Although I am not sure I needed one more Ansel Adams book, after watching the Ken Burns National Parks series, I was intrigued by the role that Ansel Adams book "Sierra Nevada The John Muir Trail" had in helping establish Kings Canyon National Park. I then learned more about its history, as Adams first landscape photography book.
Ansel Adams expressed himself a lot of satisfaction over the reproductions of the John Muir Trail book, and Szarkowski calls this book a "landmark" in photography mechanical reproduction, so I assume the 1938 book was faithful to the prints.
The book was reprinted in 2006. Reviews on amazon are mixed, with some complaining about poor reproduction quality, and some (including Ben Crane, who posts here) defending it as faithful to the less dramatic printing style of the early years.
However, my understanding is that most of the prints in "Ansel Adams at 100" (I am referring to the hard cover version) are also expressly based on earlier prints, yet there is a considerable difference between the centennial book at the John Muir Trail book. Take for instance the Precipice Lake image, and look at the shadow detail. The centennial book looks much nicer to me.
It's been a while since I've seen the prints, so I don't remember well. I have also never seen a copy of the 1938 book. So my question is, are indeed the reproduction in the John Muir Trail book faithful to the original edition ? To the prints ? If that's the case how about the difference between this book and the centennial book ?
On a side note, I was struck by how much the cover image looked better on the grey cloth-covered cover, than inside the book, on the white page.