Huss
Veteran
Look at the pics. His subjects are in bright sunshine.
Modern Black and White Aesthetic
- Thread starter John Bragg
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 179
- Views 8K
Look at the pics. His subjects are in bright sunshine.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Portra 160, and even Kodak Gold 100 or 200 are really like you say made for places like California, and for the few times I've been to the Med. I also shot my last roll of Kodachrome in Italy, Monaco, and south of France: bliss.
teddy
Jose Morales
Blasphemy!!! Burn her!!! (Monty Python)
I am of course joking Helen and I undestand your point of view, please I never like offending, I'm saying this in a light hearted way.
I love Ansel Adams but I do undstand what you are saying! Analytical images can be - boring sometimes.
teddy
Jose Morales
Love to see these latest photos John!
teddy
Jose Morales
Well, I will build a dark room one day, I have the space - and I believe what you say about REAL prints.
I have an Epson 4990 too. Please check my Flickr and tell me what you think about my latest colour scans. I use Vuescan. I have done a new process with Vuescan and Lightroom to get as close as I can to Frontier (never will) but hey - it's fun. If you're interested I can show you a little trick on how I can that colour response.
teddy
Jose Morales
Well, I feel the same sometimes. I think that Ansel Adams Photographs of the American landscape served a purpose then. A well documented image of what it was, a beautiful landscape. Well composed, well printed.
Ste_S
Well-known
What a strange thing to call lazy.
You might as well call people shooting wide open to use thin depth of field to hide boring compositions lazy.
Use wide depth of field to pack the frame, narrow depth of field to isolate the subject. Neither are lazy or need 'skill'. 🙄
LCSmith
Well-known
I have a feeling we are talking in different languages.
Let's set the scene. I am walking down fifth ave on a nice sunny day with my M3. I am shooting street photography and I am zone focusing. That means I am judging the distance of the subject I am shooting without critical focusing. In order to do this, one must be very precise in judging distances -- but it becomes easier to get one's subject in focus if the depth of field is broader. This is less of an issue on 5th ave on a sunny day, but let's say I decide to turn down a cross street where it's suddenly quite dark -- let's say f/3.5 at 1/500 and iso 400. Many street photographers will compensate for this sudden change by pushing the entire roll in order to keep their shutter speed high and go to f/8 instead of f/3.5 in the shadowy areas.
I say that's lazy. That is my studied and well reasoned opinion. I do not say it to be incendiary or a "troll" or whatever.
The result is a uniform aesthetic of pushed wide angle film shots that, in my studied and well reasoned opinion, are uniformly ugly and uninteresting.
That's just my opinion.
It takes more skill not to push the film and to become better at judging distances.
Brian Atherton
Well-known
I guess I am really, really, really lazy. 🙂
I use digital with auto ISO, auto shutter speed and aperture priority.
I use digital with auto ISO, auto shutter speed and aperture priority.
CharlesDAMorgan
Veteran
Brian Atherton
Well-known
robert blu
quiet photographer
There are interesting different opinions in this thread, which is good and is part of the strength of this forum where different opinions can live together.
Back to the original question I think one of the most important point has been made by Michael Markey specially in his last sentences which I highlighted and I agree with.
In my case I try to adapt my style to the feeling I want to commmunicate, sometimes I need a rough image, with much grain and contrast and other times I find better a smooth scale of tones.
There is no one single recipe for everything, just my opinion.
zuiko85
Veteran
One day old? And 92 comments....already!?
Wow! This ‘stuck at home’ business is really cooking.
Nevertheless, when I looked at the OP’s post it dawned on me that I started out with film, 50 years ago, using Tri-X and Diafine...all exposed at 1600 ASA. Wasn’t introduced to Plus-X or Panatomic, (and a tripod & cable release) till a couple of years down the road.
Along with that of course came a less hurried and more contemplative photography experience.
But, that TX and Diafine was what my friend used, and he had been shooting and processing his own film since he was 10, while I was a latecomer at 20.
