Walt wrote:
Digital is just a convenience, like PhotoShop, which, IMO, is mainly a
crutch for incompetent photographers who couldn't get it right in the
camera to begin with.:-)
Fire away.
Walt
----------------
Hmmmmm,
Hi Walt, I just thought you would like to see a little quote from a
pretty respected photographer.
>From the book ?Examples? (The Making of 40 Photographs) page 42
?Moonrise?.
?The negative was quite difficult to print; several years later I
decided to intensify the foreground to increase contrast. I first
refixed and washed the negative, then treated the lower section of the
image with a dilute solution of Kodak IN-5 intensifer. I immersed the
area below the horizon with an in-and-out motion for about 1 minute,
then rinsed in water, and repeated about twelve times until I achieved
what appeared to be the optimum density. Printing was a bit easier
thereafter, although it remains a challenge.
.
.
It is difficult to make a print from the negative that I truly like;
papers differ, toning sometimes gives unwanted density changes, etc. It
is safe to say that no two prints are precisely the same.?
Ansel Adams
It makes me wonder what Ansel would have thought if he could have
intensified the foreground to increase contrast, treated the lower
section with a little un-sharp mask and lighten the area below the
horizon 12 times to what appeared to be optimum, all with the newest
tools and equipment of the day. I also wonder if he would have liked
the idea of printing 2 prints exactly alike after he finally achieved
that perfect print. Hmmm...?
He probably would have just figured he was one of those:
?incompetent photographers who couldn't get it right in the camera to
begin with.?
Just a little food for thought.
Buddy Walters
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|