Digital BW, The Print

Michael's is exactly my view. 

Ansel didn't have densitometers in his world for a long time. And he
went heavily digital in the end, devoting himself to the
then-primative science of scanning. His best work was, IMO,
lithographic. He obsessed on a very narrow range of experience, along
his life's path.   

Weston lived among artists and poets of all sorts, had a rich social
(heh!) life and (IMO) expressed far more than did Ansel (or far more
that was of interest to me!).  

Some say Ansel was equal to Weston. I don't buy that, preferring
Weston's eros (his "eros" wasn't restricted to nudes), but many prefer
Ansel's near total lack of eros, his astonishment and reverence for
gigantic phenomena. 

Seemingly, Ansel expressed one side of the brain...Weston the other.

The implications for the digital workflow strategies that we
individually choose seem obvious.
 
 



 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Michael Vendrell
<mjvendrell2@y...> wrote:
> As a physician and an artist - I couldn't agree more
> fully with Wendel. Technique or feeling?  Instruments
> or observation?  Science or art? Intellect or emotion.
>  Objectivity or subjectivity?  YES -all.
> 
> 
> Ansel Adams was heavily involved with the Zone System.
>  Edward Weston didn't use a light meter.  Some from
> the "decisive moment" school used the  maxim "f8 and
> be there."  In my opinion all of these have made great
> art.  Is one right and the others wrong?  I have my
> personal preferences and if you are moved by my work -
> you might be interested in how I did it - if not,
> probably not.  For other's art and craft I have always
> been much more interested in why they did it, rather
> than how.  But of, course' on a technical forum such
> as this I am most interested in how to best translate
> my own vision. And of such want to learn what others
> know = regardless of how they leared it. Techne is BTW
> a word from ancient Greek and includes all of
> "know-how" and not just instrumentation.
> 
> As a newbie in some ways and an oldie in others (as I
> suspect we all are) I want to hear all that any of us
> has to offer from their knowledge and/or experience.
> And I enjoy the intelligent and/or heartfelt questions
> that urge us all to examine ourselves and grow in our
> craft.  
> 
> My only caveat is that I do not appreciate the
> character attacks and personal insults that have been
> thrown by a few of us.  Let's all  share what we know
> and love and let the rest of us "take what we can use
> and leave the rest".
> 
> Michael J. Vendrell, MD
> 
> --- Wendel White <wendel@b...> wrote:
> 
> > > You mean all the bad practices based on the users
> > prejudices and what they
> > > do well generally get bypassed by technological
> > developments and eventually
> > > disappear.
> > > 
> > > Richard
> > 
> > Richard,
> > 
> > For me subjectivity is not the same as arbitrary and
> > it may be that we have
> > different notions of the merits of subjective
> > knowledge. Subjectivity can
> > (and should) be a very high form of intellectual
> > reasoning, a means of
> > transcending the limits raw data, gaining real
> > understanding and thereby
> > producing results that are art.
> > 
> > Certainly we all know that if you are ill and visit
> > two different physicians
> > and they both review the same data, one of them
> > might be able to "see beyond
> > the numbers" to recommend a better course of
> > action--using subjective skills
> > to assess the situation. The same is true for
> > printing - I want both skills
> > because neither is of much value without the other.
> > 
> > Wendel
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________ 
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
> http://mail.yahoo.com