Nowadays, at 71 I’ve really slowed down a lot and only occasionally shoot a roll or two. With whatever I happen to have on hand, like the unopened bulk roll of Pan F, 12 years past date, discovered when finally trying to sort my photography pile and put it in some kind of organization.
Wow! This ‘stuck at home’ business is really cooking.
Nevertheless, when I looked at the OP’s post it dawned on me that I started out with film, 50 years ago, using Tri-X and Diafine...all exposed at 1600 ASA. Wasn’t introduced to Plus-X or Panatomic, (and a tripod & cable release) till a couple of years down the road.
Along with that of course came a less hurried and more contemplative photography experience.
But, that TX and Diafine was what my friend used, and he had been shooting and processing his own film since he was 10, while I was a latecomer at 20.
Nowadays, at 71 I’ve really slowed down a lot and only occasionally shoot a roll or two. With whatever I happen to have on hand, like the unopened bulk roll of Pan F, 12 years past date, discovered when finally trying to sort my photography pile and put it in some kind of organization.
LCSmith
Well-known
Thank you for chiming in, Robert. Sad to say, I think the majority of photographers of my generation (30s) and younger have never even seen (in person) a large print with nuanced and graded tonality. These are in the homes of artists and in galleries and museums. The imagery which is forced upon people (to make them more obedient consumers) is not intended to generate thought or feeling but cheap emotions.
Michael Markey
Veteran
That`s a good point .
There just isn`t enough of it about or enough people making that type of picture for styles like that to become familiar .
I mentioned before ,at my camera club there are one or two master printers .
They`ve done commercial darkroom work for clients and written tutorials .
None of them do that now .
So that "loss" of expertise has had a profound effect on the up coming generations of photographers .
CharlesDAMorgan
Veteran
Just to add to that, I learned developing and printing from an Ilford Artisan Partner, Keith Moss, who has been working professionally in a darkroom for nigh on 35 years, and he specialises in film photography. He offers courses in that (one of which I took) and in street photography and a few other things. He gets virtually no takers for the developing courses (I suspect cost and location might be an issue) but enough for the street photography, which equally costs as much and involves travelling too. I take the view that of all the things photographic I have done, it was the best money I ever spent learning to expose, develop and print.
LCSmith
Well-known
My experience was similar, and I feel likewise about the investment. My mentor was (is) a photographer but mostly a 4x5 printer specializing in architectural photography. I spent about two years in his darkroom, one day a week. Sometimes we printed my stuff, other times we printed his commissions. I became acquainted with photographers and artists. If you can find a guy (or gal) with that kind of situation who will mentor you, it is optimal.
Michael Markey
Veteran
I`m sure that dark room printing is still being taught ,in fact I`m sure that it`s still part of the Photography course at my local college.
It`s never going to be mainstream again though and therefore the type of shot which features lovely graduated tones which was subject of this thread will (has) slipped from public consciousness .
That apart from dropping out of fashion.
I`ve heard it said many times that print competition judges only spend , on average , three seconds on a print.
Given the number presented at competitions that`s probably generous and this type of competitive photography is a large part of the UK scene .
It all serves accelerate this decline ,if you will , of the subtle beauty of a really good print.
It`s never going to be mainstream again though and therefore the type of shot which features lovely graduated tones which was subject of this thread will (has) slipped from public consciousness .
That apart from dropping out of fashion.
I`ve heard it said many times that print competition judges only spend , on average , three seconds on a print.
Given the number presented at competitions that`s probably generous and this type of competitive photography is a large part of the UK scene .
It all serves accelerate this decline ,if you will , of the subtle beauty of a really good print.
jsrockit
Moderator
I know his work well. I`ve had classes with him. I would say his color photos are (Kodachrome) ... a lot of the B&W street doesn`t appear to be. It looks like overcast many times. He obviously is referring to the worst case scenario when using 1/1000th and pushed film. Going out hoping for the best case scenario is not the right thing to do. Also, the B&W street photography is his earliest work... he had better technique as he grew obviously.
jsrockit
Moderator
It is a legitimate way of working. The main objective is compelling content framed well. If zone focusing is done well, it works. If not, it doesn`t. Like anything else in photography.
Similar threads
