In two previous blogs (7th and 10th March) 2014 I have discussed two elements in Adams' book Examples The Making of 40 Photographs [Adams A (1983) Examples The Making of 40 Photographs. Eleventh paper back printing 2013. Italy: Little, Brown and Company] namely the choices he made and the technique he reveals in his book. In this blog I would like to explore Adams' philosophy as revealed in his comments throughout the book.Not only do we get an insight into Adams' thinking but also the general philosophy that guided his work.
In the Introduction Adams makes clear that there will be no attempt by him to offer the 'meaning' of his photographs believing that such meaning lies with the photograph itself. Later in the book (p. 80) he offers the view that whilst it is possible to describe the physical elements of a picture to then try to express the photographer's aesthetic/emotional response can only lead to confusion for those that view the image and set unnecessary boundaries on the viewer's responses. Despite this statement there are references in the book to 'mood'. Adams does question the use of such a term in relation to photographs but acknowledges that there may be no other word that best matches what he is trying to explain. He offers the suggestion that mood is a quality of both interpretation and subject. Referring to the image "Boards and Thistles" he says - "..this photograph reveals quite convincingly what I saw and felt at the moment of exposure" (p. 31). We are also told of something of his feelings when taking the image "Rose and Driftwood".
Adams gives us an explanation (p. 34) of the difference between a 'found object' and a 'contrived object'. Briefly the 'found object' is something that exists and is discovered whilst 'contrived objects' are organised selectively. One is not better than the other although according to Adams they evoke quite different intellectual and emotional experiences. I would suggest that the interested reader refers to the writing on pages 34 and 35 as Adams reveals more about his approach to photography.
He expresses strong feeling about what he labels the "'in' syndromes" in particular where this leads to the craft side of photography being lessened by over involvement with those things that can distort taste and purpose such as social, political and commercial motives. Given that Adams made his living out of photography and elsewhere comments on the constraints he worked under when carrying out assignments it is possible to agree with the purity of Adams approach but are left wondering whether he was always true to his beliefs.
One theme that is mentioned more than once in the book is his reaction to 'Pictorialism'. It was major reason for his involvement in the Group f/64. In the early 1930's the Pictorialists held a dominant position in the world of photography. To quote Adams - "..anyone trained in music or the visual arts, the shallow sentimentalism of the "fuzzy-wuzzies" [as Edward Weston called them (one wonders what reaction Weston would have had to Adams' picture Lodgepole Pines p. 49)] was anathema, especially when they boasted of their importance in "Art". Reacting to this dominance Adams and others formed Group f/64 in 1932. They believed that what they were proposing ( 'purity of image'; ' optical qualities'; 'in-depth focus'; and 'smooth papers') was a new aesthetic only to discover later that Alfred Stieglitz had pursued similar goals since the beginning of the 20th Century. After a time the Group became less strident in their views. Adams claims that his involvement in Group f/64 and his meeting with Paul Strand led to his abandoning a career in music to become a photographer.
It cannot be said that Adams compromised or hid his feelings about others whose view of photography differed from his own. He writes of the Pictorialists: I have endeavoured to discover what the photographers of this classification [pictorialism] try to express. It is clear that the goal is to reflect closely the qualities of painting in photographs. These attempts are usually futile and inferior [my underlining] for they betray the natural traits of our medium. Another example of Adams dismissal of those who disagree with him can be found in his narrative that accompanies the image - Nevada Fall when he writes - "Some urban aesthetes claim this photograph is just a bit of scenery and is certainly not art. May they and their opinions rest in peace! Perhaps he fails to see the irony in his closing comment in the paragraph that reads - "I do not desire to impose a definition of creativity on anyone."
