Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 74

Thread: LF Purity

  1. #51

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,860

    Re: LF Purity

    Both words are relative to ?


    Bernice


    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    Strange, uncanny, would be the ones I'd use.

  2. #52
    Mark Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Stuck inside of Tucson with the Neverland Blues again...
    Posts
    5,854

    Re: LF Purity

    Weird? Us?
    "I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    4,980

    Re: LF Purity

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Both words are relative to ?


    Bernice
    Not weird.

  4. #54
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    7,935

    Re: LF Purity

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Both words are relative to ?Bernice
    To the concept that the word 'purity' has any significant association with the words 'Large Format'. As the OP wrote:
    Just for fun, a matter of word association.
    I believe this thread came into existence because of the use of the word 'purity' in the thread about cropping. It appears that a few people cannot comprehend peoples' decision not to crop and assume it must be due some sort of idea of purity of formats or some such silly thing.

    Some of us are weird -- some of us are way too normal.
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,860

    Re: LF Purity

    1 = -1


    Bernice

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianShaw View Post
    Not weird.

  6. #56
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    5,730

    Re: LF Purity

    For some reason when every I read the word "purity" I can't help but think of this...

  7. #57
    Land-Scapegrace Heroique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Wash.
    Posts
    2,647

    Re: LF Purity

    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    …I believe this thread came into existence because of the use of the word 'purity' in the thread about cropping. It appears that a few people cannot comprehend peoples' decision not to crop and assume it must be due some sort of idea of purity of formats or some such silly thing. Some of us are weird -- some of us are way too normal.
    Vaughn's guess might not be the reason I started this thread, but it's just as good, maybe better! (And some of the replies are "weird" indeed, quite entertaining, even instructive.)

    The real reason? I'd been musing on AA's LF-related remark about purity. You can find it in post #35, but no need to travel backwards – I'll re-post it here:

    "The significance of the objects of nature, the significance which concerns poets, dreamers, conservationists and citizens-at-large, relates to the 'presence of nature.' This is mood, the magic of personal experience, the awareness of a certain purity of condition." (Source: Letter to William Colby, the conservationist, 1952 – not William Colby, the 1970's Director of Central Intellgence!)

    So, for those reading this thread who remain shy about replying:

    "LF Purity."

    Quick – what occurs to you? First thought, best thought!

  8. #58

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,860

    Re: LF Purity

    What memories were created by a strong emotional response, then what has triggered the recall of that emotionally created memory?

    Part of what makes Fotography and all related forms of 2D images is often tied to an emotional response created memory.

    And yes, I'm taking the "Feelings and Emotions" out this for very specific reasons.


    Bernice


    Quote Originally Posted by Heroique View Post

    The real reason? I'd been musing on AA's LF-related remark about purity. You can find it in post #35, but no need to travel backwards I'll re-post it here:

    "The significance of the objects of nature, the significance which concerns poets, dreamers, conservationists and citizens-at-large, relates to the 'presence of nature.' This is mood, the magic of personal experience, the awareness of a certain purity of condition." (Source: Letter to William Colby, the conservationist, 1952 not William Colby, the 1970's Director of Central Intellgence!)

    So, for those reading this thread who remain shy about replying:

    "LF Purity."

    Quick what occurs to you? First thought, best thought!

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    9,093

    Re: LF Purity

    Quote Originally Posted by Heroique View Post

    So, for those reading this thread who remain shy about replying:

    "LF Purity."

    Quick – what occurs to you? First thought, best thought!
    Julie London.
    I don't know why, but
    definitely Julie London comes to mind.
    And Ringers Solution.
    I steal time at 1/125th of a second, so I don't consider my photography to be Fine Art as much as it is petty larceny.
    I'm not OCD. I'm CDO which is alphabetically correct.

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    103

    Re: LF Purity

    William Eggleston, from the afterword to The Democratic Forest (1989):

    "...It was one of those occasions when there was no picture there. It seemed like nothing... . I started forcing myself to take pictures of the earth, where it had eroded thirty or forty feet from the road. There were a few weeds. I began to realize that soon I was taking some pretty good pictures, so I went further into the woods and up a little hill, and got well into an entire roll of film. ...

    "... [S]omeone said, 'What have you been photographing today, Eggleston?'

    "'Well, I've been photographing democratically,' I replied.

    "'But what have you been taking pictures of?' ...

    "'Well, just woods and dirt, a little asphalt here and there.'

    "I was treating thing democratically, which of course didn't mean a thing to the people I was talking to. ...

    "I am afraid there are more people than I can imagine who can go no further than appreciating a picture that is a rectangle with an object in the middle of it, which they can identify. They don't care what is around the object as long as nothing interferes with the object itself, right in the center... They want something obvious. The blindness is apparent when someone lets slip the word 'snapshot'. Ignorance can always be covered by 'snapshot.' The word has never had any meaning."
    ***
    Of course, Eggleston is not a LF photographer. But others working similar territory are (Stephen Shore and Joel Sternfeld, for example, but there are many others). They use the deep focus and resolution inherent in LF to 'interfere' with the supposed object (or subject) as much or more than Eggleston.

    If large format 'purity' is exemplified by Ansel Adams and Edward Weston, presumably these post-1965 photographers are the dirty heretics.
    David
    Comments and critique always welcome.

Similar Threads

  1. Purity of sodium carbonate needed for paper developer?
    By Darryl Baird in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-Apr-2011, 08:28

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •