As we all know the digital process softens an image and from that knowledge has grown the created desire to sharpen our images. I say 'created' because there is no agreed criteria for what is considered a sharp image and one that is deemed to be 'soft'. Some images, particularly portraits of females, are seen to be in some way better if the photograph overall is soft and more specifically the face. Almost all training material offers advice on ways to soften the face whilst leaving the eyes, teeth and lips sharper than the surrounding area. With other images, where the texture is 'hard' such as buildings and hard landscape then the advice is to sharpen. Software sellers have seen this as an opportunity to create a market for their goods and we now have 'capture sharpening', creative sharpening' and 'output sharpening'.
The strange thing is that show the same image to two different assessors the chances are one will say that the image requires sharpening and the other will say that it is over-sharpened. This suggests that sharpening is a matter of personal taste and yet the disciples of sharpening continue to proselytise that there is a perfect outcome for each image. There may be agreement at the extremes but as we near the point of best possible outcomes there will be less and less agreement. What looks right to one viewer will look totally unacceptable to another.
Is the statement - "all digital images need sharpening" true. The answer is no. Some very successful images are deliberately left unchanged or may be made softer by deliberate blurring or other methods available in software programmes. Equally I would not agree with one writer who stated that he never sharpened an image and rejected the idea. My personal approach is to judge each image on its merits and the message that I wish to convey. Even when I feel that sharpening will enhance the image I usually try to keep it to a minimum. To me any image where sharpening is evident detracts from the overall image unless there is a contextual reason for increasing the level of sharpening.
Monday, 7 April 2014
Thursday, 3 April 2014
Cropping an Image
I recently received my tutors comments on Assignment 1. As always informative and helpful a number of issues were raised and I thought I would comment on each of them in a separate blog. Like this one some deal with specific issues but I will use the last one the series to address what has become a matter of increasing concern to me - the conflict that arises between the development of a personal style by the student and the sometimes specific advice received from the tutor.
As stated above I will use this blog to address the question of 'cropping'. At first sight this does not seem to be a major issue but in fact cropping is used frequently to improve composition and its use therefore can have a major impact upon the final image. As with all cases of composition it is a matter of personal taste (there are no right and wrong answers only personal opinion). Much depends upon the overall effect that the photographer intends in the final image. Unfortunately it is a fact that it is impossible to guarantee what interpretation the viewer of the image will place upon what is being offered. At best the viewer can only be guided in a certain direction by offering clues and again we are unable to know whether the interpretation will be as we intended.
Here is a copy of an image I submitted with Assignment 1
As stated above I will use this blog to address the question of 'cropping'. At first sight this does not seem to be a major issue but in fact cropping is used frequently to improve composition and its use therefore can have a major impact upon the final image. As with all cases of composition it is a matter of personal taste (there are no right and wrong answers only personal opinion). Much depends upon the overall effect that the photographer intends in the final image. Unfortunately it is a fact that it is impossible to guarantee what interpretation the viewer of the image will place upon what is being offered. At best the viewer can only be guided in a certain direction by offering clues and again we are unable to know whether the interpretation will be as we intended.
Here is a copy of an image I submitted with Assignment 1
It was suggested that the image could be cropped to produce the following image (obviously the red area is the cropped pixels - the comment was added by my tutor).
The 'unbalanced feel' was a deliberate choice to create tension within the image. The position achieved by the dancer is, in my view, remarkable and teeters between stability and disaster and it was my intention to, in some way, have this disequilibrium reflected in the image. For me the second image has created a 'box' in which the dancer is held and it appears that she has only to reach out and touch the sides to maintain her balance. I do not claim that the first picture is in some way better than the second but I would argue that it better reflects my interpretation.
In this second image I show the cropping suggested by my tutor.
Again I make no claims that the original is in some way better than that suggested but again I do not believe that the cropped version best reflects my view. The image is of a five year old girl who, like many of her age, had unbounded energy. She seemed to be able to occupy all dimensions of space and time at the same instant as many young children can. In some way I wanted to capture this phenomenon within the image and this was my attempt. I left space within the image for her to 'move' into.
In summary I fully accept the suggestions put forward but I believe that they create a different result and feel to that I intended.
Friday, 21 March 2014
Beyond the Architects Eye - Mary N. Woods
Have been reading this book during the past week (Woods Mary N. (2009) Beyond the Architects Eye Photographs and the American Built Environment Philadelphia Philadelphia University Press ). It seemed to be directly relevant to the 2nd Assignment part of my Course although this judgement was solely based on the title. It cannot be argued that some of the material in the book is what one would expect from such a book. However two things struck me as strange - the overall construction and the way that the author's views impinged upon the presumed subject matter.
The book was quite difficult to follow (in part because of my expectations about content) because the reader would happily be following the narrative about say a particular photographer or an area of America when for no immediately obvious reason the main topic, at that point would change, frequently to a more sociological bent. I always found this slightly disturbing as I was left with the feeling that nothing ever reached a conclusion that linked directly with the material immediately beforehand. On more than one occasion I checked to see if I had turned two pages over at once. Overall the effect was to lessen the impact of the major themes discussed and which in my humble opinion could have been written in a more structured form.
The author's views on such things as segregation of races are important of themselves but it was never the case that the links that were being suggested between these matters and the built environment were proven. Indeed at times they seemed irrelevant. Clearly the Afro-American and the itinerant population were poorly treated and occupied the less desirable and fashionable housing. Yet the author failed to prove that this was the direct consequence of building decisions - i.e poor accommodation was built and provided for the afro-american. As in all societies the well off and the upwardly mobile move on and usually into better and better standards of accommodation. What they leave behind is occupied by the less fortunate who in turn move out of their original accommodation that is then occupied by the least fortunate. Paradoxically, as can be seen in parts of London, a distressed area can become popular again with the well off and the cycle begins again. This is not to deny that speculators take advantage of the desperate situation of the poor and create multi-occupancy lodgings from accommodation that was originally occupied by just one family.
Those parts of the book that directly relate to the built environment are of considerable interest and offer a great deal of information both written and pictorially. Offering insights into the work of a number of photographers through looking at their work in three areas that were undergoing significant changes in the built environment at the time of their work - New York, the Old South and Florida. We are introduced to the work of such photographers as Thomas Ruff, Jeff Wall, Andrew Moor Eugene Atget, Walker Evans, Arthur Rothstein, Charles Sheeler, Albert Renger-Patzsch and Frances Johnston amongst many others all of whom contributed to the development of architectural photography.
I remain with mixed feelings about the book and my recommendation would be to borrow it if you possibly can rather than buy it.
The book was quite difficult to follow (in part because of my expectations about content) because the reader would happily be following the narrative about say a particular photographer or an area of America when for no immediately obvious reason the main topic, at that point would change, frequently to a more sociological bent. I always found this slightly disturbing as I was left with the feeling that nothing ever reached a conclusion that linked directly with the material immediately beforehand. On more than one occasion I checked to see if I had turned two pages over at once. Overall the effect was to lessen the impact of the major themes discussed and which in my humble opinion could have been written in a more structured form.
The author's views on such things as segregation of races are important of themselves but it was never the case that the links that were being suggested between these matters and the built environment were proven. Indeed at times they seemed irrelevant. Clearly the Afro-American and the itinerant population were poorly treated and occupied the less desirable and fashionable housing. Yet the author failed to prove that this was the direct consequence of building decisions - i.e poor accommodation was built and provided for the afro-american. As in all societies the well off and the upwardly mobile move on and usually into better and better standards of accommodation. What they leave behind is occupied by the less fortunate who in turn move out of their original accommodation that is then occupied by the least fortunate. Paradoxically, as can be seen in parts of London, a distressed area can become popular again with the well off and the cycle begins again. This is not to deny that speculators take advantage of the desperate situation of the poor and create multi-occupancy lodgings from accommodation that was originally occupied by just one family.
Those parts of the book that directly relate to the built environment are of considerable interest and offer a great deal of information both written and pictorially. Offering insights into the work of a number of photographers through looking at their work in three areas that were undergoing significant changes in the built environment at the time of their work - New York, the Old South and Florida. We are introduced to the work of such photographers as Thomas Ruff, Jeff Wall, Andrew Moor Eugene Atget, Walker Evans, Arthur Rothstein, Charles Sheeler, Albert Renger-Patzsch and Frances Johnston amongst many others all of whom contributed to the development of architectural photography.
I remain with mixed feelings about the book and my recommendation would be to borrow it if you possibly can rather than buy it.
Saturday, 15 March 2014
Ansel Adams - "Examples The Making of 40 Photographs
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."
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."
Monday, 10 March 2014
Exhibition - Ipswich and District Photographic Society Annual Exhibition 2014
Visited the exhibition which is being held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall Galleries, Ipswich until 15th March. As expected there was a wide range of talents and ability although less than I have seen at other Camera Club exhibitions. In part this was due to the method of selection that tends to favour the best photographers within the Club. The effect of this was to allow one member to dominate the exhibition and comments were made that perhaps the exhibition should have been named after him. In other Club exhibitions that I have visited the norm is for all members who wish to exhibit their images have at least one entry and this provides the visitor with some idea as to the range of talents within the Club. Personally I prefer the latter system.
It is always difficult at the time to know what it is that we get from visiting exhibitions. Where the exhibition is of one person's work, particularly where it is in the form of a retrospective, it is possible to see the development over time and the way that different subjects are handled. It allows for a more general approach and an appreciation of the skills and talents of the individual. Where the exhibition is of a large number of people's work there is inevitably a conflict between images adjacent to each other with the risk that the judgement is made as to whether one is better than the other. Study and contemplation of individual images is difficult and I find myself tending to skip glance until I come across something that grabs my interest.
It is always difficult at the time to know what it is that we get from visiting exhibitions. Where the exhibition is of one person's work, particularly where it is in the form of a retrospective, it is possible to see the development over time and the way that different subjects are handled. It allows for a more general approach and an appreciation of the skills and talents of the individual. Where the exhibition is of a large number of people's work there is inevitably a conflict between images adjacent to each other with the risk that the judgement is made as to whether one is better than the other. Study and contemplation of individual images is difficult and I find myself tending to skip glance until I come across something that grabs my interest.
Ansel Adams Examples The Making of 40 Photographs Technique
In a previous blog (dated 7th March 2014) I reported upon my reaction to the images in Adam's book placing them in arbitrary groups solely upon my reaction to them. In this blog I want to look at the techniques used by Adams. The page numbers refer to the edition of the book that I have read [Adams A (1983) Examples The Making of 40 Photographs. Eleventh paper back printing 2013. Italy: Little, Brown and Company].
There is a great deal of technical information scattered throughout the book and the reader is offered Adams' best guess of the exposure used, the method of development of the negative and the paper used for most of the images. The certainty with which one can accept this information is lessened by his confession that he did not make notes at the time and that even the year that the photograph was taken is a best guess. Most, if not all, of this information, whilst of historical interest, is of little value today even for those who use film and print their own images.
Adams is not only famed for his talents as a photographer but also as the joint developer of the Zone system. Developed in the late 1930's Adams describes the system as: "A framework for understanding exposure and development, and visualizing their effect in advance. Areas of different luminance in the subject are related to exposure zones, and these in turn to approximate values of gray in the final print. Thus careful exposure and development procedures permit the photographer to control the negative densities and corresponding print values that will represent specific subject areas, in accordance with the visualized final image (p. 177). It is not the intention of this blog to explain the Zone system and those interested should refer to the information on the Web and/or the New Ansel Adams Photography Series (The Camera, The Negative and the Print).
Visualisation (I revert to the International English spelling of the word) is a key element in much of what Adams tells us throughout this book and has direct relevance to the Zone System. We are told in the Glossary (p. 177) visualisation is the "process of "seeing" the final print while viewing the subject. With practice the photographer can anticipate the various influences of each stage of photographic procedure, and incorporate these intuitively in visualising a finished image." In short you stand a better chance of achieving your final aim if you have a mental image of the desired result prior to taking the photograph and eventually printing it.
Michael Freeman in his book (Freeman M (2009) The Complete Guide to Black and White Digital Photography Lewes Ilex) argues ( p. 166) that the Zone system was developed for a highly specific kind of photography that very few people ever practised. Whilst it was usable for a single sheet film image it was not a practical proposition for a roll of film (the system would ideally have required all the images on the roll to be of the same or very similar exposures). He further argues that it required that the subject matter of photograph was such as to allow the photographer time to visualise the image. The latter argument is less certain because Adams talks of an intuitive process that does not, by definition, require reason or perception. It does raise the question whether the Zone system has any relevance in the digital world of today.
Even the best of modern day digital cameras with their high level of sophistication can not match the dynamic range of the human eye. When we see a potential image, particularly where there is a wide range of tones between the darkest and lightest elements, our eyes allow us to see almost everything. The camera has only a limited range and this is often the reason by what we saw and what the camera produces can be markedly different. I was recently taking a series of architectural images outside where parts of the buildings were in deep shadow whilst other parts were lit by a bright mid-day sun. As I saw the image I could see that in one of the darker areas there was a wrought iron gate that had many attractive features. Furthermore I was able to see the structure and colour of the brickwork that was lit by the bright sun. The image taken showed a deep, featureless, shadow where I knew the gate was and little if any detail in the brighter areas. I was able to recover fully the shadow detail but the highlights were non-recoverable.
The photograph was taken about the same time as I was reading Adams' book and I began to think about the thought processes I adopted when taking a photograph. As with all such processes some of it will be intuitive and difficult if not impossible to describe in words. Very often there comes a point when everything seems 'right' and the shutter pressed without conscious thought. At a conscious level I almost invariably have a specific aim in mind particularly when undertaking assignments where there is a known goal. It is often at a location I have some prior knowledge of and I give a great deal of thought about the images that I wish to take and the best possible outcome given the uncontrollable elements. In essence I have visualised the outcome, albeit in general terms.
Of course there is built-in flexibility but hopefully I am in the right area and the overall chances of getting the image are good. For any image there are the following elements: the essential, the necessary, the desirable and the hoped for. The 'essential' is the element that is the key to the success of the image as a whole. Usually the subject matter of the photograph even if it is as ill-defined as a group of people or a particular sort of landscape or object. The 'necessary' is the element or elements that will provide context and support for the essential element in the story to be told by the image. The 'desirable' is the element that provides the icing on the cake that will lift the image out of the ordinary and capture the viewer's interest. The 'hoped for' is an event or confluence of events that can underpin the image and provide it with a greater depth of understanding.
My concentration and decision making processes are centred upon the essential element. All other decisions flow from this element. Where I have to make choices between different levels of exposure and focal point then the decision will lay with the best choice for this element. I need to achieve the best possible exposure where texture and shape are clearly defined. In some cases the choice made will conflict with an optimum choice for other elements and then it may be necessary to compromise slightly to achieve the best overall result. It is here that experience will offer the best possible chance of success. Knowledge of the dynamic range of the camera being used and the amount of detail that will be captured is invaluable. I have recently purchased a second camera that necessarily means that I have less knowledge of its capabilities and this has been reflected in the success or failure of images where the dynamic range of the scene has been considerable. When I came to 'develop' the images using my computer areas that would have been recoverable using my other camera were difficult to recover whilst other areas were easier to recover.
The question then arises would an awareness of the Zone system help to make better decisions at the time. The Zone system is essentially an evaluation system and thus should help in the decision making process. Whether one needs to fully understand why or whether an area of the scene falls in Zone III or Zone IV is less certain (interestingly Adams in his book refers to certain elements as falling between, for example, III and III and a half which increases the possible number of zones and therefore the gradations by at least two). Attempts have been made to suggest a digital version of the Zone system (see for example Michael Freeman's book referred to above). An awareness of the range of the camera being used and the success or otherwise of any software that is available is what is required. It is essential that the photographer knows what is or is not feasible. Knowing what the chances of success are in capturing detail in brightly lit or deep shadow areas within the chosen image is necessary if not vital but being able to place those areas within a particular Zone by number is of little consequence.
Perhaps the best comment I have read on the Zone system is in this book " Edward [Weston] ..a highly intuitive artist paid little attention to what he called "complexities". Through experience alone he had developed a personal equivalent of the Zone System. ..He simply was not capable of or interested in technical discussions beyond his own methods and controls" (p. 146)
There is a great deal of technical information scattered throughout the book and the reader is offered Adams' best guess of the exposure used, the method of development of the negative and the paper used for most of the images. The certainty with which one can accept this information is lessened by his confession that he did not make notes at the time and that even the year that the photograph was taken is a best guess. Most, if not all, of this information, whilst of historical interest, is of little value today even for those who use film and print their own images.
Adams is not only famed for his talents as a photographer but also as the joint developer of the Zone system. Developed in the late 1930's Adams describes the system as: "A framework for understanding exposure and development, and visualizing their effect in advance. Areas of different luminance in the subject are related to exposure zones, and these in turn to approximate values of gray in the final print. Thus careful exposure and development procedures permit the photographer to control the negative densities and corresponding print values that will represent specific subject areas, in accordance with the visualized final image (p. 177). It is not the intention of this blog to explain the Zone system and those interested should refer to the information on the Web and/or the New Ansel Adams Photography Series (The Camera, The Negative and the Print).
Visualisation (I revert to the International English spelling of the word) is a key element in much of what Adams tells us throughout this book and has direct relevance to the Zone System. We are told in the Glossary (p. 177) visualisation is the "process of "seeing" the final print while viewing the subject. With practice the photographer can anticipate the various influences of each stage of photographic procedure, and incorporate these intuitively in visualising a finished image." In short you stand a better chance of achieving your final aim if you have a mental image of the desired result prior to taking the photograph and eventually printing it.
Michael Freeman in his book (Freeman M (2009) The Complete Guide to Black and White Digital Photography Lewes Ilex) argues ( p. 166) that the Zone system was developed for a highly specific kind of photography that very few people ever practised. Whilst it was usable for a single sheet film image it was not a practical proposition for a roll of film (the system would ideally have required all the images on the roll to be of the same or very similar exposures). He further argues that it required that the subject matter of photograph was such as to allow the photographer time to visualise the image. The latter argument is less certain because Adams talks of an intuitive process that does not, by definition, require reason or perception. It does raise the question whether the Zone system has any relevance in the digital world of today.
Even the best of modern day digital cameras with their high level of sophistication can not match the dynamic range of the human eye. When we see a potential image, particularly where there is a wide range of tones between the darkest and lightest elements, our eyes allow us to see almost everything. The camera has only a limited range and this is often the reason by what we saw and what the camera produces can be markedly different. I was recently taking a series of architectural images outside where parts of the buildings were in deep shadow whilst other parts were lit by a bright mid-day sun. As I saw the image I could see that in one of the darker areas there was a wrought iron gate that had many attractive features. Furthermore I was able to see the structure and colour of the brickwork that was lit by the bright sun. The image taken showed a deep, featureless, shadow where I knew the gate was and little if any detail in the brighter areas. I was able to recover fully the shadow detail but the highlights were non-recoverable.
The photograph was taken about the same time as I was reading Adams' book and I began to think about the thought processes I adopted when taking a photograph. As with all such processes some of it will be intuitive and difficult if not impossible to describe in words. Very often there comes a point when everything seems 'right' and the shutter pressed without conscious thought. At a conscious level I almost invariably have a specific aim in mind particularly when undertaking assignments where there is a known goal. It is often at a location I have some prior knowledge of and I give a great deal of thought about the images that I wish to take and the best possible outcome given the uncontrollable elements. In essence I have visualised the outcome, albeit in general terms.
Of course there is built-in flexibility but hopefully I am in the right area and the overall chances of getting the image are good. For any image there are the following elements: the essential, the necessary, the desirable and the hoped for. The 'essential' is the element that is the key to the success of the image as a whole. Usually the subject matter of the photograph even if it is as ill-defined as a group of people or a particular sort of landscape or object. The 'necessary' is the element or elements that will provide context and support for the essential element in the story to be told by the image. The 'desirable' is the element that provides the icing on the cake that will lift the image out of the ordinary and capture the viewer's interest. The 'hoped for' is an event or confluence of events that can underpin the image and provide it with a greater depth of understanding.
My concentration and decision making processes are centred upon the essential element. All other decisions flow from this element. Where I have to make choices between different levels of exposure and focal point then the decision will lay with the best choice for this element. I need to achieve the best possible exposure where texture and shape are clearly defined. In some cases the choice made will conflict with an optimum choice for other elements and then it may be necessary to compromise slightly to achieve the best overall result. It is here that experience will offer the best possible chance of success. Knowledge of the dynamic range of the camera being used and the amount of detail that will be captured is invaluable. I have recently purchased a second camera that necessarily means that I have less knowledge of its capabilities and this has been reflected in the success or failure of images where the dynamic range of the scene has been considerable. When I came to 'develop' the images using my computer areas that would have been recoverable using my other camera were difficult to recover whilst other areas were easier to recover.
The question then arises would an awareness of the Zone system help to make better decisions at the time. The Zone system is essentially an evaluation system and thus should help in the decision making process. Whether one needs to fully understand why or whether an area of the scene falls in Zone III or Zone IV is less certain (interestingly Adams in his book refers to certain elements as falling between, for example, III and III and a half which increases the possible number of zones and therefore the gradations by at least two). Attempts have been made to suggest a digital version of the Zone system (see for example Michael Freeman's book referred to above). An awareness of the range of the camera being used and the success or otherwise of any software that is available is what is required. It is essential that the photographer knows what is or is not feasible. Knowing what the chances of success are in capturing detail in brightly lit or deep shadow areas within the chosen image is necessary if not vital but being able to place those areas within a particular Zone by number is of little consequence.
Perhaps the best comment I have read on the Zone system is in this book " Edward [Weston] ..a highly intuitive artist paid little attention to what he called "complexities". Through experience alone he had developed a personal equivalent of the Zone System. ..He simply was not capable of or interested in technical discussions beyond his own methods and controls" (p. 146)
Friday, 7 March 2014
Ansel Adams - "Examples The Making of 40 Photographs"
Again this book was on a recommended reading list. I was somewhat reluctant to get the book because of the antipathy I have towards the celebrity status bestowed on people in practically all fields. Such hero worship tends towards all the person's work being deemed 'good' or even 'great' sometimes referred to as the 'halo effect'. I have always felt that this is true of Ansel Adams who seems to have achieved the status of a demigod. Certainly it is almost impossible to study photography in almost any form without coming across his name particularly when the discussion is about black and white photography. Examples of his work that I have seen previously, in all cases in books, have on the whole been disappointing. However on getting this book I have had to change my mind. I believe that this is because there has been a concentration on producing the best possible images of the chosen 40 thus presenting them in the best possible light.
I believe there are three main elements of the book - the images chosen; the references to the technical elements and, for me the best part, Adams' views on photography. I decided to look at these elements separately across three blogs. I realise that this imposes artificial barriers between the separate elements that should really be considered as a whole but it does allow for, hopefully, greater clarity. To this end I have used the following headings - Choice; Technique, and Philosophy. The first element will be presented in this blog and the remaining two in two further blogs.
White House Ruin (no other information) (p. 129)
The dramatic striations on the cliff face lead the eye towards the main element of the picture. Unfortunately the 'white house' itself fails to retain interest. The development has created a bland, poorly contrasted main subject that is dominated by the area in which it is located. One would also question the decision to include the foliage at the bottom of the picture that seems to be unnecessary in portraying the overall message.
Alfred Stieglitz, An American Place New York City 1935 (p. 7)
For me the face of Stieglitz, surely the primary subject of the photograph is too small a part of the overall image. There is also a lack of definition on the left hand side of his face so that there is a sense of imbalance. One has to take into account that this was a 'grabbed' image as Stieglitz walked towards Adams but I only know this because of the script of this section. In the Introduction (p vii) Adams writes: "I cannot, and will not, attempt to describe, analyze, or define the creative-emotional motivations of my work, or the work of others. Description of the inspiration or the meaning of a work of photography, or of any other medium of art, lies in the work itself." Whilst an approach that has a great deal to commend it to all photographers it does leave open the door to mis-interpretation by the viewer.
Boards and Thistles San Francisco c. 1932 (p. 29)
If the image had been of the boards I would have rated the image higher, given the texture and lighting of this element of the photograph. It is the inclusion of the thistles that fail the overall impact of the image as there inclusion is difficult to understand. The structure and detail of this part of the image strike a jarring note.
Rose and Driftwood San Francisco, California c. 1932 (p 33)
The combination of the two elements of this image does not work. The sworl pattern of the driftwood does not complement the structure and texture of the rose. It distracts and the eye flits from one to the other. It is a brilliant picture of the rose, one can almost feel the softness of the petals. The background, provided presumably by the driftwood, is fussy and inappropriate.
Carolyn Anspacher San Francisco c. 1932 (p 37)
I think that it is the strange lighting on the face that detracts from this image particularly the shadow under the eyes.. There is loss of detail in the back of the hair although this is of less importance.
Moonrise Hernandez, New Mexico 1941 (p. 41)
Described by Adams as his most popular single image it fails to impress. The moon is a relatively small dot in the black sky and the eye.
Aspens Northern New Mexico 1958 (p. 61)
An almost abstract image apart from the brightly lit tree in the left foreground. Does not quite work for me because of the presence of this tree which drags the eye back rather than allowing it to explore the right hand side of the image which is far more interesting. There is a second image in this part of the book that is just the right hand side of the first shown image which, for me, is a far better image.
Mount Williamson (no other information) (p. 67)
The rocks in the bottom half of the image dominate whereas the interest and better part of the image is at the top. It is almost as though Adams had taken to heart the common advice to have something in the foreground but in this case it has become an almost impenetrable barrier.
Mount McKinley and Wonder Lake Denali National Park Alaska 1947 (p. 75)
There is very little to commend this image with the blocked out shadows and the lack of any real detail in the water of the lake. Mount McKinley (I assume that is the massif in the background) appears surrealistic because of the way it has been exposed and developed. It reminds me of a meringue (Baked Alaska).
Rock and Surf Big Sur California c. 1951 (p.87)
The large rock in the foreground is superfluous (the rock on the water's edge provides an ideal foreground point of interest) and diminishes the far outcrop by comparison. Having said that there is a large amount of detail of interest in the picture including the clouds and overall the print is very good.
Farm Family Melones California c. 1953 (p.95)
My initial idea was to place this image amongst the 'Greats' but on further thought there was something about the composition that does not quite work. The figure in the foreground dominates the image and the other figures are (literally) in shadow. Had the image been entitled 'Patriarch' the portrayed relationship between the four people would better fit. The actual composition does not suggest 'family'. As a technical piece of work it is almost faultless.
Silverton Colorado 1951 (p. 99)
The placement of the houses against the backdrop of the mountain does not work. It is difficult to decide context and the geographical relationship between the two elements - how close is the mountain to the houses?
The Black Sun Owens Valley California 1939 (p. 125)
The only redeeming feature in this image is the stream and landscape elements in the right bottom corner of the image. The 'black sun' is just distracting and seems more like a mistake in development but as the accompanying notes explain it was a deliberate decision. The tree that dominates the left hand side of the image together with the ground upon which it stands is too dark and whilst texture is retained one cannot help feeling that concentration on this part of the image would have produced a much better picture.
Moon and Half Dome Yosemite National Park California 1960 (p.133)
An image that is possibly one of Adams' most famous images. For me the image is not 'great' because of the large black blob that dominates the left hand corner. One is left wondering what it is (could be someone's arm) and why it was included in the image. There is also the problem of the blocked shadows on the right hand side. Of course it is easy to criticise from the comfort of one's armchair as one does not know how much leeway to move was available.
Edward Weston Carmel Highlands California c. 1940 (p. 145)
The balance between the subject and the surround is not right. It is difficult to decide what we are seeing - the image of a tree with the human figure there to provide scale or an image designed to illustrate the puny nature of man in nature. Much is revealed in the accompanying commentary but to take Adams at his word and to see the image as presented means that it is just confusing.
Sand Dune Oceano California c.1950 (p. 149)
An image that does not quite make it. Take away the title and it could be almost anything.
Frozen Lake and Cliffs Sierra Nevada, Sequoia National Park 1932 (p. 11)
The image could almost be an abstract but we are told in the title what we are looking at. The image fails on a number of fronts. The blocked out shadows at the bottom of the picture leads us to a layer of snow that is devoid of detail. The snow at the bottom of the cliffs with what appears to be a rock fall within is a strange grey with a texture that may be real but which looks decidedly odd. Shadows on the cliff face are blocked out and overall I found it to be a very unsatisfactory image.
Surf Sequence San Mateo County Coast, California, c. 1940 (p. 22)
It was only by reading the accompanying notes that I could make any real sense of this image. This is largely due to being used to seeing the sky where the surf is in this picture. Even knowing what it is there remains a sense of unreality. The composition leaves a lot to be desired and the three main elements (shadow, scree and surf) are in disharmony and fight for ones attention.
Lodgepole Pines Lyell Fork of the Merced River, Yosemite National Park c. 1921 (p. 49)
Reading the accompanying article one supposes that this image is an experiment in soft focus. The result is poor by any standards but this may be due to the lightness of the rocks and trees in the middle of the picture.
Early Morning, Merced River, Autumn Yosemite National Park c. 1950 (p. 53)
The eye finds it difficult to settle on any particular spot and the overall impression is of an image that tries to provide too much information. The is no doubt about the very high quality of the printing and the capture of detail and texture overall but as a composition it fails.
Martha Porter, Pioneer Woman Orderville, Utah c. 1961 (p. 71)
The subject of this image is Martha Porter but the dominant feature is the porch support on the right of the picture. Brightly lit and textured it immediately attracts attention and further study. The presence of the woman seems almost incidental. The portrait element fails to do justice to the subject and greater attention to lighting and developing to emphasise the character and life history etched into the face of this woman would have led to a much more striking image.
Buddhist Grave Markers and Rainbow Paia, Hawaii c. 1956 (p. 83)
My initial response was - this is awful. On further examination I feel I was being too kind. The rainbow could be anything. The jumble of grave markers with the white one on top is exactly that - a jumble.
St Francis Church Ranchos de Taos New Mexico c. 1929 (p. 91)
It may be the limitations of the equipment used or difficulties with developing the image but this image is a massive disappointment. The most appropriate treatment would, I suggest, lie in deepening the shadows to emphasise the shape of the church and to bring out the texture. There is also a need for the introduction of a human figure or other marker that would give the viewer to make a clue to the size. As shown it could be a child's sandcastle shot from low down.
Old Water Tower San Francisco California 1961 (p. 159)
There is nothing about this image that attracts me. It is badly composed and the domination of the tower created by its central location in the image does not allow any judgement on its size and its relation to the surrounding buildings.
Winter Sunrise Sierra Nevada from Lone Pine California 1944 (p. 163)
A four layered 'cake' that fails to impress. The black mass in the middle of the image where there is virtually no detail gives the impression that there is a hole in the landscape upon which the sun lit mountain stands. A real disaster.
Graffiti Abandoned Military Installation Golden Gate Recreational Area California 1982 (p. 167)
One is left wondering 'Why?'
I believe there are three main elements of the book - the images chosen; the references to the technical elements and, for me the best part, Adams' views on photography. I decided to look at these elements separately across three blogs. I realise that this imposes artificial barriers between the separate elements that should really be considered as a whole but it does allow for, hopefully, greater clarity. To this end I have used the following headings - Choice; Technique, and Philosophy. The first element will be presented in this blog and the remaining two in two further blogs.
Choice
Of the many thousands of photographs that Adams took over the 50+ years of his photographic career it is not obvious why he chose these 40 and perhaps he does not know. In many ways it is a fruitless exercise to try to explain and it is not my intention to try. In looking through these photographs I found myself responding in a number of different ways some of which were surprising given the attitude of mind I brought to the exercise. The more I studied the images the more I found myself asking where I would place the individual images in a simple classification of 'Wow', 'Great', 'O.K,' and 'Nope' which led inevitably to me asking myself why I had made those decisions. In what follows I have used the titles used by Adams. The page numbers refer to the edition of the book that I have read [Adams A (1983) Examples The Making of 40 Photographs. Eleventh paper back printing 2013. Italy: Little, Brown and Company]. It is important to stress that the choices are solely mine and record my reaction to the individual prints and a brief analysis as to why I think I reacted as I did.
Wow
Monolith, The face of Half Dome Yosemite National Park 1927 (p.3)
The overall impact of this image is enhanced by the capture of the detail in the various elements. Apart from the sky everywhere one looks there is texture and form . The grandeur of the scene and the way that it is composed draws strong emotion.
The Golden gate before the Bridge San Francisco California, 1932 (p. 19)
This image has almost everything - the cloud formation, the light on the water and the framing provided by the headlands. There is detail and texture in all parts and the eye is drawn into the image by the composition. One of those images that make you wish that you could be half as good.
Sand Dunes, Sunrise Death Valley National Monument, California 1948 (p. 57)
An image with real impact that draws the viewer in. There is just sufficient sense of texture in the brightly lit dune front to retain the interest.
Tenaya Creek, Dogwood, Rain Yosemite National Park 1948 (p.79)
Everything about this picture is right. It is wonderfully composed; light has been captured at its best and the printed result is breath-taking.
Church and Road Bodega California c. 1953 (p.137)
It is the simplicity of the image combined with the capture of the various textures that makes this a 'wow' image. The composition with the church above the natural eye line adds a dynamic that contributes to the picture's strength.
Merced River, Cliffs, Autumn Yosemite National Park 1939 (p. 141)
One of my favourites. The capture of the light and the detail offered in a busy but well composed image makes it outstanding.
Georgia O'Keeffe and Orville Cox Canyon de Chelly National Monument 1937 (p. 153)
Given Adams' other portraits it is something of a surprise to come across this image. The composition cannot be faulted and the drama of the sky with the two figures set against it with only their faces and one hand in the light makes for a classic photograph. The strength of the image lies in the expression on their faces and the sense of an unposed picture adds to the appreciation of a 'wow' image.
Sand Dunes, Sunrise Death Valley National Monument, California 1948 (p. 57)
An image with real impact that draws the viewer in. There is just sufficient sense of texture in the brightly lit dune front to retain the interest.
Tenaya Creek, Dogwood, Rain Yosemite National Park 1948 (p.79)
Everything about this picture is right. It is wonderfully composed; light has been captured at its best and the printed result is breath-taking.
Church and Road Bodega California c. 1953 (p.137)
It is the simplicity of the image combined with the capture of the various textures that makes this a 'wow' image. The composition with the church above the natural eye line adds a dynamic that contributes to the picture's strength.
Merced River, Cliffs, Autumn Yosemite National Park 1939 (p. 141)
One of my favourites. The capture of the light and the detail offered in a busy but well composed image makes it outstanding.
Georgia O'Keeffe and Orville Cox Canyon de Chelly National Monument 1937 (p. 153)
Given Adams' other portraits it is something of a surprise to come across this image. The composition cannot be faulted and the drama of the sky with the two figures set against it with only their faces and one hand in the light makes for a classic photograph. The strength of the image lies in the expression on their faces and the sense of an unposed picture adds to the appreciation of a 'wow' image.
Great
Base of Upper Yosemite Fall Yosemite National Park, c. 1950 (p. 15)
My first reaction to this image was 'wow' as I saw the detail and light in the upper part. It is quite remarkable and one is left with a sense of awe not only because of the power of the fall but also the talent of the photographer. Unhappily this is an image very much of two parts where the lower half is a disappointment that fails by a long way the majesty of the upper half. The inclusion of the rock face does nothing to the overall impact of the image and the tree, bottom left, seems totally superfluous.
El Capitan, Winter Sunrise Yosemite National Park, 1968 (p. 45)
A similar reaction to the image of Yosemite fall but the ethereal nature of El Capitan above the mist/cloud rather spoils the image as a whole. The detail in the valley floor and trees is exceptional.
Clearing Winter Storm Yosemite National Park 1940 (p. 103)
This is a powerful image particularly the upper half. The two large trees in the right foreground are an unnecessary inclusion but it is impossible to say whether Adams was in a position to shoot without including these trees whilst at the same time retaining the composition of the rest of the picture. One wonders whether Adams, with today's technology, would have removed them post capture.
Arches North Court Mission San Xavier del Bac Tucson Arizona 1968 (p. 107)
A very powerful image that, one presumes, captures the essence of the building. The composition is really good and it may be pernickety to wonder whether it was possible to get a similarly powerful image without the central pillar which cuts the church building in half.
Still Life San Francisco California c. 1932 (p. 113)
My least favourite of all the images in the book but this should not be allowed to detract from the quality of the work overall. The capture of detail (the pressure marks on the egg in the slicer and the reflection of the egg in the grater) is remarkable.
Jacques Henri Lartigue Arles France 1974 (p. 117)
I am not a great admirer of Adams' portraiture. However this image has everything going for it. It is well seen, powerful and the print very high quality.
El Capitan, Winter Sunrise Yosemite National Park, 1968 (p. 45)
A similar reaction to the image of Yosemite fall but the ethereal nature of El Capitan above the mist/cloud rather spoils the image as a whole. The detail in the valley floor and trees is exceptional.
Clearing Winter Storm Yosemite National Park 1940 (p. 103)
This is a powerful image particularly the upper half. The two large trees in the right foreground are an unnecessary inclusion but it is impossible to say whether Adams was in a position to shoot without including these trees whilst at the same time retaining the composition of the rest of the picture. One wonders whether Adams, with today's technology, would have removed them post capture.
Arches North Court Mission San Xavier del Bac Tucson Arizona 1968 (p. 107)
A very powerful image that, one presumes, captures the essence of the building. The composition is really good and it may be pernickety to wonder whether it was possible to get a similarly powerful image without the central pillar which cuts the church building in half.
Still Life San Francisco California c. 1932 (p. 113)
My least favourite of all the images in the book but this should not be allowed to detract from the quality of the work overall. The capture of detail (the pressure marks on the egg in the slicer and the reflection of the egg in the grater) is remarkable.
Jacques Henri Lartigue Arles France 1974 (p. 117)
I am not a great admirer of Adams' portraiture. However this image has everything going for it. It is well seen, powerful and the print very high quality.
Nevada Fall Yosemite National Park c. 1947 (p.121)
Really borders on Great/Wow but it does not make the 'Wow' category because of the blown highlights at the top of the fall. There is also the rather strange shaft of light that crosses from the left hand side of the image and catches the base of the trees on the right. It is difficult to decide where it has come from and seems unreal. There is also the trees on the right of the image that detract from the overall composition because they tend to 'block' entry into the image and they make the image unbalanced.
Really borders on Great/Wow but it does not make the 'Wow' category because of the blown highlights at the top of the fall. There is also the rather strange shaft of light that crosses from the left hand side of the image and catches the base of the trees on the right. It is difficult to decide where it has come from and seems unreal. There is also the trees on the right of the image that detract from the overall composition because they tend to 'block' entry into the image and they make the image unbalanced.
White House Ruin (no other information) (p. 129)
The dramatic striations on the cliff face lead the eye towards the main element of the picture. Unfortunately the 'white house' itself fails to retain interest. The development has created a bland, poorly contrasted main subject that is dominated by the area in which it is located. One would also question the decision to include the foliage at the bottom of the picture that seems to be unnecessary in portraying the overall message.
O.K.
Alfred Stieglitz, An American Place New York City 1935 (p. 7)
For me the face of Stieglitz, surely the primary subject of the photograph is too small a part of the overall image. There is also a lack of definition on the left hand side of his face so that there is a sense of imbalance. One has to take into account that this was a 'grabbed' image as Stieglitz walked towards Adams but I only know this because of the script of this section. In the Introduction (p vii) Adams writes: "I cannot, and will not, attempt to describe, analyze, or define the creative-emotional motivations of my work, or the work of others. Description of the inspiration or the meaning of a work of photography, or of any other medium of art, lies in the work itself." Whilst an approach that has a great deal to commend it to all photographers it does leave open the door to mis-interpretation by the viewer.
Boards and Thistles San Francisco c. 1932 (p. 29)
If the image had been of the boards I would have rated the image higher, given the texture and lighting of this element of the photograph. It is the inclusion of the thistles that fail the overall impact of the image as there inclusion is difficult to understand. The structure and detail of this part of the image strike a jarring note.
Rose and Driftwood San Francisco, California c. 1932 (p 33)
The combination of the two elements of this image does not work. The sworl pattern of the driftwood does not complement the structure and texture of the rose. It distracts and the eye flits from one to the other. It is a brilliant picture of the rose, one can almost feel the softness of the petals. The background, provided presumably by the driftwood, is fussy and inappropriate.
Carolyn Anspacher San Francisco c. 1932 (p 37)
I think that it is the strange lighting on the face that detracts from this image particularly the shadow under the eyes.. There is loss of detail in the back of the hair although this is of less importance.
Moonrise Hernandez, New Mexico 1941 (p. 41)
Described by Adams as his most popular single image it fails to impress. The moon is a relatively small dot in the black sky and the eye.
Aspens Northern New Mexico 1958 (p. 61)
An almost abstract image apart from the brightly lit tree in the left foreground. Does not quite work for me because of the presence of this tree which drags the eye back rather than allowing it to explore the right hand side of the image which is far more interesting. There is a second image in this part of the book that is just the right hand side of the first shown image which, for me, is a far better image.
Mount Williamson (no other information) (p. 67)
The rocks in the bottom half of the image dominate whereas the interest and better part of the image is at the top. It is almost as though Adams had taken to heart the common advice to have something in the foreground but in this case it has become an almost impenetrable barrier.
Mount McKinley and Wonder Lake Denali National Park Alaska 1947 (p. 75)
There is very little to commend this image with the blocked out shadows and the lack of any real detail in the water of the lake. Mount McKinley (I assume that is the massif in the background) appears surrealistic because of the way it has been exposed and developed. It reminds me of a meringue (Baked Alaska).
Rock and Surf Big Sur California c. 1951 (p.87)
The large rock in the foreground is superfluous (the rock on the water's edge provides an ideal foreground point of interest) and diminishes the far outcrop by comparison. Having said that there is a large amount of detail of interest in the picture including the clouds and overall the print is very good.
Farm Family Melones California c. 1953 (p.95)
My initial idea was to place this image amongst the 'Greats' but on further thought there was something about the composition that does not quite work. The figure in the foreground dominates the image and the other figures are (literally) in shadow. Had the image been entitled 'Patriarch' the portrayed relationship between the four people would better fit. The actual composition does not suggest 'family'. As a technical piece of work it is almost faultless.
Silverton Colorado 1951 (p. 99)
The placement of the houses against the backdrop of the mountain does not work. It is difficult to decide context and the geographical relationship between the two elements - how close is the mountain to the houses?
The Black Sun Owens Valley California 1939 (p. 125)
The only redeeming feature in this image is the stream and landscape elements in the right bottom corner of the image. The 'black sun' is just distracting and seems more like a mistake in development but as the accompanying notes explain it was a deliberate decision. The tree that dominates the left hand side of the image together with the ground upon which it stands is too dark and whilst texture is retained one cannot help feeling that concentration on this part of the image would have produced a much better picture.
Moon and Half Dome Yosemite National Park California 1960 (p.133)
An image that is possibly one of Adams' most famous images. For me the image is not 'great' because of the large black blob that dominates the left hand corner. One is left wondering what it is (could be someone's arm) and why it was included in the image. There is also the problem of the blocked shadows on the right hand side. Of course it is easy to criticise from the comfort of one's armchair as one does not know how much leeway to move was available.
Edward Weston Carmel Highlands California c. 1940 (p. 145)
The balance between the subject and the surround is not right. It is difficult to decide what we are seeing - the image of a tree with the human figure there to provide scale or an image designed to illustrate the puny nature of man in nature. Much is revealed in the accompanying commentary but to take Adams at his word and to see the image as presented means that it is just confusing.
Sand Dune Oceano California c.1950 (p. 149)
An image that does not quite make it. Take away the title and it could be almost anything.
Nope
Frozen Lake and Cliffs Sierra Nevada, Sequoia National Park 1932 (p. 11)
The image could almost be an abstract but we are told in the title what we are looking at. The image fails on a number of fronts. The blocked out shadows at the bottom of the picture leads us to a layer of snow that is devoid of detail. The snow at the bottom of the cliffs with what appears to be a rock fall within is a strange grey with a texture that may be real but which looks decidedly odd. Shadows on the cliff face are blocked out and overall I found it to be a very unsatisfactory image.
Surf Sequence San Mateo County Coast, California, c. 1940 (p. 22)
It was only by reading the accompanying notes that I could make any real sense of this image. This is largely due to being used to seeing the sky where the surf is in this picture. Even knowing what it is there remains a sense of unreality. The composition leaves a lot to be desired and the three main elements (shadow, scree and surf) are in disharmony and fight for ones attention.
Lodgepole Pines Lyell Fork of the Merced River, Yosemite National Park c. 1921 (p. 49)
Reading the accompanying article one supposes that this image is an experiment in soft focus. The result is poor by any standards but this may be due to the lightness of the rocks and trees in the middle of the picture.
Early Morning, Merced River, Autumn Yosemite National Park c. 1950 (p. 53)
The eye finds it difficult to settle on any particular spot and the overall impression is of an image that tries to provide too much information. The is no doubt about the very high quality of the printing and the capture of detail and texture overall but as a composition it fails.
Martha Porter, Pioneer Woman Orderville, Utah c. 1961 (p. 71)
The subject of this image is Martha Porter but the dominant feature is the porch support on the right of the picture. Brightly lit and textured it immediately attracts attention and further study. The presence of the woman seems almost incidental. The portrait element fails to do justice to the subject and greater attention to lighting and developing to emphasise the character and life history etched into the face of this woman would have led to a much more striking image.
Buddhist Grave Markers and Rainbow Paia, Hawaii c. 1956 (p. 83)
My initial response was - this is awful. On further examination I feel I was being too kind. The rainbow could be anything. The jumble of grave markers with the white one on top is exactly that - a jumble.
St Francis Church Ranchos de Taos New Mexico c. 1929 (p. 91)
It may be the limitations of the equipment used or difficulties with developing the image but this image is a massive disappointment. The most appropriate treatment would, I suggest, lie in deepening the shadows to emphasise the shape of the church and to bring out the texture. There is also a need for the introduction of a human figure or other marker that would give the viewer to make a clue to the size. As shown it could be a child's sandcastle shot from low down.
Old Water Tower San Francisco California 1961 (p. 159)
There is nothing about this image that attracts me. It is badly composed and the domination of the tower created by its central location in the image does not allow any judgement on its size and its relation to the surrounding buildings.
Winter Sunrise Sierra Nevada from Lone Pine California 1944 (p. 163)
A four layered 'cake' that fails to impress. The black mass in the middle of the image where there is virtually no detail gives the impression that there is a hole in the landscape upon which the sun lit mountain stands. A real disaster.
Graffiti Abandoned Military Installation Golden Gate Recreational Area California 1982 (p. 167)
One is left wondering 'Why?'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)