Didn't Ansel Adams called it the "Fuzzy wuzzies"?

Brentwood Kebab!

A
Brentwood Kebab!

  • 1
  • 1
  • 71
Summer Lady

A
Summer Lady

  • 2
  • 1
  • 99
DINO Acting Up !

A
DINO Acting Up !

  • 2
  • 0
  • 56
What Have They Seen?

A
What Have They Seen?

  • 0
  • 0
  • 71
Lady With Attitude !

A
Lady With Attitude !

  • 0
  • 0
  • 60

Forum statistics

Threads
198,777
Messages
2,780,712
Members
99,703
Latest member
heartlesstwyla
Recent bookmarks
1

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
13,930
Format
8x10 Format
No. I was there a few years ago. Most of it is empty, with some concrete foundations here and there. There is a kind of museum or visitor center at the parking lot. I can't remember if any example of the old barracks have been rebuilt in connection with that. I think they want to preserve a sense of emptiness, looking across the sage and toward the mountains. But there is certainly more than just the old highway marker beside the site. But back in AA's day, obtaining permission to
photograph something like that still in operation would have been a sensitive issue, and wartime public relations restrictions would have been in effect. He couldn't simply shoot or say anything he pleased, at least publicly, or his access would have immediately ended, maybe his commercial career too. Ethnic hatred continued well after WWII ended; the Govt made a
concerted effort to bring it to a boiling point for sake of military morale, as if Pearl Harbor had not done enough.
 

jtk

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
4,943
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Format
35mm
There are the remains of what was once someone's attempt at a Japanese-style garden (AA photographed that for PR). There are slight traces of what once was a grave yard and there is a gymnasium that may be some sort of museum (doubt it's a relic)...that was closed when I visited. There's also a tar-papered "visitor's center" that arguably simulates a barracks on the outside The memorial obelisk still stands. Guess I'd be impressed with the relevant bureaucrats if they intended a "sense of emptiness." Emptiness would have been hard to ignore, but the prisoners made heroic efforts to establish community there. Ruth Asawa, sculptor and former head of San Francisco Arts Commission, remained angry about her childhood experience there...but used that anger. www.ruthasawa.com/life/arts-activism/
 

Berkeley Mike

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2018
Messages
651
Location
SF Bay Area
Format
Digital
I absolutely love California landscape painting.
AA's depiction of happy American citizen captives at Manzanar: http://bainbridgehistory.org/gallery-of-ansel-adams-photographs-of-manzanar/

3110.jpg

The Manzanar photos kick my butt. These are Americans!
 

Theo Sulphate

Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
6,489
Location
Gig Harbor
Format
Multi Format
What may not be apparent from the photos is that there were a huge number of people in those camps. When the camps were closed, they were given only a little bit of money and then sent off... to where? They now had nothing and nowhere to go. Heartless action.
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
when he made portraits
did he use the zone system or somethng a little less
time consuming
 
Last edited:

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,649
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format
I have a Mortensen book from the 30's, since I wanted to get into that sort of darkroom wizardry.

"Print finishing"

And another one "Picture making with paper negatives" Nowell Ward

Though it seems that a lot of the negative manipulation is best suited for large format (biggest I shoot is 6*9)

The paper negative techniques seem to require very thin paper, doesn't seem that this kind of paper is produced all that much anymore :/
paper negatives work very well with regular RC paper; the positives are not exposed through the paper but emulsion side in contact with emulsion side.
 

jtk

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
4,943
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Format
35mm
What may not be apparent from the photos is that there were a huge number of people in those camps. When the camps were closed, they were given only a little bit of money and then sent off... to where? They now had nothing and nowhere to go. Heartless action.

Japanese-Americans in camps were mostly agricultural or small business people who reconnected in their communities and were supportive of each other after release. Financial losses and personal wounds were of course tremendous. In San Francisco East Bay region, the "Japs" became more respected by people like my grandparents .

You won't learn this in school, but 20th century racist laws prohibited ethnic Japanese and Chinese from buying or even leasing agricultural land.
___________________________________________________________________________

California Alien Land Law of 1920[edit]
The California Alien Land Law of 1920 continued the 1913 law while filling many of its loopholes. Among the loopholes filled were that the leasing of land for a period of three years or less was no longer allowed; owning of stock in companies that acquired agricultural land was forbidden; and guardians or agents of ineligible aliens were required to submit an annual report on their activities. The 1920 Alien Land Law was passed in reaction to the intensification of anti-Japanese sentiment, and to the fact that the 1913 Alien Land Law was doing little to stem Japanese immigration to California. The law was approved by the voters after being proposed by the California State Legislature. It passed with a vote of 668,438 to 222,086. The 1920 law was amended in 1923 to further fill wording-related loopholes.[5][7]

Related court cases[edit]
In 1923, the laws were upheld in the United States Supreme Court and were determined not to be in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.[5]

The 1946 Supreme Court of California case People v. Oyama reaffirmed the 1923 decision, determining that Japanese immigrant Kajiro Oyama had attempted to evade the Alien Land Laws by purchasing farmland that he placed in the name of his son, who was a U.S. citizen. In fact, Oyama’s petition to be named as his son’s guardian in order to have authority over the land had been approved by a local court. This method was a major way in which the Japanese were able to acquire agricultural land during this period, since most other options were closed to them. The case was then reviewed by the United States Supreme Court in Oyama v. California after petitioning by the Oyamas and their supporters. The majority opinion held that Fred Oyama’s rights as a U.S. citizen to take and hold property had been violated by the state of California. The decision was arguably instrumental in helping to bring about a shift in attitudes toward the Japanese and their property rights.[5][8]

The Alien Land Laws were invalidated in 1952 by the Supreme Court of California as a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution in Sei Fujii v. California.[9] Fujii was a longtime Los Angeles resident, but was not a U.S. citizen. He alleged that the law violated the California and United States Constitutions, and that it also went against the spirit of the United Nations Charter to which the United States was bound by treaty. The California District Court of Appeal had decided in 1950 that the Alien Land Law was in violation of Articles 55 and 56 of the United Nations Charter. The Supreme Court of California then ordered the case transferred for hearing and settlement, as it was determined to be a sufficiently important question of law.[10][11]

History and context[edit]
Leading up to the passage of the 1913 Alien Land Law, there had been growing anti-Asian prejudice in California and in the United States in general, first against the Chinese during the 19th century, culminating with the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, and then against the Japanese during the 20th century. Anti-Japanese sentiment was often expressed in terms of the racist Yellow Peril argument.[6][12]

In 1900, there was an influx of over 12,000 Japanese immigrants to the U.S. mainland, many just released from indentured labor with Hawaii’s 1898 annexation. California was a main settlement location for Japanese immigrants to the United States, and many began to relocate to rural areas after initially settling in cities. Farming became the major economic foundation for the Japanese population in California, and they saw it as a way to prove their productive abilities and establish a sense of permanency in their new nation. Gradually, many moved from farm labor into production through truck farming and usually filled the niche market for perishable crops.[6][12]

The sudden increases in Japanese immigration during this and subsequent years spurred many anti-Japanese political and organizational movements in California, and the introduction of anti-Asian legislation to the California legislature, all of which had an influence on public sentiment. Many workers returning from the World War I effort felt that the Japanese were infringing on their job opportunities. In addition, some feared that the Japanese were attempting to overtake white control of California’s farmland. The Los Angeles Times newspaper and groups such as the Anti-Asiatic Association were vocal instigators of the anti-Japanese movement. In 1908, the United States and Japan agreed to limitations on Japanese migration to the United States, with Japan agreeing that it would stop the issuing of passports to persons intending to migrate as laborers who had no established future residence in the United States or no family members already in the United States.[13][5][6]

The Japanese possessed the right to lease and own land in the United States for residential and commercial use based on the 1911 American treaty with Japan. In 1910, most Japanese were working in the agricultural and fishing industries. Rights to agricultural land, unprotected by treaty, thus became the focus for the Alien Land Laws as state-level deterrents to immigration were sought in a dearth of national-level involvement.[5][13]

The Japanese presence in California as agricultural laborers and tenant farmers experienced rapid growth during the first two decades of the 20th century. They filled a labor void in farming previously occupied by the Chinese, whose numbers had sharply declined with the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act. Especially through tenant farming, Japanese families hoped to save enough money to eventually purchase their own land. Though it was meant to decrease immigration, the 1913 law likely had relatively little actual impact on Japanese farmers, and in fact, after the passage of the 1913 law, their numbers rose. By 1915, three-quarter of the vegetables consumed by Los Angeles residents were grown by Japanese.[4][5][6]

