Weston Print Question

[jetcode]

I recently saw a print of a Edward Weston original printed by Kim Weston. The subject was Charis in the sand. Upon inspecting the print it appears the subject is printed at a different contrast (higher with nice low mid boost) then the sand (low and flat) ,and she is surrounded by a fine black line of differention, a great technique to highlight a subject.

I know little of Edward Westons technqiue but it looked liked something that a modern photographer might do in photoshop. I am trying to comprehend the possible analog techniques that could be used to arrive at such a print. Certainly a composite negative could be made from a series of duplicate negatives printed at different contrasts. Perhaps there is a technique of masking using two masks of slightly different sizes, one for the black line and subject, the other for the subject.

Any thoughts or ideas?

[Bruce Schultz]

If it's the picture of Charis face down, I remember reading that some people asked if there was some type of special effect used in making the print, such as solarization. Of course, EW bristled at any notion that he had doctored the print.

[jetcode]

heres a link to the image in question ...

http://www.edward-weston.com/edward_weston_nudes_5.htm

note that she pops off the sand ... notice the shadow surrounding her form ... also notice the juxtiposition of her body in relation to the motion of the sand ...

[MIke Sherck]

There is a passage in Weston's Daybooks which specificially refers to the black outline effect (in relation to a picture of Tina Modotti in Mexico.) To the best of my recollection, he questions how the person who originally asked could be an accomplished photographer without knowing that the line is a natural effect.

Edward was a superb printer but to be best of my knowledge, did not use techniques outside the "straight" paradigm in his printing. His great-grandson, Kim Weston, still hosts workshops, I believe, and has possession of Edward's Wildcat Hill darkroom. He would probably be a worthwhile source of information.

Mike

[N Dhananjay]

There has been discussion about this - if I remember correctly, both the daybooks and Charis' "Through another lens" talk about it. The easiest way to think of this is the way suggested by Charis - she is lying on top of her own shadow, hence the dark line between the sand and the body.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think this is the same effect you get when lighting an egg straight on, and you see a pattern of falloff around the edges.

[D. Bryant]

I think this is the same effect you get when lighting an egg straight on, and you see a pattern of falloff around the edges.

As David suggests this is a variation of axial lighting. Weston used this on more than one occasion for photographs (not portraits) of Charis. Weston was an expert commercial photographer and understood lighting very well.

Observe this shot for example:

http://www.edward-weston.com/edward_weston_nudes_15.htm

Don Bryant

[Merg Ross]

This may answer your question. Weston addressed the subject of light in a 1939 article entitled, Light vs. Lighting. His reference may be to this print or one from the same session. I quote directly:

"Any light figure or rounded object will appear to have a dark line around it when bright sunlight is hitting it squarely. In this case the model was lying on a steep sand bank and my camera was set up on a parallel bank; the morning sun was directly behind me, and the brillance of the light was increased by reflection from the surrounding dunes. Given such conditions a dark outline is bound to appear in your picture, but it is for the photographer to decide how he will use it. If he wants to emphasize it the procedure is simple enough--in this case by giving the minimum exposure to get the flesh fully timed, developing out for a fairly dense negative, and making a straight print on normal grade paper".

[Andrew Tymon]

Ansel calls this the limb effect see the negative page 133

[David A. Goldfarb]

Yes, that's it. I couldn't recall the name.

[jetcode]

That's what I was looking for, thanks. So this is purely a function of light. To my eye it appear that the sand is quite flat in contrast, but Charis appears in full contrast.

[Donald Miller]

That's what I was looking for, thanks. So this is purely a function of light. To my eye it appear that the sand is quite flat in contrast, but Charis appears in full contrast.


Joe, The reason that the sand looks flat while Charis appears full contrast is that her body surfaces are not all perpendicular to the light source. Additionally her skin is more reflective than the sand. The sand is perpendicular to the light source for the most part (some shading due to the forms in the sand in the lower portion of the image).

In lighting the angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence. That is the reason for the difference that you noted.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Joe, thanks for posting this thread. Thanks to all who have answered. I love the tones in Edwards nudes and this helps me understand his work even more.

Jim

[Harold_4074]

Andrew Tymon:Ansel calls this the limb effect see the negative page 133

In at least one of his books, Adams explains this as the "limb effect", which may be as close as he ever came to a mischievous pun ( "limb" as used here is actually a technical term from the field of astronomy). Sadly, it is elsewhere illustrated with a photograph of an egg, more's the pity.

[Turner Reich]

It says Edward Weston printed by Cole Weston, not Kim Weston. It looks like crap, It's hard to believe that Edward Weston would have approved this printing.

[Turner Reich]

Nude, 1936 (233N)
Edward Weston negative, Cole Weston print

8" x 10"
14" x 16" mounted

[jetcode]

It says Edward Weston printed by Cole Weston, not Kim Weston. It looks like crap, It's hard to believe that Edward Weston would have approved this printing.

the print I saw was printed by Kim in one of his classes ... the print is beautiful

[Jim Noel]

I have a print of Charis on the dunes printed by Cole which is absolutely stunning. When I choose to display it I get more positive comments on it than on any other of the many prints I have collected.

[Rider]

Thank you for this excellent discussion.