"he could have abraded the negative, and added graphite to the print""Were EW and Mortensen ever seen together? Hmmm..."Mortensen was anathematic to Weston and similar photographers. On one occasion Mortensen was pointed out to Weston in a restaurant, but they didn't become acquainted.
Intended tongue-in-cheek. Like Clark Kent and Superman...
When this thread meandered off into negative and print manipulations (abrasion especially), it immediately brought to mind Mortensen with his "abrasion-tone" technique. Hence my comment.
Coincidentally, Mortensen was an advocate of what he called the "7D negative" which was exposed for the highlights and then given extended (total?) development. Essentially the opposite of the familiar photo adage "Expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights." When combined with on-axis lighting, it gave the effect also seen in the Weston image. Weston employed natural on-axis lighting very effectively as did Mortensen with studio lights. But then Mortensen may have continued with physical print manipulations which Adams and the rest of the f/64 group abhorred. Curiously, Fred Picker of Zone VI workshop fame eventually came around to Mortensen's thinking and advocated exposing for Zone VIII.
"Mortensen on the Negative" is an interesting read. A brief synopsis of Mortensen's method can be found on Ed Buffaloe's unblinkingeye.com site in the article "Mortenses Revisted:An Analysis of Mortensen's 7-Derivative Technique."