John Bragg
Well-known
Many thanks Helen. Times are hard enough, but our freedom of expression and debate are a great release.
Kind regards, John.
Modern Black and White Aesthetic
- Thread starter John Bragg
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 179
- Views 8K
Many thanks Helen. Times are hard enough, but our freedom of expression and debate are a great release.
Kind regards, John.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Yes Vince
He would get crazy with his dodge & burn, burn and dodge, lol
His body of work is exquisite
Be it Nudes, Portraits, Social Commentary (love the book ‘The English at home’
Every photographer I know has his hit & misses
For Me, Brandt’s work is Raw, Emotional... emotive
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Wow!!! Helen, I respect you for it. Just as I respect you for many other things. I was kind of lonely on this feeling. Until now.
Adams is totally boring in terms of the content. So, it has to be compensated with sixteen shades of grey to make pictures without interesting content looks fabulous (technically).
And then he was given assignment to photograph people instead of cheese landscapes he totally blow it.
trianbampol
brian tampol
I would counter your argument and say it’s way more difficult to compose a photo stopped down then it is wide open. At F/2.8 or F/3.5 you’re ignoring all the elements in the foreground and background that can potentially add context to your image.
Also, Winogrand and Meyerowitz are both known for shooting at 1/1000th of a second and pushing their film 2 stops in dev. Would you call their work lazy, mediocre, and ugly? These methods are available to photographers to use as tools, there is no wrong way to make art.
phrons
Established
Isn’t that the thing that only matters when it comes to art?
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
What if photog is not a Rolleiflex snob and only has Brownie or Holga with f9 maximum?
What if photog want to have entire content at close distance, not just meaningless fly and load of empty bokeh?
LCSmith
Well-known
Agreed on all counts. I would refer to you a subsequent post, where I said: obviously there is nothing wrong with the pushed aesthetic or stopping action, so long as it is done with intention and reason (like GW and many other great photographers).
LCSmith
Well-known
Not everything is about class differences.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Having as much as possible in focus to document, instead of bogus fly and load of empty bokeh has nothing to do with casts.
LCSmith
Well-known
And... I see we have gone off the deep end. Time to go shoot.
Added:
Let me be clear about my opinion, Ko. Fe. My opinion is that the majority of street photographers push their film because they think they have to do so. They think it is the only way to get the photo. My only point was, that is not true. There are many ways to get the photo. Pushing the film is the easiest and requires the least skill to achieve focus.
This is why the internets are full of the same wide angle f16 1/500 grainy pictures of people walking in a city.
My only point about the Rolleiflex was that, one can zone focus even with a medium format camera at wide apertures. Practice.
Added:
Let me be clear about my opinion, Ko. Fe. My opinion is that the majority of street photographers push their film because they think they have to do so. They think it is the only way to get the photo. My only point was, that is not true. There are many ways to get the photo. Pushing the film is the easiest and requires the least skill to achieve focus.
This is why the internets are full of the same wide angle f16 1/500 grainy pictures of people walking in a city.
My only point about the Rolleiflex was that, one can zone focus even with a medium format camera at wide apertures. Practice.
Ccoppola82
Well-known
Interesting thread. I look at negatives as my "range of possibility" in what I can do with a final image. A properly exposed negative gives me a full range of possibility along the "value scale" of tonality. I adjust or limit those possibilities based on need, not style. If I NEED to push, I push. If not, I don't. If don't know how anyone can look at a Ravilious print and NOT see the beauty that a long tonal scale can present in certain situations, especially contre jour lighting scenarios. I do think it would be of great benefit to those new to shooting film to go into a darkroom and wet print. I think that's where the greatest differences will be found.
For me, I'm just glad people shoot film. I don't care how they do it. The more they buy, the longer it will be around. I'm 38, so I am sort of in that weird middle between growing up shooting film and the new generation who started with digital and just dabbles in film. I (hopefully) have a lot of years left to shoot.
For me, I'm just glad people shoot film. I don't care how they do it. The more they buy, the longer it will be around. I'm 38, so I am sort of in that weird middle between growing up shooting film and the new generation who started with digital and just dabbles in film. I (hopefully) have a lot of years left to shoot.
John Bragg
Well-known
Very good points well made.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
Just pull the trigger🙂 Whatever “comes out”, tell people that’s what you were after. Who’s to know? I always feel lucky, sometimes turns out I’m not. Most stuff isn’t a keeper no matter how skilled you are.
🙂
LCSmith
Well-known
I don't agree with this at all, but I respect your opinion.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Nicely written for a start ^^^. And I thought when digital first came out I would never have to put my hands in developer again. I was wrong at least for what I wanted; conversions just didn't work for me. Now I don't even think about digital to B&W conversions. I spend my B&W time continually trying to produce the effect I want.
