Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,206   Posts: 1,531,879   Online: 1036
      
Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2678910111213 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 126

Thread: Masters

  1. #111
    Art Vandalay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    287
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by lee
    is it a full moon? or is it just the crazies time to play? Jeeze!

    lee\c
    Well sometimes you have to just inject a bit of passion into the mix. It keeps things from getting too dull.

  2. #112
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandalay
    I think the key part of this statement is 'as [a] useful technique'. It doesn't really mean anything does it. It's a 'technique'. Techniques are something you chose to use or not..
    Actually, pre-visualization is not a technique that one can choose to use or not. It is an inate ability that some have and most don't. I'v read that only about 10% of the population at large is capable of pre-visualization. And the type I mean is that when I photograph, I can litterally see in my mind's eye the final print framed and hanging on the wall. A close friend of mine, with whom I go out and photograph is a neurologist and used to be a brain-surgeon. We talk about this often. He cannot pre-vislualize and he can't even understand it or explain how it works, and he can't explain it, I won't even try to. I just know it happens and studies have been conducted to see how common it is. So it can't really be considered a technique.
    Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandalay
    However, I also know that he changed his mind later and desired to print the negs differently. Too bad that he chose to previsualize so severely because I suppose the negative would be useless for any other print than the one he decided on the exact day and point in his life. By being so anal and unyeilding he painted himself into a corner. It would've been better if he had made a more general negative so he could print it differently if he so chose....but he didn't so that's that.
    He didn't change his mind to such a degree that it made the original negative useless. Can you point a single example where he had to re-shoot a negative just for a different brand\batch of paper? You're suggesting that's its' 'too bad' that Ansel Adams didn't dump the Zone System and just create 'average' negatives that he would spend hours in the darkroom working over......hey wait a minute, that's how your work, isn't it? Are you suggesting that AA got it all wrong and he should work like you do? Yeah, that's the ticket, and we could call it the 'AV System' and then we would have the AV Gallery in Yosemite, and the AV System Basic Photography Series and of course Mt. AV.
    Aren't we getting alittle carried away, Art, suggesting that AA got his technique all wrong and should have done it like you (and some others on this baord) do?

  3. #113
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by doughowk
    To sum it up, a perfect negative is that which contains the information you need to create your vision, and that information has to be readily accessible during the printing process.
    Does it matter to you how that information got into the negative? One one (admitidely ridiculous extreme, which actually happened to me), I could drop the camera, the shutter release could go off and an exposure would be made, controlled by the in-camera meter. At another extreme, as in LF, every step in making a negative is consiously controlled by me. Let's say that in both cases, I get negatives with enough information to pull a good print from. Thei first one may take a lot of dodging, burning, papg\er grade changes, maybe some bleaching, etc. The second maybe a little manipulation, but not much.

    Do both meet your definition of a 'perfect negative'?

    -Mike

  4. #114
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by mikewhi
    ... You're suggesting that's its' 'too bad' that Ansel Adams didn't dump the Zone System and just create 'average' negatives that he would spend hours in the darkroom working over......hey wait a minute.... (clipped).
    Aren't we getting alittle carried away, Art, suggesting that AA got his technique all wrong and should have done it like you (and some others on this baord) do?
    I didn't interpret that message like that, mikewhi... at all.

    It was a rather sarcastic method of try to illustrate a point by intensifying... that can be a slippery slope, but I understood what he was trying to say.
    The only "suggestion" that this meat something like AA "should have abandoned anything" was yours.

    Art Vandalay was not suggesting that the "Zone System" or "previsualization" are "bad" - or that Adams "got it all wrong" ... only that we are free to choose to use those techniques - or not.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  5. #115
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Foraging around here... I've been giving deal of thought to the idea, advanced by "mikewhi", that APUG is predominately a "technical" site; that we are primarily and narrowly interested in the "technical matters" of photography, as opposed to the aesthetic.
    I think he has a point there, although the thoughts of trying to communicate our ideas in an aesthetic frame seems to me to be difficult to say the least.

    I will take the plunge, and start (I hope this is OK) a thread titled "Aesthetics". .. where we can, hopefully express our emotional reactions to different images.

    "Technical talk" (i.e. Dmax - min; "blown highlights"), should be, gently, off limits... not that they are to be forgotten or deemed unimportant - only that we should have a dedicated venue that should be for opinions and impressions that do not have to be supported or "logical" - or conform to anyone else's opinion.

