DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Ansel Adams — Observations on the Eve of the Chall
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 69, (reverse)
AuthorThread
03/05/2005 03:34:23 AM · #1
Ansel Adams — Observations on the Eve of the Challenge

Overview

The current challenge, about to be closed, is "Ansel Adams — Take a photograph in the style of this famous black & white photographer."

There have been quite a few threads on the topic of this challenge, which tells me that quite a few of us are very interested in Ansel and his work. As well we should be, for he was one of the truly great and influential photographers of the 20th century. At the risk of being repetitive, I'd like to explore what is meant by the "style" of Ansel Adams.

One of the things that worries me the most is that the community as a whole may confuse Ansel's most famous subject matter, the American wilderness, with his "style", which is something else altogether. Ansel did not photograph only the natural world. Far from it. He was very versatile, and in particular he produced a large body of photographs of buildings and "artifacts", objects created by the hand of man. The best-known of this latter group are mostly of "historical" or "derelict" structures, or details of same. He did many, many natural closeups, leaves, rocks, deadfalls and the like. He also did portraits and still lifes, especially in his earlier days. For most of his life he was a working professional photographer, hired by clients for specific jobs.

So, the challenge is NOT about "shooting the American wilderness", although we can certainly expect that a vast majority of images entered will be of the natural world, mountains and landscapes and seascapes and the like, simply because for most people these are what Ansel was all about.

Then, what IS Ansel's style?

Ansel Adams' greatest contribution to photography was his creation of the "Zone System", a technical process by means of which photographers could precisely and consistently control the tonal range of their B/W images. Adams is identified with B/W photography of a certain nature, and the fact that he sometimes shot in color in no way changes that his "style" (for want of a better word) invokes a certain sort of fully-realized, technically perfect, B/W image.

An Ansel Adams print is characterized by the way it captures with stunning luminosity the entire possible range of tonal values from pure black to pure white within a single image. Even in his predominantly gray images there will be areas of black and areas of white making vital contributions to the luminosity of the image. It's true that many of his most famous images use large masses of black and would appear to be, at first glance, "high contrast" images, but this isn't really true. A "true" high-contrast image uses black and white without any gray in between, and this was never true of Ansel's work. It's particularly important to realize that Ansel was a master at rendering luminous highlights that nevertheless retained detail and texture, one of the greatest challenges any photographer can face. The same is true of his shadow details, where every important shadow area in his images retains a trace of texture and detail to provide visual interest and depth.

Beyond the technical criteria of exposure as applied to the print, what else can we say about Ansel's "style"? For one thing, he was noted for his extreme depth of field. You can see this clearly in his great landscapes, where both very near foreground and distant background are rendered in great detail and sharpness. You can get lost in an Adams print, wandering around within it seeing all sorts of lovingly-rendered detail in every part of the image. Another characteristic of an Adams image is the way he used foreground objects or fields to lead us deeper into the image. There's almost always a palpable sense of depth to his work.

Also worthy of note is the way Ansel rendered many of his skies, using them as active components of the composition rather than as neutral fields upon which objects are displayed. Even when his skies are pure tonality (no clouds in the image) he would usually (but not always) make them deep and rich, using gradations of tonality to pure black at the edges where the sky meets the border of the image. Exceptions to this do exist, however, especially in some of his high sierra shots focusing on rocks and dead trees, which tend to be much "grayer" images than, say, the Yosemite shots that made him so famous.

So, in a nutshell, what we're looking at here is a "style" of B/W photography that relies on the fullest possible expression of tonalities within the print for a sense of luminosity and depth. THAT's the "Ansel Adams Style".

So how does one VOTE this challenge?

Only you can decide this, of course, but I have some opinions (or fears). As mentioned above, my greatest fear is that any "non-landscape" shot will be voted down, and this would be doing a grave disservice to the photographers who really have taken the time to study Ansel's work, and to the photographers who are not fortunate enough to live within easy commuting distance of a dramatic wilderness locale. It's possible to make GREAT "Ansel-style" images in an entirely urban environment. There have been many fine zone system photographers who have worked with the NYC environment of urban canyons, for instance.

