Digital BW, The Print

This conversation bears the typical snippets I hear quite frequently in digital -vs- film debates. I'm sorry, but I do not "agree to disagree", or frankly agree with any of it. If you can't produce decent monochrome work with a modern dSLR then the problem is clearly between the camera strap and viewfinder. 

The typical comment goes something like this; "digital shooters don't have to think like we did in the film dayz because they can shoot many more frames without thinking". That's pretty much the jest of what I'm reading here, just said nicer.

This is news to me, because I worked almost a decade in the commercial lab biz, and recall many times being up to my knees in 220 wrappers and stacks of 4x5 holders trying to get that one perfect shot. Not to mention late rush 8x10 contacts of 35 nearly identical frames of the model making the same pose. Puhleeeeze....

What *has* changed remarkably in the past 20-30 years is the 'culture' of fine art photography, which to the benefit of the medium has seriously lost it's audience. Photographers are now free to choose for themselves what their aethestic preferences are -vs- having it chosen for them. I mastered color processing and printing before B&W while 99.999% of 'artsy' shooters never went beyond B&W in their own darkrooms. Coincidentally, color work was never quite accepted as 'fine art' for reasons that if you asked me were simply because hardcore B&W shooters coulnd't figure color reproduction out. Now color work and B&W work stand on their, and a lot of old timers don't like that.

The overwhelming volume of monochrome and color work I see today is light years in concept beyond what I was used to seeing (and shooting) 20-30 years ago. Today you can't just take a mediocre frame of poorly processed Tri-X with agitation marks across the sprocket holes, print it on fiber based paper ("Silver Gelatin" in pretentious asterisks for the grey poupon types) and declare it fine art. 

Photography by definition is a communicative art form. Note that communication comes before art.

-WSE


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tboleyyh" <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> Jim, I think we should wrap this up, it becomes a discussion about contmeporary culture, subjective opinions, etc etc.. we should agree to disagree. Whatever you think of William Eggleston's work, at the least you have to admit much of what we are seeing today, he did decades ago.. in the documentary about him "in the real world", a student asks him how many frames he shoots to result in the one he likes.. predictably, if you are from my generation and influences.. his answer is.. just the one. Of course. Just the one, the one the artist INTENDED.
> I have been using a digital camera professionally and personally for a long time now, personally when I don't have other equipment along. As you suggest, it's easy to shoot a lot of frames.. a lot. And see what one has later, hopefully.
> You will not believe me I know, but there are hundreds maybe thousands of these, and I have yet to print a single one of them. Seriously. Not one. This activity simply does not yield the kind of images I seek. It's not the technology, it's the kind of shooting you are suggesting, the state of mind, I think.
> Granted, if I were a sports or news photographer, "better" images may come this way.. not sure that's the kind of work we're talking about in this thread...
> Anyway, thanks for putting up with my rants and dinosaur opinions...
> Tyler
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jimbo" <mrjimbo@> wrote:
> >
> > Tyler,
> > Jimmie here..  I have literally tons of respect and admiration for you.. I mean that .. I would like to suggest that their is some validity to his words.. Let me share ..
> > 
> > I am and have a full time photographer for over 40 years.. It is exponentially easier for me to get a quality image today then it was 40 years ago , 30 years ago, or 20 years ago.. I am living proof of that ..It doesn't mean that I can sleep in ..I still have to get my butt out of bed and be in the space of that incredible image ...you get what I'm saying ...The capture process is incredibly improved.. With my D4's I can damn near shoot in the dark.. My dynamic range is the best the photographic industry has ever ever had..
> > 
> > Ok so now lets see where it's going.. I think if we want to see the future we have to watch what's going on with video not camera's as we know them.... Canon released a 4k (video) DSLR late last year this is an industry first... Red, Sony & Panasonic all have 4k & 5k video cameras.. 8k video is on the design & build  board now and 16k video is a viable spec.. The point is that within but a couple of years an image that we see coming out of a DSLR with be coming off a single video frame.. along with whatever light gathering improvements will come to pass during this time.. So.. the glut of imagery will get yet more confusing.. I'm working with a guy right now playing with getting 5k video frames on paper.. The point I'm trying to get to is that I'm sure most can hopefully embrace...... It will be easier to get many of the magic images.. and the glut or volume of them will increase.. That is just the direction it's going.. Even an unskilled shooter can get really lucky.. 
> > 
> > jimbo
> >   ----- Original Message ----- 
> >   From: tboleyyh 
> >   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> >   Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 2:18 PM
> >   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Photography That Doesn't Suck
> > 
> > 
> >     
> > 
> > 
> >   --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, John Anderson wrote:
> >   ...
> >   John, I appreciate your comment that Jimbo or I may be able to produce a superior print.. true or not .. but...
> > 
> >   > 2. More generally, photography has changed. To produce an acceptable
> >   > quality image requires far less skill and experience than driving yourself
> >   > across town safely. The ability to produce a good image is somewhat rarer
> >   > but still more common than good driving skill. Neither skill is
> >   > really sale-able though there will always be hacks. To make a living at
> >   > driving you either have to be exceptional (F1 driver) or be very good and
> >   > drive something that uses technology beyond the norm. Same with
> >   > photography.
> > 
> >   I just have to disagree with almost all of this.. in fact looking at most of the work we are talking about on sites along the lines of this discussion, I'd say evidence clearly points to the contrary...
> >   But that may be the opinion of an elitist .
> > 
> >   Anyway, to try and relate this more to what this group used to be about... the advancement of techniques and high craft standards in the pursuit of making a stunning B&W prints as an object... it would be interesting to consider how these on line image "sharing" communities and the world of creating art objects will ever begin to converge somehow.
> >   Tyler
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> >   No virus found in this message.
> >   Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >   Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date: 02/20/13
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>