    I don't expect that it will be easy to post in that thread ... we will have to discuss our "insides" ... but ... here goes.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  6. #116
    Art Vandalay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    287
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by mikewhi
    It is an inate ability that some have and most don't. I'v read that only about 10% of the population at large is capable of pre-visualization.
    I'd be interested to see this reference if you have it. To me pre-visualization seems pretty simple.

  7. #117
    Art Vandalay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    287
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by mikewhi
    He didn't change his mind to such a degree that it made the original negative useless. Can you point a single example where he had to re-shoot a negative just for a different brand\batch of paper? You're suggesting that's its' 'too bad' that Ansel Adams didn't dump the Zone System and just create 'average' negatives that he would spend hours in the darkroom working over......hey wait a minute, that's how your work, isn't it?
    But I thought that he 'pre-visualized' exactly how the print would look on the wall (as you said) and 'pre-visualized' the paper and developer he would use and made 'the perfect negative' for that situation using the Zone System. Isn't this why he was considered a demi-god? That he knew exactly what he wanted and created the exact negative for the situation? Is this or is this not the truth, as has been said by many of his supporters on countless threads in numerous forums?

    I would say that this is what others interpret, so logically, if you've (allegedly) created a negative for such an exact situation then you're screwed if you change your mind and/or can't get that paper/developer combo. What would you do in this situation? You create technically perfect negatives and I assume you pre-visualize and use the zone system to get the perfect neg for the paper/developer. What happens if the paper you're using suddenly disappears? Do you chuck the negative? I mean if it's perfect for one paper then surely it's going to be less-than-perfect for another and any print you make will be substandard and make you look rather silly if you show it.

  8. #118

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Düsseldorf, Germany
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,021
    Images
    1
    This is one of my favourite passages in the Daybooks. I love its simplicity and how it implies complete mastery of technique leading to complete independence from it.

    "My way of working -
    I start with no preconceived idea --
    then rediscovery through the lens --
    final form of presentation seen on ground glass, the finished print previsioned complete in every detail of texture, movement, proportion, before exposure -- the shutter's release automatically and finally fixes my conception, allowing no after manipulation --
    the ultimate end, the print, is but a duplication of all that I saw and felt through my camera."
    Francesco

  9. #119
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandalay
    But I thought that he 'pre-visualized' exactly how the print would look on the wall (as you said) and 'pre-visualized' the paper and developer he would use and made 'the perfect negative' for that situation using the Zone System. Isn't this why he was considered a demi-god? That he knew exactly what he wanted and created the exact negative for the situation? Is this or is this not the truth, as has been said by many of his supporters on countless threads in numerous forums?

    I would say that this is what others interpret, so logically, if you've (allegedly) created a negative for such an exact situation then you're screwed if you change your mind and/or can't get that paper/developer combo. What would you do in this situation? You create technically perfect negatives and I assume you pre-visualize and use the zone system to get the perfect neg for the paper/developer. What happens if the paper you're using suddenly disappears? Do you chuck the negative? I mean if it's perfect for one paper then surely it's going to be less-than-perfect for another and any print you make will be substandard and make you look rather silly if you show it.
    Art, you're trying to force a point where there is none to be made.
    1) "then you're screwed if you change your mind". The point is that you don't change your mind. Once you realize what you want, that's is what you go for. The expeience of it is so strong that you simply don't change your mind. Peopel who post-visualize in the DR, those are the ones who constantly change their minds.
    2) "What happens if the paper you're using suddenly disappears?" Well, obviously, you use a different paper. The characteristics of top-end FB papers aren't so drastically different that a negative is suddenly useless if that paper disappears. When graded Brilliant went away, I switched over to Seagull with no problem, still print the same negs on Seagull as I did on Brilliant. Some sligt re-calibration is necessart to determine the range of the new paper, but you won't find it much different than the other top-end brand.

    You've got no point here and you're arguing up a blind alley. You don't have any experience inthis type of photography so I'd suggest you stop trying to invent reasons why it can't work when the best photographers of all time have made it work for decades and decades.

    -Mike

  10. #120
    mikewhi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    808
    Images
    9
    Francesco:

    This is the pass I was trying to recall earlier. It says it all perfectly. I know not everyone works like this, but the fact is that many photographers do. There just seems to be people on this board whao can't stand the idea that an image can be pre-visualized and the technical aspects are all about creating a negative and print to re-create that pre-vislualized image.

    I guess they think everyone has to work like them or it isn't photography!

    -Mike



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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