Hi folks!
I have a question regarding traditional dark-room prints, more specific the prints of Master Ansel Adams.
I got the new book: Ansel Adams - 400 photographs (which I recommend to everyone - beautiful!)
The look might be due to the printing used in the production of the book as such.(I am not referring to the actual prints, unfortunately) But I guess the book is produced with great care.
I noticed some silver-like look and appearance in many photographs.
Is this due to Adams' dark-room mastery (which I guess plays a role anyway), or is this because of a certain film or because of a certain photographic paper he printed on?
I just want to learn where this look (which I find very appealing) stems from, and furhermore, if there is a trick in Photoshop(plug-in) to emulate this for digital-bw photos.
Thanks as always for any help or hints, or links to some sites dealing with this topic.
Kind regards
Dietrich
Posted by Carol Hyman on January 2, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Morning, Dietrich,
I'm sure there are ten ways to Sunday to accomplish the look you are after.
I've been experimenting with duotones in Photoshop. Using more than one tone seems to add to the depth of the image.
From what I have read, Ansel Adams spent a great deal of time in his darkroom and Photoshop is our darkroom. I think it takes a lot of experimentation and then suddenly, voilà, there's the perfect image.
Regards and Happy New Year,
Carol
Posted by Dan Borzynski on January 2, 2008 at 12:43 PM
The answer to all of your questions is, generally, yes.
From what I have seen, Ansel Adams real strength is in the darkroom. As good as all of the other "names" in BW photography are, or were, very few of them can match his darkroom technique. The only current photographer I am aware of who is comparable is Clyde Butcher (the guy who photographs the Everglades, and for whom an 8x10 is a point and shoot camera ).
As a side note, and this is a bit off-topic for which I might be slightly singed, I have seen a book of his color work. My impression of it is that it was remarkably ordinary for someone of his talents. The main reason is that in color darkroom work, you don't have anywhere the ease of manipulation which you get with BW. There is no safelight, since color paper will pick it up. This makes it far more difficult to do the burning and dodging of BW, plus you now have the choice of doing it in three primary colors, rather than just with light. It is not impossible, just orders of magnitude more difficult. This takes away a lot of Adams real strength in the darkroom.
It is for this reason that color prints, when done well, benefit greatly with digital processes. All of the control which you give up in the darkroom when you shift from BW to color, you suddenly get back, and without the immense investment in time and expense of test prints.
Back to your question, papers and films do make a bit of a difference. But in the end, it is the human skills that are really important. You have to know your materials, processes and techniques, and what is best for what you have in front of you. Nothing is ever going to replace those, and this hasn't changed even with digital. *You still need to know what you are doing!*
For a digital replacement - we are still waiting for this. What cannot be emphasized enough is that digital is a different medium. It will react different that film. Part of the issue is that digital has far less dynamic range than BW film, up to 5 stops depending on the camera, film, and film processing techniques. You can simulate this with HDR. Properly done, this is a very useful technique. Even with this, though, you have to remember that a sensor reacts to light linearly while film is non-linear. In english, this means that highlights and shadows are going to look different. Maybe not by much, but enough to affect the "feel" of the print, if that makes any sense.
Also complicating matters is that printing substrates make a huge difference. Until very recently, there really haven't been any inkjet papers that really look like traditional silver papers when printed on. The differences are greater in inkjet to silver that between silver papers.
There are some newer papers which are supposed to be very close to the appearance of silver papers but I haven't seen them in use yet. Maybe someone else can comment on them.
Unfortunately, really the only way to get Ansel's BW feel is to shoot BW film, with as large of a format as possible, do your own darkroom work or pay someone to do it, and get very, very good at it.
And before anyone takes any of this as a knock on BW printing, digital processes, film cameras, digital cameras, technology or talent, it is NOT that. I shoot digital, film, LF and 35, and wouldn't be as serious about this if digital was not as good as it currently is. But the operating theme that has to be remembered is that film and digital are very different mediums and have to be thought of that way.
(Edit - BTW, I have seen many absolutely first rate BW prints which for quality, I would put up against any silver BW prints. But they have a different look. Not unpleasing, but it is a different medium!)
The closest I've seen were printed on Fuji Frontier rather than inkjet or similar. It gave the "feel" of a conventional print to complement the photoshop work to get the appearance of selenium toning.
I'm more intrigued by Dietrich's mention of a "silver-like" look to the book. If these images really do have a metallic sheen to them, it might be due to a new printing technology that allows for adding a fifth "metallic" color to printing on a press. They can do this with silver or gold finishes. All I know of it is from a brochure someone here picked up at a trade show. The pictures really are striking in how they seem to glow and shine.
The company is called MetalFX Technology, and is based in the UK.
Just want to shoot out a short thank you to all of you that answered so far!
@Dan: Thanks for your huge reply - I have not read it yet - I am a bit in a hurry now. I am sure I will find valuable information in your post and I will come back commenting.
@Patrick: The photographs in the book are of very high quality: I do not own many coffee-table books on photography so i cannot really compare, but as fas as I can judge it, the quality is excellent.
And it were the photographs in the book that made me realize that there is a certain silver-like look. I have once (some months ago) seen original Ansel Adams prints - there was an exhibition in Vienna. I did not remember having noticed the silver look, but I was overwhelmed by Ansel's use of light, composition and subject matter. And now that I have the book I can study the photos better.
Posted by Dan Borzynski on January 2, 2008 at 7:19 PM
Dietrich, the big thing I want you to take away from my post is that film and digital are different mediums and should be thought of that way. There is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to produce first-rate digital black and white prints, but as the state of the art currently exists, prints from both mediums will look a bit different, no matter how good the worker.
For doing digital black and whites, take a good look at books on darkroom printing. Some of the information there will be irrelevant, such as doing N-1 development. However, much of the information there will be very helpful. You'll always see a section on doing test strips. Digitally, this is still useful as it gives you a handle on how dark your blacks are, on how white your whites are and finally, how well your printer can differentiate between tones. Doing dodging and burning is still a useful skill digitally and the texts will talk about that. Paper choices will be talked about - the equivalent digitally is the huge number of choices currently out there. There may be sections talking about the actually shooting process, with filters, contrast, etc. Sections may also talk about lighting and similar tones - again, useful info. Black and white darkroom skills have never left us, they just appear in a different guise.
And don't forget to look at Photoshop books for techniques for BW conversions. There are a half a dozen ways that come to mind immediately as a starting point. Blending darkroom ideas with digital ideas is only going to help the final results.
Your post reminded me that I also recently saw some color prints done on one of the digital metallic papers. The results were very interesting. I'll have to play with them for BW sometime later next year.
Hello Dan, thanks for your replies.
I now have read them...:-)
They helped me appreciating the differences better. Of course I was aware that digital and film are not comparable in many respects, but I did not understand that there are some differences that cannot be overcome, that the look will always be different. What one prefer might be a personal matter, but the AA look is surely awesome. I now also did some research and found out about this selenium-toning. They do it for the Yosemity special edition prints, and I guess Ansel did it himself as well. Since the process is termed "toning" it comes as no surprise that this will be noticable in the final print.
I also experimented a bit with this due-tone thing in PS that Carol (thanks!) mentioned. It really gives a different feel to the look but the options are endless and I guess I have to practice a lot!
I defintitely plan to read some books about tradtional dark-room techniques - maybe the AA-trilogy(camera, Negative, Print). After all I am a trained chemist and eventually I will dig into trad. dark-room sooner or later..
Thanks again!
