Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,701   Posts: 1,548,417   Online: 1039
      
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 129
  1. #31
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,029
    As I've said in other threads of this type and in Shiite vs Sunni, there are right brained and left brained individuals. One is not better or worse than the other. Generally one is more "creative" than the other and one is far more technically oriented. To find the "perfect" blend of this type is pretty rare.

    One type, left brained, loves the process, and dabbles and makes equipment and processes and chemical concoctions to fulfil his love of this side of the equation.

    The other is more "arty" or "creative" and attempts to capture emotion, or subject matter that the image speaks for itself and is not dependant on process so much.

    Everybody is a blending of these two "brain" types and the world could not function without both ends of the spectrum.

    Occasionally the "perfect storm" of both types comes together to make a master photographer, who handles both aspects with ease, and I wish that were me.


    Michael
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  2. #32
    Joe Lipka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    809
    Yes.

    Not really. Using large format and ULF by their very nature you have significant physical limitations imposed by (and by practictioners warmly accepted) the equipment. This tends to limit the subject matter. Thus, we continue to see Peppers in tin funnels, flowers and the ubiquitous rock and tree photographs. You have to be a very adept technical photographer to break this mold. Nicholas Nixon is one of the few that uses a view camera in a very non-traditional approach.

    The Alt process comes in as a consequence of the requirement of a large negative. They just seem to work together.

    Probably been said many times before, but medium is not necessarily a good indicator of the worth of the image. It is the image itself which should be judged. If you are aware of the medium of the image, then the photograph failed to impress the viewer. Your response should be, "Great Photograph", not "That's a really good black and white print." The format should serve the image, not be the point of the image.

    That's just my opinion.
    Two New Projects! Light on China - 07/13/2014

    www.joelipkaphoto.com

    250+ posts and still blogging! "Postcards from the Creative Journey"

    http://blog.joelipkaphoto.com/

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    Process and ULF photographers feel a lot more secure knowing that if they are shooting with something that is "obscure" that more people will become interested in it- I think this is mainly due to the sheer size of their negative or the chemical makeup of the print.

    I could understand the intial question and your reasons, but now you are going beyond what is reasonable and making silly assumptions. Do you really think that any of us think people will be interested in our pictures because we used a big negative or an alt process? Give me a break! Outside photographers, 99% of those who see a pt/pd print have no idea waht it is or how it was done, many just say it looks "old"......YOu obviously did not see the work I recommended to you, or you would not be writing this follow up.

  4. #34
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky
    One type, left brained, loves the process, and dabbles and makes equipment and processes and chemical concoctions to fulfil his love of this side of the equation.

    The other is more "arty" or "creative" and attempts to capture emotion, or subject matter that the image speaks for itself and is not dependant on process so much.
    Blansky, that's perfect.

    I'm a born "tinkerer", in that I love the process for its own sake (having a degree in chemistry is a symptom, not an excuse).

    I realise there are artistic aspects to each and every process, and I aspire to master these.

    If I can "meld" the two, I'll make a great print (I hope).
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  5. #35

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Mass, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    113
    "you are going beyond what is reasonable and making silly assumptions"

    It seems that you are the only one making the assumptions. Grant never said that ALL alt. processes were as he described, simply that some people seem to hide they're poor photographs behind complicated processes. I have seen many lovely photos done in ULF or alt. process, but I have seen many more (particularly on this site), of lame subject matter with an ongoing list of all their technical details that get many responses that I know they wouldnt had they been shot with a smaller format.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,241
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by VoidoidRamone
    I think it would be a lot of fun, and a good challenge, to try ULF- but I personally don't have the funding right now to shoot film that costs in upwards of $5 a sheet. I also think that my work and style is perfectly suited to any format 4x5 or smaller. I don't think that I need to shoot in a format in which I am more concerned on how big it is rather than be able to focus all my attention on what I'm actually taking a photo of. Sometimes it seems to me that Alt. Process and ULF photographers feel a lot more secure knowing that if they are shooting with something that is "obscure" that more people will become interested in it- I think this is mainly due to the sheer size of their negative or the chemical makeup of the print.
    -Grant
    Why so defensive? Seems like a tomAto tomOto argument to me. If you don't like it don't do it, but don't bash on people for doing what they like. You are not forced to look at the images so you are not having it shoved down your throat.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  7. #37

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Grady O
    "you are going beyond what is reasonable and making silly assumptions"

    It seems that you are the only one making the assumptions. Grant never said that ALL alt. processes were as he described, simply that some people seem to hide poor photographs behind complicated processes.
    Hear! Hear! Technical mastery is always easier than artistic mastery.

    Many achieve both. But those who achieve only technical mastery -- in ANY medium, includiing the 'easy' ones, small formats, etc. -- sometimes seem to expect (and occasionally receive) disproportionate praise.

    Cheers,

    Roger

  8. #38
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    ULF is expensive, in terms of price per shot (not equipment).

    So is 35mm (in my experience), in terms of cost per successful shot.

    Both media deserve the best print quality you can give them. Sometimes it's a quick neg scan (fast, efficient, but not all that great. The newspapers love them). It could be a "proper" enlargement on RC paper, or FB paper if it's going for an exhibition or similar. Sometimes the negative just seems to call out for some kind of "alternative treatment", which unleashes a plethora of options.

    I wish I were determined enough to shoot my negatives for one kind of treatment, and one kind of print. As it is I'm an undisciplined experimentalist: I prefer to get the picture, then worry about how to print it.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  9. #39
    billschwab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Meeshagin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,749
    Images
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by Grady O
    I think that most of you are missing the point. Yes there are MANY bad photos with 35mm on traditional papers, but it just seems that when that same photo is taken with some obscure ULF size and printed on a paper that was dicontinued years ago and is only special order over the internet that same photo magically becomes a work of art.
    It appears you simply have some grudge against people doing alt process work? Why should it matter where and how the materials were procured? Can you show those of us that are "missing the point" some example of a print "magically" becoming a work of art simply because of its process?
    Quote Originally Posted by Grady O
    ...of lame subject matter with an ongoing list of all their technical details that get many responses that I know they wouldnt had they been shot with a smaller format.
    What is the real problem here? I don't see any more or less crap or "lame" subject matter coming from those that do ULF or Alt process work than those doing smaller, more traditional processes. In fact, just by sheer numbers of practitioners of each it stands to reason there would be more crap created by those using the latter. And your reasoning as to what is accepted as a "good" photograph confuses me even more. A photograph of say... vomit might get a lot of responses as well. Am I to think that is any more a "good" photograph simply because it illicits a lot of response? I understand one man's regurgitated food and drink is another man's art and can leave it at that. I don't need to look at what others think to be able to decide what is good in my eyes.

    I think the original poster of this thread was off-base and perhaps a bit defensive as Mark said. Why single out alt processes unless there is perhaps a feeling of jealousy or inferiority?

    Bill

  10. #40

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Mass, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    113
    You seem to have forgotten the part where I said, "I have seen many lovely photos done in ULF or alt. process". I'm not making any personal attacks here and theres really no need to get so defensive, it's just my thoughts. And as for Grant feeling "jealousy or inferiority", uh, well, I'll just let him speak for himself.

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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