What's up with the messed up quoted sections?
Anyone else seeing this?
I went to the Royal Museum in Toronto to see his exhibition. It was a mixmatch including previous work too, especially from 'Africa'. I was stunned by some of the photographs, where all the qualities of his technique were present, especially the grain; but in others the gray was as if they were made of dolphin skin, really fake. After asking around and reading about the process from the brochure provided at the museum, I noticed that he was using a hybrid process. I had arrived to the museum with the hope of returning home with a copy of his book, but that didn't happen. Also because the book's format does not let you enjoy the photographs as one picture takes both left and right pages. For this and for the photographs themselves I didn't get the book, i went home and purchased a copy of 'Africa' through amazon, as it was cheaper than at the museum's store. This might constitute a pre- and post- on his career.
And I don't know if it's because of his intention, in many images the shadow parts have little detail, without much tonal variation.
I'm thinking returning the book if Amazon allows me to and get one of his earlier books.
Hmmm... I saw the Genesis prints in Toronto last May--the new, big ones were obviously digital and rather poor at that; the older ones I wasn't sure, but if they were wet, they were crappy, too. The gallery owner assured me they were made "under Salgado's supervision by his lab in Paris."
If you like sniffing prints (like I do :cool:) I'm afraid you'll have to look up older material. There's relatively little of quality left to the wet process these days--and "quality" does not necessarily mean "lush texture" or "rich midtones"--unless you coat your own...
EDIT: There was a line here praising the print quality of Sahel. Alas, going by memory. Went to the shelf, picked it up... Nah, won't recommend. :) Africa's not bad, actually.
Craziest thing is if Salgado would have just continued doing what worked (film + silver gelatin prints) he'd probably still be wowing people. Now due to the technology switch and all the indirect crap that happens as a result everything is now a cerebrally driven mess of mediocrity.
I guess shooting digital, making internegs on Tri-X, and wet or dry printing somehow make sense? Maybe he's forgetting that its the original light hitting the film that actually matters.
Here is a wonderful and touching talk by Salgado on TED.