Ansel Adams and Photoshop?

Subject: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 12:10 AM

I've been having a great time using my slide scanner and then working on things with Photoshop. What a myriad of possibilities.

It all leaves me wondering what Ansel Adams might've done with this if he had had it. He did what he could with "special effects" -- to the extent that he could. And we all know how he softened and then enhanced his black-and-white images of Yosemite and other places.

But do you folks think he'd've taken to thiese new possibilities, or would he despise the newfangledness and never touch it !?!?

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Cluin
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 12:38 AM

I bet he'd avail himself of the opportunities offered by the new technology. Most pro photographers do today, so why not him? A little mix of the traditional and modern never hurt anybody.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Peace
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 12:47 AM

I agree with Cluin, Art. Adams was an artist. His photography was beautiful. His love of his subject--Yosemite--was obvious in every shot of his I ever saw. His understanding of his subject was inspired. I think he would have played with the work to see what new 'places' he could take it.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: mack/misophist
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:13 AM

On the other hand, he sometimes took snapshots. On purpose. Look at his pictures of the Manzanar (sp?) Prison camp during WW II.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Bob Bolton
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:14 AM

G'day Art,

Of course, much of the applied densitometry skill of Ansel Adams was spent in the absolute essential of capturing an image - making sure that every possible detail of the scene was captured and available on the negative. This was the second part of the triad of skills that made him unique.

The first was his vision ... and the times and lengths over which he could hold in his mind the final image he sought ... and the consumate skill and dedication with which he worked to finalise that image.

The second was this total understanding of his materials - the films he tested out and chose and the families of developers / times / contrast ranges that he kept in his mind, as well as his notes.

The third was his skill as an interpretive printer - using every printing / dodging / burning / enhancing tool that could be found ... or built.

I'm sure he would have used any tool that could advance the image - PhotoShop included.

That said, I'm sure he would not have been settled for the output of most systems for printing from digital images. I had only seen his work as reproductions for many years - when I got down to Canberra for some other good reason ... and visited the (Australian) National Gallery. I sought out their photographic exhibitions, without checking any listings. I wandered into an exhibit of really nice work by Minor White ... then stepped around a corner and was confronted by a full portfolio of Ansel Adams's prints.

I could scarcely comprehend just how vastly better they were - Adams had wrung out every last detail possible ... in scenes of great beauty ... magnificently composed ... photographed at the absolute optimum moment for lighting - and put more of that detail into any single print than I would have believed.

I'm not quite sure how he would have equalled, let alone bettered, that ... but I think he would have - and he would not have scorned any tool that could help.

Regards,

Bob Bolton

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Billy the Bus
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 02:13 AM

Ummm... Bob's said it all... almost...

I guess Ansel would have used Photoshop = after all, some of his best sna[shots were taken on Polaroid pos/neg, which was hi-tech. BUT could he cope with 'mousing about'?

I see Ansel as a symphony orchestra conductor - the "dodging and burning" came from his hands weaving and waving in the enlarger light. Wonderful -
Here's to a bloke who took some fine snaps ... and may or may not have used digital cameras and Photoshop if they were availble.

Let;s just say he had a fine mind, eye, and hands - and I'll betcha voice. Ansel just had to be a Folkie...

Thanks Art - I'm off to find the karge format enlarger I'm sure AA used.

Cheers - Sam

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Bob Bolton
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 02:43 AM

G'day Sam,

Well, he was actually a classical concert pianist - by training and profession! (However, that still supports the "... hands weaving and waving in the enlarger light ..." - but the 10" x 8" enlarger head he built himself does not.

This was a diffusion head (diffusion minimises the tonal distortion of the Peltier Effect and gives an enlarged image with a tonal range closer to that of a contact print) ... with 48 separately switched globes - so he could achieve very controlled dodging and burning at the illumination stage. (Which is not to say that he didn't nip in for the odd fine detail dodge or burn!) The whole rig was horizontally mounted, if for no other reason, so he could directly switch lights while watching the projected image.

The Polaroid work he did, in later years, really stretched the capabilities of that medium ... but the great work was on 10" x 8" film, brewed up in varieties of pyrogallol developers.

... And the last thing a photographer would call any of Ansel Adams's great photographs is a "snapshot"!

Regard(les)s,

Bob Bolton

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 05:22 AM

Just in case some might want to refresh their recollections of Ansel Adams works – a don't have at least a couple of his coffee table books:

ArtCyclopedia: Ansel Adams

The accessibility of works by the master photographers seems to run afoul of the copyright police. Relatively few Adams, Eastman, Weston, etc images are easily accessible (with my usual art resources) on the web, and often in poor quality images, with offers to sell you a poster. Few individual museums have more than one or two images each, and there seem to be only a handful of sites specializing in collections by photographers.