There is not complete agreement about the effects of the 1920 law. It is thought by some to have had a significant negative impact on Japanese involvement in agriculture. For example, the amount of agricultural land controlled by Japanese decreased by approximately 40 percent between 1920 and 1930, and total acres farmed by Japanese persons declined by 47 percent. During the 1920s, there was a general decline in the agricultural economy in California and elsewhere in the United States, which would have partially contributed to the sudden downturn in Japanese farming. Many Japanese were also able to evade the law, often by claiming to be farm “managers.” There were at least sixteen prosecutions of Japanese for violations of the Alien Land Law from 1920 to 1940, but there were likely many more. Despite the fact that the Alien Land Laws made farming more difficult for them, the Japanese still managed to maintain a fairly high level of economic success in the agricultural industry. In 1915, Japanese Foreign Minister Komei Kato likely spoke for many Japanese when he expressed the sentiment that Japanese immigrants were dismayed by being singled out in such a fashion by the Alien Land Law legislation.[4][5][6]
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
Zone System becomes intuitive if actually studied. Minor White did a better job explaining than did Ansel.

ive studied it ... and dont' practice it
sunny 11 is more intuitive ...
i asked because most all of his
portraits tend to have
the "hurry up and take it"
face which doesn't seem
like they were intuitive / fast exposures ..
like moon over ...
 

jtk

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
4,943
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Format
35mm
To each his/her own, and up to his/her own capabilty (obvious in his/her work).

I prefer photographers like Weston, Penn, and Avedon...whose capabilities are also, like Ansel's, seen in their work.

Neither Weston, Penn, nor Avedon employed the linear, quantitative, pop-photography Zone System-lite but seem to have gotten what they visualized in B&W using the non-quantitative, non-linear, perceptual aspect of Zone System (i.e. relied upon eyes and brains).

Digital photography in all of its aspects, because it can be so incredibly fluent tone-wise, offers opportunity far beyond the pop-photography Zone System-lite. The photographer's personal capability is, as always, measured by her/his aspirations and evident work. Perhaps that allows digital photography SOMETIMES to better represent what the photographer previsualized...up to his/her own capabilty (obvious in his/her work).
 
Last edited:

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
no clue what you are talking about
non linear pop photography zone system ...
==
as i said i was wondering
if he used the zone system to make
the portriats because they look so
staged and "hurry up faced"
=
not an insult just an observation
as you said
to each their own
==
 

jtk

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
4,943
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Format
35mm
no clue what you are talking about
non linear pop photography zone system ...
==
as i said i was wondering
if he used the zone system to make
the portriats because they look so
staged and "hurry up faced"
=
not an insult just an observation
as you said
to each their own
==

You don't need to apologise to Ansel for your harsh opinion of his work.
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
You don't need to apologise to Ansel for your harsh opinion of his work.


dude,
all your negativity
cause i said his portraits looked "stiff" ... ??

Pln9qRt.gif

you are making MR T cry again...
 
Last edited:

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,272

faberryman

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
6,048
Location
Wherever
Format
Multi Format
when he made portraits
did he use the zone system or somethng a little less
time consuming
It is unlikely that his portraits required much zone system manipulation. Place Caucasian skin in Zone VI and go. Maybe N+1 development to stretch out the tonal scale in an otherwise low contrast setting. You should be able to do those calculations instantaneously. For an accomplished zone system practitioner, I doubt you would be futzing with your meter.
 
Last edited:

jtk

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
4,943
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Format
35mm
It is unlikely that his portraits required much zone system manipulation. Place Caucasian skin in Zone VI and go. Maybe N+1 development to stretch out the tonal scale in an otherwise low contrast setting. You should be able to do those calculations instantaneously. For an accomplished zone system practitioner, I doubt you would be futzing with your meter.

Yes!

That's what an "accomplished zone system practitioner" would likely do. As well, he/she would have learned to previsualize (there's that word again) the print.

Some mistakenly think Zone System is slow and technical, probably relying on a spot meter.

