Printing black and white images with dark tones

[Manfred M]

Dan - in upgrading the equipment, this can be as simple as buying a suitable tripod and shooting at a lower ISO. It doesn't just mean getting a new camera.

[DanK]

I agree. In fact, I will soon be doing an introduction to night photography in which I expect to tell people that the two things they cannot do without are a tripod and a remote release (which can be just a $5 or $10 wired release from Yongnuo on eBay). They also need a camera that saves raw, and they need to remove protective filters if they are in the habit of using them. Other than that, I hadn't planned on talking about equipment at all, but none of the group involved uses a camera like Damiano's.

What I was responding to was this:

People that spend the money on cameras with good low light performance do not do so because they like spending money, they do so because this technology is expensive. As an example, the current top of the line full-frame Nikon D5 has a 20MP sensor and is considered a low light camera. The D850, the next model down (same sensor size) has a 45MP sensor, but does not perform as well in low light conditions due to the smaller sensels.

Damian could read this as suggesting that one needs a high-end DSLR. I just didn't want him to walk away from this thinking that he can't begin to address the problems we raised with spending a lot of money.

[fatoddsun]

I have a feeling that by the end of this discussion we'll have enough material to publish a small book!

It is nice to see how different people have different approaches to photography, different purposes, different views, and how the same range of tools can be exploited in such a wide variety of manners!
I am very keen to learn more and more about how to get the best out my camera, and how to make my camera "serve" my creativity process, and most importantly, how I can make my own shooting experience as pleasant as possible.

The most important thing that this thread has led me to do is to think in these terms, if nothing else, and this is already a big takeaway for my very modest experience.

As for the camera, I agree with DanK that for now it's important for me to do the best I can with what I have, for a little longer. The constraint given by the small sensor, for instance, might push me to learn how to better use long exposures. Later on I'm sure I'll move to a bigger sensor camera, but I'll also be more knowledgeable about this topic.
I think I'll get a little tripod for now, and see what I can do.
DanK, your pictures are absolutely beautiful shots (the third gave me a great sense of calm instantly).

Manfred, your teachings are very valuable to me, but I don't personally care too much about what the judges of competitions are trained to do, or what percentage of film surface is supposed to contain pure black or pure white. As I mentioned in my personal intro to this forum, one of my favourite photographers is Daido Moriyama, who's taken pictures like this one, or this one. They would probably never pass any shortlist in the world, but I still consider them beautiful, for a reason that I cannot easily describe. Not that I want to say that my pictures are even barely resembling those of an incredible artist like Moriyama, but this was just to give an idea of what, somehow, I consider "beautiful". This doesn't mean that I shouldn't know what is considered "good" in photography, according to the Western standards, and it's good to have models to start with.

Thank you all for these very valuable suggestions!
I will try to incorporate your views and advice into my photography right away, and hopefully you'll soon see me posting better images on these pages too!

Thank you!!

[Manfred M]

Damian could read this as suggesting that one needs a high-end DSLR. I just didn't want him to walk away from this thinking that he can't begin to address the problems we raised with spending a lot of money.

That is definitely not the message of either the post nor what I was attempting to say in my response.

Pixel (sensel) size is the most important factor in determining low light performance. Most people infer that there is a premium associated with a sensor with higher resolving power and my example was merely meant to show that the premium price product has a lower resolution sensor and that photographers were willing to pay a premium primarily because of low light performance. Higher burst mode is another feature of the more expensive body.

Ever since the introduction of the D3 and D800 Nikon has marketed the D# cameras to the sports and low light photographers and the D8## lines to the portrait and landscape photographers.

[Manfred M]

Manfred, your teachings are very valuable to me, but I don't personally care too much about what the judges of competitions are trained to do, or what percentage of film surface is supposed to contain pure black or pure white. As I mentioned in my personal intro to this forum, one of my favourite photographers is Daido Moriyama, who's taken pictures like this one, or this one. They would probably never pass any shortlist in the world, but I still consider them beautiful, for a reason that I cannot easily describe. Not that I want to say that my pictures are even barely resembling those of an incredible artist like Moriyama, but this was just to give an idea of what, somehow, I consider "beautiful". This doesn't mean that I shouldn't know what is considered "good" in photography, according to the Western standards, and it's good to have models to start with.

As CiC is very much a learning site, I feel it is important for people to understand where contemporary photography is going. That being said, there is definitely a lot of snobism in the field and frankly there are fashions that come and go. These are little more than the opinions of the self-proclaimed gurus, but as these "influencers" do have an audience, I find it important to listen and learn.

Modern photographic judges do not judge based on a set of rules (I am working on my national / international certification) but rather look at an image to see if it works from a technical, organizational and emotional impact standpoint. Rules based judging is still prevalent in places and this is unfortunate as many fine works can be penalized this way.

When it comes to Japanese photographers, I have definitely been influenced by Hiroshi Sugimoto and his "Seascape" images, as have many others. There really is no "western" view any more as this aspect of photography went international some time ago.

https://www.sugimotohiroshi.com/seascapes-1


I do have a personal project that involves photographing sky and water shots of all the Great Lakes near sunset and my direction is strongly influenced by Sugimoto. He concentrated on salt water bodies but philosophically, I am more drawn to fresh water because it has such a significant impact on human life.





When it comes to some of the things I wrote about prints, these "rules" developed because by and large in following them, the print works well. Large areas of pure black and pure white do not work and are rather boring. In inkjet prints, in particular, this can be a problem with white area. There is no ink deposited there and when viewed at the appropriate angle, the image has visible "bald spots" that look terrible and distract from the image. Large areas of black don't have quite the same issue, but large, textureless areas of black don't look good, as you have noted.

[fatoddsun]

Totally agree with you with the fact that it is very important to learn and understand contemporary photography, and that photography, like all other human expressions, has trends and fashions which are often dictated by few people that might be in their position for many disparate reasons.

It's curious to hear about training for photography judges of competitions. This is one of those things that rarely arises in "non-specialised" environments.

Hiroshi Sugimoto is such an interesting artist! Seascapes is a powerful collection. And so simple!
I really like your inspired picture above.

Good luck for your certificate! : )

[DanK]

Manfred,

I have to disagree with you. I care very little what is trendy in the art world, and I wouldn't criticize anyone for failing to conform to whatever is now the fad. I have actually used Sugimoto's work as an example; I find it extremely boring and uncreative, and it startled me the first time I realized how highly it is regarded. That's not an extreme example, however. Not long ago, we had a dinner discussion with some friends about what led us all to drop our memberships in the DeCordova, a well regarded modern art museum. Two people pointed to the same exhibit: a board with doll heads glued to it. I had a different one: a bunch of pieces in which the “artist” glued debris from the demolition of old houses—things like piece of broken Venetian blinds—to plywood boards. My 3-year-old granddaughter does better.

It's worth remembering that many of the artists now considered to be history's greatest were disparaged at the time for not conforming to a fad at the time. The same is true of many of the world's greatest musical composers and some of the greatest jazz musicians.

For a great example of how silly the trendiness can be, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BlLX03OJRU.

My view is rather different. I do study the greats, but to take from them what interests me and is useful for me. E.g., I find Weston's work (apart from the earliest) to be striking and instructive. I don't like pictorialist work, so I don't spend much time with it. Others would reverse that ranking. More power to them.

Dan

[Manfred M]

Manfred,

I have to disagree with you. I care very little what is trendy in the art world, and I wouldn't criticize anyone for failing to conform to whatever is now the fad. I have actually used Sugimoto's work as an example; I find it extremely boring and uncreative, and it startled me the first time I realized how highly it is regarded. That's not an extreme example, however. Not long ago, we had a dinner discussion with some friends about what led us all to drop our memberships in the DeCordova, a well regarded modern art museum. Two people pointed to the same exhibit: a board with doll heads glued to it. I had a different one: a bunch of pieces in which the “artist” glued debris from the demolition of old houses—things like piece of broken Venetian blinds—to plywood boards. My 3-year-old granddaughter does better.

It's worth remembering that many of the artists now considered to be history's greatest were disparaged at the time for not conforming to a fad at the time. The same is true of many of the world's greatest musical composers and some of the greatest jazz musicians.

For a great example of how silly the trendiness can be, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BlLX03OJRU.

My view is rather different. I do study the greats, but to take from them what interests me and is useful for me. E.g., I find Weston's work (apart from the earliest) to be striking and instructive. I don't like pictorialist work, so I don't spend much time with it. Others would reverse that ranking. More power to them.

Dan

Dan - I am very interested in much what many of the well known photographers created. My interest in Sugimoto is that I love some of his work and find that he Seashores as an inspiration because he should have done much better. Some of his work is sublime and reminds me very much of the work of Irving Penn, for instance this piece.

https://www.sugimotohiroshi.com/stylized-sculpture

My view of the Pictorialists is right up there with the Impressionists; I generally dislike both. Both schools were very much a reaction to photography and in their own way they suffered very much from being the "first generation". The impressionists were very much looking for a way to produce art as the camera had taken over as the means of creating portraits and landscapes. The Pictorialists were responding to the accusation that photography was little more than a way of recording events, rather than being a creative and artistic tool. The good news is that both genres were swept aside by art forms that are generally much more to my tastes.

Weston and Adams both started off as pictorialists, but thankfully the California school (and the Group f/64) pushed the Eastern American school into obscurity.

Right now I am trying to come to grips with something that some are referring to as the "post-photographic" genre where the lighting is very flat. I'm planning to meet the artist that this work next week. This piece combines origami with the face printed on the folded paper, but frankly I'm far more interested in the technique used in the base print.

https://www.haser.org/cosmicsurgery