Lenswork will no longer be found at newstands.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

He does Tim - and I'd really like to know what he thinks of that statement given that experience. I don't believe for a moment he'd agree either, despite the fact that he has chosen to experiment in other mediums (haven't we all)....

Referring back to a thread I made regarding an editorial by Brooks Jensen in one of the previous issues of LW, with today's offset printing technology, a print can actually be superior than the traditional methods of printing photographs. Looking at what my printer can do and what Michael Smith's printer, who is superior to my printer, I will agree that in some instances a photograph printed from an offset printer with ink is asthetically superior than that same photograph printed in many of the traditional methods.

[PViapiano]

Referring back to a thread I made regarding an editorial by Brooks Jensen in one of the previous issues of LW, with today's offset printing technology, a print can actually be superior than the traditional methods of printing photographs. Looking at what my printer can do and what Michael Smith's printer, who is superior to my printer, I will agree that in some instances a photograph printed from an offset printer with ink is asthetically superior than that same photograph printed in many of the traditional methods.

You mean a reproduction of a photograph...but still, I can't see how anyone could say that a reproduction of any sort is superior to, say, a Pepper No. 30, printed by Weston himself. The artist is the decider, and until a photographer decides to use offset printing as his original form of expression, your argument doesn't hold water.

That's like saying, "...that cadmium red is so much brighter today, so let's pump up the saturation when we print the catalog, or better yet, let's just paint over that little spot in Vincent's self-portrait."

[jetcode]

IMO if it exists on paper (or electronically) it is a reproduction unless the paper is the negative and print. Pepper #30 is a printed reproduction. It was produced by hand during a transfer of light through the neg onto paper. The paper was uncommitted until reproduction took place.

[timbo10ca]

You mean a reproduction of a photograph...but still, I can't see how anyone could say that a reproduction of any sort is superior to, say, a Pepper No. 30, printed by Weston himself. The artist is the decider, and until a photographer decides to use offset printing as his original form of expression, your argument doesn't hold water.

That's like saying, "...that cadmium red is so much brighter today, so let's pump up the saturation when we print the catalog, or better yet, let's just paint over that little spot in Vincent's self-portrait."

I wonder if Weston and Adams if alive today would embrace digital technology like Photoshop and offset printing......

Tim

[windpointphoto]

I wonder if Weston and Adams if alive today would embrace digital technology like Photoshop and offset printing......

Tim

You don't have to wonder. Do a little research on Ansel's views and you'll know.

[timbo10ca]

You don't have to wonder. Do a little research on Ansel's views and you'll know.

I will do that. Seems to me that in reading his books, as well as Schaeffers, he was of the opinion it was a good thing. I will have to go back and see if I'm right.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Referring back to a thread I made regarding an editorial by Brooks Jensen in one of the previous issues of LW, with today's offset printing technology, a print can actually be superior than the traditional methods of printing photographs. Looking at what my printer can do and what Michael Smith's printer, who is superior to my printer, I will agree that in some instances a photograph printed from an offset printer with ink is asthetically superior than that same photograph printed in many of the traditional methods.

Sorry, but you don't get to decide. No one can decide if the reproduction is "better" or "worse" than the original artist. That you might have seen reproductions that you liked better than the original is a different matter.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I will do that. Seems to me that in reading his books, as well as Schaeffers, he was of the opinion it was a good thing. I will have to go back and see if I'm right.

Ansel Adams is often quoted that he was exited about the developments in electronic capture. Unfortunatelly, those doing digital assume that because of this statement he would have liked the results, and this is a mistaken assumption, or as I call them suppository. While he was exited about the new development, he might have loved the results or he might have hated them, this we will never know.

In Weston's case, we certainly will never know or be able to guess. He seemed to be a weird cat..

[D. Bryant]

I wonder if Weston and Adams if alive today would embrace digital technology like Photoshop and offset printing......

Tim

Who really cares what Adams or Weston would think.

Don Bryant

[Mike Castles]

Who really cares what Adams or Weston would think.

Don Bryant

Isn't that the truth Don...not sure why anyone cares who uses what as long as 1 - they have mastered the process and 2 - it fits their vision.