Dietrich, I'd have to see the book to be able to say for sure that your "silver look" was done on press. There are a couple of ways in which we can do this on press but I'd hate to think that anyone was taking liberty with Mr. Adams work to attempt to enhance or change it from the original. It's more likely the the incredible dynamic range that Adams was able to achieve, and which can be reproduced on a good press, is what you are seeing. His shadows and highlights were a looooong way apart and the detail that he was able to get in between is astounding. He was, after all, the author of the zone system and nothing has yet been able to match it. Such prints look crisp and almost surreal to us mortals who are not accustomed seeing anything like it. A good dense ink of the correct "color tint" (ie warm to cool) printed on a fine finish white stock, with a fine halftone or stoastic screen, using a good alcohol dampening system will hit you right between the eyes. I'd guess that you are seeing better reproduction than you're accusomed to seeing. As for a digital equivilent, I can't say. Monotone digital prints are not that impressive to me.
Hi Bob
I am not sure if the silver look was done on press or if the silver look is a perception that I have due to the content and tonal range of the photographs displayed there-in.
I also think that for the production of a book , the photo's (or lets say the image-files that are used for the book) have to be adjusted in order to match what one would see in a print.
Get the book, you won't be dissapoined!
Dietrich
Discussion
9 repliesI have a question regarding traditional dark-room prints, more specific the prints of Master Ansel Adams.
I got the new book: Ansel Adams - 400 photographs (which I recommend to everyone - beautiful!)
The look might be due to the printing used in the production of the book as such.(I am not referring to the actual prints, unfortunately) But I guess the book is produced with great care.
I noticed some silver-like look and appearance in many photographs.
Is this due to Adams' dark-room mastery (which I guess plays a role anyway), or is this because of a certain film or because of a certain photographic paper he printed on?
I just want to learn where this look (which I find very appealing) stems from, and furhermore, if there is a trick in Photoshop(plug-in) to emulate this for digital-bw photos.
Thanks as always for any help or hints, or links to some sites dealing with this topic.
Kind regards
Dietrich
I'm sure there are ten ways to Sunday to accomplish the look you are after.
I've been experimenting with duotones in Photoshop. Using more than one tone seems to add to the depth of the image.
Also, here's a web page with some suggestions ...
http://photoshop911.typepad.com/help/2005/05/getting_the_ans.html
From what I have read, Ansel Adams spent a great deal of time in his darkroom and Photoshop is our darkroom. I think it takes a lot of experimentation and then suddenly, voilà, there's the perfect image.
Regards and Happy New Year,
Carol
From what I have seen, Ansel Adams real strength is in the darkroom. As good as all of the other "names" in BW photography are, or were, very few of them can match his darkroom technique. The only current photographer I am aware of who is comparable is Clyde Butcher (the guy who photographs the Everglades, and for whom an 8x10 is a point and shoot camera
As a side note, and this is a bit off-topic for which I might be slightly singed, I have seen a book of his color work. My impression of it is that it was remarkably ordinary for someone of his talents. The main reason is that in color darkroom work, you don't have anywhere the ease of manipulation which you get with BW. There is no safelight, since color paper will pick it up. This makes it far more difficult to do the burning and dodging of BW, plus you now have the choice of doing it in three primary colors, rather than just with light. It is not impossible, just orders of magnitude more difficult. This takes away a lot of Adams real strength in the darkroom.
It is for this reason that color prints, when done well, benefit greatly with digital processes. All of the control which you give up in the darkroom when you shift from BW to color, you suddenly get back, and without the immense investment in time and expense of test prints.
Back to your question, papers and films do make a bit of a difference. But in the end, it is the human skills that are really important. You have to know your materials, processes and techniques, and what is best for what you have in front of you. Nothing is ever going to replace those, and this hasn't changed even with digital. *You still need to know what you are doing!*
For a digital replacement - we are still waiting for this. What cannot be emphasized enough is that digital is a different medium. It will react different that film. Part of the issue is that digital has far less dynamic range than BW film, up to 5 stops depending on the camera, film, and film processing techniques. You can simulate this with HDR. Properly done, this is a very useful technique. Even with this, though, you have to remember that a sensor reacts to light linearly while film is non-linear. In english, this means that highlights and shadows are going to look different. Maybe not by much, but enough to affect the "feel" of the print, if that makes any sense.