BLOWUP: Ansel Adams provides an interesting biographical summary:


Ansel Adams made his first photographs during a 1916 vacation trip to 1902 San Francisco Yosemite National Park in California. Even then he exhibited the first 1984 Carmei, manifestations of what was to become characteristic of his entire work: a combination of superb photographic skill and a deep admiration for the American landscape. Adams originally wanted to become a pianist. It was only after an encounter with Paul Strand in 1930 that he discovered that photography was his true medium of expression. Strand's concept of pure photography made a lasting impression on Adams and motivated him to clarify his own intentions.

In 1932 he joined photographers Imogen Cunningham, John Paul Edwards, Sonya Noskoviak, Henry Swift, Willard van Dyke and Edward Weston to found the group "f/64". Members of this group dogmatically practiced a style of photography that emphasized the greatest possible depth of field and the sharpest reproduction of details. Fascinated by the precise rendition capabilities of their medium, the photographers particularly favored close-ups of individual subjects.

Adams' photograph Rose on Driftwood is an example of this It was in 1941 that Adams created his famous "Zone System", an aid for determining correct exposure and development times for achieving an optimal gradation of gray values. Adams disseminated his photographic ideas and procedures through numerous books and seminars.

In 1946 he founded the Department of Photography at the California School of Fine Art in San Francisco. In 1962 he retired to Carmel Highlands. Adams spent a considerable part of his life as a landscape photographer in America's National Parks, about which he published more than 24 photographic books. During that time, he not only practiced his photography, but he also used his work to generate public interest in the parks, which he supported

[numerous "typos" edited in the last paragraph above.]

Only 5 images showing examples of Adams' work at the BLOWUP site.

Masters of Photography: Adams offers posters for sale, but only poor images of 3 or 4 photos for viewing.

USC Annenberg School for Communication has two images. Fair quality(?).

The articles at the bottom of the ArtCyclopedia page (first link above) may be of interest. I subscribe to Smithsonian, so I've read the one there and it's a good one; but others may be good as well.

Ansel worked from the beginning of his photo career at attempting to capture the most detailed and "real" representation of natural scenes. His mastery came largely from his skill at selecting scenes especially worth preserving, and then in carefully using the best methods available within the technology of film. While he could have used Photoshop methods to do some dodge and burn, and could have made brightness and contrast adjustments, I doubt he would have been interested in most of the other tools available there. He chose film technology, and worked it to the limits of the equipment and methods available within that technology. He documented, and made available, the techniques he developed, and his interest was in advancing photo methods and materials. His works don't need, and would not have benefited from, any additional gimmickery.

Photoshop was available(?) during his last years, albeit rather crude compared to now. There's no evidence that I've seen that he was interested in it. I do suspect that most of those numerous poster offers rely on big scanners and a little "shopping" but I doubt that the resulting posters improve on the original prints that Ansel made.

John

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Fibula Mattock
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 05:25 AM

Well, maybe he would've liked its functionality, but the tonal (dynamic) range available to him through film was much better than that of a computer monitor, so I reckon he was better off sticking to hardcopy!

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 05:27 AM

The "Masters of Photography" link above doesn't seem to work. You can find a working link at the bottom of the ArtCyclopedia page if you want a poster. Otherwise the site has little to offer.

Can't resist posting the quote from the ArtCyclopedia page:

"There is nothing worse than a brilliant image of a fuzzy concept." - Ansel Adams

John

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 08:55 AM

I was a bit of a Luddite (US: machine-breaker? Look it up!) where digital photography was concerned, but I started using Paint Shop Pro about 18 months ago and I've been converted. (PSP is almost as powerful as Photoshop, but much less expensive, and earlier versions 7 & 8 are available 2nd hand very cheap.)

I learned techniques in a few weeks or even days that would have taken years and a great deal of money to learn in a wet darkroom. I'm still scanning negs, since I can't afford a digital SLR, but 16 bit mono gives you over 65,000 levels of tone, and a good up-to-date scanner will give you as much resolution as you want.

Still, in the end it's what's in the camera that counts, whatever you do with it afterwards. After years of having to wait a fortnight for my prints to come back from the chemist's, it's second nature for me to try and make every shot a Work of Art (and it often works).

You know Kodak have stopped making film cameras altogether? And they've shut down one of their British film factories too. We might not have much choice in a few years.

Steve

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Fibula Mattock
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 09:39 AM

Yeah, the problem doesn't lie in the levels of tone you can store, but in the levels you can display. I think digital photography is wonderful, but in terms of display and preservation we've got a way to go before we can beat film.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 09:48 AM

I read that Adams took his famous "Moonrise" shot as a VERY quick snapshot...hopping out of the car and resting his big camera on the roof with barely time to get one shot. Then, it took him several hours everytime he tried the print the lousy B&W negative (which he kept in a safe!)....it tested his darkroom skills to the limit. So, I'd bet he'd at least have played with digital software just to see 'if' it could help.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 09:58 AM

Steve -

I haven't tried any of the recent Paint Shop Pro releases (since WWG days, in fact) but Photoshop Elements 2.0 is fairly inexpensive and for photo work does almost everything the "real Photoshop" does. Some things, in fact, are easier in PSE2 than in the big one. List is about $70 US, but sometimes you can find a rebate deal or a discounter and get it for quite a bit less.

The only real distinction I've noted is that PSE2 works only in RGB color format, and the big version lets you use CMYK if you want. For photo work, that's not generally a problem, since all the printers you're likely to encounter are RGB based.

For your consideration, and also those others (ArtThieme listening?) who might be using Photoshop or PSE2, my "efficiency" and results with PSE2 took a quantum leap when LiK got me a copy of The Photoshop Elements Book for Digital Photography by Scott Kelby, New Riders ©2004, ISBN 0-7357139-2-8, ($29.99 US/$45.99 CAN/£23.50 Net UK). Even for people with "real" Photoshop, I think there is a lot of help there. Can't recommend it strongly enough. The most helpful info is when to use the "presets" and when it's quicker and better to "do it otherwise." The help on "dodge and burn" alone is worth the price of the book.

John

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 10:00 AM

I saw the Moonrise photo in a special exhitbit in Louisville several years ago. Absolutely stunning. It makes me want to know more about photography. Bill, I think "big" camera is an understatement!

Steve, I use my Paint Shop Pro nearly everyday. It's amazing how the technology has enabled amateurs like me to explore many creative ideas.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 10:05 AM

Bill D -

Ansel's biggest problem with "playing with Photoshop" to see if it would help might have been the lack of good scanners to get his images into digital format. In the era when he did most of his work, 300 dpi was considered a pretty good scan.

One does wonder why he didn't "fix it once" and make a negative from the good version. He could have done that in the wet lab - and certainly knew how.

John

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Pauline L
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 11:23 AM

I'm sure Ansel Adams would have explored the possibilities of Photoshop Pro. He was curious and talented in so many ways. He pioneered a lot of photographic techniques and even tried using his microwave oven in a modified developing/printing setup. My guess is that he would have thought of ways to improve Photoshop.

Ansel Adams's connection with music was very strong and predated his discovery of photography. He grew up in a poor and dysfunctional family, and he was forever grateful to his father for buying him a very good piano, spending just a little money every week for years. (I can understand his feelings. My family of origin was likewise dysfunctional, and my father bought me a good violin in just the same way. That has meant so very much to me throughout my life.)

When AA had to make a choice of careers to pursue -- concert pianist or photographer -- one of the key factors was the size of his hands. He felt that they were not large enough for a piano virtuoso.

AA's connection with music was so strong that it influenced his thinking, writing, and teaching of photography. He often explained something first in terms of music and then, by analogy, in terms of photography. In his will, he bequeathed his negatives to a university (U. of New Mexico, I think) with the stipulation that they be used by graduate students to study the photographic development process. He said that a negative is like a musical score. Each time the negative is developed or the score is played, the original work is created anew, with opportunities for interpretation and creativity.

He was such a star and contributed so much in so many ways: photography, teaching, writing, music, and environmentalism. He used to walk the halls of Congressional office buildings with his photos and drop in on Congressmen to lobby for conservation.

I highly recommend his autobiography.

Thanks for the links to the photos.

I didn't intend to write this much, but AA always inspires me.

Pauline

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: frogprince
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 12:59 PM

Yes, JohnInKansas, interesting question as to why Adams didn't make a corrected negative; I've heard repeatedly that "straight" prints of his negatives are nothing compared to what he created in the darkroom, and have seen examples of the extensive notes and diagrams he kept for use in reprinting many of the negatives. I doubt if the guy would have snubbed any newly developed tool, other than if he really felt he could continue to get better results with his proven methods. I've also heard that, as a social animal, some think that he could never have been enough of a salesman to get off the ground financially without an agent; but, as an artist primarily expressing that part of myself via photography these day, I wish I could imagine I had a fraction of his magic.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:32 PM

Ansel Adams developed the Zone System of photography, later adopted by many photographers and taught in photography schools and workshops.
This little article is oversimplified, but one may obtain a basic understanding of the system here: Zone system
Using this system, one tries to capture the best image possible on the negative. Choosing the best tonal scale demands an artist's eye. The rest depends upon darkroom artistry. Adams was a great artist.
This article mentions the matrix meter. Exposures might approximate the zone system, but it still must be the photographer who determines just what tonal values are emphasized, and what changes must be made during the preparation of the final print image.

The techniques, of course, are applicable in digital photography, but it is the mind of the photographer that supervises the computer and tells the machines what the final image must be.

Sometimes the image must be captured NOW, such as the Moonrise shot or some others mentioned above. The negative may not have the perfection of a carefully pre-planned shot; the photographer must achieve his final result in the darkroom (or through the computer, scanning, etc. methods available today). I know a professional photographer who uses them; his equipment and programs are the best and cost a small fortune. He admits, however, that he lacks the ability and creative imagination of Ansel Adams.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:35 PM

That website is http://www.photomentor.co.uk/zone.html.
Try again: Zone System

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: frogprince
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:49 PM

Don't read me as meaning to take away from what Adams did at any stage of the photographic process; You can get what you can get on a negative or slide, no matter how good you are; he knew how to get the best possible negative to "build" from; very literally "wrote the book" on that. Then, as noted, he went from there with inspired creative imagination.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 11:10 PM

I've not had a chance to look back into this thread since I started it yesterday. What a great read to find here tonight. You all have written graphic prose poems to the man. Thanks so much for all your expertise, insights, and information about a man that I, sadly, know too little about. My appreciation of his work comes mainly from buying the AA calendars over the years. But this leads me to want to delve further. Thanks so much to you all.

Art

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 11:17 PM

YoooWeeeeAhhhhh!

Nicely done "hack" on an old handle.

The guy has been dead eight months...but his ghost lives on.

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 04:58 AM

There's a good feature in this week's New Scientist magazine on the rise of digital over film. Unfortunately it's not on their website, so you'll have to buy or borrow a copy of the mag. It seems the resolution of CCDs (the photo-taking electronic component) is increasing steadily, and will equal that of film in a year or two, while the price is halving every two years: it won't be long before digital will be both high quality and cheap.

The downside is, of course, that film is going to become more expensive. I don't want to ditch my camera and lenses, which I've spent a long time (and a few bob) building up.

There again, AA could have taken a masterpiece on a Kodak Brownie, while even with the most expensive and advanced modern camera, you still still chop Auntie Gladys's head off.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Fibula Mattock
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 06:18 AM

Lol! Too true, Steve.
And, regarding what you said on the scanning negatives thread, we've got to worry about digital preservation now as well. If the images are only stored digitally then they're a lot more difficult to preserve than a print that only needs the eye and some light for it to be viewed. I see there's a big drive these days to encourage people to print their digital images using photo services. That's where they make their money these days.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 06:57 AM

Would that be a hard drive, Fib?!

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Fibula Mattock
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 07:24 AM

groan....!

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 08:18 AM

Wait a minute...(I'm ignoring the pun)...

I was told that the life of a paper picture AND a digital picture (storage of file) was limited...as best I remember 50 - 75 years, the digital longer. Why would the digital have a finite life? Couldn't you just reburn it to a CD every 10 years or so? Do you lose something when you do this?

I want to preserve my digital photos (masterpieces of my grandchildren IMO) on CDs.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Fibula Mattock
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 08:26 AM

Mary - viewing the digital image depends on a number if things: that the image is in a format that is likely be around in the future (TIFF and JPEG are a reasonable assumption) and therefore that software exists to read them; that the storage device it is on will be readable in the future (CDs don't last that long - they are easily corrupted, and might end up just fading away to be replaced by a different type of media - look how DVD is taking off); that images will be 'migrated' each time the equipment is upgraded; that quality demands are taken into account; that back-ups have been made and stored ina similar manner... it has been estimated that the life of a digital image before any changes need to be made (e.g. migration to a new format or media storage) is about 5 years maximum. By contrast, photographic prints can last much, much longer if stored correctly - and that doesn't have to be full-on cold storage - simply taking basic care of photos is enough.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Fibula Mattock
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 08:34 AM

on the positive side - the Internet is this great, big, beautiful, never-switched-off storage medium...! Stick 'em online!

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 09:13 AM

any place you put them 'online' is using one of those formats...it may not be on YOUR HD, but it is on someone else's HD. It does mean that there may be multiple redundant backups, if you know where they are & how to reclaim them.

Subject: RE: Ansel Adams and Photoshop?
From: Fibula Mattock
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 09:15 AM

Yup, it works as a back up storage medium, but they will still need preserving.