Giacomelli...how?

[jtk]

How did he accomplish his distinctive prints?

 

[awty]

Wow! Brilliant work.
Looks high contrast, little tonal range to excellent effect.

 

[jtk]

 

[jtk]

 

[jtk]

https://monovisions.com/mario-giacomelli-figure-ground/


6X9 ....but did he really need that custom camera? It's not Photoshop.

 

[jtk]

 

[jtk]

 

[NB23]

I believe it’s simply the sign of times.
The guy just went inside his darkroom and came out with these prints, naturally. Just as we do today.
Just look at color photography/film. The drastic change of looks through time happened gradually. Look on youtube for old tv ads you relate to from your childhood, teenage, early adulthood, until today, the subtle changes are amplified through a quick glance.

the other day i purchased Koudelka’s Exiles. Meaty negatives, very heavy tones. This was simply what came out of the films and papers from that era. Same with my old tri-x negatives, there is this embedded look.

old films combined with old papers are much more responsible of the vintage look than an Old lens shot and printed with today’s material.

 

[juan]

Getty says he used slow shutter speeds and shallow depth of field. It also says he used expired film to increase contrast. I’m more inclined to agree with NB23 - went into the darkroom and printed.

 

[jtk]

I believe it’s simply the sign of times.
The guy just went inside his darkroom ...

Me, I couldn't do it. Lots of very highly developed skill accomplishing a unique sort of vision.

 

[jtk]

I believe it’s simply the sign of times.
The guy just went inside his darkroom and came out with these prints, naturally. Just as we do today.
Just look at color photography/film. The drastic change of looks through time happened gradually. Look on youtube for old tv ads you relate to from your childhood, teenage, early adulthood, until today, the subtle changes are amplified through a quick glance.

the other day i purchased Koudelka’s Exiles. Meaty negatives, very heavy tones. This was simply what came out of the films and papers from that era. Same with my old tri-x negatives, there is this embedded look.

old films combined with old papers are much more responsible of the vintage look than an Old lens shot and printed with today’s material.

I love Koudelka photos...easy to emulate his tones etc, even with a phone. Not so easy to make significant photos.

 

[jtk]

Getty says he used slow shutter speeds and shallow depth of field. It also says he used expired film to increase contrast. I’m more inclined to agree with NB23 - went into the darkroom and printed.

Guess that explains it Same as anybody. Just go in darkroom and print. Absurd.

 

[Merg Ross]

How did he accomplish his distinctive prints?

Thanks for the reminder, he was one of my early favorites. Unique, wonderful way to start the new year!

 

[jtk]

Hi Merg. Seems pretty obvious that pin registration and process camera was sometimes involved...far more expertise than normal on Photrio. But I could be wrong...go for the gold.

 

[NB23]

Amazingly enough, your posts 3,4,5,6 and 7 (the photos) didn’t load when I answered. I googled his name and saw his work. What I saw pretty much were straight prints. Many which would be considered flawed by today’s standards, whatever they are.

The photos you posted show a technique but I wouldn’t know which. Still, seems pretty straightforward and more akin to his own poetic vision, hand, eye, than some special complicated technique. Also, some old papers used to give such results pretty straightforward. Luminos papers, warm developers...

 

[awty]

Bend your knees. He seems to rarely take pictures at eyelevel, some from a low angle others from higher up, doing drone shots before drone, doing landscapes without horizons.
You could probably get similar with a red or orange filter and more contrast printing paper. You can also bleach away unwanted highlights.
He was also sloppy with his dodge and burns when he did so, for an interesting effect.
Goes against the purist photographers to create an atmosphere.

 

[jtk]

He wasnt nearly as signiricant as most on Photrio! And his edges were sloppy

 

[DWThomas]

The contrast in the images in posts #3 and #4 remind me of what one might get with lithographic film -- but I would expect that to be finer grain. I might wonder if a grainier film developed in litho developer might approach that. But then -- do we know how much of these effects were in the negative vs in the print?! I once took a "normal" analog photo and did an enlargement on litho film, then a contact print on litho film to essentially wind up with a negative that printed to look a line drawing.

However he did it, he certainly came up with a recognizable style. Thanks for bringing it to our attention!

 

[jtk]

I've processed a lot of Kodalith in Dektol ...nothing familiar in those images.

Interesting about your litho film > litho film contact... played with that might explain some of what we're seeing. The strange dlagonal slashing suggests a unique (custom made) litho screen, which may have to do with pin registration. ...

 

[DonW]

Looks like he printed low contrast and then photocopied the print. Maybe taking that image and then photocopying it again.

 

[awty]

Interesting use of dodge and burn.

 

[Don_ih]

Underexpose and overdevelop the film. Overexpose, normal develop, then Farmer's reducer. Develop prints with excessive amounts of benzo and carbonate or boost the hq - all to get harsher black. Straight print to paper, contact printed back to negative, use pencil on the back of the new paper negative to change how it looks. A lot of his photos have the look of copy negatives, so straight print onto copy film, contact print back to negative, enlarge the new negative to paper - each step eliminates highlights and condenses shadows - similar to a photocopier. These are all things that could be tried out to get a similar look.

 

[jtk]

Underexpose and overdevelop the film. Overexpose, normal develop, then Farmer's reducer. Develop prints with excessive amounts of benzo and carbonate or boost the hq - all to get harsher black. Straight print to paper, contact printed back to negative, use pencil on the back of the new paper negative to change how it looks. A lot of his photos have the look of copy negatives, so straight print onto copy film, contact print back to negative, enlarge the new negative to paper - each step eliminates highlights and condenses shadows - similar to a photocopier. These are all things that could be tried out to get a similar look.

Don, I think he used some or most of the techniques you mentioned. Those were once relatively common photo techniques though they undoubtedly seem exotic to todays amateurs.

The contact printing does suggest pin (or just paper punch) registration. A common technique among some skilled photographers. Think dye transfer, masked Cibachrome, title slides etc.

It does appear that his shop/studio (?) produced litho services of some sort, which would almost certainly have involved a process camera and registration techniques.

 

[Don_ih]

It does appear that his shop/studio (?) produced litho services of some sort, which would almost certainly have involved a process camera and registration techniques.

And would have made high-contrast developer always available. Lith film would have been plentiful, too - sheets big enough for full-size masks. He could have done straight prints and rephotographed them, also. There are lots of ways to get a similar result - but it can be difficult to retain detail when you do them. That may be why he always went with 6x9 negatives.

 

[Lachlan Young]

From what I recall reading about him, he could be pretty flippant when asked about technique - which usually tends to mean that (to the artist) the technical aspect is so blindingly obvious/ routine that the interviewer really doesn't know a lot about the basics of BW technique (and how to creatively misuse it in ways that would turn camera-clubbers apoplectic).

Ask yourself this: with normal film, a filter or two, a normal film developer & a hard/ very hard grade of paper (something like photo-typesetting paper - like Brovira EH/ no.6 (G5 to everyone else) would not surprise me in the slightest), could you get similar tonalities? It isn't as complicated as people want to think it is.