>
> And you of all people. Clearly a zone system guy and presumably a
> student of Ansel Adams. Despite great exposures due to the zone system
> Adams' negatives were just the starting point. The real image was made
> in the darkroom doing things that film engineers couldn't do for him.
> Were he still around I'll bet he'd be ecstatic to have a raw converter
> to play with. Sheesh!
>
With all due respect, neither you or I are Ansel Adams. :)
I'm not particularily picking on the 1/100 of 1% of photographic application
(extreme fine-art photography), but the bulk of photography. I still
maintain, however, that most extreme fine-art photography is best served by
perfecting the "production" process, not the "post-production" process.
I know that in the chemical darkroom, I can do a lot of twisting and bending
of the process to get a negative to print in the desired manner, but it is
always better to have a negative that gives as close to the final result as
possible. I may be tainted by the fact I primarily shot slide films (mostly
Velvia) for many many years.
I have several B&W pictures that require extensive work in the darkroom to
yield the desired end-result, but in nearly every case, reality isn't
reflected in these prints and they border on abstract.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|