PDA

View Full Version : Simplicity and the Silver Process



Merg Ross
15-Jan-2012, 22:40
Frank's query regarding a sheet film washer renewed my thoughts on how really simple the large format process can be. In reply, I commented that my negative washer for the past fifty-nine years is an inexpensive tank with a hole in the bottom. I still print my early negatives, some that passed through that washer in 1953, and can assure their archival worthiness, at least archival in my lifetime, which is all that matters for negatives. Prints are a different matter, and they have always received the currently accepted archival treatment. I periodically check with collections housing my work, and my early prints chosen by Beaumont Newhall for Eastman House in 1959 are reportedly in fine shape, as are subsequent purchases elsewhere.

My advice regarding the process of photography has been, "keep it simple". Simple in process, and also in choice of equipment. The latter is simply a case of choosing equipment capable of capturing the vision of the photographer. For many years I made my living at photography, most notably as an architectural photographer with a very fine list of clients. During that time, I was using several inexpensive Calumet view cameras of differing nomenclature. To complement them were the best lenses of the day, but not the most expensive Linhof or Sinar camera available; the latter would not have made a bit of difference to me while in the field, nor to the clients purchasing my work.

As this thread title implies, I am addressing the silver process. It is the only process that I know, so my advice of simplicity will be of little value to those seeking or using alternative methods for presenting their vision. However, if you are a novice in this niche, let me suggest placing the greatest emphasis on the finest lenses, film and paper. Developers will always be available by your own hand, either from existing formulae or experimentation.

Keep the process simple, and spend the bulk of your time making images. Have fun!

Daniel Stone
15-Jan-2012, 23:06
amen

Gem Singer
16-Jan-2012, 07:04
That's exactly what I am referring to when I tell folks that "photography is not rocket science".

Follow the principle of K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid!).

Thank's for the reminder, Merg.

Merg Ross
16-Jan-2012, 21:41
That's exactly what I am referring to when I tell folks that "photography is not rocket science".

Follow the principle of K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid!).

Thank's for the reminder, Merg.

Thank you Gem, I think we all need the reminder now and then. The process can be as simple as one wishes, and there is no "silver bullet".

I was thinking of you (and Sandy) this afternoon while souping new negatives in Pyrocat HD. They look good, the proof will be after printing in the morning tomorrow.

Best,
Merg

Jim Fitzgerald
16-Jan-2012, 21:59
Merg, It really is simple if you think about it. Learn your craft! Make it part of YOU! It really is simple if you keep it that way and do not over think things.

Henry Ambrose
16-Jan-2012, 22:28
I also love the "directness" of darkroom work and can't really add much to what Merge wrote.

David Karp
16-Jan-2012, 22:46
So simple that an 11-year old can do it, and continue to do it for year after year.

Thanks for the reminder Merg.

John Kasaian
17-Jan-2012, 17:33
I like working with the silver process. I think the enjoyment I derive from working within the medium is a genuine part of the finished print, perhaps unseen but a part of the print none the less.
The simplicity is something I find very attractive and that played a major factor in getting me interested in LF---there is less "stuff" to get in the way when shooting and making contact prints from 8x10 negatives compared to all the pricey gizmos I had or felt I needed to have (but didn't) when I was married to the Hasselblad system.

bob carnie
18-Jan-2012, 06:32
Yesterday I went into the darkroom at 4 in the morning , I am exposing a lot of film lately, using a 100 year old century camera and then solarizing two 8x10 sheets at a time, using a 60 year old point source light , some old 8x10 hangers and a few stainless steel tanks, all chemistry was mixed from scratch. With the music on, knowing probably no one in my neck of the woods was working I had great satisfaction of the simplicity of what we do to create images.


Merg, I am dying to ask you this.. Is it true that Brett Weston would print at night because he could open the doors and let the fresh air come into his house while listening music?

I seem to recall this story about him , and I always remember mental image of him printing and how I would someday like to live in the country , open the doors and print all night.

Merg Ross
18-Jan-2012, 09:22
Merg, I am dying to ask you this.. Is it true that Brett Weston would print at night because he could open the doors and let the fresh air come into his house while listening music?

Bob, it is true that Brett was always an early riser. When I first met him he was usually up by 4:00 am, and when at home, started work in the darkroom (after some very strong coffee).

Later, when he was living in Hawaii, he started getting up even earlier, often at 2:00am. So, his so-called night sessions were in fact early morning sessions. In this early darkness he did open the darkroom windows and door while printing.

The music was reserved for the main part of the house to not disturb the sleeping guests. He had a fine sound system, and Bach and Vivaldi were among his favorites.

Gem Singer
18-Jan-2012, 09:27
I remember reading a story, written by a close friend of Brett's. While living in Hawaii, far from the city lights, with no air conditioning, rather than work in a hot stuffy darkroom, he opened the windows, and printed by star light in the cool night air.

Come to think of it, Brett could have marketed those prints as "all natural, organic prints". They probably would have demanded a higher price.

bob carnie
18-Jan-2012, 09:44
Brett Weston is my hero.

Kirk Gittings
18-Jan-2012, 09:48
Bob Carnie is my hero.....

bob carnie
18-Jan-2012, 09:57
Ok buddy lets not have a repeat of Sherman's here. Its still early in the day for me.

Bob Carnie is my hero.....

Doremus Scudder
19-Jan-2012, 01:32
Merg,

I agree 100%. With the exception of quality lenses, skills and craft can take the place of lots of bells and whistles and are often more flexible than many "convenience features." There are only a couple of features on view cameras that I can't live without: basic swings and tilts, shift on at least one standard and a gridded ground-glass (actually, I could work around the shift, but that's one convenience I like :) ). Other than that, I can get the same results from any camera. I tell my students often that the most important thing in photography is what they point their cameras at, not what they are pointing with.

I, for one, love the simplicity of the silver process and strive to keep my approach as basic and unencumbered by mechanical and electronic "aids" as possible. The real exception is a Pentax spot-meter. Otherwise it is basic Zone System exposure, development by hand in trays (timed by a metronome and kitchen timer in Vienna, where my darkroom is quite basic), and enlarging onto graded paper, again using a metronome.

I guess I could move to a larger camera and contact printing and simplify even further, but I love 11x14 and 16x20 prints and probably couldn't lug that large a camera quite as far as I can my 4x5s.

Best,

Doremus

P.S: My dream one day is to have a darkroom where I can open the barn-doors to the outside at night and print...

rdenney
19-Jan-2012, 06:22
We all, of course, define simplicity in different ways. And technology that seems simple to a person who has mastered it might seem complex to a beginner.

Technology offers temptations, and some of the temptations are to serve the technology rather than serving the image. But even the highest technologies can be used with discipline and simplicity. In fact, simplicity is the high calling of technology--taking away those bits of process that are not central to the thinking we do as photographers and artists to provide more headroom for the thinking we need.

I have built darkrooms in the past and explored the full traditional process, back when it was the only choice. I found that I struggled to achieve my visualization--the technology was limited and required years of effort to master. I did okay with that part considering it was not my living, though I often had to make compromises many would find unacceptable (RC paper? Anathema!). But as much as even the greats have learned to manipulate their craft, even more they learned how to see their subjects in the context of what that craft could produce. Thus, they learned to constrain their visualization as much as they learned to express it.

When I venture out with my Pentax 6x7, I avoid images that demand movements and concentrate on images that don't. When I'm out wiith the Sinar, I'm bored with images that can't make use of at least some of what the camera can do. When I'm out with a 6x6 camera, I see images in squares (I think it was Ken Lee who said this in another thread, and it absolutely speaks for me). When I have a DSLR in my hands, I have a different set of options and thus attempt different types of pictures. All of that suggests to me that much of craft is learning how to visualize outcomes that are within the capabilities of the tools at hand.

It takes me much less time to produce a print that approximates my visualization using my film-scan-Photoshop-Epson workflow than I was ever able to achieve in the darkroom, given the context of my life. For me, that's keeping it simple.

For me, the ultimate simplicity is seeing the outcome of releasing the shutter clearly so that we always know where we are going, and with the confidence in our skills to get there. Without that clear sight, no technology will ever seem simple. But we can also distract ourselves in the pursuit of ever-better technology and never let ourselves see those outcomes. That's how I choose to interpret your wisdom as advice I need to hear.

Rick "for whom silver has never been simple" Denney

Terry Hayden
20-Jan-2012, 18:14
Last night Richard Garrod gave a talk at the Fresno Art museum. A great deal of his material was on the need to move beyond the mechanics and physical equipment that we use.
Developing Vision is the key. The way to do that is to simplify your process - a way to simplify the process is to be disciplined and master it. Once the physical is mastered, the artist can concentrate on being an artist.
He had a great comparison to driving a car with a clutch( not that many people do that any more ). One you are practiced enough to start smoothly, you can concentrate on being a driver.
For him, like many of us, decades have been spent moving ( or attempting to move) beyond the mechanics. He ( and Merg ) have done so with great success. Film is what we know, film is our standard transmission car, we just need to continue on this road and enjoy the ride.

Jim Galli
20-Jan-2012, 21:50
Perfectly said Merg. I'm at the point where I just enjoy the quiet alone time in the dark room. The mechanical work almost does itself and I enjoy the 'me' time, listening, thinking.

Merg Ross
20-Jan-2012, 22:06
Last night Richard Garrod gave a talk at the Fresno Art museum. A great deal of his material was on the need to move beyond the mechanics and physical equipment that we use.
Developing Vision is the key. The way to do that is to simplify your process - a way to simplify the process is to be disciplined and master it. Once the physical is mastered, the artist can concentrate on being an artist.
He had a great comparison to driving a car with a clutch( not that many people do that any more ). One you are practiced enough to start smoothly, you can concentrate on being a driver.
For him, like many of us, decades have been spent moving ( or attempting to move) beyond the mechanics. He ( and Merg ) have done so with great success. Film is what we know, film is our standard transmission car, we just need to continue on this road and enjoy the ride.

Hi Terry, good to hear from you and that you were able to connect with Richard last night. I saw him in December and knew that he was headed your way; if he ever slows down, we are trying to sneak in a lunch together!

I hope he brought some of his magnificent work to show. He had an outstanding exhibition in these parts a few months ago. His vision and technique are extraordinary, as you suggest, due to many years of dedicaton.

For those unfamiliar with his work, here is the link:

http://www.richardgarrodphoto.com/#

Best,
Merg

Merg Ross
20-Jan-2012, 22:20
I'm at the point where I just enjoy the quiet alone time in the dark room. The mechanical work almost does itself and I enjoy the 'me' time, listening, thinking.

Hi Jim, I reached that point decades ago; we may be among the privileged few these days!

Hope you are well, and belated best to you and yours for 2012!

Merg

Jay DeFehr
21-Jan-2012, 10:01
As Rick suggests, simplicity is not so....simple. Or perhaps it's often conflated with more descriptive terms like primitive, or unsophisticated.

When I left Idaho for Seattle I left behind a fairly well appointed darkroom/lab. Among the equipment therein is a Jobo ATL 3 film processor; complex, sophisticated, and simple. Shuffling sheets in a tray while watching (or listening to) a timer and checking a thermometer, and then moving the sheets from tray to tray is certainly more complicated than loading the film into a drum, entering a program, and pushing a button. I'm not making a value judgement, just pointing out a difference between complexity and complication.

Like automatic transmissions make driving less complicated while making the machine more complex, most of the technology we've integrated into photography is intended to make our task less complicated (simpler) even at the expense of making our machines/processes more complex. As I've said so many times, photography has always been a collaboration between man and machine, and a negotiation of autonomy. Should we assign the responsibility of determining best focus (the machine always does the actual focusing) to the machine, or reserve it for ourselves? How about exposure? Should we rely on our on-board opto-computational system (eyes and brain), or delegate that work to the machine, or share the task? The same collaboration and negotiation persists throughout the photographic process, and we each come to our own arrangements with the machines that are our collaborative partners.

It can get quite primitive-

When I left for Seattle, I wasn't sure what I'd find there, but I knew I was moving into a one bedroom apartment. I planned to make a second trip to move things, so on the first trip I took very basic photography provisions; just a few daylight tanks, trays, graduates, a scale, a liter of 510-Pyro concentrate, several cameras and lots of film and paper. There would be very little in the way of automation in Seattle, and I even forgot to pack my process thermometer. Oh, well, it's just temporary......

I have yet to return for that second load of items, and I've been getting along quite well. I use my phone for a timer, my finger for a thermometer, my eyes for a light meter, and rely on the latitude of my materials to keep everything within tolerable limits. I've even managed to make some carbon prints under these conditions ( I bought a spiral fluorescent black light and fitted it into a large reflector fixture from Ikea).

Given the option, I would delegate many mechanical jobs to reliable machines, and that would simplify my process, but absent that option, I stand in for the machines I used to rely on. I don't enlarge, and I don't do any real lab work (though I did experiment with quercetin as a developer), but I do make photos, and I enjoy it, however complicated my process has become.

Vaughn
21-Jan-2012, 13:03
Perfectly said Merg. I'm at the point where I just enjoy the quiet alone time in the dark room. The mechanical work almost does itself and I enjoy the 'me' time, listening, thinking.

I was quite please to get the Expert Drum 3005 to do my 8x10's in the light. This was after 25 years of open tray development (4x5/5x7/8x10)...usually one or two negs at a time -- lots of time to think! But I am finding it nice to be back in the dark again with the open trays developing my 11x14's.

While not the silver process, I find carbon printing to be quite "simple" (tho complex I guess compared to ordering silver gelatin paper from Freestyle). Spending 15 minutes sloshing a print in hot water, watching the unexposed gelatin melt and the image get reveled is very nice. No developer, stop bath or fixer to worry about.

Drew Wiley
21-Jan-2012, 13:43
The most difficult task in photography is deciding whether to head out with the 8x10
this afternoon or head into the darkroom. I'm weighing the options over a bowl of
soup.

jayabbas
21-Jan-2012, 14:10
Thanks for the correct wisdom. As a testament to simplicity I just look at all the gear I don't use that I thought would " get me there". An expensive pile that gets sold off. The tools that work are amazingly simple and straight forward. Now if my mind would go straight forward ...

Terry Hayden
22-Jan-2012, 14:19
Merg,
Sorry I didn't respond earlier, been away for a bit.
Yes, the Fresno Art Museum has an exhibit of Dick Garrod's work up now. There are at least 30 ( or more ) prints of his up. They are exquisite.
If anyone is passing through Fresno ( not that anyone would come here for a
destination <G>) - it's worthwhile stopping by the F.A.Museum and seeing this exhibit.

Merg Ross
22-Jan-2012, 21:55
Merg,
Sorry I didn't respond earlier, been away for a bit.
Yes, the Fresno Art Museum has an exhibit of Dick Garrod's work up now. There are at least 30 ( or more ) prints of his up. They are exquisite.
If anyone is passing through Fresno ( not that anyone would come here for a
destination <G>) - it's worthwhile stopping by the F.A.Museum and seeing this exhibit.

Terry, thanks for the update. I now recall Dick mentioning the Fresno exhibition. Lucky you are! His show a couple of months ago in Hayward was full of stunning images dating from 1955, with the most recent work from 2007. There were fifty-six silver prints in all. He ranks with the greats of the West Coast Tradition (the title of his Hayward exhibit).

David Karp
22-Jan-2012, 22:02
Perfectly said Merg. I'm at the point where I just enjoy the quiet alone time in the dark room. The mechanical work almost does itself and I enjoy the 'me' time, listening, thinking.


Hi Jim, I reached that point decades ago; we may be among the privileged few these days!

Hope you are well, and belated best to you and yours for 2012!

Merg

Absolutely. I love that time in the darkroom. Well, most of the time. There have been a few times over the years when I had to pack up and walk out. Everything I did was wrong. But those days are by far the exception. I can spend hours in the darkroom and it feels like no time at all. I like to keep the room dark too. I'm not one for those bright safelights.

Vaughn
22-Jan-2012, 23:02
...His show a couple of months ago in Hayward was full of stunning images ...

I spent a long time looking at Dick's work in Hayward -- wonderful stuff. Another good show there now (Charlie Cramer and others).

Vaughn

John Kasaian
22-Jan-2012, 23:15
I think you can make it as complicated as you wish, or as simple as you like. I prefer simple--which is a bit of a mental thing. We are programmed into believing we need X or Y in order to achieve Z but photographers long ago were achieving Z with far more primitive resources and often under more challenging conditions. There is a great deal of personal satisfaction in getting the job done with simple, basic equipment, either on the taking end or the printing end of the spectrum.