Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,878   Posts: 1,520,369   Online: 1147
      
Page 6 of 22 FirstFirst 12345678910111216 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 214
  1. #51
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    6,995
    Images
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Klein View Post
    Read this article about how she got 4 of her most famous pictures. You'll understand why she was too busy to worry about tracking F stops.
    http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/fe..._excerpt200810
    That last one was a doozy (it was also DIGITAL she didn't have to record anything, it's all in the metadata... Lol).

    But I found it strange that her "4 most famous photographs" didn't include any of the ones I know her for....maybe the Demi Moore one but I mean definitely didn't include the John Lennon one... I know everyone already knows about it, but it's certainly more famous than the rest...

    Thanks for sharing, I read the whole thing.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  2. #52
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,163
    Images
    288
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    There's the other side of this coin though. Supplying tech info could also potentially prevent people from going down the slippery slope, particularly when it comes to developers. People sometimes have the tendency, when they see a great looking print (or reproduction in a high quality book), to think there must be something in the process they're missing (Pyro, Amidol, whatever). If they knew many of the greats use(d) "boring" materials it might convince them to work harder instead of searching for magic films, developers, papers etc.
    That's true. It is 95% about technique anyway.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  3. #53
    erikg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    pawtucket rhode island usa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,391
    For many photographers, especially for those who consider what they do art, there is already this feeling that they need to work against the idea that photography is just a technical exercise. It's a bias or perceived bias that has lessened over the years but hasn't completely gone away. Artists in other media get this too and you won't find too many books put out by painters who go into much detail about process. Unfairly or not in the art world it seems amateurish. Ever go to a lecture by an established fine art photographer? There always seems to be one person in the audience who asks about cameras or film or something and you'll hear a collective grown go through the audience. There are just bigger questions to ask and to think about. The stakes should be higher. Sunday painters talk about brushes. Serious artists keep that talk amongst peers.

  4. #54
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,089
    Images
    341
    Most readers are not interested in that detail.
    Last edited by cliveh; 11-22-2013 at 02:36 PM. Click to view previous post history.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  5. #55
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,946
    Because most people reading those books don't care a bit, and in the end it adds absolutely no value for most readers.
    Several folks have made a reply similar to the one above.

    I think, however, that there is more to it than that. Having been around a few really talented professional photographers, it seems to me that many of them (all?) just simply don't think it that important. I think all of them have worked with the same (relatively small number of) materials for so long that they can make the materials do whatever they want...they can achieve whatever 'look' they want/need using their chosen materials.

  6. #56
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    6,995
    Images
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by erikg View Post
    The stakes should be higher. Sunday painters talk about brushes. Serious artists keep that talk amongst peers.
    That last sentence is the key....

    Where are my peers??? LOL

    Should I considered a compliment when people I think are amazing and above me actually tell me their secrets?
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  7. #57
    erikg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    pawtucket rhode island usa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,391
    Maybe so! I've found that many artists don't mind talking about process and often really enjoy it but don't want to be that public with it for all sorts of reasons. Like actors not talking about their stagecraft they like to keep the illusion that what they do is effortless.

  8. #58
    Maris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Noosa, Queensland, Australia.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    ...I'm constantly surprised and frustrated when I'm looking through a book of photographs by a famous photographer, and almost never is there any indication of what film it is or what developer was used....
    You reckon you're frustrated, well I'm driven to the point of anguish when looking at most photo-books by not knowing what is being offered to my gaze.

    Ok, I can see the page in the book bears a picture and it is probably a print made by web offset photo-lithography like much of high end printing these days. But the burning question for me remains "What does the picture in the book illustrate?"

    Sometimes the picture in the book IS the final work itself. The photogravures in Alfred Stiezlitz's Camera Work periodical are artworks in their own right and that's why many have been cut out, auctioned , and framed. The same goes for pages out of Ansel Adams' Parmelian Prints of the High Sierras.

    Sometimes the picture in the photo-book is an illustration of a physical photograph that exists somewhere. I'd love to know "what medium on what substrate", how big is it (in long measure not pixels!), who made it, how was it made, when was it made, does it have a signature or other annotations? I've looked at thousands of photographs over several decades and I know well the frisson that goes with being in the presence of a great photograph. I wish the photo-book would give me enough clues so I could recreate a parallel experience in my imagination.

    Sometimes the picture in the photo-book is a "print-out" of an electronic file that does not have (never did have?) a descriptive relationship to something with physical existence. I'm thinking of negative scans recalculated as positives, stitches, HDR's, and all the other electronic chicanery. Do I accept the picture in the photo-book as the artwork itself, a la Camera Work, or do I dismiss it as "never existed, didn't happen, never looked like this" and move on to something with physical provenance? I do wish the photo-book would be explicit about this so I don't feel soiled by accidentally and momentarily selling my soul for a swarm of pixels.
    Photography, the word itself, invented and defined by its author Sir John.F.W.Herschel, 14 March 1839 at the Royal Society, Somerset House, London. Quote "...Photography or the application of the Chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation,..". unquote.

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,534
    Stone for prez

  10. #60
    kintatsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bavaria, Germany
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    349
    Images
    2
    I know Ansel Adams considered the technical aspect- f/stop and time, merely chatter. Including the technical "chatter" really provides no useful information if the reader is unable to reference the levels or some other variable. In his book Examples, for instance, he includes the approximate values and placements. That will help a photographer in their growth more than just knowing what aperture and shutter speed.

    That's one of the reassons people find his teaching so approachable, even 30 years after his passing.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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