More on print quality, techniques and esthetics

[Shilesh Jani]

This massage is crossposted.

I received my copy a few days back and I had only given it a cursory glace and I remember being impressed by the "moody" quality of Meriel's pictures. Until this morning, that is; over a few leisurely cups of coffee - Sunday morning stuff, I looked at the issue more closely.

I am no expert at printing, never spent any time printing in the darkroom, but plenty of time printing quad inkjets from MF and 4x5 scans. I must say the very first photograph (page 37) immediately caught my eye. I can clearly see a transition line just above the gate, going along the entire frame horizontally. The tree trunks in the vicinity of the gate below this line have detail, while above the line they go into black. Having no experience in the darkroom, my first reaction was "sloppy use of a graduated nd filter". Now I must say it did not send me into a paroxysm of emotion distress or anything so dramatic, but I noticed it in that one picture and others upon close examination.

I am not intending to create more "darkroom vs lightroom" wars here, but my experience is in the lightroom, so one of the thoughts that ran through my mind was "I would have shot these without the nd grad, pull-processed the negative and opened up the shadows in PhotoShop". It is so easy to affect changes to ceratin tonal regions digitally, irrespective of their spatial position in the image frame. Now I understand that Meriel may NOT actually have used an nd grad.

Too bad because I like the images otherwise.

[ISO 2]

"I hope this does not becoma a fad, just like the filed negative holder or the "distressed" negative did"

Ansel Adams and the west coast school became a fad - look how long that fad has lasted. May I remind you that American provincialism was never the standard for darkroom printing, although cultural imperialism might have left that legacy beyond American shores.

France and its photographic practitioners have not been wholly inspired by the large format systematics of Ansel Adams approach, let alone landscape photography as much as it has with its own contrasting influence - HCB and the diminutive 35mm format. That Olivier is French might just be incidental. I guess all the attention in internet forums about Olivier can only serve to magnify people's awareness to his peculiar brand of work.

"When a photographer submits work for publication in a journal, one assumes he is familiar enough with the journal's past publications to be comfortable, even eager"

Things change. The above quote reflects a traditionalist mentality of thinking, locked in on its own tradition. Sometimes we submit things because we value what is submitted. Other times because we sincerely believe (mistaken or not) that our work is special, or even ground-breaking. The zone system and the old west coast school of photographic printing isn't acce[ted as the goal standard of an artist's expression and thank goodness Lenswork doesn't ape that confined way of thinking. It might be a darkroom technician's goal standard in the last century, although in this century even that legacy isn't clear. The tradition is very much alive today: those advocates of perfect zone I-IX azo prints with technical perfection to the point of sterility have no mandate to curtail others' expectations of what 'good art' is by crying out wolf.

Mark's paranoid point about the whole presentation of Olivier's work in Lenswork being a hoax still reflects a stuckness with darkroom values based in the last century. Reading Olivier's biography and images sheds some clue as to what he strives to achieve; it isn't formalistic beauty; nor systematic apprehension of the negative, nor a defacement of the imaged landscape by darkroom skills.

Defining Olivier's work by virtue of a positive value is a more difficult task. I guess photography is moving on, and Oliver's work shows one possible direction. Is his work 'postmodern' in respect to his abrogation of conventional printing expectations, and insistence on using the same traditionalist media? His biography indicates he is an artist .....not a documentary photographer. Lenswork role in this may very well be to release an issue highlighting Olivier's work, knowing the controversy which causes even Brooks to hesitate. And then move on.

Guess some of us will always wince at self-expression and that of another artist's. Especially if the west coast school is the only measure of all things great about photography.

David - I agree with all of your points although I would struggle to believe that you could not form an opinion, at some level, of Olivier's artistic merits, based on the limitations of the poorly reproduced images in the public domain, whether that be on the web or Lenswork.

[Mark Sawyer]

Jorge, I too doubt that it's a parody of the "fine print," given that there are some very good prints mixed into the portfolio. I do allow for the possibility, but it mostly just seems like Meriel made some bad, not just so-so, but actually BAD prints. I allow for the possibility, as at this point, I honestly don't understand it. But I doubt it. I will say that other than the printing issues, I find Meriel's work quite good and worthy of publication.

