Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Help Me FInd an Image of an Ansel Adams Contact Print  (Read 3531 times)
Michael West
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 339



« on: March 02, 2011, 08:47:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Somewhere on the web I saw an image of a contact print made from one of Ansel Adams' negatives.

Id like very much to locate it to share with a young aspiring photographer.  almost totally unfamiliar with the joys of modern photo processing.

The vast distance between the image of the photographic contact print and the print Ansel made from the photograph should I think be rather inspiring.

Im hoping that someone here might be familiar with the image I referred to.

Thanks
Logged
lightstand
Guest
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2011, 04:55:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Honestly to me your question is very vague as I'm sure Ansel Adams made numerous contact prints and then later made larger processed fine prints of the same negatives.

There is a good book about Ansel Adams something like "the Making of 40 prints"  I can't remember the title exactly (google)  the book is all about the different steps taking these 40 views and making the fine print  and it it has illustrations of the Raw image such as "Moonrise Over..."  without any darkroom magic and then the creative decisions in the darkroom to come up with the Fine Print

On the same topic of interpreting negatives  I saw a great show of Edward Weston's work and each view had two prints one that Edward Weston printed and one that his son Brett Weston printed.  A very cool show
« Last Edit: March 05, 2011, 07:02:05 PM by lightstand » Logged
bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2662


WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2011, 08:55:34 PM »
ReplyReply

The Photo Purity Police often accuse me of Felony Digital Post Processing.  I like to give them this URL...

http://www.f45.com/html/tech/tecindex.html

Click center-top for starters.

Plenty of good examples of photo-chemical contact->print workflow.  Ansel did all that, and much more.

Adams also had a contact printer with a multitude of lightbulbs and various holdouts that could be be positioned underneath the platen surface to create various feathered gradations.  With a contact printer like that you could set up a lot of burning and dodging with no more than a single exposure, with perfect repeatability.
Logged
Michael West
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 339



« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2011, 08:21:40 PM »
ReplyReply

 desperation may also be the mother of invention

I used googles image search to find a fine comparison of a contact print and a fine finessed  print made in the darkroom.

   

Thank you
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2907

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2011, 08:30:02 PM »
ReplyReply

The Photo Purity Police often accuse me of Felony Digital Post Processing.  I like to give them this URL...

http://www.f45.com/html/tech/tecindex.html

Click center-top for starters.

Plenty of good examples of photo-chemical contact->print workflow.  Ansel did all that, and much more.

Adams also had a contact printer with a multitude of lightbulbs and various holdouts that could be be positioned underneath the platen surface to create various feathered gradations.  With a contact printer like that you could set up a lot of burning and dodging with no more than a single exposure, with perfect repeatability.

I've never done darkroom, but wow, that example you pointed out shows just how extreme analog adjustments can be. Funny thing is, that wouldn't even be possible with digital due to burned out highlights!
Logged

Michael West
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 339



« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2011, 10:28:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I've never done darkroom, but wow, that example you pointed out shows just how extreme analog adjustments can be. Funny thing is, that wouldn't even be possible with digital due to burned out highlights!

I don't know about impossible, but it most certainly illustrates the great latitude that the "old school" "analog"  purveyors of Fine Art photography allowed in their work
Logged
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1533


WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2011, 12:03:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've never done darkroom, but wow, that example you pointed out shows just how extreme analog adjustments can be. Funny thing is, that wouldn't even be possible with digital due to burned out highlights!

I've been doing analogue since I was 12. That is 48 years. Yikes! Analogue won't pull detail out of blown highlights any better than digital. What you are looking at is a bad scan of a contact print.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2907

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #7 on: April 03, 2011, 05:52:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Not to hijack the thread (but I guess I am anyway Tongue ), but does anyone have an extreme example of just how much can be done in the darkroom? I've seen lot of examples in the past, but the one linked above was way beyond anything I've seen, and seems like it's not a representative sample.

I've always shot slides when shooting film, so all my editing is on the computer.
Logged

Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1533


WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 03, 2011, 10:55:01 AM »
ReplyReply

The example above is a great one. It started with an underexposed negative-it was exposed to preserve the detail in the moon. Later AA chemically intensified the foreground to boost the contrast. The sky is then heavily burned in. Get a copy of AA's "The Making of 40 Photographs". He explains the printing of the image in there.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
langier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 599



WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 03, 2011, 01:48:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Who needs photoshop?

Jerry Ulsmann simply used a darkroom full of enlargers to do his great manipulated images and craft them quite well, years before even the brothers Knoll were born.

http://www.uelsmann.net/
Logged

Larry Angier
ASMP, NAPP, ACT, and many more!

Webmaster, RANGE magazine
Editor emeritus, NorCal Quarterly

web--http://www.angier-fox.photoshelter.com
facebook--larry.angier
twitter--#larryangier
google+LarryAngier
Michael West
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 339



« Reply #10 on: April 03, 2011, 08:46:16 PM »
ReplyReply

 Who needs photoshop?

using whatever is at hand to the very maximum best effect is what really counts.

Thanks
Logged
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #11 on: April 03, 2011, 10:02:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Who needs photoshop?

In my opinion, every serious photographer who shoots digital.
Logged
NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 04, 2011, 03:54:59 AM »
ReplyReply

In my opinion, every serious photographer who shoots digital.
They don't, what they really need instead is Lightroom.  Grin
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad