David Alan Harvey/x-t1 in Rio

[CK Dexter Haven]

So in other words, you are biased against digital?

Somewhat.
I've owned canon 5Ds and expect to buy a 5D3 soon. But, anything that comes out of it will be processed toward an analog feel and I won't graypoint the white balance unless I'm doing studio stuff. I'll use digital for getting certain types of work done. But I also just re acquired a fuji ga645, and will re acquire a mamiya rz before I get back into the 5D. I love the look of film. I do have a very strong prejudice against digital as a beginning collector. I have no interest in photographs that were shot on digital and very little interest in non darkroom prints.

I really believe photographers are getting lazy. When well known bloggers are talking about shooting professional assignments with m4/3 cams, and forums are rife with complaints about dSLRs being "too big," I think there's a ridiculous sense of tech entitlement. It's more about 'what can I get away with,' and less of a commitment to the art.

Maybe more importantly, the choice between digital and film is just an illustrator of tastes. Maybe the people who did such beautiful work in the past were only doing it incidentally, and the effects and results they achieved were only due to successes found while using the only tools they had available. Fact is, most photographers don't really have great taste..... Look at how many of those khaki pocketed vests were sold.... 🙂

Clearly, there are aspects of photography that are more important to me than to other photographers. For some people, what's important is being there and the composition. After all, there are a lot of people who regard the topic of bokeh as ridiculous. I feel that everything in the frame is important. Some only care about what they were focusing on..... So, for some, grain and texture were never matters to be considered except as artifacts to be avoided. I regard them as critical components.

So, am I anti-digital? Yes and no. At this point, it's closer to Yes. I'll use it, but I place a far greater value on images made on film.

 

[jsrockit]

Thanks for the honest answer CK. You've thought it through and have come to conclusions that work for you.

 

[jsrockit]

No issue with him using digital but his images are lifeless and muddy. He lost the feel of sunlight.

Sometimes you make a photo when the sun is not out... 😀 To me, these are all technical concerns that can be fixed... what is more important is that he has content and great framing. I still see that in some of the images in the OP.

 

[KM-25]

I'm going to be the contrarian here. Sorry to hijack the thread. I've liked DAH for a long time. I have a book or two of his. I once won one of his website's contests.

But, since his change to digital, i haven't seen a single image from him that i like. The composition may be there. The subject matter is still there. I've spent a lot of time in Rio and the 'spirit of the city' is there. But, the photographs just don't have any of the appeal of the old stuff. His old film work had spectacular color — vivid slide film, and mixed color temperatures.... The grit of some grain.... There was Texture and Atmosphere. These are just pictures. I feel the same way about McCurry, Gibson, etc....

Sorry.

I keep coming back to the same analogy: it's like classic painters who, with new technology, were able to suddenly paint without the physical characteristics imparted by a brush.

I know DAH, I have him rip my work a new one every few years and he knows I share this opinion about what happened to some of the world's best editorial and journalistic shooters of color transparency once they went digital.

The look of Leica glass in particular with a great slide film shot by someone who truly understands light and color often imparted a kind of "Chiaroscuro in a Bottle" in the finished image. And that is kind of the key thing here, when the shutter was tripped, for the most part the photograph was finished and any great photographer knew this and knew for a fact they could just keep right on working along that vein. There was no upping the ISO after dark, no major shifting of white balance, just deeply creative and emotional response to a medium that one was closely tied to....and it is different when it is actually a limit instead of an option like in digital, you *truly* act and think differently.

Those very hard and often unforgiving limits allowed master shooters to erupt in a glorious style we don't see as much of anymore. There is digital camera that is particularly adept at giving photographers that look and it is the Fuji X100S when set on Astia, medium hard in the shadows, jpeg. I find that is as close as digital out of camera gets to Chiaroscuro without spending all day in front of a computer which I refuse to do.

But overall I work in black and white film and hand printed darkroom prints these days, it allows me to engage in the journey and therefore the result that is true to my heart and that in turn, allows me to make my best photographs....real tactile photographs with emotion and depth.

I just don't think that digital has done the photography world any favors nor will it from here on out...but most people on here know that is my opinion on it and my work hold's it's own, so I will leave it at that...🙂

 

[__--]

On Burn, DAH repiied to my question on the contrast:

i am operating kind of as a one man band and off the cuff and stream of consciousness crazy no sleep rag tag fast no time to think mode…i am right out of the camera and with no super tech person w me and my 11″ laptop screen is messed up, needs to be replaced, and well i am the worst person on the planet w the tech side….i was a really good b&w printer yet no knowledge of photoshop etc…so please have patience with what will be the final results here…my main point for publishing here is to do what i have done in the past and just put it out on a day to day basis my “contact sheets” so to speak…by the time we get to print, all of this will be “fixed” i can assure you….

this is just the way i work sometimes….shoot first, think later….live it, shoot it, worry about the tech side later….

MITCH ALLAND/Potomac, MD
Do You Know What is Really Real?
Download link for PDF file of 15-shot portfolio

 

[nongfuspring]

No issue with him using digital but his images are lifeless and muddy. He lost the feel of sunlight. There's no sparkle and they look like bad conversions to B&W from unadjusted in camera jpg's.

I agree. He seems like a decent photographer but it seems like he needs to get to know the curves tool, most images are flat and inconsistent. Good on him though.

 

[semilog]

But I imagine this is the only way the vast majority of people are going to see it.

I'm afraid X-ray summed it up pretty well, for me anyway. Lifeless was the word that had popped into my head when I looked at them. It baffles me since there are some nice shots. I'd personally have rather looked at color jpegs from the camera.

DAH is making this work for print and for large-print exhibition.

He's posting some work-in-progress on his blog (and on Instagram) so that we can have a nearly real-time window into that progress. That openness is one of the reasons I admire DAH as a teacher -- he is extremely transparent about his working methods and process. That we get to see the work, at this proof-level of finish is, I think, pretty darned cool.

 

[gavinlg]

Yeah these photos aren't final proofs, they are generally with a quick tune in software and then posted as a window to his workings. I'm sure the printed finals will be much more finely tuned.

To be honest though I think a lot of you are being overly judgemental - the photos are great and the processing doesn't detract from the content, which is the major problem with digital photography. Most digital photos I see are stupidly overcooked to have a 'look' in PP. All IMO.

 

[jsrockit]

He seems like a decent photographer ...

We should all be so lucky to be as "decent" as DAH.

 

[__--]

I agree. He seems like a decent photographer but it seems like he needs to get to know the curves tool, most images are flat and inconsistent. Good on him though.

I guess you didn't read the quote from DAH in post #25. "Seems like he needs to get to know the curves tool"? Seems you simply posted in the wrong discussion: I'm assuming you meant to post in one of these two discussions Great Photographers on the Internet and Great Photographers on the Internet, Part II

MITCH ALLAND/Potomac, MD
Do You Know What is Really Real?
Download link for PDF file of 15-shot portfolio

 

[willie_901]

It's possible there's some degree of envy being expressed.

After all, how many of us would like to make a living doing what DAH does?

Or maybe people are just upset that on-line display has replaced contact sheets with regards to proofing. For all Flickr and similar self-publising channels deserve criticism and disdain, I don't see anything wrong with throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what sticks.

 

[MCTuomey]

It's possible there's some degree of envy being expressed.

After all, how many of us would like to make a living doing what DAH does?

Or maybe people are just upset that on-line display has replaced contact sheets with regards to proofing. For all Flickr and similar self-publising channels deserve criticism and disdain, I don't see anything wrong with throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what sticks.

Agree. DAH has a deserved rep for his candor and openness. And here folks are criticizing his images while he is sharing unfinished files freely with the public, giving pedestrians like myself a window into his process (where he starts vs where he finishes). And yeah, I can't even begin to criticize someone who's making a living doing what he's doing, envy being so evident in my case.

 

[newsgrunt]

Bill Allard was up at the Calgary Stampede this year with what looks like a micro 4/3. Anyone wanna have a go at him 😉

for many photographers, The Photograph and content within are sacrosanct and technical perfection is secondary. otherwise its a sharp, well processed photo of…nothing

 

[emraphoto]

Bill Allard was up at the Calgary Stampede this year with what looks like a micro 4/3. Anyone wanna have a go at him 😉

for many photographers, The Photograph and content within are sacrosanct and technical perfection is secondary. otherwise its a sharp, well processed photo of…nothing

William Allard has always been a serious inspiration for me. From the genius approach to colour down to his hard nose, take no xxxx attitude... love the guy.

"a sharp, well processed photo of…nothing" is about 90% of what i see these days. beyond the pale, smooth skin and crazy actions/filters/cooking in post... there is very little.

 

[semilog]

This capture could be better-processed, too. As many of the 200+ commenters on Flickr point out.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Is it my laptop video card and monitor?
On the link provided b/w pictures are all kind of grey and dull.
Same like my cheap V500 b/w scans 🙂

O'h, wait a second, I'm not the only one.

No issue with him using digital but his images are lifeless and muddy. He lost the feel of sunlight. There's no sparkle and they look like bad conversions to B&W from unadjusted in camera jpg's.

Exactly, right!

 

[jsrockit]

This capture could be better-processed, too. As many of the 200+ commenters on Flickr point out.

A favorite... gotta love the internet experts.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

I know DAH, I have him rip my work a new one every few years and he knows I share this opinion about what happened to some of the world's best editorial and journalistic shooters of color transparency once they went digital.

The look of Leica glass in particular with a great slide film shot by someone who truly understands light and color often imparted a kind of "Chiaroscuro in a Bottle" in the finished image. And that is kind of the key thing here, when the shutter was tripped, for the most part the photograph was finished and any great photographer knew this and knew for a fact they could just keep right on working along that vein. There was no upping the ISO after dark, no major shifting of white balance, just deeply creative and emotional response to a medium that one was closely tied to....and it is different when it is actually a limit instead of an option like in digital, you *truly* act and think differently.

Those very hard and often unforgiving limits allowed master shooters to erupt in a glorious style we don't see as much of anymore. There is digital camera that is particularly adept at giving photographers that look and it is the Fuji X100S when set on Astia, medium hard in the shadows, jpeg. I find that is as close as digital out of camera gets to Chiaroscuro without spending all day in front of a computer which I refuse to do.

But overall I work in black and white film and hand printed darkroom prints these days, it allows me to engage in the journey and therefore the result that is true to my heart and that in turn, allows me to make my best photographs....real tactile photographs with emotion and depth.

I just don't think that digital has done the photography world any favors nor will it from here on out...but most people on here know that is my opinion on it and my work hold's it's own, so I will leave it at that...🙂

A lovely reply. Thank you.

 

[Monochrom]

REally nice shos!

 

[ramosa]

We should all be so lucky to be as "decent" as DAH.

I got to this comment in 2015, but will nominate it for best comment of 2014.