I would hope that all voters (vain hope, I know) would study the entries first with an eye towards determining if the contain a fully-expressed tonal range, whether they are rich and luminous or flat and limited, because this is definitely the first criterion of an Ansel shot. Once "luminosity" is established, then strength of composition should be a deciding factor (naturally enough). In my opinion, any image in B/W that uses dramatic composition and a rich, luminous, fully-expressed tonal range is already well on its way to qualifying as a photo in the "style of Ansel Adams". Once I've sorted those out, I'll go by gut from that point, but I'd hate to see ANY image short-changed in the voting because it's not a "landscape".

These are my thoughts on the eve of this challenge, for whatever they're worth.

Robt.

03/05/2005 03:40:28 AM · #2
Excellent post, rob...thanks.
03/05/2005 03:53:10 AM · #3
Unfortunately, Robert, we can discuss this over and over, but I'm not sure enough people are going to read these threads to make an impact. I hope people have been encouraged to look up some of his images beyond the really famous ones.

For me, 'in the style of' suggests that any subject is fine, the challenge is about the approach and the look of the result. Nevertheless, it is always worth remembering that the majority of the users of this site are not 'serious' photographers - by which I mean heavily committed to understanding the history of the medium - most, i think, are here for fun and a diversion.

e
03/05/2005 04:00:06 AM · #4
I think Ed is right here... but thanks for posting all the same - you provide a really nice explanation of Ansel's work - particularly useful for newbies like me who aren't all that familiar with the greats of photography.

It would be nice if more read it though - I won't get my camera back from the store (there was something wrong with it) until three hours before the challenge deadline here - time perhaps to come up with something in the style of Adams, but hardly enough to find myself a dramatic landscape.
03/05/2005 04:21:46 AM · #5
Time for the digital medium format camera users to shine.
03/05/2005 04:23:52 AM · #6
Originally posted by e301:

Unfortunately, Robert, we can discuss this over and over, but I'm not sure enough people are going to read these threads to make an impact. I hope people have been encouraged to look up some of his images beyond the really famous ones.

For me, 'in the style of' suggests that any subject is fine, the challenge is about the approach and the look of the result. Nevertheless, it is always worth remembering that the majority of the users of this site are not 'serious' photographers - by which I mean heavily committed to understanding the history of the medium - most, i think, are here for fun and a diversion.

e


All that's a given, but it's no reason NOT to make the attempt, now is it?

Robt.
03/05/2005 04:29:05 AM · #7
hehehe... no... It's certainly worth a shake :).
03/05/2005 05:14:01 AM · #8
i hope everyone reads this that enters and votes. thanks for posting this!
03/05/2005 06:10:12 AM · #9
Very good post Robert, I'm glad someone pointed this out. I can see people voting along certain lines because they think that's all Ansel Adams was about. I too hope everyone who votes has an opportunity to read this post. I'll even give it a bump or two.
03/05/2005 06:59:43 AM · #10
I have looked at many of his photographs this last week, but I still don't see a unique AA style. Sure zone system and the tonality of the B&W, but the content of the photographs themselves is many times not all that interesting or unique. Same applies to the depth of the tonal range.

I'll just vote as I always do, what looks the best to me gets a 10. There is no way that I can determine if a photo is in AA's style. I think you can come close if you use a strong red filter and have a lot of blue in the sky.
03/05/2005 07:04:03 AM · #11
Yes, that's the point; content of photographs does not = style. It's how you treat the image, what you DO with the content, that = style. "Style" is a compositional/technical term. Full tonal range and rich dark skies are the most recognizable elements of the Adams style to most people. DOF is part of it as well. The use of foregrounds in landscape to lead you into the landscape is another element.