One thing that comes across strongly throughout the book is the certainty Adams has about the correctness of his own views. In discussing the early use of the 35mm cameras he refers to the 'bleakness' of most of the work produced claiming that the camera was used to create photographs for reportage rather than display. He claims that there were very few photographers using this camera whose intention was aesthetic or expressive. He also refers to the temptation offered by the camera to shoot as many shots of the same scene/action as possible in the belief that one will be successful. He is dismissive of this process claiming that whilst there will always will be one better than the others but that does not make that image a fine one. Whilst one cannot argue against this conclusion there is ample evidence in the book that Adams used a similar, albeit much slower, system when taking his photographs. He also used a 35mm camera in his work where he felt that this was appropriate.
Surprisingly, or perhaps not, he also felt it legitimate to remove elements from a photograph that, in his view, did not belong there. He tells us (p. 164) of the vandalism (my word)caused by the pupils of Lone Pine High School who had painted the letters L and P on the rocky face of the Alabama Hills. His defence reads "...I am not enough of a purist to perpetuate the scar and thereby destroy - for me, at least, - the extraordinary beauty and perfection of the scene." Whilst I find it easy to understand and agree with Adams' motives in this situation I am left wondering where he drew the line when developing and printing other scenes that did not quite meet his exacting standards.
He is dismissive of the demand for detail about the equipment and materials used in the making of the image. Virtually every magazine or book about photography regales us with details about the camera and the settings used as though this will help us both understand and interpret the image and in some way make us better photographers. Adams argues that a more fruitful discussion would be to discuss shapes, colour values and luminance levels. Despite his views almost every photograph in the book is accompanied by such details because of Adams belief that many photographers find them helpful. Perhaps we should ask the question in what sense are they helpful. Photographs represent a captured moment in time in which for all intents and purposes that moment is and remains unique. It follows that the settings used can only be absolutely right for that photograph as seen by the photographer at that time. Unthinking application to other images is useless. Advice from Adams (p. 93) suggests that the photographer (or artist using Adams' term) trust his own judgment (intellect and creative vision).
Adams refers often to seeing in the minds eye the desired outcome in print of the scene in front of him using the word "visualisation". 'Seeing' offers the possibility of the precise application of the actions throughout the process, from taking the image to final print, offering the best chance of success. Adams offers this explanation - With all art expression, when something is seen, it is a vivid experience, sudden, compelling and inevitable...this resource is not of things consciously seen ..it is perhaps a summation of total experience and instinct...." (p. 13). Such an explanation is at odds with other explanations given within the book that present visualisation as a more conscious process particularly where reference is made to the Zone system (discussed in the blog 10th March 2014). It may be the case that in offering an explanation of how he decides where the key elements fall within the Zone system Adams has tried to explain something that was, in practice, intuitive. If this is so then the two explanations complement each other rather than conflict.
Another element of "visualisation" that, for me, was not immediately obvious is the ability to 'see' what the camera 'sees'. Cameras use a particular format. As Adams points out (p. 55) the world rarely fits these formats in its natural state. It behoves the photographer to visualise the image in whatever format it presents itself and in producing the image use cropping to match the original visualisation. I understand what is being said but am unsure what it means in practice.
Adams spent many years photographing Yosemite and the Sierra Nevada. Areas of outstanding natural beauty that offer enormous vistas of ever changing light and detail. I have only visited Yosemite once but my memories and the images I still have are of the majestic beauty as seen from the many vantage points. Adams asks the question whether such all inclusive shots are the best way to capture such a landscape. He asks whether their beauty would not be better captured by selecting smaller fragments or by attention to close detail. Referring to the work of others (Edward Weston; Brett Weston; Minor White; Wynn Bullock and Elliot Porter) he argues that landscape can be "an intimate art form not necessarily dominated by the grand, remote aspects of the world or the passing excitement of events. (p. 17). What seems to be missing from this discussion is that the term 'landscape' is a classification applied to a particular type of photography - it is not a strait jacket. It can include or exclude anything and whether an image 'belongs' in the genre depends upon the acceptance of its placing by others. It is a convenient shorthand that can be both restricting and all-embracing.
Adams comments on the 'contrived' situation, for example the studio set-up, that he suggests leads to an image whose artificiality can be recognised by the viewer. Referring to the world of advertising where, for him, the unreal quality of the image is difficult for him to trust. He acknowledges that he had been obliged to take many images of this sort but he reveals his dislike of this process in his comment on p. 97 when referring to the Farm Family photograph - "Working with the Melones farm people...was indeed a refreshing experience". He talks also in the book about studio work being synthetic because it involves creation of the desired result comparing it with the analytic approach in a non-studio setting where selection and management of the parts of the overall scene by the photographer is the key to success.
Throughout the book it is evident that Adams thought carefully about why he pursued a particular type of photography such as photographing old buildings whilst rejecting there more modern counterparts. In the discussion on this topic on pp. 100 -101 he comes to the conclusion that he photographs that which, to him, is aesthetically beautiful and which he can visualise as a photograph worth creating both for himself and others. It is a statement of the obvious because it, in one form or another, applies to all serious and not so serious photographers. One presumes that even the professional photographer will try, as best he or she can to work on assignments where the level of comfort and commitment is the greatest. At the sub-conscious level this 'zone of comfort' is bounded by those things that we as individuals feel create those images worth looking at. Later in the book (p. 106) Adams talks, in a similar vein, about his work in the National Parks particularly Yosemite. He tells us that he does not remember ever taking a photograph for "environmentally significant purposes" and that those photographs that may be judged by others to be of environmental significance were taken purely for their "intrinsic aesthetic and emotional qualities.".
He was also aware of the effect of pre-conceived ideas about an area or country can have upon the final outcome. Referring to his reactions to parts of America and Great Britain where he had positive ideas about what he would discover compared with Hawaii, mainland Europe and the American South where his projections were largely negative he found that those areas that he thought positively about beforehand he found 'exciting' whereas he retained his negativity in the other areas. I believe this to be one of the most revealing and useful statements in the whole book.
We are all encouraged to plan ahead so that there is a structure about how and where we photograph. We may, where the assignment is not of our choice, have negative feelings and these have to be guarded against. However these are generally easy to recognise and steps taken to reduce the impact. In more general terms where it is a large area such as a country or continent we may not recognise an underlying reluctance or something may occur that re-inforces our negative views. If I may give a personal example. Last year I arranged a holiday in France to coincide with the Arles Photographic Exhibition. The accommodation we had booked left something to be desired and the exhibition was a huge disappointment. I had only passed through this area of France and never stayed more than a couple of nights. I found it largely uninteresting and in some areas frankly disappointing. I took many images, some related to my OCA Courses, but none were outstanding and most were frankly bad. In essence the build up of negativity, that I did not realise until discussing my reaction to the holiday with my wife who had accompanied me, impacted heavily upon my photography with disastrous effects. Beware feelings that sub-consciously affect our work.
In the narrative accompanying the Merced River, Cliffs, Autumn Adams makes the assertion that few subjects lend themselves to both black and white and colour. He tells us about the work of Marie Cosindas who 'saw' her photographs as compositions in colour. He then argues that her visualisations were inappropriate to black and white imagery. When learning the techniques and methods for black and white photography the student is encouraged to 'see' the image in monochrome. Without the aid of software I would suggest that this is impossible to do and that experience tells us which colours and combination of colours, together with the variance of light across the image, will give us a worthwhile black and white image. It is also of interest that almost all advice given is not to use the black and white facility in the camera; and when working on the image on the computer to make the best possible colour image before converting to black and white. This would suggest that Adams contention that few images lend themselves to both types of rendition is far too sweeping and that it is more accurate to say that only a few images do not work in both mediums.
Let the last word belong to Adams (it is also the last paragraph of the book but also happily coincides with my own views):
"All art, including photography, cannot be defined or explained because it relates to experiences not measurable in material terms. Physical procedures and techniques may be thoroughly discussed, but these are of little value unless a compelling creative reason-for-being exists. To borrow again from the statement by Alfred Stieglitz, the camera enables us to express what we have seen and felt in the worlds of nature and humanity."
No comments:
Post a Comment