Two interpretations of the same negative

[mcarmo]

Hi everyone!
I would like to start by wishing everyone a Happy New Year.
I have sadly been once again deviated from the chance to come back to photography, for reasons regarding elderly members of my family that have become less independent in the last year. Family takes priority over hobbies, so I have been away from the darkroom and also from this forum.
I am, however, trying to give some help to my daughter who is finishing her studies and as part of an essay she is writing she is trying to find a known example of a photograph, that has had more than one interpretation of its negative.
We can find some examples of known photographs and of the darkroom notes that the photographer/printer made regarding the printing of the negative, so we have an example of how that final print came to be. (these are an example taken from the magnum photos site)

What we are trying to find is a photograph that has known two different interpretations of the same negative.
Do any of you have any ideas?

Thank you very much.
Monica

 

[Romanko]

Ansel Adams produced several very different prints of his “Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico”. This is probably the best known and documented example of reinterpretation of the negative.

Your daughter might explore in her essay how AA's "pre-visualization" co-exists with vastly different looks of the prints he produced at some stages of his career.

 

[MattKing]

This was a good idea that never really got a lot of traction, but there should be some useful ideas in the "Lets All Print One Negative" Gallery: https://www.photrio.com/forum/media/categories/lets-all-print-one-negative.15/

 

[Pieter12]

Kit Young, a talented UK photographer, sometimes shows his contact sheet vs the final print, but no notes:

 

[Harry Callahan]

What about the Che Guevara picture which often is printed on T-shirts?
On a T-shirt this picture usually is cropped to the head only and high contrast - only black and white, resp. black and the color of the T-shirt.
The original picture (negative) is cropped different and also has different tonality.

 

[grahamp]

Are you interested in variations of interpretation by the photographer over time, or in editorial decision in reproductions? Dorothea Lange's 'Migrant Mother' has some cropping variations (right side particularly). See MOMA for a discussion.

To be topical, since the movie just released, Lee Miller's concentration camp photographs were not published how she wanted for years (if at all).

It is not unusual for photographers to change print interpretation over time - materials change, attitudes change. Much like musicians change their work. That's more interesting than and editor who fits the image to the page. Though that's a topic in itself.

 

[MattKing]

I am extremely fortunate to be a member of my Darkroom Group.
This sort of discussion is common at our semi-weekly (usually) meetings - we bring work prints, and discuss the differences. Suggestions and constructive criticism are welcome.
Some of us are even good at making and sharing meaningful notes .

 

[mcarmo]

Thank you very much for your replies. This is a fantastic community. You've already given us a lot of very useful information.

Are you interested in variations of interpretation by the photographer over time, or in editorial decision in reproductions?

Both of these optics will be addressed, so we will investigate all the suggestions all of you have already given and any other thoughts will be most welcome!
Thank you all!
Monica

 

[gary mulder]

Italy 2003 ©gary mulder

 

[Don_ih]

It's difficult to make a new print identical to ones you made in the past, if the enlarging process involves anything more than running the timer. Dodging and burning are often impossible to repeat from print to print in the same session, let alone after some time has passed (thus the weird map on the Stock photo of James Dean up above). So, I imagine if you can find examples of actual darkroom prints from negatives separated by time, you'll be able to see differences.

The Westons are a family that has been printing the same negatives since they were exposed, over three generations. I'm sure, in spite of every attempt to force a particular "way" of making the prints, there are variations in the results. Your daughter might try to contact Kim Weston and ask about it.

 

[mcarmo]

I'm sure, in spite of every attempt to force a particular "way" of making the prints, there are variations in the results.

Hi!
You are talking about variations which are a consequence of the introduction of different factors to the process (things like materials used, the lamps on the enlargers, quality of optics etc or even that the person doing the printing is not the same, however hard the person might be trying to be faithful to the original prints or original way of printing of the photographer)
What we are looking for are variations as result of a different vision of what the print should be. A different interpretation of what to enhance, of on what the emphasis or meaning of the message should be. Either be it by a different framing/cropping of the negative or by giving it a different dodge/burn exposure.

For example, Dorothea Lang's the Migrant Mother that @grahamp mentioned earlier.

