[pure-silver] Re: The Quest and My Heresy??

  • From: "Ralph W. Lambrecht" <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: PureSilverNew <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 13:37:29 +0100

Does it really matter how we produce the image?

Of course, it separates us from painters and carpet weavers.





Regards



Ralph W. Lambrecht

http://www.darkroomagic.com







On 2006-12-16 03:50, "Gregor33@xxxxxxx" <Gregor33@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> Hello to all,
> 
> Although I don't post often I had to add, how wonderful it is to read a
> sensible email on photography. Does it really matter   how we produce the
> image. Please I'm not knocking anyone or anyones process what works for you
> may or may not work for another. But the print is indeed the score and if no
> one likes the sound of the score you need to keep trying. For me I'll be
> trying to get it right for the rest of my days be it analog or digital I enjoy
> it all. 
> 
> Greg Orlando
> 
> Dear Adrienne,
> 
> sorry if I am being a heretic (feel free to burn
> me at the satke) but I myself always find myself with two hearts in my chest.
> 
> Firstly I want to make good pictures (note: not
> necessarily good prints) and I do feel that most
> people, also some on the list here, are far too
> technical in their approach. For a lot of people
> good pictures boil down to printing technique and
> chemistry. Or lots of pixels and PhotoShop. Or
> expensive ameras and even more expensive lenses.
> At the Photoclub especially the digital crowd
> just drones on and on about their cameras and not
> about the pictures taken with them, I sometimes
> wonder if they actually take pictures or just get
> their kick reading the spec sheet!
> 
> My point is: is it really worthwhile for you to
> try and make prints that look like someone elses
> by going down the same "technical route" what
> with big cameras and unsharp masks and/or loads
> of pixels etc. ?? Is this the way you should "run" _your_ hobby?
> 
> Photography (well, the way we do it) is a unique
> pastime in that you need specific technical
> skills and thorough working habits and procedures
> in order to produce an acceptable quality.
> 
> But if you try to emulate someone else I think
> you simply get frustrated. At some point, after
> having seen tons of grand and fabulous prints by
> the Grand Masters and Mistresses I just gave up
> "trying to be like them". The problem being:
> there is obviously no "right way" - everyone has
> their on style, their own "look" of the prints
> etc. So I am stuck with having to chose a Grand
> Master to follow plus all the technical challenges thrown in on top.
> 
> And some of the renowned pphotographers never did
> their own darkroom work. Helmut Newton and James Nachtwey for example.
> 
> So my second heart is now: try to take good
> pictures which are "medium-indpendent". I try to
> capture the emotions, the look, the scene , the
> moment and I simply do my processing to ensure
> that the pictures are "consumable" in an
> acceptable form. Oh, sure, I try to get things
> "right" with contrasts, gray scales, no dust, no
> scratches and some such, but I only really see
> this as the "substrate" on which good pictures grow.
> 
> My friend Lance does a lot of Baryt prints. They
> are wonderful - because he captures the souls of
> his models and his message is clear. I do RC
> prints and my critics assure me that my message
> also comes over (sometimes better, more often
> worse). But I do not feel "hampered" by the
> paper. I feel hampered due to lack of talent, not technical skills.
> 
> By the way - this attitude of trying rto simply
> taker "good pictures" i.e. those that transport a
> "message", have a "deeper sense", emotional depth
> etc. is a kind of neat way to escape the entire
> film vs. digital debate. I don´t give a damn how
> the picture got into the camera. Whats important
> is what COMES OUT OF THE FINAL PICTURE to reach ME.
> 
> And I admit it: I have never never ever made a
> print and/or picture I am truly happy with. And I
> have been trying for nearly 30 years now! Oh, my
> models, my friends etc., everyone I take them for
> are happy, very happy indeed. But I am NEVER happy.
> 
> It is an eternal quest. Maybe a curse. But it has
> very little to do with unsharp masks, chemistry
> or pixels. If I feel my messagewould come over
> better if the print were sharper, only then would
> I dig out unsharp masks and all the good stuff.
> 
> So the questuion to you is: would you really be
> happier if you produced prints that looked like someones elses?
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> Have a nice weekend...and thank you lots for all
> of your postings on pure-silver, always wonderful to read...
> 
> Love,
> Snoopy
> 
> 
> 


Other related posts: