Ansel Adams and other great printers

removed account4 · Dec 29, 2019

Alan Edward Klein said:
He probably would have like the idea he could print out oodles of copies and sell them all and make more money.

You are probably right. But sadly my ouji board just keeps telling me to go to the loose brick by the fireplace so I will never know. I think its hillarious that people in this thread are getting so insulted or offended at the suggestion of AA using photoshop. He's dead and while a funny exercise to get AA fans all up in arms because suggesting he'd want to have anything to do with modern tech is sacrilegious .. it doesn't really matter. Maybe he would have embraced or at least had fun with PS, maybe he would have created a whole moonrise series by cutting and pasting the moonrise all over the place
like 1/2 dome, the falls, el cap, and those uncomfortable people that he made portraits of, and maybe he would have photoshopped their faces a little to make them look a little more comfortable ... and then again maybe he would have gotten super annoyed that making pigment on paper prints sounds easy but isn't, and pigment tanks cost too much. He's probably doing PS right now, they say the subscription is free, and pigment for his 3880 is 5finger discount when you are on the cloud.

Bill Burk · Dec 29, 2019

Oh and he said you should run it by the committee, if you get approved they might let you print one of his negs.

(pg. 745 https://archive.org/details/convanseladams00adamrich/page/744)

Bill Burk · Dec 29, 2019

Haa when you are on the cloud. jnantz you crack me up.

Sirius Glass · Dec 29, 2019

jnantz said:
You are probably right. But sadly my ouji board just keeps telling me to go to the loose brick by the fireplace so I will never know. I think its hillarious that people in this thread are getting so insulted or offended at the suggestion of AA using photoshop. He's dead and while a funny exercise to get AA fans all up in arms because suggesting he'd want to have anything to do with modern tech is sacrilegious .. it doesn't really matter. Maybe he would have embraced or at least had fun with PS, maybe he would have created a whole moonrise series by cutting and pasting the moonrise all over the place
like 1/2 dome, the falls, el cap, and those uncomfortable people that he made portraits of, and maybe he would have photoshopped their faces a little to make them look a little more comfortable ... and then again maybe he would have gotten super annoyed that making pigment on paper prints sounds easy but isn't, and pigment tanks cost too much. He's probably doing PS right now, they say the subscription is free, and pigment for his 3880 is 5finger discount when you are on the cloud.

Of many darkroom techniques, Ansel Adams did not cut and past objects in his prints. He dealt with the negative as it was and worked on burning and dodging. He did not remove tails from dogs, like others did. So irrationally claiming that he would have used PhotoShop, are less than without foundation.

BrianShaw · Dec 29, 2019

Sirius Glass said:
Alan. you just got caught with your pants down!

Please... no...TMI...

removed account4 · Dec 29, 2019

Sirius Glass said:
Of many darkroom techniques, Ansel Adams did not cut and past objects in his prints. He dealt with the negative as it was and worked on burning and dodging. He did not remove tails from dogs, like others did. So irrationally claiming that he would have used PhotoShop, are less than without foundation.

whatever .. manipulation is manipulation.
no one said that in order to use PS you need to go into those extremes you mention, except for people only see PS as some sort of an extreme way of doing things.
he did not do straight photography plain old un dodged un burned un manipulated image making, he most likely retouched with leads like most people, he abraded his negative with the blade like most people and did what many might think of as extreme burning and dodging and contrast enhancement ( and negative intensification ) when he made his DR prints, while the lions share of people who use PS do, burn and dodge and contrast. So irrationally claiming that he would NOT have used PhotoShop, are less than without foundation.

Bill Burk said:
Haa when you are on the cloud. jnantz you crack me up.

RalphLambrecht · Dec 29, 2019

awty said:
Of coarse. He would of profited on writing a whole new series of books and stayed relevant to modern photography.

Darkroom work is for artisans.

I'drather be an artisan than a technoid!

awty · Dec 29, 2019

RalphLambrecht said:
I'drather be an artisan than a technoid!

