Making 40 Photographs: WOW! Great book

[John Kasaian]

The Making of 40 Photographs is still one of my favorites. Besides being an expert photographer, Ansel Adams was also an eloquent writer and resourceful teacher.
A several of times a year I'll pull out my well worn copy and I never cease to be amazed by it's contents.

[Vaughn]

Although it's quite impressive to be able to do that without histograms, what is the benefit of learning it now that we do have histograms?

1) Not all cameras have historgrams (can't seem to find the right button to punch to bring one up on my 8x10... )

2) Histograms are a tool...it is good to know what it is, how it is created, and how it actually relates to what one sees and how what you see will translate onto film (or other storage device) and then into a print.

I have a copy of 40 Examples somewhere (boxed up during my move)...I'll have to dig it our soon!

Vaughn

[dh003i]

1) Not all cameras have historgrams (can't seem to find the right button to punch to bring one up on my 8x10... )

LOL, but what I mean is, as other people here have advised me, using your DSLR to meter for your LF camera (I'm presuming one has one).

[Vaughn]

LOL, but what I mean is, as other people here have advised me, using your DSLR to meter for your LF camera (I'm presuming one has one).

Well, my wife has a Canon SureShot she lets me borrow occasionally... And I suppose I could learn to read and coorelate its historgram with how my film will react to light, but using my Pentax Spot Meter and reading two of three places in the scene and twisting one dial sure seems a lot easier and precise.

Plus I am already carrying 60 pounds, adding a DSLR seems to be unnecessary weight (though I do sometimes toss in the Rollei TLF in the pack for fun .)

Vaughn

[Doug Howk]

I've never understood the DSLR recommendation for LF users. One media uses white balance, histograms, noise levels, etc. while the other media uses sensitometry for film and variations of the Zone System. Where is the knowledge transfer between the two so totally different media?

40 Examples is a great book along with most of Ansel's writings.

[Frank Petronio]

The Histogram is just a measurement, as are spot meter readings. By understanding the concept of the Zone System you'll use either or both to control how your images look. I'm sure many of Adams' images would have "ugly" histograms, i.e. not the bell shaped curve.

[aphexafx]

"The Histogram is just a measurement, as are spot meter readings. By understanding the concept of the Zone System you'll use either or both to control how your images look. I'm sure many of Adams' images would have "ugly" histograms, i.e. not the bell shaped curve."

Exactly. Among other things the Zone System allows you to place any tone anywhere in your exposure. I taught myself a modified “Zone System” (scaled down for color reversal film and/or digital sensors) and use it exclusively with my DSLR. I do not need to "check my histogram" because it is only really useful to me during editing. With the (modified) Zone System and my DSLR's spot meter I can read out a scene, decide on the tones that are the most important to me, and then quickly place put them where I want them to be in my exposure.

I would suggest this to everyone, but not everyone cares. I got frustrated on another message board (a much less technical one than this board) and wrote a 20 page article on exactly how to do this with your DSLR's manual mode and spot meter.

Understanding the Zone System (at least the exposure half of it) has totally changed the way I make photographs on all of my cameras. I highly suggest learning it, even just out of curiosity.

[venchka]

I got my copy for Christmas. I love it.

[Andrew O'Neill]

It's a nice book but don't fall for Adams' claptrap BS about "previsualizing" the shots he did. He bracketed and guessed and did what-the-hell pictures just like the rest of us.

...and you know this from personal experience?

[dperez]

It's a nice book but don't fall for Adams' claptrap BS about "previsualizing" the shots he did. He bracketed and guessed and did what-the-hell pictures just like the rest of us.

I believe it was the print that Adams previsualized, not necessarily the shot. The visualization of the shot as it appears on the ground glass is simply a necessity of the process. That is to say, it is necessary to position the camera and execute the shot in such a way that would assist the artist in achieving the previsualized print. For example, it seems to me that there is no point in trying to previsualize the negative, it's not the final product; similarly it's hard (not impossible) to previsualize the natural scene, as it's just a selection one has made of an infinite amount of possibilities.

It's not as if he randomly positioned the camera some place and then triggered the shutter. He positioned the camera to best capture a scene that he previsualized as a print. I've done that before, it's not so hard to understand, a bit harder to put into practice.

In drawing or painting we often have a previsualized notion of hat we want to put on paper or canvas. Many artists would agree that to previsualize is the easy part, to render the art on paper or canvas, or on a photographic print as one has visualized the finished product is much more difficult.

That's my two cents worth.

-DP