Ansel Adams - Which Book?

[Keith Tapscott.]

I forgot to mention film choices which also come down to person preferences. Buy a couple of rolls of any film that you fancy trying and use the 2nd roll for refining exposure and development. You will usually know from the first roll of film whether you like a particular film stock or not, then make the one you like your regular film choice.

[Ornello]

You will also note that he, like Ornello, tends to have a unique interpretation of "film speed" and likes to underdevelop film.

The manufacturers development times should be used as a guide and then adjusted to acheive the desired contrast as needed for your enlarger, so that the majority of the negatives print well on what ever your "standard" paper grade is (Grades 2-3 are considered normal, depending on film format).

This could be quite different from the time you started with and should be considered as a "personalised" time rather than under or over development. You should also run a test to determine a personal exposure index for your chosen film stock.

Almost everyone who investigates exposure seriously gives more exposure than the ISO speed calls for. Almost everyone finds that ISO speeds are overly optimistic, if you want good shadow detail. Actually, ASA film speeds were doubled in 1959. We're simply finding out that this was a mistake.

Development time is another matter, but many manufacturers call for far more time than is needed for optimum results.

The general principle is to be more generous with exposure and more conservative with development than the ISO standards call for. This is almost universally acknowledged.

[pbrooks]

I say any they are all good

[Jim Noel]

It appears from this thread that there is only one person in the world who knows anything about exposure and development of film and how it affects the final printed image, Ornello. I don't know how anyone can be so self important.

Anyone with an open mind can learn a lot from many other people, including Ansel. I have not had a large format camera but 70, yes seventy, years. Do I follow AA religiously? No. Do I use his basic prnciples in my everyday work? Absolutely.

If you feel like investing inonly one book in the series, believe it or not the most inclusive is "Polaroid Photography" It includes basic information which is easily carried over into all of film photography. It does not have the detail of complete film testing, etc. but is a good sound book.

[Ornello]

It appears from this thread that there is only one person in the world who knows anything about exposure and development of film and how it affects the final printed image, Ornello. I don't know how anyone can be so self important.

Anyone with an open mind can learn a lot from many other people, including Ansel. I have not had a large format camera but 70, yes seventy, years. Do I follow AA religiously? No. Do I use his basic prnciples in my everyday work? Absolutely.

If you feel like investing inonly one book in the series, believe it or not the most inclusive is "Polaroid Photography" It includes basic information which is easily carried over into all of film photography. It does not have the detail of complete film testing, etc. but is a good sound book.

Some people are lazy and just follow the path of least resistance. I have dug deeper and looked harder than those people who simply wander into a bookshop and see those books of Ansel Adams on the bookshelves. Don't confuse the author's popularity with soundness. Just because Adams made some famous photographs (you'll note I did not say 'good' photographs) does not make him an expert on B&W technique. He is not. Quite the contrary. If you actually do experiments, and not just accept it because "Adams says so" you will find that his books are wrong on almost every page, and that Kodak is right.

Most people today use small format (35mm) cameras. Adams's books were intended primarily for large format workers, and even for them his assertions are wrong or obsolete. There is almost nothing to be learned from those books. They are based on false assumptions; and when they were written different materials with different characteristics were available. Even if what they say was true when they were written (and in fact the books are fiull of outright falsehoods) they would no longer hold true with today's materials and small format film.

To get the best results from miniature (35mm film) one should study and understand techniques and recommendations for motion picture film, not large format film. Unfortunately this information is not as widely disseminated as Mr Adams's books. You have to work harder to find it, but I have found it. Some of this information is available in old Kodak dataguides from the 1940's and 1950's, and some appears as early as 1929, in one of Kodak's publications about D-76 developer: Some Properties of Fine-Grain Developers for Motion-Picture Film. Here is a key passage, which I quote from that publication:

"From the standpoint of graininess, therefore, for a given virtual gamma of the positive (product of negative and positive gammas) it is preferable to develop the negative to a relatively low gamma and the positive to a relatively high gamma." (Page 438)

This is the earliest statement of this principle (expose your film generously and develop conservatively) I have found from Kodak. It was repeated numerous times in different Kodak publications through the 1950's. You'll note that the notion of developing negatives individually to compensate for different scene contrasts (the heart of the zone system) flies in the face of this principle.

Adams has almost nothing to say on this matter, which is the most important apsect of miniature (35mm) technique. How much of a research budget did Ansel Adams have? How many thousands of feet of 35mm film did he process and examine for grain, speed, and sharpness? ZERO, my friend, ZERO. Kodak performed these tests for many years to improve both their films and developers for the motion picture industry. They had enormous resources and a capable scientific staff.

I should add that the primary difficulties in working with small format film are getting low graininess and high sharpness. Following the approach described by Kodak in Some Properties of Fine-Grain Developers for Motion-Picture Film will give you the finest-grained, sharpest images.

For today's 35mm worker, this means giving about 2/3 stop more exposure, and developing so that the typical "sunny-day" negative prints on grade 3 paper, not grade 2 paper. Usually I find that reducing development time by 1/3 (or increasing dilution by 50%) from what is suggested by the manufacturers gives good results.

[Greg Winterflood]

Most people today use small format (35mm) cameras.

....with CCD chips instead of film

I've been loaned a copy of Ansel Adams "The Negative".

My initial impression of the photographs it contains is "dark and gloomy".

I find the writing style rather dense; but that is not to say that it is uninformative, and I am gleaning some basic technical information which I had not come across before.

I doubt that the owner would care for me, if I burned the book, rather than give it back.

[Ornello]

Most people today use small format (35mm) cameras.

....with CCD chips instead of film

Yes, but we're talking about B&W film here.

I've been loaned a copy of Ansel Adams "The Negative".

Yes, which edition? He had trouble keeping his nonsense straight from one edition to the next.

My initial impression of the photographs it contains is "dark and gloomy".

Of course.

I find the writing style rather dense; but that is not to say that it is uninformative, and I am gleaning some basic technical information which I had not come across before.

Most of it is false or obsolete.

I doubt that the owner would care for me, if I burned the book, rather than give it back.

Yes, burn it. Turn it back into atoms.

[foolscape]

My two cents.

I've used Ansel Adams' books with some success. I used them as starting points when I first began taking black and white images, and then when I built my darkroom two years ago. I agree that not everything in them is current, but the methods are good. Use them as a launching pad, not as a ceiling. They were never intended (I think) to be defintive.

I had no problems with the writing style, but I may not be the best judge. I have a degree in writing, and I've written both creatively and technically.

--Gary

[Pim]

as far as I know, Adams exposed his film @ half speed lots of times. And when you expose @ half time, you still have to aim your spot meter @ some place, thus place that spot in a zone. Or don't you use a spot meter at all? How do you expose when your ev are extremly far apart?

[Samm Etinger]

Ansel Adams photographs "dark and gloomy"?

Unbelievable! What possible point of reference could cause anyone to make this oddball statement?

It is true that the Ansel Adam's Basic Photo series of books are not for everyone - they do make you think! They are not easy reading! If you want intertainment, read Edward Weston's Daybooks -

I suggest that new photographers visit good classic galleries where they can view real original prints in order to have a frame of reference. Reproductions just don't cut it!

I would recommend reading Barry Thornton's book, "Edge Of Darkness"

That is - for anyone who is interested in learning the process of making Fine Silver Prints -

[Ornello]

Ansel Adams photographs "dark and gloomy"?

Yes, a lot of Adams work could be so described. To say his work is far over-rated would be an extreme understatement. If you've seen one Ansel Adams photograph, you haven't seen them all. If you've seen two Ansel Adams photographs, you have seen them all.

Unbelievable! What possible point of reference could cause anyone to make this oddball statement?

Reality.

