A Virtue of Straight Photography

Here's what Dan said;

**edited out - not relevant to jj's post - too contentious - sorry**

If you're intersted, it's here;
http://www.apug.org/forums/showthread.php?t=15768

Murray

 

Jjstafford –
I respect DH’s motives for his type of photography or the way he feels others should present their images. For what it is worth: I frequently use USMs and D/B masks (i.e., unsharp or dodge/burn masks) to better deal with “local” contrast and/or to provide the “edge” effect. Stated another way, the former mitigates the need to do as much burning and obviates the need for long slow development times (e.g., “stand” development) to achieve an “edge” effect in the negative. The D/B masks facilitate and ease needs for more precise burning and dodging (not to mention precise repeatability*). Bottom line, in my opinion, these processes can create an image as it was seen or perceived “in situ”. However, if the photographer wishes to render the scene with a different “mood”, these techniques will facilitate this. As you have stated DH does not want to this, no doubt, because his is Documentary Photographer. However, the masking techniques mentioned above would better facilitate or ease the craftsmanship needed to render his images as he saw them or wishes to document them.
On occasion I’ve used Highlight Masks and Shadow Contrast Increase Masks (SCIM) – and, on rare occasions Fog Masks.
*Alan Ross who is licensed to produce prints from Ansel Adams negatives uses D/B masks for the purpose of precise repeatability not to mention the other benefits.
hortense

 

I must say that when someone tells me that there is only one right way to do things that my bullshit detector starts flashing and sirens go off. I have no problem with someone deciding there is only on right way to do things for themselves but when it dictating what others must dol I am almost bound to do it any other way.

From my reading of his work Ansel Adams was very open-minded in the way he spoke and wrote. I believe the same could be said of Phil Davis.

 

Why?

"...proper rendition DICTATE A proper contrast. We must only..."

The use ofproper, dictate, and must leave only one question: Is it so?

 

Sorry jj, I edited out Dan's quote from my earlier post (but left a link for anybody interested) as it's too contentious and not relevant here. Me bad. Me still learning...

Murray

 

JJ my remarks were not at all in meant reply to anything you said. Rather they were in reply to the postings on the previous thread by Danqu.

Sorry am I for making myself misunderstood.

 

A Goad! Just what I need. A few more minutes at the
computer and I'll be in the dark and another test underway.

I've late summer or early fall intentions of buying a mini Mac
and scanner good for prints. I've many rolls of developed film
awaiting the enlarger. Dan

 

Seems to me that a "purist" printing approach is mainly for the benefit of the printer. The viewer doesn't know what was done unless things are carried too far. Or the printer tells the viewer what his process is in an attempt to influence him. A big factor is how you print concerning light/dark and hard/soft. Sometimes things carried to extremes work well. But personally I think that a strong image printed in a matter of fact way is best. A print that causes least attention to the printing. And I guess you could extend that to photographing in a way that uses the least drama.
Chuck

 

I'd say so although 'require' would have been a better
choice of word. I think it is all a matter of establishing
borders and working within those. I'm working toward
prints which are representative of the subject and
avoid impressionistic impulses. Not easy when
working with material brought in from
THE DEEP DARK WOODS. Dan