Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,663   Posts: 1,481,645   Online: 857
      
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 55
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,810
    For one, if I only photographed a scene where the range of lighting fits neatly in 10 zones maximum, I'd be avoiding awful a lot of excellent opportunities. Wait... make that 8 because most paper can't even show all 10 zones. More like 7 to 8.

    For two, I first see the scene by my eyes. I scan the field. My brain automatically adjust my iris (in my eyes), compensate for excessive and lack of lighting and construct the scene in my mind. Camera, on the other hand, has a fixed exposure for a given shutter release. It applies to the entire frame of the film. (unless one uses grad filter, etc). Dodging and burning are often necessary to print the scene as my my eyes saw it and my mind reconstructed.

    Plus.... the photograph need not be an accurate depiction of the actual scene. It is not always a documentary rendition. It can be an interpretation of the scene. In other words, that's what I want the viewer to see - through my lens and my mind.

    Photography to me, is an artistic expression - not a forensic evidence.
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  2. #22
    ROL
    ROL is offline
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    688
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    Dodging & Burning In – I know this is sometimes necessary when producing a print. However, if you photograph something with the correct lighting ratio for the film you are using and get the exposure and development right, this is often not necessary. I also think that some of the maps shown by printers who do extensive dodging and burning are really trying to show they have some special skill which should be emulated by others. Almost comparable with Photoshop manipulation and devoid of original integrity related to original capture.
    Unless you are spoiling for an argument (an even then), I think these are very immature and ignorant statements. I might agree with the relative lengths I've seen some go to, which involve split second timing, but that is their process, not mine to judge. In the thousands of prints I've made, I've only encountered one case where the straight print was good enough to be considered a finished fine print, and that was only with one size. Other sizes from the same negative required small adjustments to match the the straight one.

    With natural light one doesn't get to fine tune lighting conditions, that is why one needs to adjust developing of the negative. There is no way a monochrome negative can normally translate the emotion of any color scene to monochrome substrates without intervention – the visualization of the photographic artist.

    Showing off "some special skill", as you say, is ludicrous. I have never seen a case where fine art prints are accompanied by "maps", unless the creator of the work desired to convey classical methods clearly to others. This act of internet altruism I have done myself (Making a Fine Art Print –> Print Record), without apology to you, and no financial gain to myself, simply for the benefit of others.

    You are a very silly person.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    102
    So, Clive, I guess this is one of your photos:
    http://www.make-a-print.com/photo_44...tos_id=7989106
    I suppose it was your intent for my eyes to be drawn to the bright foreground, and stay there, looking at nothing else in the photo? Because that's what's happening.

    Burning and dodging don't exist to cure errors in exposure--they're there to shape the viewer's interaction with the photograph, stressing what is important, subduing what isn't. Nature doesn't always cooperate with what we were seeing, and how we want other people to see that.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,257
    Images
    2
    the way i see it is no matter what is done with a camera, it is manipulating whatever scene is in front of it.
    slow exposures manipulate time just like instant exposures of a millisecond do the same. ( i won't even go into filters .. )
    developing the film and converting it into a negative manipulates the scene even more, soft invisible grain, hard grain reticulation
    ( i won't go into intensification or negative retouching either )
    then printing it ... chemistry paper, hands on the print, ice in the bath, hair dryer, water bath, burning, dodging, wide open lens, stopped down, obstructions,
    graphite dust on the print, abrading it with a knife ... inks, oils bleaches paints ...
    there really is no such thing as an unmanipulated straight print ...

  5. #25
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    [snip snip snip]

    I would try to take the middle road in this discussion. Again, there is such a thing as special/good light, or "found" light if you want to call it that. And knowing how to use it is a very useful skill. That said, there's nothing wrong with whatever tools and techniques someone may use to achieve their artistic vision. We have to be tolerant of each other's workflows and appreciate the diversity of approach...
    Last edited by keithwms; 01-08-2012 at 09:59 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    588
    As long as you get the print that you want , who cares how you achieve it. Your visualization of the scene is far more important.
    We can argue whether it should be achieved in camera, in the darkroom or the computer all day, but in the the end, what does it matter.
    A good print is a good print, no matter how it is created.
    Bachelor of Fine Arts and Bachelor of Arts: Journalism - University of Arkansas 2014

    Canon A-1, Canon AE-1, Canon Canonet GIII 17, Argus 21, Rolleicord Va, Mamiya RB67, Voigtländer Bessa

    http://darkroom317.deviantart.com/

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Grande Prairie, Alberta, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    I'm not saying that dodging and burning are wrong, but often unnecessary and done because some printers are saying that this is what a photographer should do to produce a good print. I would say the same about cropping, not wrong, but if you have considered original composure, why crop? Does a painter go out and make a painting and then when he/she returns to their studio, take a pair of scissors and cut a bit off one edge?
    The painter always has a complete set of lenses with him...his eyes... and he can always make a perfect composition in his brain and create the painting he wanted to capture. However for someone like me who only has one lens, I have to compose the scene to include the specific portion of the landscape that I visualize in the print and then when I get back into the darkroom, crop in order to achieve that vision. Cropping for artistic control is one thing....cropping to correct a mistake is another.

  8. #28
    tomalophicon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Canberra, ACT.
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,562
    Images
    24
    I don't know why everyone continues to say things are OK for artistic reasons and not to correct mistakes.
    They must be perfect practitioners of the art or science.
    I for one make mistakes with almost all of the pictures I make and have to employ certain tools to correct them in varying degrees.
    I hope one day to be as good as all of you.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Bookham Surrey
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    105
    Images
    4
    I just find the whole of this debate depressing. So many problems in this world are caused by people creating self imposed rules of their own thinking and then trying to force others to comply by any means possible, criticism, coercion, ridicule etc. Surely we should all be allowed to use the techniques that work for us without being ostracized. Crop, burn, dodge, tone, two bath, hot finger, bleach, warmtone, cool tone, lith, water bath etc, are these all banned in our totalitarian state?
    Tony

  10. #30
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,136
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Carnie View Post
    I have never made a print in my entire career that was not dodged or burned , it is a necessity IMO.
    Same here. When you look at the print you feel that dodging or burning is necessary, it most likely is. The Both it are not a rescue operations but part of the creative process of the human in the thedarkroom.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin