Steve Shapiro (sgshiya@redshift.com)
Sun, 31 Jan 1999 10:39:27 -0800
Subject: Re: Quasi "alt" question re:8x10 cameras
>Hi,
>
> It is shocking what an 8 X 10 outfit can total up to in dollars.
Today,
>a lot of this gear is designed for the professional studio and has a
multitude
>of features and accessories that only serve to confuse someone who wants to
>work more simply. A lot of Edward Weston's photographs were made with a
>$5.00 lens he bought in Mexico. He used what tools were available in
>that era such as the old style wooden tripod with "non-stop" leg
ajustments.
>For working outside in rough terrain. In that era, these tripods were
>what was available. Today, small companies make similar tripods. But
>they are very expensive, more beautifullly made, something you would be
>better off bringing to a photo "gear show" than using.
>
> Rich Lahrson
> tripspud@hooked.net
>
I'm not intending to create an argument, but what inhibited EW was his own
income.
He was, for all practical purposes, a portrait photographer. He didn't have
much money. If he had the money, he'd have used the most modern, up to date
lenses and always regretted he didn't have the lenses others had at that
time.
His photographs are wonderful to behold, and only in comparison with what
was out there then are truly unique. In comparison with what's done today,
and mostly because of EW, with modern materials the work of today is far
superior. If he is your benchmark photographer, do yourself a favor and
don't seek out his original work.
Brett, on the other hand, had everything we have today except finer grain
film and automatic focus, the latter which he dearly wanted. Ansel accused
him -- in good fun -- of taking his studio into the field. Brett had the
white light reflector umbrellas, spray for moisture, flash meters; almost
like the Abercrombe & Fitch satire of the fisherman with everything but
never caught the fish. Only flaw in the comparison, Brett brought home to
big ones.
It is this mastery of the large format, patient darkroom techniques that I
have seen first hand; and availability of materials with latitude that has
magnatized me back into photography for in camera negatives that have never
been surpased by second generation negs in alternative process. But, this
is like comparing apples with Honda cars.
A clear, meticulously focused large format negative printed to perfect
contrast in Platinum is unsurpassable, to my eye.
And, rare is the moment that all that can be achieved without laying out a
few bucks.
We're not talking Brownie Hawkeye, here, and cheap to make it available to
everybody. Larger than 4X5 is a special dedication; and all the time and
trouble to make one negative, I don't want to focus through cheap lenses.
Been there, done that. Cried a lot. I'd rather pay the price and get more
from the gallery.
Steve Shapiro, Carmel, CA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:48