Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,952   Posts: 1,557,962   Online: 1030
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35
  1. #21
    MurrayMinchin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Coast, BC, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,195
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Chinn
    But most non-photographers don't look at a print and search for the flaws. This is a weird quirk among photographers I suppose due to the technical nature of the medium, wanting to compare ones own skills to a master and be able to say "look his print has the same flaws mine have". Sometimes I think that folks think a perfect, "sterile" print with no flaws in the technical aspects is the ultimate in photography. We should strive for the best possible print but obviously Weston and Adams were not obsessive about it and it has not hurt their reputations.

    It is when we stand back and look at the master's print at a normal viewing distance should we make comparisons. At that distance it is not quite so easy to say his work is just like mine. At a normal viewing distance it is the image as a whole that we see not the technical aspects of the image.
    Well said! (As I recall, I did have my nose up against the Ansel print to find the lint).

    Murray
    _________________________________________
    Note to self: Turn your negatives into positives.

  2. #22
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Chinn
    As photographers it is easy to get ones nose up to a print and find the flaws and most prints will have them unless the negative is "cleaned" digitally and an inkjet made. And even then I have seen minor flaws of banding if one looks close enough.
    I understand all this .. but don't make the mistake that I value technical perfection over all else - I don't. In fact, I see the VALUE of what others may consider to be "flaws" (see" "blown highlight" discussion) - I think a little more flexibly than *some* others do.

    What I wrote about was a comparison between the "original print" and a printed reproduction.
    We carry these images around in our memories... and when the actual, original image is different than our internal image, it is a shock. When the images printed in books differ so intensely, it is even a greater shock.

    There really is no way to discuss this intelligently without "at hand" copies of both the original print and the reproduction.

    My point was that, "It is not heresy".
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    [QUOTE=Ed Sukach]We carry these images around in our memories... and when the actual, original image is different than our internal image, it is a shock. When the images printed in books differ so intensely, it is even a greater shock.[QUOTE]

    That's exactly it.

    Cheers,

    R

  4. #24
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rural NW Missouri
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,831
    When Ansel Adams oversaw the reproduction of his prints for the New York Graphic Society calendars, he said the prints looked nearly as good in reproduction as in the originals. In the absence of originals, I treasure those reproductions. However, there are times when such technique is an insignificant factor. Consider the Robert Capa photo taken on Omaha Beach during the Normandy invasion. Technically it is little, if any, better than many Holga images. It conveyed a message to the viewers of that time that technical perfection would have little helped. Too much technical perfection would have lost the feeling of the occasion.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Jones
    . Consider the Robert Capa photo taken on Omaha Beach during the Normandy invasion. Technically it is little, if any, better than many Holga images. It conveyed a message to the viewers of that time that technical perfection would have little helped. Too much technical perfection would have lost the feeling of the occasion.
    Also absolutely true. The idea of appropriate quality is an interesting one.

    Cheers,

    R

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7
    My (career) background being Photojournalism and my personal ethic cleaving to "The Foundview", there are no "flaws" in my images if I accurately captured the event or scene.
    What distresses me most is no-one seems to appreciate straight out Photojournalism these days, their critiques harshly favoring the more pretentious, more "artsy" output.

    I am reminded though that prize winning PJ images have and do tell stories, as opposed to the banal subjects of most photographic images, images that even with good captions say absolutely nothing.

    Ed Greene, A Clinton Hill (Brooklyn, NY) PJ

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    284
    When looking at old films and more importantly old photographs I often see dust/dirt/scratches/broken plates/missing emulsion (i.e. the Atget Paris book). Upon seeing things like this I am usually of the feeling that it would be perfectly acceptable in my own work if it is being accepted by myself when viewing a book/movie or an actual print in a museum.

    With this being said I do show prints that have defects, though, if when making a print I have the ability to cure the problem (dust/hair that can be removed) I will. An image with dust/scratches in the actual negative that cannot be fixed will still be printed and shown as that is how the negative actually looks.. I will always know of the defect and will regret it having happened though knowing the image itself is more important than the 0.1% of the photograph which is flawed I will still feel as if I have created a succesful photograph.

    I am a perfectionist and strive to do the best work I can.. If something can be cleaned to solve an issue an attempt will be made but as I mentioned, if something with scratches and flaws is good enough to be in a museum collection or put onto DVD than it seems my flaws and errors will be perfectly acceptable..


    As a side note..

    I have been unimpressed by Ansel Adams prints as well.. Both behind glass and seen just mat'd right in front of me I will always prefer the ones I've seen in a book..
    "Where is beauty? Where I must will with my whole Will; where I will love and perish, that an image may not remain merely an image."

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    Carrying around the burden of grand expectations could give one a hernia...lighten up.
    Claire (Ms Anne Thrope is in the darkroom)

  9. #29
    Sjixxxy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Zenith City, MN
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    394
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by EdGreene
    My (career) background being Photojournalism and my personal ethic cleaving to "The Foundview", there are no "flaws" in my images if I accurately captured the event or scene.
    What distresses me most is no-one seems to appreciate straight out Photojournalism these days, their critiques harshly favoring the more pretentious, more "artsy" output.

    I am reminded though that prize winning PJ images have and do tell stories, as opposed to the banal subjects of most photographic images, images that even with good captions say absolutely nothing.

    Ed Greene, A Clinton Hill (Brooklyn, NY) PJ
    If it makes you feel any better, every photography book that I own is all PJ & Street photos. Not a single 'Fine Art' book in the lot. Every print I've ever purchased has been by an anonymous photographer. Interesting PJ type images that I've found deep within boxes of prints at antique stores.
    Gear: Camera, Brain, Light.
    Website - FB

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    I am reminded though that prize winning PJ images have and do tell stories, as opposed to the banal subjects of most photographic images, images that even with good captions say absolutely nothing.
    :rolleyes:

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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