I agree with Eric. There are sooo many examples to prove his point. Regards Ralph W. Lambrecht http://www.darkroomagic.com On 2006-12-18 16:46, "EJ Neilsen" <ej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > David Wrote... "The process does impact the image...... For me, "Moonrise" > is a rather mundane subject made beautiful by AA's darkroom skills." > > Sitting here this morning reading the thread of the Quest requires my 2 > cents : ) > > > And I'll use David's point about Moonrise to make mine. The Moonrise image > may or may not be most spectacular image every made that will be determined > by how it attaches itself to the mind of the individual viewer. The fact > that the negative is not all that great technically speaks to a large part > of this thread. How many great images came from less than perfect negs? > Nobody knows or will ever no the answer to that question in numerical sense, > but in a less perfect way the answer is, it doesn't really matter. What > matters is how many make the effort. The effort is everything that happens > behind the print from location, format, the totality of the individual that > made the image. What is presented is ALL that should matter to the viewer. > The semi permeable membrane of life allows the two to interact. If Ansel's > moonrise didn't have an attraction, how many of us would know that the > negative was not technically perfect? Or what he may have thought to be > technically perfect for his needs, which is the far more important than what > we think of his negative. Some need to know what went on behinds the lens, > both camera and enlarger, and for others it is truly about the print and how > it makes you feel. There is no need to pass through the membrane and see > intent of the moment. There is a commercial on about great moments in > American sports moments that follows this somewhat. What if Michael Jordan > missed that shot against Cleveland, Dwight Clark didn't make that catch in > the back of the end zone? These things are great to discuss, but the print > of Moonrise did happen, and the shot of Penn's village people did get > printed in platinum. You can fight about what moment they became art but > they have. > > > Digging into an artist' file drawers after death is a curious endeavor. How > many of us would like to see our work prints viewed or negatives examined > with a fine tooth comb? We all have moments of lucid thoughts that lead to > WOWs, some even get seen or heard. > > Eric > > > > Eric Neilsen Photography > 4101 Commerce Street > Suite 9 > Dallas, TX 75226 > http://e.neilsen.home.att.net > http://ericneilsenphotography.com > Skype ejprinter >> -----Original Message----- >> From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:pure-silver- >> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Koch, Gerald >> Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 8:44 AM >> To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: The Quest and My Heresy?? >> >>> Again, *in some cases*, the original image just acts as a canvas and >> it's the post-processing that creates the >>> WOW factor. >>> >>> There are various excellent examples in Tim Rudman's books where the >> straight prints look (sorry Tim !) just >>> boring but the final result is of another magnitude. >> >> I have a completely different take on this. If a straight print is >> boring then no amount of manipulation is going to turn that negative >> into a great photo. Just producing a striking print is not enought. >> There has to be someting there to start with. That's the reason that I >> don't tone or do anything else to my prints. If a negative can't speak >> for itself then nothing is going to help it and that's the end of it. >> >> Copying others is a good learning technique but not something that one >> wants to keep doing. I am reminded of the composer Engelbert >> Humperdinck who venerated the work of Wagner. Except for his opera >> Hansel and Gretel he comes off as a second rate, imitation Wagner. >> There are too many two bit Ansel Adams in photography today. To cite >> only one example. >> >> Jerry >> ====================================To unsubscribe from this list, go to >> www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and >> password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there. > > ============================================================================== > =============================== > To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your > account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) > and unsubscribe from there. ============================================================================================================= To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.