I do understand that LensWork is focused on artistic/aesthetic issues, but I'm surprised that they published what appear to be bad prints from someone trying to make good, serious work. Given that Lenswork's reproductions are normally quite good, I'm not willing to say, "oh, the reproductions just don't allow you to appreciate the originals."

The faults we are talking about are not artifacts of bad lithography, they're evidence of a bad original print. The only question is whether they were meant to be that way. I'd really love to hear from the editorial staff at LensWork on this. They're too sophisticated to accept bad prints through ignorance, yet there they are. An interesting curiosity.

I'm not terribly bent out of shape over it all, just a tempest in a teapot. Perhaps LensWork should be somehow forced to rebate $1 to each of its subscribers, thus ushering in the era of the "fined" print...

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Ansel Adams and the west coast school became a fad - look how long that fad has lasted. May I remind you that American provincialism was never the standard for darkroom printing, although cultural imperialism might have left that legacy beyond American shores.



snore.......

[Mark Sawyer]

>>Mark's paranoid point about the whole presentation of Olivier's work in Lenswork being a hoax still reflects a stuckness with darkroom values based in the last century.<<

Paranoid?! PARANOID???!!! JUST BECAUSE THOSE BASTARDS AT LENSWORK PRINTED THAT STUFF ONLY TO FOOL ME INTO MAKING BAD PRINTS DOESN'T MEAN I'M PARANOID!!! And I know about their mind-control rays too...

Actually, I found Meriel's work much more reminiscent of Frederick Evans 19th century European (you seem to find which continent and century important pigeonholes for artists) work than Adams' twentieth century American work. And I'm very fond of Evans' work.

Meriel seems to have chosen to make a "bad" print. Is "bad" always bad? No. Many wonderful works are "bad" prints. But it seems at odds with the rest of his work's aesthetic, (large format, conventional composition, heavy atmosphere, nostalgic subject matter). I find it more curious than objectionable, and frankly, wouldn't have found it all that curious without this thread.

>>Guess some of us will always wince at self-expression and that of another artist's. Especially if the west coast school is the only measure of all things great about photography. <<

Geez, give it a rest.



I suppose it's like reading Proust, (excuse me, Proooost,) and finding really bad misspellings all through the text.

[Mark Sawyer]

My apologies to ISO2 and the forum if my last post was a little acidic, acerbic, or one of those other "a" words...

[Kirk Gittings]

I welcome experimentation and inovation in the arts even if it ultimately fails. To me the genre of photography would be incredibly boring if all we did was quest for the perfect "straight" print.

Witness this work:


http://www.zonezero.com/exposiciones/fotografos/witkin2/

Witkin's work is disturbing and brilliant (he himself is disturbing and bri!liant!). I wouldn't want the work on my wall (except for an investment) but I'm extremely glad he is out there pushing the boundaries.

There is a traditional core to every artistic medium, but it is the experimenters who give a medium its energy. Even when they fail.

[Rob_5020]

Aww shucks Mark. I'm touched.

Actually I don't think anything you said needed an apology.

Anyway. Enough of the 'a' words.

I read Prooooust too.

[Mark Sawyer]

Spoken like a true gentleman! At this point, I think I'll just consider Meriel's work as printed with a French accent...

[ISO 2]

"Spoken like a true gentleman! At this point, I think I'll just consider Meriel's work as printed with a French accent..."

You've heard of the 'Texas Leica'...this 'awww shucks' is the English version of the Texas drawl

A lot of French photographers would takeissue with Meriel's work too. In one example, what fascinated me about his work is the way he seems to 'interpret' justice to those 'orrible English tourist resorts - the image of the town of Trouville in Normandy is populated by my fellow patriots. In fact, Trouville may be more English than French, not just in terms of real estate but after WWII, a lot of the French kids were sired.

In anycase, Meriel seems to enjoy painting a blackened image of the town- distorted and manipulated. It's funny reading the photo.net thread. Meriel today. Next please..