Also complicating matters is that printing substrates make a huge difference. Until very recently, there really haven't been any inkjet papers that really look like traditional silver papers when printed on. The differences are greater in inkjet to silver that between silver papers.
There are some newer papers which are supposed to be very close to the appearance of silver papers but I haven't seen them in use yet. Maybe someone else can comment on them.
Unfortunately, really the only way to get Ansel's BW feel is to shoot BW film, with as large of a format as possible, do your own darkroom work or pay someone to do it, and get very, very good at it.
And before anyone takes any of this as a knock on BW printing, digital processes, film cameras, digital cameras, technology or talent, it is NOT that. I shoot digital, film, LF and 35, and wouldn't be as serious about this if digital was not as good as it currently is. But the operating theme that has to be remembered is that film and digital are very different mediums and have to be thought of that way.
(Edit - BTW, I have seen many absolutely first rate BW prints which for quality, I would put up against any silver BW prints. But they have a different look. Not unpleasing, but it is a different medium!)
The company is called MetalFX Technology, and is based in the UK.
www.metal-fx.com
@Dan: Thanks for your huge reply - I have not read it yet - I am a bit in a hurry now. I am sure I will find valuable information in your post and I will come back commenting.
@Patrick: The photographs in the book are of very high quality: I do not own many coffee-table books on photography so i cannot really compare, but as fas as I can judge it, the quality is excellent.
And it were the photographs in the book that made me realize that there is a certain silver-like look. I have once (some months ago) seen original Ansel Adams prints - there was an exhibition in Vienna. I did not remember having noticed the silver look, but I was overwhelmed by Ansel's use of light, composition and subject matter. And now that I have the book I can study the photos better.
For doing digital black and whites, take a good look at books on darkroom printing. Some of the information there will be irrelevant, such as doing N-1 development. However, much of the information there will be very helpful. You'll always see a section on doing test strips. Digitally, this is still useful as it gives you a handle on how dark your blacks are, on how white your whites are and finally, how well your printer can differentiate between tones. Doing dodging and burning is still a useful skill digitally and the texts will talk about that. Paper choices will be talked about - the equivalent digitally is the huge number of choices currently out there. There may be sections talking about the actually shooting process, with filters, contrast, etc. Sections may also talk about lighting and similar tones - again, useful info. Black and white darkroom skills have never left us, they just appear in a different guise.
And don't forget to look at Photoshop books for techniques for BW conversions. There are a half a dozen ways that come to mind immediately as a starting point. Blending darkroom ideas with digital ideas is only going to help the final results.
Your post reminded me that I also recently saw some color prints done on one of the digital metallic papers. The results were very interesting. I'll have to play with them for BW sometime later next year.
I now have read them...:-)
They helped me appreciating the differences better. Of course I was aware that digital and film are not comparable in many respects, but I did not understand that there are some differences that cannot be overcome, that the look will always be different. What one prefer might be a personal matter, but the AA look is surely awesome. I now also did some research and found out about this selenium-toning. They do it for the Yosemity special edition prints, and I guess Ansel did it himself as well. Since the process is termed "toning" it comes as no surprise that this will be noticable in the final print.
I also experimented a bit with this due-tone thing in PS that Carol (thanks!) mentioned. It really gives a different feel to the look but the options are endless and I guess I have to practice a lot!
I defintitely plan to read some books about tradtional dark-room techniques - maybe the AA-trilogy(camera, Negative, Print). After all I am a trained chemist and eventually I will dig into trad. dark-room sooner or later..
Thanks again!
Bob
I am not sure if the silver look was done on press or if the silver look is a perception that I have due to the content and tonal range of the photographs displayed there-in.
I also think that for the production of a book , the photo's (or lets say the image-files that are used for the book) have to be adjusted in order to match what one would see in a print.
Get the book, you won't be dissapoined!
Dietrich