Robt.
03/05/2005 08:32:58 AM · #12
Great comments...I had the fortune to hear Ansel speak not too long before he died...his description of driving along in his truck, seeing a scene, stopping and calculating filter, exposure, etc. mentally and taking one image before moving on, which of course was absolutely "right on", was fascinating. Wonderful genius. May find the following link of help also for trying to do digitally what Ansel did with silver grains and a dark room:

//194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/How_to/n_Digital_BW/a_Digital_Black_and_White.html
03/05/2005 08:44:16 AM · #13
Robert, besides of having more dynamic range using film and a large format camera, what was AA's technique for achieving high contrast while maintaining detail in light and dark areas? He could only work within the lattitude of the film, and I presume he wasn't doing multiple exposures to increase dynamic range, as we could do if DPC didn't disallow it!
03/05/2005 09:59:40 AM · #14
Originally posted by nshapiro:

Robert, besides of having more dynamic range using film and a large format camera, what was AA's technique for achieving high contrast while maintaining detail in light and dark areas? He could only work within the lattitude of the film, and I presume he wasn't doing multiple exposures to increase dynamic range, as we could do if DPC didn't disallow it!


B/W film (conventional film anyway) consists of an "emulsion" of silver halide crystals laid in an even coating over a transparent base. The crystals are photosensitive (they react to light), and the process of "developing" the film basically produces the physical manifestation of that reaction. When we process film it begins to change as soon as it is placed int he developer. Those areas of the film that have received the least exposure (the relatively transparent areas) develop to the fullest extent that they can very soon in the process, while the areas that received a lot of exposure take much longer to develop completely.

Therefore, we can say "The shadows come up quickly, while the highlights take time to come up." The Zone System takes advantage of this characteristic of light-sensitive emulsions by precisely quantifying this relationship. We "expose for the shadows" by metering them with a spot meter and giving precisely the exposure that will render the shadows on the "zone" we want them to be on in our previsualization of the finished image. We meter the highlights, and see how many zones away form the shadows they are, and note all this information.

We consider the way the image will be displayed (usually by means of a photographic print) and the tonal range the medium is capable of expressing. In the case of typical B/W photographic paper, this would be 7 zones (or stops) that can be rendered with detail in the image; anything brighter or darker will be pure white or black.

Using the exposure information and the "display" information, we calculate from previously-derived tables the exact amount of film development time necessary for this negative to attain the tonal range that matches our desired usage of it. This is expressed in terms of "pushing" or "pulling" the negative; if the scene is flatly-lit, we "push" the negative in processing to expand its tonal range; is our detailed shadows were "placed" on zone III, and if the detailed highlights "fell" on zone VI, then we'd "push" the film "plus 1" to gain an additional dynamic range, and the highlights of the negative would be on zone VII.

More typically, the scene would be too contrasty, with the detailed shadows placed on zone III and the highlights falling on zone IX or even zone X, and we'd "pull" the negative earlier in the developing process so the highlights did not have a chance to develop fully, in these case -2 or -3 processing.

So the process involves expanding or contracting the tonal range expressed in the film to meet the requirements of the paper. Film (or any transmitted-light medium) is inherently capable of expressing a greater tonal range than any reflected-light medium, which is why your color transparencies always looked better than the prints you had made from them, and why digital photos viewed on a good monitor always look better than the prints you make from them, unless you have reduced the tonal range in the digital image to match what can be achieved in the printed image.

Incidentally, a zone system approach to digital work involves exposing for the highlights, because digital (like color transparencies) is a positive medium, not a negative one. The digital printing process is positive-to-positive, not negative-to-positive.

Robt.

03/05/2005 10:04:40 AM · #15
Another great post Robert.
03/05/2005 10:17:44 AM · #16
As far as voting goes on DPC, Ansel himself could enter a new print and not do well.

Robert, your posts are great and I appreciate your efforts. More of this is needed here. There is just as much diversity among voters as there is among entries. It will be interesting to say the least.

Good luck to all!
Dick
03/05/2005 10:25:26 AM · #17
Robert,

Awesome posts, thanks. I read somewhere once that AA used duotones. Do you know if this is true?

Mike
03/05/2005 10:29:50 AM · #18
I think you did a wonderful job of explaning the zone system Robert. I did a bit of darkroom work back in the 70s developing B&W prints for a photography class. Your description makes it easier for me to relate my limited experience with what you and Ansel were doing with the zone system. IOW, a very dim bulb just clicked on over my head. :)

Thanks!

03/05/2005 10:38:26 AM · #19
Originally posted by cloudsme:

Robert,

Awesome posts, thanks. I read somewhere once that AA used duotones. Do you know if this is true?

Mike


Yes, he did some duotones. I'm not aware that he ever used them extensively. He was pretty much a purist, and in film technology the duotone tends to be a decorative embellishment. In digital "B/W" work, judicuous use of duotones can enhance the apparent tonal range of the image as seen on the screen.

Robt.
03/05/2005 10:53:11 AM · #20
Don't they also prolong the life of a print? I heard that was another reason for sepia and blue toning.
03/05/2005 11:09:53 AM · #21
Originally posted by zarniwoop:

Don't they also prolong the life of a print? I heard that was another reason for sepia and blue toning.


I think that may have been true at one time, yes. I'm not sure it is any longer. I'm not an expert on that though.

Robt.
03/05/2005 11:38:10 AM · #22
Great post Robt. I think the idea of an Ansel Adams challenge is wonderful and should produce some very interesting photographs to judge. I do not have an entry yet, maybe won’t have as the deadline is so close now. I want to wish you all luck!
03/05/2005 11:40:16 AM · #23
I do not know if it was purposeful or not, but the majority of Ansel Adams' landscapes had great depth of focus. Some of the prints I have examined at Sandia Laboratories have blue toning which seems to add to the starkness of the scene. In any case, he will be remembered long for his prolific work and much admired style.
03/05/2005 11:42:29 AM · #24
Originally posted by zarniwoop:

Don't they also prolong the life of a print? I heard that was another reason for sepia and blue toning.

I thought that "all" his prints were processed in some kind of toner ... the checmicals used determines whether the white of the paper is toned somewhat browner (sepia) or bluish. This step is done after the developing and fixing of the image.

A "duotone" is an offset printing term, used for a process in which a photo is printed using two colors of ink in an attempt to simulate the look of a toned print. Photoshop's Duotone mode is a method for creating those two pieces of film.

To mass-produced Adams' work by offset printing (like calendars) they use a quad-tone technique using four different gray-black inks to try and closely approximate the look of the photographic prints -- I once knew the ink combination but forgot! : (

I think that, although many old printed are "toned," there really is no such thing as a "duotone" phopographic print -- just ones in which the toner plays a more or less important role.
===============================
"Image color is a property of both emulsion and paper base combined (the term "color" as used here bears no relation to color photographs, but refers to the subtle hues of greater warmth or coldness in reference to neutral black and white). The color of the base can range from a cold (bluish) white through neutral to slightly warm and very warm (ivory or buff) colors....

"The image color is further modified by the development, and still further modified by toning....

"I work for a cool purple-black image by using a cold-toned developer and slightly toning in selenium. With this combination I feel that I can achieve an image of maximum strength and beauty of print color -- an image that is logically related to the clean crisp sharpness of the image formed by the lens."

--Ansel Adams, The Print, 1983

Message edited by author 2005-03-05 11:43:13.
03/05/2005 11:44:57 AM · #25
Originally posted by ElGordo:

I do not know if it was purposeful or not, but the majority of Ansel Adams' landscapes had great depth of focus. Some of the prints I have examined at Sandia Laboratories have blue toning which seems to add to the starkness of the scene. In any case, he will be remembered long for his prolific work and much admired style.


Different developers/toners give a different residual cast to the print. Ansel for many years used a home-brew pyro that gave a very cool tonality to his images. The DOF was intentional, he was famous for it. He was a member of the group f:64 which "revolted" against the previaling "pictorialist" ethic, which was a very gauzy, soft-focus approach.

Robt.

Message edited by author 2005-03-05 11:50:43.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 10:22:28 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 10:22:28 AM EDT.