Digital BW, The Print

Peter, Ansel would surely have loved digital technology and his
technical assistants certainly would have had the latest gizmos and
applications. But in that same vein, he did a lot of second-rate work
with Polaroid because he claimed to believe it had a future (wrong)
and he was PAID to do it. Surely Adobe would pay his ghost. 

By contrast, Cartier Bresson and Sebastao Salgado relied/rely entirely
on technicians. Their work is/was camerawork, no printmaking. And they
are/were Ansel's equals.  Epson's online university...the star
photographers turn their files over to technicians for printing. 

All I meant to say is that there is a significant dichotomy between
printmaking and photography, just as there are two sides of the brain.

I love digital technology too. As you can see. But I'm acutely aware
of the negative side, which involves regular consumerism and steep
learning curves, neither of which reliably raise the level of
output...CS, for example.

David Douglas Duncan, a name few here may  know, destroyed most of
Robert Capa's D-Day photos while a lab tech at Life. Which may say  
something about photography Vs technicial work :-)




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Gorwin
<pshelleyg@c...> wrote:
> John,
> 
> You make a valuable  point that the image is of most importance, and 
> that we mustn't throw the baby out with bath water by
> getting bogged down in process.  However, I strongly disagree with your 
> statement below.  Don't forget, it was Ansel Adams  who compared
> the negative to the musical score,the print to the performance.  As an 
> artist that began as a concert pianist, he certainly didn't minimize 
> the
> importance of print manipulation.  The print definitely was not 
> secondary to the "decisive moment" for him (if you want to equate 
> waiting for hours
> for the proper light to makean image with Cartier-Bresson).  Likewise, 
> many digital photographers love  the fact that they have added time to 
> dodge and burn,
> to use just one simpleexample, instead of having their print fog during 
> extended print manipulation or during the process of blending images.
> (By the way, I have spent 17 years in a wet darkroom, would never 
> divest myself of  my darkroom equipment, and use an 4X5 enlarger with a 
> cold head,
> but, again, I am also thrilled with the luxury of time that CS allots 
> me  during the creative process.) I bet you don't settle for straight 
> prints.
> 
> Peter G.
> 
> P.S.  I don't think Jerry Uelsmann would agree with the below statement 
> either.  He's embraced the digital process.
> 
> On Mar 8, 2005, at 3:49 PM, Djon wrote:
> 
> > . . . but it's uncommon for great
> > photography, like great music, to involve great labors after that
> > decisive moment. Just for a moment, think about the type of music that
> > involves the latest technology and the most post processing.
> >
> > John
> >