Sebastiao Salgado show: The Force of Nature

[patrickjames]

I am pretty sure Salgado shoots digitally, massages the files, then has that output to film for printing. Maybe he gets it printed directly, don't know.

I think he has lost the special type of aesthetic that he used to have that really was beautiful with the deep wonderful tones. Now his photographs look rather off. They remind me in some ways of Dobrowner's work which is manipulated to within an inch of it's death in the computer.

I have seen other photographers that were incredibly good, not at Salgado's level, but when they made the switch to digital lost the magic that they had. It is unfortunate. This is not a rail against digital. Sometimes people just can't translate well with all the new words they see in front of them.

[bob carnie]

He had wonderful printers for the Worker Series and the Series at GEH. The books IMO were pumped up dramatically from the enlarger prints, I did not see the incredible contrast in the show prints at GEH.

Finding the same quality of digital printmaker is possible, but like learning how to print traditionally, it takes years to master the computer. I think the hardest thing I have tried to be good at over the last 20 years is PhotoShop. The options are so numerous, and the possibility to screw up endless.
I am looking at invites to the Salgado shows coming up this next month here in TO and the image does look heavy handed, but I will wait until I can see the prints before giving the thumbs up or thumbs down.

[patrickjames]

....PhotoShop. The options are so numerous, and the possibility to screw up endless.....

Bob, I think you will agree with me when I say I think that is where so many people go wrong. People start doing everything because they can, versus because they should. HDR is the latest iteration of that. HDR is meant to be able to pull in tones that otherwise couldn't be shown, not to make an image look like a marshmallow. With Photoshop it is very important to know what one wants before beginning the process.

[bob carnie]

Yes I agree, just because the hue saturation slider is present does not mean you use it.
I do not play chess, but I have been told the great chess players see many moves ahead and work that way.
Knowing where you want to end up is the trick in my opinion when using PS.

I will say that once Lightroom came into the game , 50% of the bad editing was eliminated as Lightroom has constraints( just look at the curve tool for example) . As well all the moves you make are not applied until the end and the Lightroom program will decide the order they are applied. White balance feature is also a great addition in LR , this function alone is a major step in stopping colour fringing due to sharpening over off colour.

Bob, I think you will agree with me when I say I think that is where so many people go wrong. People start doing everything because they can, versus because they should. HDR is the latest iteration of that. HDR is meant to be able to pull in tones that otherwise couldn't be shown, not to make an image look like a marshmallow. With Photoshop it is very important to know what one wants before beginning the process.

[Brian Ellis]

Bob, I think you will agree with me when I say I think that is where so many people go wrong. People start doing everything because they can, versus because they should. HDR is the latest iteration of that. HDR is meant to be able to pull in tones that otherwise couldn't be shown, not to make an image look like a marshmallow. With Photoshop it is very important to know what one wants before beginning the process.

I have to respectfully disagree on both counts. Like any tool, "HDR" (by which I assume you mean making multiple exposures of a subject and then blending them into a single photograph) can be used any way someone wants to use it. There's no "meant to be" about it. Just because you don't like how some people use it doesn't mean it's meant to be used only in the way you like.

It isn't necessarily important to know what one wants before beginning the process of adjusting an image in Photoshop. While some people work that way, others like the fact that Photoshop makes it easy to try, view, then use or discard as appropriate many different variations on an image - some minor, some major - to see what works best.

[Ken Lee]

I remember reading or seeing an interview with Vladimir Horowitz where he explained that during performances he felt obliged to exaggerate certain musical elements: without over-statement, the musical content might not reach many listeners.

By analogy, the Salgado photos referenced here - in my humble opinion - have a slightly contrived or over-dramatized appearance. They'd probably look perfect in a commercial setting. Like spicy food or strong coffee, it's easy to see how they could appeal to those of us who appreciate - or need - a bit of "splash".

[pdmoylan]

Well I am resurrecting this discussion with SS's new book "Genesis" now in my local B&N.

I must say, all scrutiny aside of his process, films, papers, or camera choices, his confidence in his vision, his superb execution including composition, his choice of subjects, and impact of his images is unquestionably stunning. There are so many photographers past and present to admire whose corpus is identifiable and perhaps unique. But SS has taken many risks, financially perhaps and otherwise, to get to places and to find opportunities to express his unique vision of the world. Even his images of wildlife have a certain artistic mastery which defies even the most adept wildlife photographers. He uses the B&W mystique and some clear manipulation to put his vision out there. Frankly who cares if the images are "over the top" from a production standpoint if you are immediately drawn to what he is seeing.

This book will be on my Christmas list unless I can convince my loved ones to fork over $70 for father's day.

There is almost nothing more exciting that extraordinary photography.

Cheers,

PDM

[h2oman]

I say this respectfully - to each their own! I've read quotes from people on this forum saying that Paul Caponigro's, or Brett Weston's, or Sebastiao Salgado's, or William Clift's, or (insert name of famous photographer)'s images do nothing for them.

[Doug Howk]

I understand that there is a collectors edition of the book "Genesis" for around $4000. My much smaller copy (10"X14") was only $42 from Amazon. Even at its smaller size, it is an immense work that benefits from just viewing a chapter at one sitting. Beautiful imagery!

[bob carnie]

I have had the chance to see Salgados work three times now.

First was at the GEH , migrations and workers and it was a stunning show.
Second at a private gallery here in Toronto, some older work and some silver work from digital capture, very nice show.
Third and most recently at the ROM to see the complete Genesis show..

As Fonzy , I believe Salgado has *Jumped the Shark* with this show.

This show had approximately 270 large prints, some 40 inch x 60 inch, but most in the 24 x30 range.

These were poorly crafted inkjet prints that IMO completely missed the mark and for me has changed my opinion of his work 180 degrees.
The imagery is great, but the excecution of the prints is second or third rate, something one would expect from a beginner.
With his stature, and with current printmaking options available to a world class photographer I found this show to be a complete disaster. I think 90% of the viewing public will enjoy this show , for me it was a sad evening to see imagery presented this way.

I will say the framing and 8 ply matts were excellent. And the books are well printed but I could not force myself to buy one as my friends who all have his work could not purchase either.

Maybe over time as the bad taste leaves my mouth I will purchase a good copy of the book.