial

grasp of a financially challenged photographer. Please do keep a

focus also in B&W traditional processes, glad to hear you may be

doing something with contact printing soon, love seeing portfolios

with interviews whith the photographer which not only discuss the

technical aspects of the images but what motivated the individual as

well. Although John Paul Caponigra's articles may not be everyones'

cup of tea, I do enjoy his interviews and hope to see more. And

lastly, please continue to broach the topic of landscape

photography. Although it is a well trodden subject I still find it

most stimulating and facinating when done well. For the landscape is

where we play out the drama of our daily lives, and it has shaped us

in countless ways over the centuries. Today we are changing and

influencing it more then ever and who knows where that shall lead.

Thanks for the hearing me out.

Walter,

Thank you for sharing as I've not heard about it in the US media. It

was a wonderful gesture.

Thank you all for your various and thoughtful responses. I agree

with you all in what you have stated. I've been interested in the

landscape as a photographic subject since I had my first camera. I

am always seeking new ways of approaching and interpreting this

subject and that was why I asked for your input. It heartens me to

hear so many are interested, as I sometimes feel landscape

photography may not get the respect it fully deserves. I suppose as

an alternative perspective I could have asked those who are not

interested in landscape photography, why not?

Best Regards,

Saulius

This is not a technical question but a philosophical one. I don't know how many of you are interested in landscape photographing, but those who are I am intersted in hearing your responses. Thanks.

 

<p>

 

What has always drawn me to landscape photography is using it as a way to get away from the hustle and bustle of everyday life. In early adulthood I yearned to leave the city, the crowds of people and to be more in contact with nature. To take in the natural world, to relax and free my mind of stress. Photographing helps me focus on the landscape and in a sense meditate. This "meditation" allows me to concentrate on the landscape before me, to quiet my mind and over the years this has opened up for me new ways of seeing the world we live in. (This type of photographing naturally led me to large format with it's slow and precise technique with wonderful detail in the end product.) And it is these things I observe and experience I try to convey in my landscape photography. I was interested in hearing from others, what motivates you in taking landscape photographs. Not for commercial purposes, but for personal work. Why do you try to make an "artistic" landscape photograph?