Worth a watch

[DCB]

Found this. Very inspiring.

Not sure I have what takes to do it this way but...wow.

https://vimeo.com/91495217

Peace

 

[jmraso]

Thanks for the link.

A pleasure to watch !

 

[mfogiel]

Nice film. I am overwhelmed by the care, persistence and meticulous technique, but underwhelmed by the images themselves. Another point that disturbs me a bit, is his use of scanning and printing the negatives on a printer - this in fact destroys part of the logic to lug an 8x10 camera around, as his internegative will only be as good as the printer itself.

 

[goamules]

He was NOT scanning or using a printer. He is doing Platinum contact prints. He lays the 8x10 inch negative on the sensitized paper, puts a sheet of glass over it to hold it down, then uses the light from the florescent fixture you see to expose the print paper. Large format prints have to be seen live, in person, to appreciate their beauty and tones. An Ansel Adams or Karl Struss print is very impressive in person, but sometimes not so much on a computer monitor. Sadly, 95% of us never go to galleries anymore to see live prints.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Yes and Stieglitz's platinum print of O'Keeffe's hands with the thimble is truly breathtaking in person. Some other processes that are cool nad probably best to do as contact prints are Van Dyke Brown and Cyanotype. I did some of both in college. A piece on making platinum prints from M Monochrom files that kind shows the process.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDsUv4qPt6o

 

[mfogiel]

@goamules
I was under the impression of seeing him scan his negs on a flatbed, print internegatives on a printer, and only then, using these enlarged negatives to contact print. Otherwise, how could he be getting images bigger than 8x10?
Perhaps on such textured paper, the sharpness is not critical anyway.

 

[airfrogusmc]

The best way is to make direct contact prints from the negatives.

 

[photomoof]

He was NOT scanning or using a printer. He is doing Platinum contact prints. He lays the 8x10 inch negative on the sensitized paper, puts a sheet of glass over it to hold it down, then uses the light from the florescent fixture you see to expose the print paper. Large format prints have to be seen live, in person, to appreciate their beauty and tones. An Ansel Adams or Karl Struss print is very impressive in person, but sometimes not so much on a computer monitor. Sadly, 95% of us never go to galleries anymore to see live prints.

Sure looks to me like he is using a flatbed scanner, thus making digital negatives, and then printing on the hand made paper.

At first I thought maybe you were right and he was combining two negatives, and somehow hiding the joint -- but no, I don't think so.

Yes I could be wrong.

 

[charjohncarter]

This guy puts an end to the "Is photography art?" argument.

 

[Maiku]

Thanks. My Japanese wife was engrossed. The photos are very impressive.

Washi paper is national Japanese treasure. It takes years of training to become a master craftsman.

Here is more on Washi paper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washi

Here is a video

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=1C4B90C825DAD8053FB71C4B90C825DAD8053FB7

 

[gns]

Thanks for that link. Very interesting.

It pretty clearly shows him scanning, working on the digital file and printing an inkjet neg. I think this is pretty common practice for many alternative process folks.

You wonder about those who adopt a process which requires so much effort...Do they merely put up with the effort as a necessary evil to get a certain result that only that process or material will yield? Or is the effort itself influencing how they work and what the thing will then be? Some of both, I suppose.

Here is another example. The huge prints on the gallery walls are contact prints from negatives made with the camera shown at the end of the video...
https://vimeo.com/74971426

And his studio camera, basically 2 adjoining rooms with a lens mounted in the wall. One room the studio, the other the camera/darkroom...
http://www.sfmoma.org/explore/multimedia/videos/694

 

[photomoof]

Richard Learoyd's work is simply breathtaking.

 

[newsgrunt]

I believe in this case (saw the video a while back), the journey informs his work and as such, becomes part of the print. After putting up with camping and photographing in the rain, maybe that allows him to see things more clearly and really thinks hard about his subject and composition of.

I have no issues with scanning to make enlarged (or larger) negatives for alt process printing. Do we then slag Salgado for making negatives from his true digital files, I would hope not.

I think too many photographers let the process become just as important as the final print. Right or wrong, not my call as it's up to each person to decide what weight they gives things.

-watching the washi paper being made was beautiful, so much care and reverence for the bark.

 

[gns]

Richard Learoyd's work is simply breathtaking.

Yes, it is really amazing.

Another reason I brought him up is that this thread also got me thinking that while I love watching these kinds of videos (or reading about artists who’s work I like), they often return me to the question of how knowledge of an artist’s method (their materials and process) enhances our understanding of the art?

I’ve usually tried to hold with the position that the work is complete on the wall. That everything you need to understand it is there.

The day I first saw Learoyd’s work, I also saw Doug Rickard’s, A New American Picture, in a neighboring gallery. Two extremely different types of work, right? But I came away thinking about this question because in both cases, going in, I was made well aware (through press releases & announcements) of the processes used. It was clear that this knowledge was contributing to the meaning of the work. That maybe (especially in Rickard’s case), a clear reading even depended on it.

 

[35photo]

Yes and Stieglitz's platinum print of O'Keeffe's hands with the thimble is truly breathtaking in person. Some other processes that are cool nad probably best to do as contact prints are Van Dyke Brown and Cyanotype. I did some of both in college. A piece on making platinum prints from M Monochrom files that kind shows the process.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDsUv4qPt6o

I love that image! Its one of my fav's of Stieglitz and I've seen it in person pretty stunning.. the tones are off the charts!

 

[airfrogusmc]

I love that image! Its one of my fav's of Stieglitz and I've seen it in person pretty stunning.. the tones are off the charts!

Yeah it is amazing.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

This guy puts an end to the "Can photography be art?" argument.

Fixed it.

Beautiful film. I admire the commitment. I envy and covet the facilities, resources and time.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

@goamules
I was under the impression of seeing him scan his negs on a flatbed, print internegatives on a printer, and only then, using these enlarged negatives to contact print. Otherwise, how could he be getting images bigger than 8x10?
Perhaps on such textured paper, the sharpness is not critical anyway.

Use of the large format camera allows tilts/shifts necessary to capture his vision of nature. Then scanning the negative allows adjustment of the tonal curves that best suit the platinum printing process.