Ansel and his PhaseOne back ????

[Guy Tal]

Ron,

You may want to re-read The Print, in which Adams is discussing a laser print made from a drum scan he witnessed in 1983:

"The result is exceptional image resolution and greater control of the tonalities. The dot pattern created by the laser beam is distinctly sharper than that of a contact screen in a process camera. The scanner also permits selective enhancement of values; it is possible to reveal subtle separation of values at either end of the scale which may even exceed those attained by the photographer in the original print!"

Good thing we don't have to guess on that one, eh?

Guy

[Neal Shields]

A better question might be not: would he, but could he".

I have seen a print of Moonrise over Hernandez in our local museum.

As I remember you could have enlarged the photograph of the moon and sold it as a map of the moon's craters.

In the photograph, the moon is about 1/50th the height of the photograph. That means that with a 6 meg digital SLR you would have to resolve the features with about 40 lines of pixels.

Next time they display that photograph, that will be me, in the museum with the 40 power loop, that he guard is showing to the door.

Beyond all that, Ansel Adams sold prints for a living, why would he embrace a technology that would put him out of business?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Beyond all that, Ansel Adams sold prints for a living, why would he embrace a technology that would put him out of business?



I dont know that it would put him out of business Neal, Clyde Butcher is selling both his silver prints and ink jet prints. The ink jets are at a reduced price but I guess this makes his images available to those who cannot afford or do not want to spend much money in a photograph. I see this as no different than buying an AA image made from one of his negatives printed by other people which are sold really cheap.



OTOH if the silver prints made with a light jet printer become a popular and affordable technique, then this might be a reason to seriously look at digital as a better method to make silver prints. The control offered by PS in conjunction with the "look" and "feel" of a silver paper will be something, I think, impossible to beat.

[John Kasaian]

If Adams and Weston had digital, I'd bet that their images would be very, very good ones! Then again, if Chief Joseph had F-18s...??? Or better yet, if Michealangelo had fiberglass chop would the marble quarries at Tuscany discontiue production of 8x10 slabs and invest in resin R&D??

[Jim Galli]

Ansel was acutely aware of improving technology for reproductions. He was a businessman. He was totally aware of the difference between a reproduction and an original. That's where folks here get confused. Things made by computers are facsimiles of originals. Fabulous for making 1.6 billion "moon rise Hernandes" for the poster shops to sell. Edward, no interest at all.

[Geoffrey Swenson]

Jorge

You are one lost puppy!…sometimes :-))

“everytime you post on this threads you say we all will be using PS in the future”

No, I am not saying that, nor should that be the case. Just as an example, what would happen to you if we all did?

"why bother, we can fix it in PS, we have so much more "control""....:-)

No, just the incompetent would do that!

Guess, you are the new Edward Weston of the 21st. century. If he were alive today, the two of would be coating your own film stock together :-))

“ OTOH if the silver prints made with a light jet printer become a popular and affordable technique, then this might be a reason to seriously look at digital as a better method to make silver prints. The control offered by PS in conjunction with the "look" and "feel" of a silver paper will be something, I think, impossible to beat. ”

Now you are talking!!!

[Sergio Caetano]

I doubt that Adams and Weston , after decades of experience, researching, tuning an retuning their work, would embrace a technique with inferior quality than that they practiced. High definition (bw) means good balance over tonal scale, graininess, resolution and acutance; digital can't win analog in any one of these variables. But commercial business is another thing. Kodak executives are warming their brains, thinking about their main goal : money, not art. Stockholders don't bother about quality. Butcher is selling inkjet-printer images with lower prices as an option of his products. For sure Butcher knows the difference between prints HE MAKES in wet process and computer prints monitored by his employees.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

You are one lost puppy!…sometimes :-))



I think not bubba! If anything it is you who is lost and blinded by the shine of your new toys....I have been doing this for quite a while and have seen the best of both methods, and although I keep an open mind I dont follow the rest like a lemming....you are welcome to jump of the cliff if that rocks your boat.



Guess, you are the new Edward Weston of the 21st. century. If he were alive today, the two of would be coating your own film stock together :-))

If that is what is required to produce the work I like, then yes I would. You on the other hand are in the company of countless millions of unknowns. I rather be in Weston's company.



Now you are talking!!!



Please remember I said IF and when this technique becomes available, so far it is only rumors and nobody has seen a print yet.....it might turn out to be crap....

[Ellis Vener]

I doubt that Adams and Weston , after decades of experience, researching, tuning an retuning their work, would embrace a technique with inferior quality than that they practiced.

Digital tools and processes are not inherently inferior to chemistry based media and processes. At best that is a romantic nostalgic notion.

For sure Butcher knows the difference between prints HE MAKES in wet process and computer prints monitored by his employees.

You areignoring the power of marketing a limited edition print.. Clyde's pricing strategy has nothing to do with inherent quality, although it might have quite a bit to do with the specific quality of the prints they are producing. It probably also has quite a bit to do with the expense and time involved in making a single (or editions of) print in a wet darkroom.

[Jonathan Brewer]

In purely visual terms nothing has matched the luminance and beauty of a Dagerreotype, of course later film processes/digital were faster/easier to handle.