Digital BW, The Print

Hello James,

You make excellent points, all correct from a particular theoretical
point of view.  IMO, all of those guys were saying the same thing,
each from his own unique perspective.  I read Ansel and Minor and
Phil, and all of them left me with my head spinning and feeling
deflated.  Then I discovered Fred's stuff and suddenly it all made
good practical sense and I was able to make it work and I got all
excited and went out and did real work with it.

I think his gift was he was able to make it palatable to photographers
who weren't so technically oriented (nowadays we call it left-brain
and right-brain oriented people, but back then they didn't know that).
 He was able to reduce it down to the bare essentials and deliver it
up with practical techniques.  Not everyone learns the same way (why
did Minor feel it necessary to reinterpret what Ansel said?).  

I just think FP saw a niche and filled it.  It certainly filled my
needs, I have always been more hands-on, practically oriented.  The
other guys made it seem too complex (speaking of which, I just came
across my Minor White book this morning while looking for something
else).

In actual practice, I did a little of both approaches, never strictly
adhered to anyone's particular method.  I measured a scene and decided
where the greatest importance was, and placed the values accordingly.
 The real value of what I learned from FP was that no matter what I
chose to do, I knew I would get what I wanted because I had nailed
down my materials and methods.   Once you understand the system and
how to work it you are beyond anyone's theories - it's all
irrelevent. 

I was always amazed at how angry others could get when FP's approach
didn't match their own dearly held concepts, when, in truth, they were
all doing essentially the same thing.  I don't understand why people
can't make room for other ideas.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm