PDA

View Full Version : Horsetail Fall, Yosemite



tgtaylor
1-Feb-2010, 14:56
Anyone going this year?

Last year was my first time photographing the falls. I shot it from the meadow in El Cap picnic area with a 400mm lens on a Pentax 67II camera (200mm 35mm equiv and ~ 600mm 4x5 equiv) with the only roll of 120 color negative film at The Ansel Adams Gallery. The image seems identical with the one posted on Michael Fry's website - identical perspective as if he came by and used my camera!

I printed the image last year using a filter pack that was optimized for the rock and let the sky go a shade of grey like in Galen Rowell’s version. I just started to reprint for a blue sky using an acetate mask to mask for the sky and rock. Some folks think that a blue sky isn't appropriate for this image as the color of the sky in the west at sundown isn't blue. What do you think? A good blue sky... pale blue...grey?

Drew Wiley
1-Feb-2010, 16:59
Why the hell do you want to make fake-looking shots like Galen Rowell did?

tgtaylor
1-Feb-2010, 19:46
Actually Galen's shot wasn't fake. I found that out last year while printing mine. At the time I never thought about making a mask for the sky and instead printed the image with one exposure that was "optimized" for the texture and color of the rock (I tried to maximize the yellow and bring out the beautiful browns). My best print came out with a light grey sky and IMO a far better rendition of the "face" than Galen's with the rock texture being very palpable in the print. Although pleased with the face, I was concerned about the grey sky and went on Galen's website to see how he printed it. I couldn’t find it so I checked my copy of Mountain Light where I found that his also had a grey sky. A grey sky made sense since to change the color of the sky you would need to make a mask (digital printing wasn't an option at that time) and I don't think Galen did his own printing. This time I made a mask and printed the face as red instead of orange red and the sky the same blue as in Michael's print.

Athough I didn’t know it at the time but Horsetail Fall is a popular venue among many photographers . There must have been 100 in the El Cap Picnic area and at least that many at a location across the Merced. We were actually leaving the park when we noticed that it was flowing and drove over and got the last parking space in the Picnic area.

If I never shoot it again, I’m perfectly satisfied with the negative (3) that I got last year.

Thomas

Drew Wiley
1-Feb-2010, 21:08
Wasn't referring to just this shot in particular. Actually, I knew the person quite well
who did his R-prints in the pre-digital days, and am also aware of who did his digital
ones. For someone who made it his esthetic to treat third-world cultures with respect, Galen certainly didn't have much respect for the quality of natural light when it came to marketing. Reminds me of that spoof of duck hunters in a movie where they each point a machine gun toward the sky as a flock went overhead and
kept their finger on the trigger until a duck finally fell to earth. But in Galen's case,
if he finally landed a coot he would spray it with fluorescent paint until is resembled a mallard.

J Ney
2-Feb-2010, 09:43
Wasn't referring to just this shot in particular. Actually, I knew the person quite well
who did his R-prints in the pre-digital days, and am also aware of who did his digital
ones. For someone who made it his esthetic to treat third-world cultures with respect, Galen certainly didn't have much respect for the quality of natural light when it came to marketing. Reminds me of that spoof of duck hunters in a movie where they each point a machine gun toward the sky as a flock went overhead and
kept their finger on the trigger until a duck finally fell to earth. But in Galen's case,
if he finally landed a coot he would spray it with fluorescent paint until is resembled a mallard.

Not sure how fair this is (as I don't know Galen's work too well) but just a damn good analogy!! Just had to comment.

tgtaylor
2-Feb-2010, 19:40
I don't believe that. Galen never printed or developed any of his images and always made the original Kodachrome slide available for inspection - keep them in a big fire-proof safe that you could see from the window. Like other accomplished photographers of his genre, he shot a carload of film, knew how to get the color to pop and, in his case, hired accomplished printers. He was, first and foremost, a shooter.

dsphotog
2-Feb-2010, 20:24
What is the ideal date to have optimum light on the fall?

Keith S. Walklet
2-Feb-2010, 21:07
There must have been 100 in the El Cap Picnic area and at least that many at a location across the Merced.

It has been exciting seeing, sharing and photographing Horsetail through the years and I sincerely feel everyone should see it, just not all at once. ;-)

The crowds that gather now each evening are getting scary. Two years ago, a rescue on the Yosemite Falls trail occupied the park service who would otherwise have been out directing traffic and issuing parking citations. Northside Drive was closed, there were three foot walls of snow on both sides of Southside Drive and only half a dozen parking spots. There were probably 300 people gathered on the shoulders of the road, many were ramming their cars head-on into the snowbanks in attempts to park, making it nearly impossible for vehicles to pass in either direction.

So, while I do enjoy seeing people stopped dead in their tracks, transfixed by its beauty, fortunately there are lots of other less accessible spots where it is still possible to have the wind be the soundtrack.

I'll be in the park for two weeks teaching beginning the 10th, with Horsetail one stop of many, many that make the park so wonderful in the winter. We're a pretty busy bunch, running non-stop from 6am to 9 pm, so I doubt I'd have a chance to see anyone. But, happy hunting.

There is approximately a ten day window each year in which conditions for the saturated color occur. Roughly from around the 11th to the 21st. Each person seems to have their own perspective on what constitutes the optimum days, depending on whether the cliff behind the fall is in shadow or not, whether the color is most saturated the full length of the fall, etc.

That is not to say it isn't beautiful other times of day besides sunset. AA photographed it "El Capitan Fall" and William Neill has a wonderful image that was featured in Communication Arts magazine taken earlier in the day when the water was silvery against a deep blue sky.

And while Galen's image is definitive of the neon orange moments, my favorite has no color at all. Mike Osborne (Oz) has a stunning windblown version of the fall that more than any other I have seen, resembles its namesake. Oz's version was taken earlier in the day in a wet year when the water volume was significant and is wonderful, pale "horsetail." It is in his book, "Granite Water and Light: Waterfalls of Yosemite Valley."

Drew Wiley
3-Feb-2010, 10:26
Until his digital days, Galen just had relatively cheap R prints made by a local lab. No
masking and limited dodging/burning. Some of the color characteristics were simply that of the print medium itself. If you know anything about printing transparencies,
you'll recognize that this is hardly an exact rendition of the original chrome. How his book images were scanned I don't know. Started making prints from internegs which came out better, then the switch to digital, which eventually got patently fake. His students are often ten times as worse - machine gun and saturate beyond belief in photoshop. Nice guy around the community, but just another Geographic commodity photographer as far as I'm concerned. Before I was married, my house was often a
hangout for a number of extreme climbers - I wasn't one of them, though they
respected me for my ability to prop a Sinar atop various class 3 routes. I know the
mindset pretty well, and what is necessary for these folks to obtain funding to do the
kind of expeditions they like. With Galen it was all those SUV commercial sterotypes of
the mtns, or that outside adventure stuff which made cute posters in the 90's. Now
with PS nobody pays attention to amazing light. Twice in my life I have photographed a true apricot-lavendar sky in the high Sierra with LF - first time was after the Mt Pinatubo volcano exploded. Nowadays people would simply assume I cooked it in PS, and wonder why I didn't saturate it even more. Those kind of colors are dime a dozen now, because they are so easy to fabricate. And who needs to look at anything, if you can just concoct something? But I'm drifting off-topic, and will save my own
Horsetail Falls story for another round.

Drew Wiley
3-Feb-2010, 12:10
Well it's disrespectful to anything bad about the departed. Just before Galen left town
and still had his unsuccessful gallery/lecture hall here in the Bay Area, I mentioned that
my wife and I wanted to visit Guilin in China. He gave me a very disdainful out-of-the-corner-of-the-eye look, since Guilin is an obvious tourist attraction to westerners, and
his lifestyle was to visit eveything as non-western as possible. What he didn't know is
that my wife has a degree in Chinese literature and studied a year in Beijing with the
greatest living caligrapher, so has concrete cultural reasons for wanting to visit things
so deeply seated in their traditions and literature. Galen was very polite of course.
But so was I, as I was glancing at all his pictures on the wall with an out-of-the-corner disdainful look of my own. So I guess that made us even.

Juergen Sattler
4-Feb-2010, 09:03
I am in Yosemite right now and Horsetail Fall has hardly any water. We have rain in the forecast for this weekend, so it might change but right now it doesn't look like there will be much of a picture here.

tgtaylor
4-Feb-2010, 09:43
I am in Yosemite right now and Horsetail Fall has hardly any water. We have rain in the forecast for this weekend, so it might change but right now it doesn't look like there will be much of a picture here.

It's always iffy as the condition must be right: The sun must not be obscured and the temp must be high enough to melt the snow pack on the top. Also, according to Michael Fry and Keiths post above, it's a little too early right now so hang in there.

Thomas

Sideshow Bob
4-Feb-2010, 11:48
Do you think a 720mm on a 4x5 would be a long enough lens?

Gale

Keith S. Walklet
4-Feb-2010, 12:14
The conditions necessary for the "firefall" effect are:

1. Clear to the west at sunset.
2. Snow at the summit of El Capitan
3. Warm temperatures to melt the snow so that there is a waterfall
4. A proper angle of view (draw a line from the fall to El Cap picnic area and extend it across the Valley).
5. Wind helps move the water around for a more expressive, unique image
6. And if you are interested in color, the middle two weeks of February, when the light on the falls at sunset is the richest

Your equipment needs will be dictated by the vantage point you choose to photograph from. From the north side of the valley, a 150mm lens will fill the frame with a 35mm camera. From the south side of the valley, it is a 300mm lens on a 35mm camera.

As for time of day, it can be beautiful all day, with the backlight becoming more pronounced around 3 pm. The peak color happens between 5 and 5:45 pm.

Lenny Eiger
12-Feb-2010, 09:57
The conditions necessary for the "firefall" effect are:
As for time of day, it can be beautiful all day, with the backlight becoming more pronounced around 3 pm. The peak color happens between 5 and 5:45 pm.

Keith, Hi there. I think we have a different idea of what photography is. A shot that a million others have taken has no intrinsic value, other than a technical exercise. When I think of Walker Evans, and those portraits in Georgia, I see something where Walker had to stretch, those people had to stretch, there is an emotional connection that is revealed by the photo, and anyone looking at it can see deeply into the life of those people. It reveals their humanity, and one's own. I could make the same analysis of almost every photographer in the History. For landscape, one can look to Paul Caponigro, for one example.

Where is the depth in a purely technical exercise? If we have anything to share with others that has anything to do with us, then it is likely a unique vision. That means we don't immediately pull off the road when we see a sign with a camera on it (I wish they'd take them all down). I mean, what's the point?

I was in Yosemite last summer, when we met at the gallery, and I took my camera to the river, certainly nowhere near the valley, or on the overpopulated trail to BridalVeil. I don't think I will return again, and if I do, it won't be with a camera.

Just my opinion...

Lenny

Drew Wiley
12-Feb-2010, 10:53
Lenny - I'm somewhat like you. Even though I have property only half an hour from
Yosemite, I probably haven't taken even five shots in the Valley itself in my life. But light is always changing, and things can be relatively quiet in the off season. Within the greater park boundaries there is terrain where you might walk for several days without seeing another person, but I'm not going to publicize where that is. At my
former dentist I'd try to distract myself by looking at the pictures on the wall - he even
put them on the ceiling for his patients! He had one of the usual AA posters of Grand
Teton behind the Snake River, with a cloud overhead - everyone knows it. But I'm
thinking to myself, I bet if there were thirty professional photographers standing within
a fifteen foot perimeter of AA at the time, not one of them would have gotten that
shot. They might have gotten something OK, but that particular image had to be
immaculately timed and precisely printed to get that kind of poetry into it. Of course,
most of us would go nuts if a number of people are hanging around us when we shoot.
And I don't like cliches eiter. I've been to the Grand Canyon three or four times and
never unpacked my camera. A nature photographer friend of mine begged me to drive
him to the "Wave" in Utah because I have a 4WD and he doesn't. I told him my philosophy is to study all the famous photography spots around, and then consistently head the opposite direction!

Preston
12-Feb-2010, 11:05
"I told him my philosophy is to study all the famous photography spots around, and then consistently head the opposite direction!

Classic, Drew!

--Preston

tgtaylor
12-Feb-2010, 11:07
Keith, Hi there. I think we have a different idea of what photography is. A shot that a million others have taken has no intrinsic value, other than a technical exercise. When I think of Walker Evans, and those portraits in Georgia, I see something where Walker had to stretch, those people had to stretch, there is an emotional connection that is revealed by the photo, and anyone looking at it can see deeply into the life of those people. It reveals their humanity, and one's own. I could make the same analysis of almost every photographer in the History. For landscape, one can look to Paul Caponigro, for one example.

Where is the depth in a purely technical exercise? If we have anything to share with others that has anything to do with us, then it is likely a unique vision. That means we don't immediately pull off the road when we see a sign with a camera on it (I wish they'd take them all down). I mean, what's the point?
Lenny

Everything has been shot to death. Especially if it's on on near a road! What's the point you ask? You already answered it:
"If we have anything to share with others that has anything to do with us, then it is likely a unique vision."

I think it was Edward Weston who said "I can make a photograph looking down at my feet."

Drew Wiley
12-Feb-2010, 11:34
Yes, some things have been shot to death. But that's why I made that AA comment.
In my own case, last week I printed an 8x10 neg of a famous waterfall right off the
road in the Columbia Gorge. It's near my in-laws place, so I kept driving past it for
several days studying the light and noting the time of day crowds weren't around.
I set up practically under the fall and wrapped my camera in Goretex and kept the lens
cap on. I had about two second to pull of the cap, take one exposure, and then everything would be soaked. But I did it. After that, the lens had to go into a dessication chamber for two weeks. Yet even though tens of thousands of shots have
no doubt been taken of that particular waterfall, many by noted photographers, I am
quite certain none are like mine. I got a classic, I believe; but that's largely contingent
on how it's printed too. My own Horsetail Falls incident was quite a bit more harrowing.
I was directly underneath it when completely frozen, and huge chunks of ice were
flaking off and basically gliding and crashing. I had dragged my Sinar up there with an
ice axe. But then the wind stilled, and a slab of ice about thirty feet wide landed about
fifteen feet away. So I got the hell out of there and never did get the shot!

Brad Rippe
12-Feb-2010, 12:20
I can see the points Lenny and Drew are making about over-photographing scenes such as Horsetail Falls. However, while I think its important to encourage each other on this forum to try to find their own unique vision, it can be just as valuable photographing known scenes to help us understand the photographic difficulties of those who have gone before us. Many on this forum are here to gain insights and ideas and I think it could make someone proud to have their own version of Horsetail Falls, El Cap or Half Dome.

I think Keiths knowledge about Yosemite, and his willingness to share it with us, is very open minded and generous. If one wants to make photographs of remote hidden places, or photographs of iconic Yosemite waterfalls, I would like to see all of them because it helps me find and expand my personal vision. Its also very interesting to see different interpretations of the same subject.

If you haven't seen the book "First Light" it has photographs by Keith and 4 other photographers of Yosemite, some known places, some not. There is a photo done by Keith that I think is one of the most amazing images I have seen in awhile. Its taken by moonlight of a river (Merced?) with mist rising. It reminds me of an impressionist painting. Great job Keith!
-Brad

Lenny Eiger
12-Feb-2010, 12:54
it can be just as valuable photographing known scenes

A technical exercise can be useful but it is not equal to doing art. This is a conversation about what Photography is. Personally, I value photographs where the photographer has "understood" something. There is a beautiful thing that happens on occasion, when a viewer sees a photograph and "recognizes" something. It may be a kind of light, or something they know but haven't noticed. The instant they do, they realize that all humans know this. Like one of those energy waves in a Star Trek episode, it immediately binds all of us together.

This doesn't happen when one is copying work. I say it should not be a source of pride that I can take a photo (knowingly) of something anyone has taken. this is plagiarism. You can be proud of technical accomplishments, but it isn't something to put on your wall.

Like some others here, I have been doing this a long time. I can knock off perfect exposures one after another (without polaroids). They will all be well composed and speak to something. Some are successful and clearly some are not. The difference is going to be whether I have added anything to the conversation, whether there was any wisdom in there to share.

A long time ago, on a trip to Peru, while driving in a remote area, I came across a gallows. Hanging there, dead, was a dog. I got my camera out, excited. A photograph like that could have made me famous. Then I put my camera back in the car. I decided it wasn't what I wanted to talk about. it would add nothing to our humanity. A journalist might have done differently, and that's fine. It just isn't what I want to share with the rest of us.

If all we do are technical exercises, then it is all a waste of time. When do we stop testing and actually say something?

I have nothing bad to say about Keith, he is a fine photographer. I just think the workshops they offer at the AA gallery about how to take a specific photograph are missing the point entirely. I think especially with all the additional cameras on the market, its essential that artists know what it is they are communicating, and are not only aware but deliberate with their message.


Lenny

Vaughn
12-Feb-2010, 13:47
I, too, understand the points being made by Lenny and Drew, though for myself, I disagree -- except if the photographer has failed to put part of him/herself into the process.

I have put myself into harm's way to get an image, and have used vantage points that may have never been done before. But all of that means zip if the image and the resulting print can not stand on its own.

And its cool if people decide to avoid those over-photographed areas, such as Yosemite Valley or Pt Lobos. But BRAVO! to the photographer who goes to such places and pulls out of it an image that speaks of the sense of Place and of the photographer -- for they have risen up to the challenge and have not depended an area's uniqueness or the lack of general knowledge of a place to carry the image. I feel the same about images of unusual atmospheric conditions -- clearing storms, rainbows, et al.

Greg Miller
12-Feb-2010, 13:47
A technical exercise can be useful but it is not equal to doing art. This is a conversation about what Photography is. Personally, I value photographs where the photographer has "understood" something. There is a beautiful thing that happens on occasion, when a viewer sees a photograph and "recognizes" something. It may be a kind of light, or something they know but haven't noticed. The instant they do, they realize that all humans know this. Like one of those energy waves in a Star Trek episode, it immediately binds all of us together.

This doesn't happen when one is copying work. I say it should not be a source of pride that I can take a photo (knowingly) of something anyone has taken. this is plagiarism. You can be proud of technical accomplishments, but it isn't something to put on your wall.

Like some others here, I have been doing this a long time. I can knock off perfect exposures one after another (without polaroids). They will all be well composed and speak to something. Some are successful and clearly some are not. The difference is going to be whether I have added anything to the conversation, whether there was any wisdom in there to share.

A long time ago, on a trip to Peru, while driving in a remote area, I came across a gallows. Hanging there, dead, was a dog. I got my camera out, excited. A photograph like that could have made me famous. Then I put my camera back in the car. I decided it wasn't what I wanted to talk about. it would add nothing to our humanity. A journalist might have done differently, and that's fine. It just isn't what I want to share with the rest of us.

If all we do are technical exercises, then it is all a waste of time. When do we stop testing and actually say something?

I have nothing bad to say about Keith, he is a fine photographer. I just think the workshops they offer at the AA gallery about how to take a specific photograph are missing the point entirely. I think especially with all the additional cameras on the market, its essential that artists know what it is they are communicating, and are not only aware but deliberate with their message.


Lenny

Isn't it fair to say that there are workshops targeted for a variety of skill levels and a variety of interests? If every workshop was for a highly skilled photographers trying to create a high level artistic photograph, that would leave a huge void. There evidently a market for people wanting to take these types of photos. Some people are happy with that and have no aspirations beyond that. Seems like that is harmless enough.

Besides, musicians (even, and perhaps especially, the most accomplished) do endless technical drills, which allow them them to play more musically. Technical exercises have a valid place on the learning curve.

Lenny Eiger
12-Feb-2010, 14:31
Isn't it fair to say that there are workshops targeted for a variety of skill levels and a variety of interests? If every workshop was for a highly skilled photographers trying to create a high level artistic photograph, that would leave a huge void

I don't have any issue with this. I have decades of experience teaching, to all levels. The important thing to a youngster or newbie is to give them a idea what photography is all about and to give them a sense of what's possible - in addition to teaching them to develop film or to use curves in Photoshop.


There evidently a market for people wanting to take these types of photos. Some people are happy with that and have no aspirations beyond that. Seems like that is harmless enough.
There is also a market for the garbage products in WalMart. Doesn't mean it's harmless, or that we should buy products there. Further, do lousy posters hurt artists? I think they do.... And why would anyone want to support people with no aspirations?



Besides, musicians (even, and perhaps especially, the most accomplished) do endless technical drills, which allow them them to play more musically. Technical exercises have a valid place on the learning curve.

Of course they do. That doesn't mean that the technical exercise should be displayed as a finished product. You might go to a museum to paint a copy of a famous painting - art students do all the time. But they don't try and sell that piece to a gallery as their own.

The goal of teaching has to be to lead someone towards something that has something to it.

Lenny

Brad Rippe
12-Feb-2010, 15:20
Lenny,
Do you think the most inspirational photograph of Horsetail Falls has already been made and therefore all of us should put our cameras away and no one should attempt to photograph it further? Do you think the most incredible atmospheric light has already happened and the lichen stained granite walls have become so static that any future photograph of Horsetail Falls is merely a technical exercise?

Many of us on this forum are teachers. I used to teach in my local elementary schools, and I've learned a lot from your posts on digital stuff. Yosemite teaches us in countless ways; everything always changes. Think of the ice falling while Drew was out there, scary. Think of your first time with a view camera in the mountains, scary. (For me it was!)
These spectacular places will always be teaching us: about light, storms, water, unimaginably huge granite walls, and what inspires us to unpack our view cameras and make an image. We can't possibly have been taught all the lessons Horsetail Falls has yet to teach.

-Brad

Greg Miller
12-Feb-2010, 16:12
I don't have any issue with this. I have decades of experience teaching, to all levels. The important thing to a youngster or newbie is to give them a idea what photography is all about and to give them a sense of what's possible - in addition to teaching them to develop film or to use curves in Photoshop.

There is also a market for the garbage products in WalMart. Doesn't mean it's harmless, or that we should buy products there. Further, do lousy posters hurt artists? I think they do.... And why would anyone want to support people with no aspirations?



Of course they do. That doesn't mean that the technical exercise should be displayed as a finished product. You might go to a museum to paint a copy of a famous painting - art students do all the time. But they don't try and sell that piece to a gallery as their own.

The goal of teaching has to be to lead someone towards something that has something to it.

Lenny

Wow. That strikes me as very cynical to equate workshops in Yosemite to crap Walmart wall art and selling copycat art to galleries.

My bet is that (almost) all of the workshop participants are excited about photography and the possibility of replicating a photo already made by a photographer that they adore and respect. While that has zero appeal to me personally, I find it hard to find any harm in it either. While creating another copy of Horsetail Falls on fire may not serve the art world very well, many of the participants will walk away with knowledge that furthers their own art. I find it difficult to believe that any significant number of them are participating with the intent of selling crap/copy art to Walmart or galleries (and even if so I don;t see that stealing any sales from high end galleries (totally different customer base on many different levels).

I personally find none of that threatening to my own place on the photography world, whatever that may or may not be. I think the worst case scenario is some of the participants will find that they wasted their money but will walk away that much wiser.

Drew Wiley
12-Feb-2010, 16:24
Vaugn - I personally have made a number of prints of Pt Lobos quite unlike anything else I've ever seen anyone else do - and it's not because I did anything wierd like using a cracked lens or some bizaare PS tweak. I do like quiet, so these forays were mainly made on rainy winter days, but not always. Of course, the alternative to Pt Lobos is Salt Point, where I've also made a number of images which probably wouldn't be confused with those of anyone else either. It's all about personal vision. Staying away from the popular areas or crowded areas is just my way of feeling sane. I believe I could take equally good photos in a crowded downtown environment, if I weren't constantly worried about my equipment being tripped over, and if I didn't really need the relaxation of frequently being out on the hills or coast or whatever. There's a major part of my work the public has no knowledge of, which I might want to exhibit someday, almost my alter-ego, so to speak. I hate to prostitute these images on the web, and almost regret putting any images up. Looking at a real print nose-to-nose is a whole different level of experience.

Lenny Eiger
12-Feb-2010, 16:53
Lenny,
Do you think the most inspirational photograph of Horsetail Falls has already been made and therefore all of us should put our cameras away and no one should attempt to photograph it further? Do you think the most incredible atmospheric light has already happened and the lichen stained granite walls have become so static that any future photograph of Horsetail Falls is merely a technical exercise?


Yes, I do. There are always local details that can be of interest, but framing the whole thing in the same way is done in my opinion. I wouldn't do a shot of White House Ruin in Canyon de Chelley either. I wouldn't shoot peppers in the same way Weston did. Other vegetables are fair game, I suppose, or a different arrangement of peppers.

I am not partial to the "spectacular" style of landscape. I don't consider sunset shots art, generally, although I suppose it isn't impossible. I find them very commercial. There are not enough people who study History to see what has gone before and this is the result. Pretty colors do not make an image.



Many of us on this forum are teachers. I used to teach in my local elementary schools, and I've learned a lot from your posts on digital stuff.

Of course they are, and thank you.



Yosemite teaches us in countless ways; everything always changes. Think of the ice falling while Drew was out there, scary. Think of your first time with a view camera in the mountains, scary. (For me it was!)
These spectacular places will always be teaching us: about light, storms, water, unimaginably huge granite walls, and what inspires us to unpack our view cameras and make an image. We can't possibly have been taught all the lessons Horsetail Falls has yet to teach.
-Brad

You are obviously deeply connected to the natural world. This is a quality to be admired; always. We share some of the same interests in that regard. These days, I am interested in smaller things and images that are authentic. I like both the process and the result of slowing down enough to connect to a tree before I photograph it. Or anything else...

Lenny

Lenny Eiger
12-Feb-2010, 17:13
Wow. That strikes me as very cynical to equate workshops in Yosemite to crap Walmart wall art and selling copycat art to galleries.


Greg, That's a cheap shot. I have many friends that teach there, even some whose work I like. Some of their workshops are great. I don't like the idea of showing people how to take a particular picture, especially the same one done a thousand times, it seems ridiculous to me. That's just one of the workshops over there, some of which are excellent.



I personally find none of that threatening to my own place on the photography world, whatever that may or may not be. I think the worst case scenario is some of the participants will find that they wasted their money but will walk away that much wiser.

I'm not threatened. I don't consider that I have a place in the photography world, I have nothing to lose. I think the students are shortchanged in that one class. They would be better off looking at some slides of Dorothea Lange's work. Maybe Lewis Hine. Perhaps some Muybridge or Carleton Watkins and discussing what made them special, how they approached things.

A long time ago I questioned a mentor of mine about where I was - was I any good, was I great, was I good for a graduating student. I was trying to get my bearings. He said that I had excellent skills, technically and aesthetically. He then added - "and if you ever become half a human being, you might have something."

It's not about a superb color on a special day - that's just about making postcards. It's about our humanity, and our relationship to our world. Do we come to this place with respect and honoring, or are we here to steal something, or to make something we can sell? Do we acknowledge that we are part of it? What is this really all about?

Photography is about relationship, that's what shows through in someone's images. That's what viewers see.

Lenny

Greg Miller
12-Feb-2010, 19:57
Greg, That's a cheap shot. I have many friends that teach there, even some whose work I like. Some of their workshops are great. I don't like the idea of showing people how to take a particular picture, especially the same one done a thousand times, it seems ridiculous to me. That's just one of the workshops over there, some of which are excellent.



I'm not threatened. I don't consider that I have a place in the photography world, I have nothing to lose. I think the students are shortchanged in that one class. They would be better off looking at some slides of Dorothea Lange's work. Maybe Lewis Hine. Perhaps some Muybridge or Carleton Watkins and discussing what made them special, how they approached things.

A long time ago I questioned a mentor of mine about where I was - was I any good, was I great, was I good for a graduating student. I was trying to get my bearings. He said that I had excellent skills, technically and aesthetically. He then added - "and if you ever become half a human being, you might have something."

It's not about a superb color on a special day - that's just about making postcards. It's about our humanity, and our relationship to our world. Do we come to this place with respect and honoring, or are we here to steal something, or to make something we can sell? Do we acknowledge that we are part of it? What is this really all about?

Photography is about relationship, that's what shows through in someone's images. That's what viewers see.

Lenny

I apologize if you think this was a cheap shot. It was not intended to be. I gave an honest reaction to your comments, which somehow brought into play cheap Walmart art and selling copy art to galleries.

I just thought/think that it is quite stretch and pretty obtuse to go from Horsetail Falls workshops to those levels. Probably over 99% of the people attend that workshop because they think it is a cool phenomenon and makes a for a cool photo (from their perspective). They probably want a cool shot to show off to their local camera club or neighbors. Many probably fantasize about being a top artistic photographer. But I doubt very many of them are going to walk away thinking they are making serious groundbreaking art or sell something to Walmart.

There's nothing wrong with offering this type of workshop because there are all kinds of interests in photography. Everybody who enjoys photography doesn't have to as serious about creating grounbreaking imagry. There's room for all of them, and there are other workshops for those who want to extend their artistry.

Keith S. Walklet
12-Feb-2010, 22:54
Lenny,

I am trying to figure out how, after my first post, that you might feel I am offering a workshop specifically to photograph Horsetail Fall. My class for the AAG is called Winter Light for a reason. It is about working with light in Yosemite (and elsewhere using the same concepts).

Since my later post offering a clinical recipe of how one might see the fall in its backlit neon phase seems to have sent the discussion careening off in another direction, I'll paraphrase my original post here in hopes of getting it headed back in a more positive and productive direction:


It has been exciting seeing, sharing and photographing Horsetail through the years and I sincerely feel everyone should see it, just not all at once. ;-)

The crowds that gather now each evening are getting scary. Two years ago, a rescue on the Yosemite Falls trail occupied the park service who would otherwise have been out directing traffic and issuing parking citations. Northside Drive was closed, there were three foot walls of snow on both sides of Southside Drive and only half a dozen parking spots. There were probably 300 people gathered on the shoulders of the road, many were ramming their cars head-on into the snowbanks in attempts to park, making it nearly impossible for vehicles to pass in either direction.

So, while I do enjoy seeing people stopped dead in their tracks, transfixed by its beauty, fortunately there are lots of other less accessible spots where it is still possible to have the wind be the soundtrack.

I'll be in the park for two weeks teaching beginning the 10th, with Horsetail one stop of many, many that make the park so wonderful in the winter. We're a pretty busy bunch, running non-stop from 6am to 9 pm, so I doubt I'd have a chance to see anyone. But, happy hunting.

There is approximately a ten day window each year in which conditions for the saturated color occur. Roughly from around the 11th to the 21st. Each person seems to have their own perspective on what constitutes the optimum days, depending on whether the cliff behind the fall is in shadow or not, whether the color is most saturated the full length of the fall, etc.

That is not to say it isn't beautiful other times of day besides sunset. AA photographed it "El Capitan Fall" and William Neill has a wonderful image that was featured in Communication Arts magazine taken earlier in the day when the water was silvery against a deep blue sky.

And while Galen's image is definitive of the neon orange moments, my favorite has no color at all. Mike Osborne (Oz) has a stunning windblown version of the fall that more than any other I have seen, resembles its namesake. Oz's version was taken earlier in the day in a wet year when the water volume was significant and is wonderful, pale "horsetail." It is in his book, "Granite Water and Light: Waterfalls of Yosemite Valley."

So, without sounding too negative, I think it is pretty clear that I prefer to experience moments of inspiration on a more personal level than with hundreds of people jockeying for parking places. I think it is also pretty clear that I appreciate other interpretations of the fall than the neon orange phase that was the initial focus of this thread.

I don't deny there is an interest from my students to make an image of a neon orange Horsetail, (or the same interest from the general photographic community for that matter). Neither would I deny that the timing of the classes doesn't take the potential for the neon orange phase into account. But, I seriously doubt you'd find a single student who ever took a class from me state that my classes are Horsetail Fall workshops.

For my classes, we try to accomplish a satisfactory record of Horsetail as quickly as possible so that the students can focus on broader concepts. My own appreciation for its beauty came from studying it carefully during the fourteen years I lived in Yosemite Valley. It is a genuine appreciation of its uniqueness in nature and the amazing convergence of conditions necessary for the effect to occur.

I love to see my students jazzed by something magical like Horsetail, but much more, I'd rather they take home practical knowledge of how to work in winter conditions and how to recognize and anticipate the contributing factors to the Horsetail effect in other places. Armed with that knowledge they can express their own personal vision however they choose where ever they might be. Is there something I've missed?

Vaughn
12-Feb-2010, 23:19
Is there something I've missed?

Yeah, is Degnan’s open for pizza? ;)

Keith S. Walklet
12-Feb-2010, 23:47
Maybe when you get here! ;-)

BTW, Brad, thanks for the kind words. I believe you are referring to a moonlit image of Mt. Ansel Adams on a foggy night.

OT, it is amazing to see the impact of the last set of storms on the valley. In all my years here, I've never seen so much damage to the oaks. Countless limbs down, some entire trees gone, lots of new views... and a major limb of the elm in Cooks Meadow collapsed. No constant like change.

Drew Wiley
12-Feb-2010, 23:58
Yikes Keith - I'm already dreading finding any more trees down tomorrow. One of my saddest losses was when a huge oak limb collapsed containing a golden eagle
nest. Apparently they use the same nest for decades if not multiple generations.
Since that went down, the eagles haven't returned.

Lenny Eiger
13-Feb-2010, 15:01
Lenny,
I am trying to figure out how, after my first post, that you might feel I am offering a workshop specifically to photograph Horsetail Fall. My class for the AAG is called Winter Light for a reason. It is about working with light in Yosemite (and elsewhere using the same concepts).
--snip
Is there something I've missed?

Keith,
First of all, I enjoyed meeting you last summer at the gallery. I also enjoyed seeing your photos up on the wall, there were a couple I thought were truly terrific. I was treated warmly, and with respect, which was mutual. We talked about scanning and the results you were getting. You looked at some of my b&w work. I have no reason to cast aspersions at you, your class, the AAG or your desire to give people tools to work with. There plenty of folks who offer "tools" classes (including myself) and I have no problem with any of them - as long as they are identified as such and that the people don't try and tell me that the test print of the test neg, while it may be artfully done, is art. For example, I don't think any of us would argue that a print of Leigh Perry's scan neg is a work of art...

For me, this is about genre, and ultimately the purpose, or philosophy behind what we do in photography. I certainly want to see people get to a level of technical expertise, but I also want to see them get to a level of aesthetic expertise. Light, or the understanding of light is one component. Frederick Evans used light in compositional form. These are tools, part of what's going on.

Many of the great photographers went deeper and expressed something about life, about the nobility of the human spirit or about some aspect of the natural world. I look for those insights when I look at a photograph.

I am not satisfied with postcards, or a commercial image, no matter how well it is done. I think its incumbent upon teachers in general to discuss the broader context that's possible. Great images are layered, like a great stew, with many meanings. It isn't just about what something looks like, no matter how spectacular. It's more about communicating what something feels like. That takes being present, and being connected. When that comes thru, the amount of rose color in the alpenglow usually matters little.

Lenny

Keith S. Walklet
13-Feb-2010, 22:10
Likewise, I enjoyed meeting you last summer and viewing your work.

I think we're on the same page. We might go about the educational process differently, but we're similarly motivated. I think all of my books and a decade heading up interpretive services for Curry Co. and YCS in Yosemite underscore my appreciation for the natural world and its influence on the human spirit.

In my case, I liken learning the photographic process to that of learning any language. Initially we learn a few essential words. Later we string them together into simple sentences, and eventually, hopefully, we become conversant. As artists, though, we aspire to be poetic. To achieve that we must be fluent in the language and all its nuance.

My class structure is a mix of indoor sessions followed by time in the field. The indoor sessions provide the vocabulary that the students can draw on in the field. That indoor/outdoor cycle builds through the week and is one reason I prefer to teach five day classes instead of two-day weekend sessions or shorter, and also is the reason that any single-day classes I offer usually feature the indoor portion of my longer classes.

I am grateful to the instructors that inspired me when I first became interested in photography for their ability to communicate complex concepts in easily digested form, and hope that somehow I am able to do the same.

mandoman7
16-Feb-2010, 00:43
Most great painters spent a period of time mimicking the work of their predecessors. Its an integral part of learning a craft. Its possible to be developing your own vocabulary while walking in the footsteps of a past master. Initially a close replication is the discipline, later the challenge becomes one of finding your own voice. Van Gogh spent a lot of time copying earlier painters, not always with success. After a period of time, those with artiistic temperaments will start responding to a need to say things in their own way.

I don't see a problem with learning what Ansel was up to by copying his location and materials. Only a certain percentage will go on to produce work that is not derivative, but so be it. That's why good, original work is special.

Lenny Eiger
16-Feb-2010, 10:03
don't see a problem with learning what Ansel was up to by copying his location and materials. Only a certain percentage will go on to produce work that is not derivative, but so be it. That's why good, original work is special.

John, I'm in general agreement with you - and with Keith. I am suggesting that aesthetics get taken one step more seriously, that's all. Especially here on the West Coast where there aren't as many traditions that folks adhere to. In Carmel, there is the Weston Gallery with some very fine stuff in it and Photography West as well. Of course none of us will like it all, including me, but there there is a lot of great work in there. Then down the street from there - there is another gallery with very large chromira prints of splashy, color water scenes. The colors are pretty, to be sure, but the work appears to stop there. We are just amazed at what things look like. It's spectacular. But it just talks about what things look like, there is no other content.

This type of photography has grown and grown. Kodak, Nikon and Canon push it like crazy. This week, there is a nature photographer's convention in Reno. It's a very commercial look. A nature photography magazine called Rodney Lough, the next Ansel Adams. I think most of here would disagree. Ansel could easily put his work next to Dorothea Lange and Walker Evans, but I don't think Rodney's would stand up. (No offense to him personally.)

Why do I care? Recently, I was introduced to post-modernism. I have been reading up on it, in between bouts of throwing up. The post-modernists have taken over the museums and galleries, and everything that has gone before, and a lot of our work, is marginalized. It isn't just because of the economy that we have been selling less. The answer to why I care is that the folks in charge don't distinguish between Carleton Watkins and Rodney Lough - or Galen Rowell - or Art Wolfe. It's all just "sappy, over-romanticized landscape" to them. I say there is a difference, and there ought to be a place for serious artists within the landscape tradition, as there always has been. But my opinion doesn't carry much weight, in fact it carries none.

Now for those of you who take those folks as your photographic heroes, I see no conflict. If that's the kind of work you want to do, that's fine. However, when one takes a class or workshop, or takes photography seriously and attempts to make art, then the conversation of aesthetics and more importantly, emotional content, needs to come into play. People need to be offered an opportunity to see what is past the simply what something looks like, or the superb light, or delicate color of the dawn, and to add to it, the context of relationship, an ability to examine and discuss things on an emotional and intellectual level, and include all the other things that the history has to teach us.

That's my 2 cents. (Ok, maybe it was a dollar) ;-)

Lenny

Drew Wiley
16-Feb-2010, 11:10
Lenny - I largely agree with your viewpoint. But I'd imagine that a National Park workshop inherently attracts people who want to be introduced to the "sights" and
how to improve their skills in handling such themes. It's a little different from one of us
just going out and doing our thing. While I can understand the place of scenic and
wildlife photographers in the overall scheme of things, virtually no one is more repulsed
by the notion that some of this stuff is art than myself. But I'm equally repulsed by some of the pretentious things museums do just to sell tickets, or the pandering which
aspiring "artistes" give to this nonsense. Frankly, I don't like to play by anyone else's rules. Would rather support myself in a wholly different manner and make exactly the
prints I want to. If that's the cost of integrity, so be it. Maybe I'll get lucky and this
will provide me with some serious income when I'm old and need it most. Maybe not.
But I'd hate both myself and photography itself if it were any other way. The problem
with a lot of people potentially entering the field is that they don't have good role
models. They think that all this sterotypical sugar-coated commercialized schlok is what nature is supposed to look like. This is especially the case with this instant-everything generation. But when some of these young folks travel with me and take a peek through the groundglass itself, they get a revelation.

Lenny Eiger
16-Feb-2010, 11:27
If that's the cost of integrity, so be it.


I'm with you on this one...



They think that all this sterotypical sugar-coated commercialized schlok is what nature is supposed to look like. This is especially the case with this instant-everything generation. But when some of these young folks travel with me and take a peek through the groundglass itself, they get a revelation.

My comment about Walmart (Voldemart) is more specifically this: if all you ever see is sugar-coated commercialized shlock, why would one imagine there is anything else, especially if one never went to school for photography, etc. How do we, as a group of photographers who are more serious, combat this?

While it's laudable that young folks have ground-glass revelations in your class (I think it's great, actually), consider that without galleries and museums educating the public appropriately, our voices are removed, with the exception of the few folks who may visit us or take a workshop with us. It presents a scary future. I'm concerned.

Lenny

P.S. I realize that once again I am discussing a subject that is not the OP's concern. It is a concern to me. However, if someone wants to move this or suggest we stop on this thread entirely, I'm ok with it. I don't want to be rude....

mandoman7
16-Feb-2010, 11:42
Looking at things like museums and galleries as absolutes, or representative of what's happening with public tastes or artistict movements will be an endlessly frustrating excercise. In a museum, what's truly being represented is the work of a board that is guided by an academic, essentially. That doesn't mean that nothing good will ever get in, just that whatever does get shown must have a serious hype behind it. Often times its the ability of the artist to put together a schpiel more than the content of the work, that provides the necessary fodder.

You can throw yourself in the way of the train if you want to, I guess, but public appreciation of art will always be riding a line between lunacy and valid appreciation. I say ignore the crowds and do your thing as best you can. Try to have faith in the idea that, if you are able to tap in to some universal truths with your vision, you will find an audience. Otherwise, you go to work for a corporation and wind up hating yourself (that's another topic actually) ;) .

Drew Wiley
16-Feb-2010, 11:45
Well, I'm almost at an impasse Lenny. My print sales come from a small but loyal crowd.
Never sold a print to a tourist in my life. Got tired of doing the usual gallery thing a long time ago, though it was a useful been-there/done-that experience. Same with
museum-backed showings. Now it's a question of energy and whether or not me and
the folks who want to partner with me have the momentum for another potentially arduous building project. Cash flow is a little tight due to the recession, and the ability to break even quickly not real good at the moment. But having my own rendition of a gallery would give me control over the content. And I would indeed break a few of the stereotypes. But there are more important things in life, as well as many more pressing chores. And I'm glad just to be shooting and printing.

tgtaylor
16-Feb-2010, 12:35
Here's two work prints of Horsetail that I did last night from last years negatives. Color certainly poses a problem. How do you like your sky: blue, not so blue, grey...etc. How do you like your rock: brown, black bown, blue brown...etc., What about the apen glow: rosey, yellow...etc.

Drew Wiley
16-Feb-2010, 13:28
What amazes me is just how much people stereotype beauty. As is my custom, I take
back roads back down the mtn till I hit the valley floor. The light and color in the foothill country this time of year are unbelievable. When I finally reach a regular hwy there are all kinds of people madly speeding back from Yosemite. I find a turnout by a creek, totally blank out all the background traffic noise, and set up the 8x10 for awhile.
Finally a 35mm photographer sees me with my view camera and pulls over at the next
turnout down and starts shooting. Probably wouldn't have done it unless he had seen
me there. Typical. Nobody looks; they just copy. And frankly, I wish significant tracts
of the hill country could be protected from development, because the beauty there is
in my opinion often more spectacular than Yosemite itself. Now the govnr wants to
dam the last low elevation wilderness river in the range, which has incredible biota and
great beauty; but alas, due to sheer ruggedness, almost no one knows about it.

Greg Miller
16-Feb-2010, 14:58
The colors are pretty, to be sure, but the work appears to stop there. We are just amazed at what things look like. It's spectacular. But it just talks about what things look like, there is no other content.Lenny

One person's treasure is another person's junk. This is all highly subjective. Just because the work "appears to stop there" for you doesn't mean it does to anyone/everyone else. It just stops there for you based on your sensibilities, education, training, and exposure.

Who is to say that having splashy colors means it cannot have deeper meaning? Who is to say that a piece of work that causes deep emotion, but has few layers of meaning, for one person, is less important than a different piece of work that has more layers of meaning that causes deep emotion in the same, or some other, person? For every piece of work that one person deems to be a masterpiece, we can find an expert who considers it shallow. And many ground breaking artists produced work that nobody understood, and was considered junk, in their lifetimes.

I'm all for a learning process that challenges students to see in new and different ways. But people have very different learning styles, and learn at different paces. Aesthetics are so subjective that I really can't see the validity in mentioning to Keith that aesthetics should be taken one step more seriously. Perhaps some day you will take a different view on post-modernism. Perhaps not. None of us is the the sole arbiter of what is aesthetically good or bad, and aesthetics are not static, and I think that is a all good thing. I don't know Keith, but I think Keith can decide for him self what is the appropriate approach to aesthetics in his own workshops. And you can do the same. And you both can be right.

Lenny Eiger
16-Feb-2010, 15:23
One person's treasure is another person's junk. This is all highly subjective. Just because the work "appears to stop there" for you doesn't mean it does to anyone/everyone else. It just stops there for you based on your sensibilities, education, training, and exposure.

I think you have to admit, however, that the people in Beaumont Newhall's History of Photography often belong in there. I may be moved more by Stieglitz than Bill Brandt, but there is style and substance in both. There is a reason that certain artists are considered significant in their field. I don't like every one of any photographer's work, and I personally like Weston much more than Adams, but they both made great contributions, and they deserve their place at the table. It isn't as arbitrary as you suggest.


Who is to say that having splashy colors means it cannot have deeper meaning?

My best work speaks of integrity, presence or intimacy. It takes a lot of work, and plenty of luck. I like talking about the big words. I don't care to talk about what a nice shade of blue that is. That said, sometimes color photography is wonderful, when the photographer, regardless of using color, has something to say, and there is no reason at all to suggest color work is not art.

Just talking about color is like focusing on what camera someone used, or what f-stop. It may be fun for us photographers, but it isn't particularly significant to the image.


w. And many ground breaking artists produced work that nobody understood, and was considered junk, in their lifetimes.

Sure, but you're simply dismissing what I'm say by trying to go the middle road. One can always point out both sides of the question. There is no absolute. The difference here is that I'm interested in a better world, where people communicate, and communicate real things, if we're lucky, genuine and deeper things. I think its essential. I know plenty of people who just think about the money, or their own needs. Doesn't keep me from trying.



I'm all for a learning process that challenges students to see in new and different ways. But people have very different learning styles, and learn at different paces. Aesthetics are so subjective that I really can't see the validity in mentioning to Keith that aesthetics should be taken one step more seriously. Perhaps some day you will take a different view on post-modernism. Perhaps not. None of us is the the sole arbiter of what is aesthetically good or bad, and aesthetics are not static, and I think that is a all good thing. I don't know Keith, but I think Keith can decide for him self what is the appropriate approach to aesthetics in his own workshops. And you can do the same. And you both can be right.

This is not about Keith, never was. Let me be clear about that. It is for me, about deliberateness. I am not imagining that I should be the sole arbiter of anything. However, people that don't study aesthetics - and what came before them - bop along like a log on a river, and don't control where they are going. Most often their works looks like other work they've seen. Where I used to live they had a saying - even the blind chicken gets some feed. That is true, but is it a way to live one's live, and to photograph? Not for me.

Lenny

Drew Wiley
16-Feb-2010, 17:16
Photography in the Natl Parks, just like the parks themselves, is for all the people, not
just the elite. I believe there's a long tradition of photo walks and so forth that keeps
this in mind. Can't put people down just because they want to see and photograph
certain famous sites or phenomena. But that's the whole other side of the coin to the kind of thing which annoys me, when allegedly skilled photographer make a cheap whore out of the natural world. They just keep the stereotypes coming and coming because they don't know how to look for anything else. And given a choice, people
will often respond to more sensitive images. Too bad they rarely have the choice.

tgtaylor
16-Feb-2010, 18:42
If you are going to shoot it this year, NOW is the time. I bet Keith and his class got some memorable photos. Rain moves back in on Friday.

tgtaylor
16-Feb-2010, 18:50
I just got an idea: A green face for St. Paddy's Day! Imagine seeing that in your favorite Irish pub on St. Paddy's Day.

dsphotog
16-Feb-2010, 19:49
No problem, Tom.
Just get a group to pour their green beer from El Cap.....
Oh no, better p'shop it, instead of wasting beer.

Drew Wiley
16-Feb-2010, 19:58
El Cap doesn't pour beer but vino. Remember when Warren Harding made the claim
of climbing on only a pint of water a day? Well, it was true, sort of. After Royal Robbins chopped Warren's bolt line up the dawn wall, it remained unclimbed for about two decades until my nephew and his lunatic buddy reclimbed it. Took them almost a month, just like the first ascent. Halfway up, near an important ledge, they rediscovered, stuffed into a large crack, Warren's considerable wine collection, with many of the bottles still unopened!

JR Steel
16-Feb-2010, 20:17
My best work speaks of integrity, presence or intimacy. It takes a lot of work, and plenty of luck.
Lenny

I think this is an important discussion. What Lenny speaks of to me, I call visual literacy. I have been involved in photography for most of 40 years but it was not until I attended a workshop taught by a master photographer whose primary message was personal expression, did I start the journey toward truly rewarding work. As an example, this past weekend I stepped into a scene that I instantly recognized as exceptional. I was mesmerized by the quality of the light, the reflectance of various subjects, the relationships of forms, line, tones and the unity of content. It was not a famous location, just a back country road, up a no-name drainage in the Western foothills of the Southern Sierra. I was transported and had to concentrate on technique and breathing. In the end, I don't know if I'm capable of making a print that speaks clearly of the experience but I know I never had that depth of experience banging away brackets on Velvia or "chimping" at 20 version of a classic scene. I believe I could have easily missed understanding why I was so moved by great photographs and wished to personally attempt creating expressive work.

BTW, my teacher - Bruce Branbaum and his instructional booklet "The Art of Photography... an Approach to Personal Expression" is excellent.

tgtaylor
16-Feb-2010, 21:27
No problem, Tom. Just get a group to pour their green beer from El Cap.....Oh no, better p'shop it, instead of wasting beer.

Hi David. Actually I was thinking of dialing-up the magenta rather than wasting good green beer or photoshoping.


I think this is an important discussion. I have been involved in photography for most of 40 years but it was not until I attended a workshop taught by a master photographer.

One day, back during my army days, when I was on guard duty looking over a fantastically beautiful landscape, I casually remarked to my mates that this was a beautiful country. I got a stream of derisive comments in reply (which I understood aswe were not on a luxury assignment) but it was truly beautiful to me.

dsphotog
16-Feb-2010, 21:54
[QUOTE=tgtaylor;559866]Hi David. Actually I was thinking of dialing-up the magenta rather than wasting good green beer or photoshoping.
Great stuff Tom!
Yes, split filtration. Perhaps 2 exposures on the paper, one while covering the sky, filtered to enhance the falls and wall.
And one filtered to keep the sky blue.
As Ansel said, "The print is the performance."

tgtaylor
16-Feb-2010, 22:01
[QUOTE=tgtaylor;559866]
As Ansel said, "The print is the performance."

Truer words were never spoken!

mandoman7
17-Feb-2010, 15:03
I think this is an important discussion. What Lenny speaks of to me, I call visual literacy. I have been involved in photography for most of 40 years but it was not until I attended a workshop taught by a master photographer whose primary message was personal expression, did I start the journey toward truly rewarding work. As an example, this past weekend I stepped into a scene that I instantly recognized as exceptional. I was mesmerized by the quality of the light, the reflectance of various subjects, the relationships of forms, line, tones and the unity of content. It was not a famous location, just a back country road, up a no-name drainage in the Western foothills of the Southern Sierra. I was transported and had to concentrate on technique and breathing. In the end, I don't know if I'm capable of making a print that speaks clearly of the experience but I know I never had that depth of experience banging away brackets on Velvia or "chimping" at 20 version of a classic scene. I believe I could have easily missed understanding why I was so moved by great photographs and wished to personally attempt creating expressive work.

BTW, my teacher - Bruce Branbaum and his instructional booklet "The Art of Photography... an Approach to Personal Expression" is excellent.

Its possible that you are a unique student, JR.

Are we talking about wandering through our experiences while paying attention? This could apply to many things. Being there and in the moment is something that most people disregard in general. You see automated responses everywhere you go!

Sociologically speaking, however, patterns of behaviour serve useful functions by allowing people to save energy . Superficial greetings, etc.. Nobody really minds those cliches. Many people are living their lives as basically a series of cliches, or mimicked behaviour, not questioning a single presumption they've made all day.

I would contend that the ability to think outside of the box, to actually hear the bird chirping, is an innate characteristic that a certain small percentage of people have. And that no amount of scolding or face slapping can change the other types. :)

Lenny Eiger
17-Feb-2010, 15:28
Its possible that you are a unique student, JR.


Yes, very nice hearing from JR....



I would contend that the ability to think outside of the box, to actually hear the bird chirping, is an innate characteristic that a certain small percentage of people have. And that no amount of scolding or face slapping can change the other types. :)

Maybe. There are certain fewer and fewer people who are deeply connected to the natural world. There are certain people who deserve some slapping - some museum characters, etc. However, I would agree that slapping people never works.

I would say that some of the design characteristics in my current images can be traced all the way back to my first photographs. However, I was taught the important stuff. Or one could say that someone pointed out what was possible to me. I had to develop it. Without someone pointing it out, I would be taking more useless photos like I was doing then.

Read a book last year by Gladwell called Outliers. He debunks this American ideal that we all pull ourselves up by our bootstraps with our individualism. He points out that all of the recognizable folks in one field or another had opportunities presented to them. They met someone, lived next to a University with computer center (Bill Gates), etc. I recommend it....

As much as I'd like to think I had some innate knowledge, I remember getting to college for Photo 101 and finding out that I knew absolutely nothing. There is certainly something we are born with. How far it goes I couldn't say.

Lenny

mandoman7
17-Feb-2010, 16:59
Yes, very nice hearing from JR....

What... I'm not nice? ;)

... He points out that all of the recognizable folks in one field or another had opportunities presented to them. They met someone, lived next to a University with computer center (Bill Gates), etc. I recommend it....

I would tend to agree. There was a time when it seemed to me that the only people selling prints were Ansel's assistants, or other photogs who had a tie-in with someone notable. I see it a little differently now. Chance favors the prepared mind, as Ansel said.


I would say that some of the design characteristics in my current images can be traced all the way back to my first photographs.
Lenny
I've looked around and have not found any current work on your site, Lenny. Is it being shown anywhere?

JR Steel
17-Feb-2010, 17:38
Its possible that you are a unique student, JR. :)

Well, a student for sure and still pretty green with larger format. I know this has all digressed significantly form the OP's subject and that it's not about me but I thought some might be interested in a quick and dirty neg-scan of the image I described above. I think it illustrates that today photography for me is not about things but my reaction to the environment. Of course this is not the only approach to photography but I think it contains some fundamental validity.

Oak Grove 2
http://kpa.dunnnet.com/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/10131/oakgrove2.jpg

Lenny Eiger
17-Feb-2010, 17:49
What... I'm not nice? ;)

You are nice. I was just being nice... and trying to answer two posts at once...



I've looked around and have not found any current work on your site, Lenny. Is it being shown anywhere?

I'm almost there. I recategorized everything, but haven't fill things in yet. Haven't a little trouble making a living.... Went up to Oregon for Thanksgiving with another photographer for a week. Much fun.... I love my Canham 8x10!

Lenny

mandoman7
17-Feb-2010, 19:34
Well, a student for sure and still pretty green with larger format. I know this has all digressed significantly form the OP's subject and that it's not about me but I thought some might be interested in a quick and dirty neg-scan of the image I described above. I think it illustrates that today photography for me is not about things but my reaction to the environment. Of course this is not the only approach to photography but I think it contains some fundamental validity.

Oak Grove 2
http://kpa.dunnnet.com/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/10131/oakgrove2.jpg

That's a truly lovely image.
I hear what you're saying and know what you mean.

For me, there are times when I'm shooting and I know that the subject is not that exciting, but I'm getting a feeling or maybe there's something about the light. I'll shoot freely and give those times legitimacy. There are other times, too, though, when I have a feeling that the image may have broad appeal, but I know that its a bit cliche'd. The coastal sunset or whatever. Its all good, though.
Somewhere in my history I decided the dichotomy was OK, as long as I represented the subject honestly and without contrivance. A conduit, not an arbiter.

Keith S. Walklet
17-Feb-2010, 23:29
If you are going to shoot it this year, NOW is the time. I bet Keith and his class got some memorable photos. Rain moves back in on Friday.

You're right, Tom. The elements converged on Sunday evening, when half the class lingered beyond the workshop to improve upon their efforts from the first evening (Wednesday) when very little water was flowing. The string of warm days brought the falls to life, the sky to the west stayed clear and the last light of the day caught the windblown spray and seemingly transformed it into a spray of molten metal.

Monday and Tuesday, high haze to the west softened the intensity of the light. Still beautiful, though much more subtle.

This evening, the first night of the second class, we spent the last couple of hours of the day enjoying the light show as it grew more intense and the shadows lengthened to contrast with the falls. Lovely up until the last ten minutes of the day when western haze once again softened the light.

I found it interesting to note that of the students in the current class, only one had selected the class based on the opportunity to view Horsetail. He actually showed up a day early to try to capture the convergence on his own. As he was watching the light tonight, he commented that the previous night featured no color up until the last few minutes of the day, and suddenly the last rays of sunlight found a gap in the western sky and lit up the falls for less than sixty seconds. For him, it was a transformational experience.

For some locals, the appearance of the fall in the spring is part of the cycle of life (and light) in the valley akin to the return of the first redwing blackbird of spring. Regardless of whether artistic pundits view photographs of the scene as art, it is certainly a natural work of art.

I personally think that film (moving images) best captures the emotion of the gently waving veils of water against the shadowed cliff. To do so with a single frame is more challenging, but that doesn't keep me from trying when conditions are exceptional. William Neill, who has some of the finest images of the fall I've seen, was in the valley Tuesday and lingered for Horsetail.

So, to those of us who enjoy observing the phenomena, it doesn't hurt to return, revisit, remind ourselves of the earth's annual trip around the sun, the uncertainty of life, and the magic of the moment when the stars align, even if for just a brief moment.

When you stop looking, you stop seeing.

Vaughn
18-Feb-2010, 09:43
...When you stop looking, you stop seeing.

Wiser words rarely spoken...

tgtaylor
18-Feb-2010, 11:12
You're right... The string of warm days brought the falls to life, the sky to the west stayed clear and the last light of the day caught the windblown spray and seemingly transformed it into a spray of molten metal.


That's what I thought when I logged on to the parks website late in the afternoon and saw the beautiful apen glow on El Capitan. I knew it would be just as good on the other side :)

To all that may be following this thread, I would like to point out that it is perfectly possible to obtain a image that is fundamentally different from others photographing the very same scene - even at the same time and angle! Below is another work print I did last night from a negative that I made of Horsetail Falls last year. If you go on Michael Fry's website, for example, you'll see a similar view of the Falls but with a yellowish face. Mine is reddish and, last but not least, it was shot on film and the print was made in a traditional darkroom - a digital scanner or Photoshop was not employed at any stage in the images creation :)

Note: The yellow spot on the left is a reflection that the camera picked-up. It is not on the print itself.

Drew Wiley
18-Feb-2010, 11:56
A commuter brings in a copy of the Sacto Bee paper. Yesterday they published a fresh
photo of the fall from the rim with the explanation that conditions were pefect. And today there is a two-page spread about a Sacto nature photographer who makes his
living mainly from Yos or similar workshops named Gary Hart. Don't know anything about him except what's printed. Claims most of his students use DLSRS but he still tries to teach them to study and wait for the light rather than cooking things in PS.
Found that interesting.

Brad Rippe
18-Feb-2010, 12:11
Thanks for posting the photograph TG, I would like to see it in person sometime. As I read your original post I sense your excitement and enthusiasm to see this spectacular and fleeting phenomena. Plus its in Yosemite! It doesn't get much better.

I don't understand why this discussion has descended to a level where some claim to have superior personal vision only because they choose to photograph subjects that have not been photographed before. I hope we all realize the pedestals we think we may be standing on are imaginary; we are actually standing on the shoulders of those who have gone before us.

Good luck to all who are going to Horsetail Falls. I wish I could join you.

-Brad

Lenny Eiger
18-Feb-2010, 12:37
on't understand why this discussion has descended to a level where some claim to have superior personal vision only because they choose to photograph subjects that have not been photographed before. I hope we all realize the pedestals we think we may be standing on are imaginary; we are actually standing on the shoulders of those who have gone before us.
-Brad

Descended? I was actually trying to raise the level of conversation. You say that we are standing on the shoulders of those who have gone before. I agree 1000% That's my point. Study what has gone before, learn a little history.

There's no pedestal. There's only people who attempt to take inspiration from what went before and do something with something to it and people who don't. There's a lot more to photography than subtle color, or over-saturated color, whether you apply it in the darkroom or some digital means.

I think it's fine to go somewhere others have been and photograph. A particular place doesn't always reveal all at the first look. But taking the exact same picture doesn't make any sense to me - except as a technical exercise. A writer might as well copy Huck Finn and put his name on it. Ridiculous.

If you want to call yourself an artist it behooves one to study a little. Preferably photographers who had something real to offer.

Lenny

srbphoto
18-Feb-2010, 15:00
Finally a 35mm photographer sees me with my view camera and pulls over at the next
turnout down and starts shooting. Probably wouldn't have done it unless he had seen
me there.

Drew - That happens all the time on the Eastside (especially during fall colors). They see the 4x5 (in my case) , come to a screetching halt, get as close as they can to me, fire off a couple shots and take off. Always makes me chuckle. I guess the big camera makes me look like I know what I'm doin'.

tgtaylor
18-Feb-2010, 15:54
A little Heraclitus, anyone?

"You could not step twice into the same river; for other waters are ever flowing on to you."
---Heraclitus, On the Universe

"All is flux, nothing stays still."
---Heraclitus, from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers

Vaughn
13-Mar-2010, 14:17
A image of Horsetail Falls from 2008. Taken from the Merced River. I had not planned on it -- just happen to be there. I was surprised when several other photographers showed up.

Not exactly LF, but the camera had GG viewing. Taken with a 150mm lens.

Scan of the contact print -- on textured paper, so that might show a bit. Destined to be a pt/pd print someday.