This is from the Library of Congress website, and probably close to what the original print must have been.
As I went looking through what information I could find, I came upon a link to an exhibit where we can see a different emphasis on the central subject, which I speculate must have been a curator's decision or interpretation. Perhaps the curator's vision of how the image would best fit the space and exhibit.

Your daughter might try to contact Kim Weston and ask about it.

Thank you for the suggestion, she might give it a try. It would certainly be a great resource to have their views on the subject.

 

[koraks]

Ansel Adams produced several very different prints of his “Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico”. This is probably the best known and documented example of reinterpretation of the negative.

Yup. See here: https://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/grant/ansel-adams-moonrise-hernandez-8-31-11.asp
Maybe it's a little too obvious...but at least it's a well-known image, and the multiple versions are indeed representative of changes in the artistic vision of the photographer.

 

[Romanko]

This is from the Library of Congress website, and probably close to what the original print must have been.
As I went looking through what information I could find, I came upon a link to an exhibit where we can see a different emphasis on the central subject, which I speculate must have been a curator's decision or interpretation. Perhaps the curator's vision of how the image would best fit the space and exhibit.

When you add different media, formats and presentations into the equation you complicate your task by orders of magnitude. The image from the Library of Congress website might be a contact print from the negative intended solely for cataloguing purposes (or it might be an actual print). The print from the exhibition could have been produced on a different media (inkjet/canvas?) unavailable at the time the photograph was taken.

 

[Don_ih]

The print from the exhibition

There is also lighting to consider. The light shining on the face may be brighter than on the rest of the print.

 

[ic-racer]

As mentioned above; different interpretations of "Moonrise."

 

[Chuck_P]

That's a nice example of the progression of interpretations. It's interesting that "Moonrise" does not appear in any of the seven portfolios printed from 1948 to 1976 in the book "The Portfolios of Ansel Adams" by John Szarkowski.

 

[Don_ih]

You are talking about variations which are a consequence of the introduction of different factors to the process (things like materials used, the lamps on the enlargers, quality of optics etc or even that the person doing the printing is not the same, however hard the person might be trying to be faithful to the original prints or original way of printing of the photographer)

I wasn't, actually, I was referring to the fact that, whenever darkroom manipulation is involved (dodging, burning, masking), it's difficult to replicate the exact conditions to make the print. There's also the fact that what looks good to someone at one point in time may not look as good as something else later on. Opinions change.

With an established photograph, there would be more pressure to match the earlier reproductions of the print (whether you did them or someone else did), since that's what people expect.

I imagine that most instances of significantly different interpretations of the same negative stem from finding a new interpretation better visually than the earlier one and have little to do with any message the photo may be thought to convey.

 

[joho]

interpretations of the negative​

This is a full can of worms, it does need a special subject topic thread I think ?

 

[koraks]

interpretations of the negative​

This is a full can of worms, it does need a special subject topic thread I think ?

That's what this is, so feel free to discuss.
Edit, for clarity: I mean this thread is dedicated to the subject. Not that this subject is a can of worms. I don't think it's that, really.

 

[joho]

Here is a work out for a negative with A&&B print dev. variations of which are 16-here is just 4.
The light was very hard to capture, a total of 14 f/stops -- 1/200at f22 to 20sec at f/22 and this was 135m/m film.
Fohar was the paper N [normal] 13x18 size
A&&B print dev. type selctol soft A-- beers B but super hard modified.

 

[koraks]

Thanks for sharing this, that's an interesting comparison! I would personally welcome it if you could say a few words about how the different versions coincide with differences in mindset or intention. Did you print these within a short period, or was there considerable time between these versions? What were your motives in exploring these different renditions of the same composition?

 

[joho]

The work has a mindset and the intention to bring out the complete dynamics of the image.
This is an experiment in tonality, with time sync for the water to refract light, the shutter speed for detail in the water had to be just so,
... [not low and all turn to cotton candy. and not too fast as the water will turn into glass!!]


As for the test prints,
All versions where made in a two day work session -- 28 hours -developer A developer B made just for this test run, and for an enlargement 30x40 as a proof print.
Yes, My motives where in exploring these different renditions of this one composition. I work more as an artist, planned out drawing [painter -skhedēi as drawn on paper]