It is true that the Ansel Adam's Basic Photo series of books are not for everyone - they do make you think! They are not easy reading! If you want intertainment, read Edward Weston's Daybooks -

Why does it need to be difficult reading? B&W photography is exceedingly easy, and all that you have to do is run a few contrast tests on any new film and developer combination. Adams is so full of baloney that it's sickening. His books are full of delusions, misinformation, and outright lies. Those books have been responsible for ruining more negatives than any others.

I suggest that new photographers visit good classic galleries where they can view real original prints in order to have a frame of reference. Reproductions just don't cut it!

For the most part, all you have to do is follow the manufacturers' directions, experiment a little, and adjust from there.

I would recommend reading Barry Thornton's book, "Edge Of Darkness"

It's a good book, but even that book has some erroneous information in it.

That is - for anyone who is interested in learning the process of making Fine Silver Prints -

It isn't that hard. Just don't underexpose or overdevelop. And never, ever, read any of Adams's books. You'll regret it if you do.

[Samm Etinger]

"B&W photography is exceedingly easy"?

Well - yes - I would have to agree.

However - EXCELLENT Black and White Photography is definately NOT exceedingly easy!

That is why some photographers strive for perfection.

[Ornello]

"B&W photography is exceedingly easy"?

Well - yes - I would have to agree.

However - EXCELLENT Black and White Photography is definately NOT exceedingly easy!

That is why some photographers strive for perfection.

Adams wanted you to think that, so he can sell you more books...

Getting excellent results is not difficult at all...

Perfection is unattainable in anything. B&W photographic film has a certain amount of latitude, mostly in the overexposure region. What is important is to achieve adequate exposure, i.e., to avoid underexposure. In photographing stationary subject matter, bracketing may be employed to get minimum adequate exposure.

In any other kind of photography, of dynamic or constantly changing situations, getting a good minimum exposure is always a best estimate. So long as at least a minumum exposure is given, however, excellent results can be obtained with even several stops of overexposure.

You have to stop thinking of trying to get 'correct' exposure and instead think of getting adequate exposure...

Meter for the shadow areas and ignore the highlights...the film's curve will take care of that (unless you're foolish enough to use T-Max film)...

When you work this way, you will find your negatives almost always provide excellent prints.

So, understand that if you underexpose, you will get bad results...but if you you overexpose a stop or two, you'll still be fine...and get excellent results. In fact, you'll have difficulty telling the prints apart.

Unless all you want to photograph is rocks and trees or buildings (borrrrrring!)....you'll have to live with imperfection...

The Big Lie that Adams and his followers have promulgated, is that you must use their 'system' or else you will be lost...

The zone system is a fraud. You don't need it, and it will bring you nothing but grief...

[Pim]

You really got me interested in your work Ornello!

[CJBas]

Each of Adams' trilogy (Camera/Netative/Print) contain a great deal of valuable information. No mater what anyone tries to tell you the value of understanding the Zone System is trememdous.

Adams goes into meticulous detail in explaining what it is and the relative effects of exposure and development on film. And that is what the system is really all about. He does show how to be precise with it beyond the point of practicality, but anyone explaining a methematecal of techincal principle will do the same. There's no need to be that precise in actual practice, but there is great value in understanding - to the point of it being instinctual - how exposure determines density and development controls contrast, and how to control your negatives by having an intuitive sense of balancing the two.

Anyone who tells you that such an understanding in idocy or nonsense obviously does not understand the relationship very well themselves.

Adams' book The Print also can be very valuable for the darkroom worker. Sure some of what he recommends is his own personal taste. For example he only toned his prints in selenium for a few seconds. And he says he never used any other toner. Feel free to use whatever toner/s you feel fit your own work. But it can be a good idea to inow what those toners do, chemically, to the print. Also, personally I like a full selenium tone and not just a touch.

But his exposure and edvelopment techniques for paper are as valid and worthwhile now as they were whenthey were written. Light still acts just like it always did. All of ht e tips and techniques he talks are available elsewhere. But if you read The Print cover to cover, I really don't think you'll need another book on printing black and white negatives.