Post processing old school.
- Thread starter ulrikft
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 6
- Views 2K
sojournerphoto
Veteran
But the responses are much more revealing of the responders than the question of when photographs cease to eb photographs and become some alternative form of art. Loads of people who clearly need the opportunity to denigrate other people and latch onto someone famous to get their buzz.
All a bit sad really.
Mike
Merkin
For the Weekend
I wish the base time for that exposure was written on the sheet, I would love to know. That is some SERIOUS dodging and burning. It would take every drop of everything I have ever learned in a darkroom to even attempt that much, and that would be after I took a couple months in the darkroom every day printing my most difficult negatives to knock the rust off.
As to the purist nonsense, it has always struck me as a way too extreme reaction to overphotoshopping, combined with some need to codify and quantify taste. Eventually, people start thinking that overdone shots look overdone, and underdone shots need more work. It all balances out eventually.
As to the purist nonsense, it has always struck me as a way too extreme reaction to overphotoshopping, combined with some need to codify and quantify taste. Eventually, people start thinking that overdone shots look overdone, and underdone shots need more work. It all balances out eventually.
tcline
Member
Avedon's prints simply glow in person. He knew what the print needed to look like and made sure that in the end it matched. I can't wait to see the "American West" exhibit again someday.
popeye
Established
And who should argue his technique? He had a brilliance not often seen, so who am I to question it? I do recall seeing that instruction sheet before in the distant past.
I saw his exhibit up in SF recently and loved everything about it, too bad I missed it down here in SD...
250swb
Well-known
Every time the 'purist' argument comes up I always wonder if the camera of said purist goes out and takes photo's itself. Because as soon as a human points a camera he or she is editing the composition, adjusting exposure or colour balance, choosing a focal length, in short interfereing with the subject matter to get an opinion across. It is no different to dodging and burning. As soon as all purists understand this the 'purist' discussion can stop.
FWIW I think the 'purist' stance comes from lack of knowledge about photography and photographic history rather than a deep inner spirituality based on cutting out un-necessary manipulation. There is rarely a 'purist' print that wouldn't benefit from some dodging and burning.
Steve
FWIW I think the 'purist' stance comes from lack of knowledge about photography and photographic history rather than a deep inner spirituality based on cutting out un-necessary manipulation. There is rarely a 'purist' print that wouldn't benefit from some dodging and burning.
Steve
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
That picture with Avedon's markings all over it was published in American Photo about 12 yrs ago. I forget the exact date, but I have it somewhere. They did an awesome article that explained Avedon's lighting, cameras, film and developer, and printing...everything! He shot Tri-X in 8x10 for most of his later work, such as the example you linked to, developed in straight D76 for about 50% more time than Kodak recommends. He did this to exaggerate midtones and used the extreme dodging and burning shown in the example to bring the overdeveloped highlights and too-dark shadows back to normal. He could do this because the prints were extremely large, often over 10 feet tall! You cannot do that kind of print manipulation on an 1x14 or 16x20 print no matter how good a printer you are. I know from trying and I was damned good in the darkroom. With Photoshop and a scanned neg its simple, though time consuming. He had a fulltime printer do his prints.