I have devolved so now I don't even really like my own digital color work. There is a softness, warm, non-surgical look to color film that I really can't leave. Just like Prest 400.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
It wasn't intended as a serious approach to making a living at photography. More along the lines of how life comes at us sometimes, despite our best intentions.
It might not even be my opinion🙂
John Bragg
Well-known
Thanks John. I don't shoot colour these days, except the odd phone snap, but I couldn't imagine being unable to load a 36 exposure roll of HP5+ and I am still full of eager anticipation when developing my films. I miss wet printing, but there is still real joy to be had from a sparkling roll of film hanging up to dry.
Corran
Well-known
Lot of subjective opinions there getting pushed as objective truths...
KenR
Well-known
Overuse of technique
Overuse of technique
Wow! I had to go to the garage to get my fire extinguisher and spray the monitor a couple of times while reading the posts.
I think the intent of the original post was to point out that ANY technique when used over and over for the sake of technique becomes boring and repetitive. It doesn't matter whether it's HDR, pinhole unsharpness, overdone bokeh, 10 zones in every photo or in this case, pushing EVERY roll of film 2+ stops, even when it doesn't seem needed. All of the tools that are available are tools for the making of better photos. What is needed or enhances one day, when used over and over, will indeed be boring and repetitive.
They're tools, not the be-all and end-all to photography. When used appropriately they're great - otherwise kind of blah.
Overuse of technique
Wow! I had to go to the garage to get my fire extinguisher and spray the monitor a couple of times while reading the posts.
I think the intent of the original post was to point out that ANY technique when used over and over for the sake of technique becomes boring and repetitive. It doesn't matter whether it's HDR, pinhole unsharpness, overdone bokeh, 10 zones in every photo or in this case, pushing EVERY roll of film 2+ stops, even when it doesn't seem needed. All of the tools that are available are tools for the making of better photos. What is needed or enhances one day, when used over and over, will indeed be boring and repetitive.
They're tools, not the be-all and end-all to photography. When used appropriately they're great - otherwise kind of blah.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I was traveling across Canada and doing commissioning, training of broadcast systems.
After many years of those and my previous international, intercontinental travels for business I came to "one week, one bag" traveling style.
I'm not a snob and do my own laundry by my bare hands every day.
To keep this travel light concept I didn't haul loads of cameras and lenses.
Just one small camera and lens. With dozen or less films per week.
I would leave hotel room in one hour before my job starts and do photo walk. After work I would walk for photos until it was time for laundry, bathroom and sleep.
I was loading ISO400 rated as @1600 at any time. Starting from hotel in the morning ISO1600 was good. Sun was going up, I would put x2 yellow filter to lower shutter speeds to which camera shutter supports. Sun is in the zenith, x4 orange filter.
After work walk it would be often still the same film and it would go to the opposite. Orange x4 to bring it down @1600, yellow x2 and then just protective filter. And if I would walk into the gallery, museum, exhibition with bright light still on outside with same film in the camera, but in dark halls of museums or in the pubs, where I stopped to eat. 1600 was handy.
I would change film in the evening and dark, rate it as @1600 and continue to use this film next day.
Why I would not dink with two cameras? I wanted to travel, walk light and smart. After decades of travels it feels great not to check-in your Samsonite and wait for it to be dumped at the baggage carousel. 😉
__________________________________________________
But for some it might be too ESL (educated solution level).
How do you know if frame posted on Flickr was not taken under same as mine solution allowing to use same high rated film for any situation instead of dinking with different cameras, different films?
After many years of those and my previous international, intercontinental travels for business I came to "one week, one bag" traveling style.
I'm not a snob and do my own laundry by my bare hands every day.
To keep this travel light concept I didn't haul loads of cameras and lenses.
Just one small camera and lens. With dozen or less films per week.
I would leave hotel room in one hour before my job starts and do photo walk. After work I would walk for photos until it was time for laundry, bathroom and sleep.
I was loading ISO400 rated as @1600 at any time. Starting from hotel in the morning ISO1600 was good. Sun was going up, I would put x2 yellow filter to lower shutter speeds to which camera shutter supports. Sun is in the zenith, x4 orange filter.
After work walk it would be often still the same film and it would go to the opposite. Orange x4 to bring it down @1600, yellow x2 and then just protective filter. And if I would walk into the gallery, museum, exhibition with bright light still on outside with same film in the camera, but in dark halls of museums or in the pubs, where I stopped to eat. 1600 was handy.
I would change film in the evening and dark, rate it as @1600 and continue to use this film next day.
Why I would not dink with two cameras? I wanted to travel, walk light and smart. After decades of travels it feels great not to check-in your Samsonite and wait for it to be dumped at the baggage carousel. 😉
__________________________________________________
But for some it might be too ESL (educated solution level).
How do you know if frame posted on Flickr was not taken under same as mine solution allowing to use same high rated film for any situation instead of dinking with different cameras, different films?
Similar threads