Me to, I'm proud to be an artisan.......its just not very profitable.
I love things made by people, whether they are an expert or novice. Things made by computers are a throwaway commodity, things made by hand are special.
My sister inlaw's husband who works in IT, built his kids a cubby house, quite big, he showed me some pictures of it, was the first significant thing he ever built, was very proud. No matter how good he was he would make far more money in IT than building cubby houses.
There is no money to be made in darkroom work anymore, its something for crafts people.

removed account4 · Dec 29, 2019

awty said:
Things made by computers are a throwaway commodity

i've seem some photography made by a digital camera and computer and it was anything but throw away.
and i have seen things made by hand that were absolutely terrible.
oh well ...

markbau · Dec 29, 2019

jtk said:
That's what some do say. But the most impressive I've seen is a Moonrise mural, apparently glue mounted...in 1971 on the wall of Gene Saunders, the man who did most of his print spotting...and student of Minor White.

That’s what AA himself told attendees at Yosemite workshops. You could buy the same 8x10, $10 for one printed by him, $5 for an AA. John Sexton will tell you the same thing as he did most of the AA printing.

Alan Edward Klein · Dec 30, 2019

Sirius Glass said:
Of course he was a "money grubber" which is why he instituted low cost prints of his work at his Yosemite studio which still prints low cost copies of his work I have several myself. Alan. you just got caught with your pants down!

Yikes. I hope nobody took a picture.

Frank53 · Dec 30, 2019

Sirius Glass said:
Of many darkroom techniques, Ansel Adams did not cut and past objects in his prints. He dealt with the negative as it was and worked on burning and dodging. He did not remove tails from dogs, like others did. So irrationally claiming that he would have used PhotoShop, are less than without foundation.

True, we do not know that, but what we do know, is that in 1982 he wrote in the preface of “The Negative”:
"I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them"
Regards,
Frank

awty · Dec 30, 2019

jnantz said:
i've seem some photography made by a digital camera and computer and it was anything but throw away.
and i have seen things made by hand that were absolutely terrible.
oh well ...

Terrible maybe, but I struggle to throw away anything I made or something a friend or family has made. Don't own any digital prints to throw away, but if I did they'd have to be pretty good to avoid the bin in a redecoration.

removed account4 · Dec 30, 2019

i didn't say i throw away gifts people give me, i hope my comment didn't suggest that.
i was just sayin' ...
the material an image is made from isn't my criteria whether something is good or bad.
it seems that to some the materials overshadow everything else. oh well ...

Bob Carnie · Dec 30, 2019

awty said:
Me to, I'm proud to be an artisan.......its just not very profitable.
I love things made by people, whether they are an expert or novice. Things made by computers are a throwaway commodity, things made by hand are special.
My sister inlaw's husband who works in IT, built his kids a cubby house, quite big, he showed me some pictures of it, was the first significant thing he ever built, was very proud. No matter how good he was he would make far more money in IT than building cubby houses.
There is no money to be made in darkroom work anymore, its something for crafts people.

I hope this last statement is not true, as its the only way I can survive.....

Dr. no · Dec 30, 2019

The answer is obvious to anyone who has actually read his comments:
1. "I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them" (as above) He would use the technology he felt would be appropriate to his vision.
2. He would be able to more easily print his pictures. He often regretted time in the darkroom as opposed to being out making photographs, but not entirely as the "print is the performance". Also, he did a major amount of his printing when health problems would not permit much else (he was spending at least half-days in the darkroom less than two weeks after his pacemaker implantation. That's not a minor thing.)
3. He would not pump out reams of prints. He was completely aware of the idea of limiting volume to increase unit price. If DR prints sold for more, he'd probably do that. And remember also, he did catalog shoots till he could sell the "art" for enough, and had the kids out of school...

jim10219 · Dec 30, 2019

CMoore said:
These questions are always silly.
If Jimi Hendrix were alive, would he have ditched tubes, single coils, and been playing Hum-Buckers into Digital/SS Amps.?

NOBODY knows what somebody MIGHT have done.
Ansel might have quit photography altogether and opened a piano Studio/Store.

I am glad he is NOT alive now, and he did what he did with what he had.!

Well, Hendrix did often play a Flying V with humbuckers, especially later in his career. So we know about that. Jimi also endorsed the Sunn Orion, which was a solid state amp. So we know about that as well. I'm betting that with his love for effects, unique tones, and technology, he probably would have embraced digital amps and effects as well.

Most professional artists don't really care as much about the tools as the product. Amateurs are the ones who obsess over gear. Pros tend to focus more on the quality of their output, however it's accomplished. In fact, I know several professional musicians, and they all pretty much play whatever gear they're paid to play (endorsement deals). Sure, they have personal preferences, but they're no where near as hung up on gear as most hobbyists.

When you do something for a living, you tend to embrace things that make your job easier. That is, until you reach a certain age. At some point, most of us become too set in our ways to keep up with the times. So if we're talking about young Ansel, then yeah. I'm pretty certain he would have. Old Ansel? I'm much less certain.

CMoore · Dec 30, 2019

[QUOTE="jim10219, post: 2239154, member: 82696"
When you do something for a living, you tend to embrace things that make your job easier. That is, until you reach a certain age. At some point, most of us become too set in our ways to keep up with the times. So if we're talking about young Ansel, then yeah. I'm pretty certain he would have. Old Ansel? I'm much less certain.[/QUOTE]

No Doubt

CMoore · Dec 30, 2019

jim10219 said:
Well, Hendrix did often play a Flying V with humbuckers, especially later in his career. So we know about that. Jimi also endorsed the Sunn Orion, which was a solid state amp. \
.

Everybody did.
Joe Walsh ads for Carvin guitars and God knows what amps. But what does he pic on stage..... and he is/was usually plugged into a Dr Z
Guitar Gods were frequently connected to one main axe, even though they owned many types. Hendrix with his Strats for example.
The point is.....TUBES were by far the choice of the day, and still are for guitar players.
Would Hendrix have ditched that for the technology of 2020 is the same discussion as ...would Ansel have embraced computer driven processing. Nobody knows. It all becomes pontification.
As you say, it is often, probably, an age thing associated with the tools of habit.

Jimmy's Tele sold a lot of Les Pauls

jtk · Dec 30, 2019

This man made my Selmer-style MD50. You won't find many manouch-style guitars being played by top-40 motel bands.

http://www.acoustic-guitars.com/historique-atelier.php

http://www.acoustic-guitars.com/galerie-lutherie-maurice-dupont.php

CMoore · Dec 30, 2019

All i can say is..... Wow.
Exquisite Work.!

awty · Dec 30, 2019

Bob Carnie said:
I hope this last statement is not true, as its the only way I can survive.....

I was meaning in a pure sense, from what I can gather you do both to remain viable. Could you run a "profitable" business based solely on darkroom work with out using digital printer? I know of only one local business in a area of 2 million people who still offers darkroom work, but most of their business is in digital printing. Its great your still offering the service, like a lot of self employed people (my self included), you'll will probably have to stay with it till you drop.

Sirius Glass · Dec 30, 2019

CMoore said:
These questions are always silly.
If Jimi Hendrix were alive, would he have ditched tubes, single coils, and been playing Hum-Buckers into Digital/SS Amps.?

NOBODY knows what somebody MIGHT have done.
Ansel might have quit photography altogether and opened a piano Studio/Store.

I am glad he is NOT alive now, and he did what he did with what he had.!

God blessed Jimi Hendrix, he and Carrie Fisher are rare examples of people who produce new work after they were death. While Carrie Fisher, so far, has only been in one movie since she died, while Jimi Hendrix still releases new albums. Presley and Jim Morrison get your acts together!!

CMoore · Dec 30, 2019

Sirius Glass said:
God blessed Jimi Hendrix, he and Carrie Fisher are rare examples of people who produce new work after there death. While Carrie Fisher, so far, has only been in one movie since she died, while Jimi Hendrix still releases new albums. Presley and Jim Morrison get your acts together.

eddie · Dec 31, 2019

I'm fairly certain Adams would have been well aware of the advances in digital technology, and would have explored the possibilities. I'm not sure (no one can be) whether he would have embraced digital over analog, but I don't think it's farfetched to think he would have consulted with printer/ink/camera manufacturers to help improve their products. I'd like to think he wouldn't have been as dismissive of the changes as others have been.

Ansel Adams and other great printers

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency