Skip to main content

Is this why my cameras collect dust?





Kenneth Brower writes about Ansel Adams at 100. I've never been a huge fan of Adams, preferring pictures with more people than just the photographer in them. And, voila, Brower sums it up as:



His critics have conceded Adams his pre-eminence in the history of modern photography, his eloquent composition, his technical mastery of printmaking, his ingenious "zone system," and his vast influence as a teacher. But the consensus seems to be that Adams did all these things too well. Today in photography we are seeing a retreat from Adams-style classicism, a glorification of images that look accidental. Photographers with whom I work, men and women who spent years mastering their trade, are dismayed by this development. Morning is no longer the photographer's hour. The young editor or curator complains about the prettiness of low-angle light. Couldn't the photographer shoot more at noon, when the light flattens everything out? Where is the irony? (By which the postmodernist means a kind of empty hipness.) Does everything have to be so sharply in focus? So composed? Couldn't we blur things more, to suggest movement? The photographer hurries home to search the wastebasket for rejects.
I used to work for the man who was best man at Adams's wedding. Needless to say, having a negative view of Ansel was dangerous. My father was a huge fan, but then my father grew up in the Colorado Rockies. Those stark black and white pictures were like picture post cards from home.



When I learned the Zone System, and actually began to understand it, my darkroom work improved immeasureably. I'd hike all around the Bay Area (all right, drive or ride), camera bag at hand, Nikons at the ready, and blast away a few rolls of Ilford HP-5 pull-processed to ASA 200. (See, I can still sling some of the slang around!) Film back to the darkroom, process, dry, print, play, print some more. Great fun, truly.



But the lure of Adams eluded me. Reading Browers's article makes me think that I never saw Adams the right way. The technical virtuoso of the view camera, his prints shine best when viewed large, and you'll not find a book large enough to give the same effect.



If I still had access to a darkroom, I'd dust off the cameras. Then again, I could always see if Fuji has improved Fujichrome Professional 50 (exposed at ASA 80, FYI; slide film is gorgeous is slightly under exposed). It's hard for a decent lab to screw up your slides, other than through physical destruction.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...
Post a Comment
Read more

DVD: The Descent

While waiting for the fourth disk of season 4 of House to arrive, I watched The Descent . This movie has been out on DVD for a while, so why bring it up now? Because I think I might become a fan of its writer-director, Neil Marshall . His latest is Doomsday , recently released on DVD, and while it’s sort of a mess, it’s a mess in that oh-fun-what-the-heck-let’s-shoot-a-Bentley-through-a-bus sort of way. The Descent is a different sort of animal. Prepare for spoilers. Since this film has been out for a while, I’m going to feel free to reveal. The setup is simple: Six friends go spelunking, complications ensue. Basic complications involve Sarah and Juno. Sarah is an emotional wreck following the rather horrible and tragic deaths of her husband and daughter (this trip is seen as therapy , oh my). Juno is a reckless thrill-seeker who leads an unknowing Sarah and friends into a cave no one has – publicly, at least – ever explored. All goes horribly...
1 comment
Read more

Dune Part 2 (2024)

I have come not to praise Dune but to bury it. I am in a distinct minority. So be it. To explain why, there will be some minor spoilers ahead; sorry. The short version is #NotMyDune. Summary: Picking up where Dune Part 1 left off, we find the young Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) hanging out with the Fremen. Plots to overthrow rival houses and empires ensue. Go here to see what I thought about Dune Part 1 (2021) . Overall, I found it to be technically brilliant, but lacking a human heart, an exercise in frenetic slow motion. D2 is more of the same, though with far more action. Acting-wise, everyone is doing a fine, more than adequate job. Absolutely no one or nothing stands out. The way the characters are written (adapted, actually), their back and forths and interactions, are all weak and unengaging. I generally hate when they speak. I've read the novel a ridiculous number of times, and these films are prompting me to read it again. I understand that trying to translate the n...
1 comment
Read more