By contrast, that "accomplished zone system practitioner" previsualizes (probably instantly) what the image will look like when rendered the way he/she intends in B&W....may or may not use a spot meter, may not need any meter.

I have no idea how AA metered his portraits, if he even bothered. I do believe he previsualized his negatives and prints.
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
It is unlikely that his portraits required much zone system manipulation. Place Caucasian skin in Zone VI and go. Maybe N+1 development to stretch out the tonal scale in an otherwise low contrast setting. You should be able to do those calculations instantaneously. For an accomplished zone system practitioner, I doubt you would be futzing with your meter.
thanks faberryman,
its been IDK 30 years since i looked at my zone system info so i forgot that it would have been "no fuss"
'preciate the info and experience !
maybe his portraits seem stiff becasue he was directing them
and ... well landscapes were his wheelhouse, not portriats ?
its ez to get stressed when you are out of your comfort zone ..
 

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,272
Above probably explains why at the time Mortensen was considered the better portrait photographer. While a zonie would say "easy,. nailed it in one", Mortensen taught his students to make several bracketed exposures and would have had a choice. Yes, history wrote him out.
 

jtk

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
4,943
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Format
35mm
As to "fuzzy wuzzy", perhaps that was Mortensen's slur, rather than that of Adams.

Might be worthwhile to confirm that, either way.

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/oct/06/william-mortensen-photography-master-macabre

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts...who-ansel-adams-called-anti-christ-180953525/

A.D. Coleman's praise couldn't have helped Mortensen's "place in history.".

Mortensen's personal religion and very formal theories about composition may both have helped to dig his grave deeper.

What do people who hate Joel Peter Witkin's work think about Mortensen's? Do you see a relationship?
 
Last edited:

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,359
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
As to "fuzzy wuzzy", perhaps that was Mortensen's slur, rather than that of Adams. Might be worthwhile to confirm that, either way.

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/oct/06/william-mortensen-photography-master-macabre

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts...who-ansel-adams-called-anti-christ-180953525/

A.D. Coleman's praise couldn't have helped Mortensen's "place in history.".

Mortensen's personal religion and very formal theories about composition may both have helped to dig his grave deeper.

What do people who hate Joel Peter Witkin's work think about Mortensen's? Do you see a relationship?

The BS that both authors poorly attempt to foist on us that Mortensen was a modernist and futurist is something I would use fertilize my garden plants. The more I have read about Mortensen the less I like about him and his work. Thank you for the articles.
 

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,272
Referring to the link in post 189 it seems to me that using a modern day reflective lightmeter it should be possible to make a number 7 negative by taking a reading from skin tone in diffuse light ,underexposing by 1 stop and developing for a long time to give maximum contrast in the skin tone.
So there would not be any need for bracketing with a modern meter.
The long time of development means that this is not a variation of the zone system.
 
  • jtk
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • Reason: duplicate due possible photrio bug

jtk

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
4,943
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Format
35mm
The BS that both authors poorly attempt to foist on us that Mortensen was a modernist and futurist is something I would use fertilize my garden plants. The more I have read about Mortensen the less I like about him and his work. Thank you for the articles.


Interesting, fair, if perhaps overly-agitated response.

Why do you dislike Mortensen so much? Where do the Smithsonian and Guardian articles come up short?

Can you explain your response more fully?

Seems to me that most "figure studies" on Photrio toy with intentions similar to Mortensen's. Just my impression.
 
Last edited:

jtk

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
4,943
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Format
35mm
Referring to the link in post 189 it seems to me that using a modern day reflective lightmeter it should be possible to make a number 7 negative by taking a reading from skin tone in diffuse light ,underexposing by 1 stop and developing for a long time to give maximum contrast in the skin tone.
So there would not be any need for bracketing with a modern meter.
The long time of development means that this is not a variation of the zone system.

I think you're right from one perspective, however Zone System isn't simply a technical process. It also requires learning how to PREVISUALIZE the tones one intends to produce in the print...in other words it's also a trained psychological/perceptual exercise. Adams entusiasts seem often to be aware only of the phototechnical, spot metering exercise. My guess is that Adams always previsualized and didn't always need to go through the phototechnical exercise...always employing his learned psychological/perceptual ability. Minor White, who may have been more meditative than Adams, seems to have stressed previsualization more than Adams did.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom