Some favorite Ansel Adam pictures

Ansel Adams

Little,Brown and Ansel Adams: 30 Years

The article reports on the succesful partnership between US photographer ANSEL ADAMS and publisher Little, Brown. Although Ansel died in 1984, his popularity may be at an all time high. At a recent auction, a 1948 print of Adam's Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico sold for $609600 a record for the artist. The sustained sales can be attributed to the accessibility of his work both to photographyexperts and amateurs, and to Little, Brown's enthusiastic commitment to publishing his work. Adriani Lynn:Author Publisher's Weekly: 11/27/2006, Vol. 253 Issue 47, p.22-23, 2 p.

Club Honorees

This article presents information on the Sierra Club's 2006 awards that was presented to conservationists at its annual banquet in San Francisco, California. Gary Braash of Oregon won the Ansel Adams Award for his online photography project related to Global warming. Native Kentuckian Erick Reece received the David R. Brower Award for his book "Lost Mountain," an account of coal mining's devastation in Appalachia. Larry Mehlhaff, former deputy director, was presented the John Muir Award. Sierra: Nov/ Dec 2006, Vol.91 Issue 6, p 82-83, 2p

The Delaware Photographic Society

The article provides information on the Delaware Photographic Society. The society was established in 1931. It is one of the original members of the Photographic Society of America. The society is well known for its exhibition "The Wilmington International Exhibition of Photography." History of the society shows that it was quite small in the early years with its focus on learning more about photography through sharing, and theyscheduled meetings in Wilmington, Delaware with photographers ANSEL ADAMS and Edward Steichen. Jean Timmermeister PSA Journal; Feb 2007, Vol 73 Issue 2, p33-33 1p, 1c

Paying Tribute to Environmental Heroes

The article announces awards given to those people who have contributed in saving the wildlife and wilderness in the US. The Wilderness Society confered the Robert Marshall Award to Terry Tempest Williams, a resident of Utah. Senator Maria Cantwell earned the Ansel Adams Award for her lifelong contribution to the stewardship of America's natural treasures. Tom toles stood the ninth recipients of the Aldo Leopold Award for his distinguished editorial writing.
Wilderness; Dec2006/2007, p53-60, 2p, 4c.

Imagine that a person not familiar with photography is given a mixed pile of ten Ansel Adams, ten Yousuf Karsh and ten Gerry Uelsmann photographs. He or she will have little trouble in sorting them correctly into three correct piles. That is because of the greatly different styles of these three photographers. Think of your own favorite top photographers. The results will generally be the same.

A photographer's style is a consistent, distinctive and recognizable combination of characteristic picture elements in a body of work that define a photographer's particular vision. In that sense it is a restriction of options sometimes even a repetition of motifs from image to image. A style can be thought of as the work an artist creates over and over again. Think Edward Weston, Julia Margaret Cameron, Salvador Dali, Arthur Conan Doyle, Bach, Stravinsky, Bob Dylan.

Style is the "what" of the image itself, not how it was made, the tools you used, or your social style. It is how you see and reproduce an image through self-expression--the recurring underlying themes and patterns. It binds a group of pictures into a whole. It could be called your personal taste. It is something that nobody else has--as unique as handwriting. It separates your images from those of others. There is something about your work that makes it identifiable. It gives your image a distinctive or characteristic mode of expression or presentation. Remember that it is the body of your work, not an individual picture that represents your style.

Elements of Photographic Style

If a photographer uses only subdued color, never uses a border, uses only a vertical format. Does only landscapes, employs certain compositional devices, uses texture, grain and focus in certain ways, we have the beginnings of a style. Within that style, an infinite variety of images can be created.

One characteristic of a typical Ansel Adams photograph is the use of a relatively small number of tones in clearly different zones encompassing white to black. This leaves little room for subtle separation of the halftones in the light areas in the picture. On the other hand, William Mortensen believed in enhancing the separation of these light halftones, at the expense of shadow details. Both were addressing the problem of representing the real-world tonal scale on a sheet of paper with a greatly reduced tonal reproduction capability. Their photographic styles were radically different. Of course, each photographer employed a multitude of elements in his style, not just one. Neither felt restrained by his style--more likely energized.

The elements that make up a given photographic style are infinite in number. However they can be grouped into a few broad categories, such as Subject, Structure Esthetics, and, sometimes, Genre. Subject includes the object being pictured and its broader category, such as landscape, nature or news. Structure includes such elements as composition, order, color, contrast, graphic qualities and tonal distribution. Esthetics includes emotional, symbolic, psychological and abstraction elements. Genre is a broad group style or school, like Group f/64 or "pictorialism."

Some photographers have employed more than one style, perhaps one for landscapes and another for portraits. This does not happen often, and usually not at the same time. Multiple styles make a photographer and his work unrecognizable and unmarketable. Fortunately, even a photographer who does both personal and commercial work will often show a common feeling that runs through all of it.

More than one person can have similar styles, especially if they are members of a special group. Individual members may argue that they personally have no identifiable style. It would be more accurate to say that each individual's style has been submersed to some extent by the constraints or genre imposed by the group itself. Group f/64 was perhaps the most famous example of such a genre.

What Good is Style?

Michael Freeman once wrote that a style becomes a mark of quality or territorial signpost-- a trademark, if you wish. It also provides a framework or focus for your work, even if you do not seek recognition. A cohesive body of work has more lasting power than a random group of photographs.

I have noticed that painters frequently deny that they have a repetitive style, since they view that as a lack of creativity, even though most viewers are somehow able to recognize their work. The truth is that even creativity requires a focus. Your style provides that focus. A style allows viewers to recognize our images as the work of a particular photographer. This doesn't mean that style need be formulaic.

Abandoning the use of a style will let you make many pictures of all kinds. This is not creativity, more likely just randomness. You will be seen as a technician, with all that implies. Without a recognizable style, people may see your prints as no more than derivative of other photographer's work. For some, a personal style is an ego essential. Generally, as viewed by critics and audiences, a photographer who does not have a style is not very good!

At the same time, style alone does not signify excellence. It is just one part of the ongoing search for perfection.

Discover and Strengthen Your Personal Photographic Style

A recognizable style is rare among photographers--snapshooters in particular. But it is a desired attribute among many serious photographers. There are many ways you can discover and strengthen your personal style.

Years ago it was easy to have a unique personal style. Not only was there little competition, but many photographers had few opportunities to regularly view the work of others. In the earliest days, every picture was a first. Today the photographer is inundated with images in magazines, on television and the internet, as well as in galleries. Everywhere there are overexposed traditions.

Your personal photographic style reflects the way you see. Your personality, previous experiences, environment, training, interests, exposure to arts in all media, and your aptitude influence it. These are the source of your personal sense of photographic esthetics. It is this that helps you determine how you will depict the subject and how close you came to that ideal. Your style is the personal criteria you use to decide whether your image is acceptable. It's you.

It will likely take you many images and years to discover your own voice. Over time you will begin to do certain things over and over again--those things that you come to believe make the best pictures. For some time you may not recognize that your own style is developing, or that you have a style at all. Listen closely to your friends when they look at your pictures--they will tell you.

Your style provides you with a set of guidelines or photographic approaches that you have developed through countless hours of trial and error. These guidelines provide you with a filter for more easily creating new and creative images. If you like, think of this filter as nothing more than your growing personal taste.

Exercise Your Individuality

Look at what you like to photograph, and how you represent those subjects. Ask yourself how you decide which photographs are good, which are bad. What criteria do you use? Would you put it on your wall? Do your pictures have an individuality that distinguishes them from those of others? Does it represent a new way of seeing or rendering the subject? Does it convey something the viewer has not seen, known or thought of before? Would people say, "That is a great picture?"

Take lots of pictures. Try out different styles and style components you have never used before. Experiment with new pictorial approaches and picture ideas. Break some rules--do your critical selecting later. Work with a group of other photographers in a competitive learning situation. The Society's American and Canadian Portfolios are wonderful tools for this.

Look at your favorite photographs, posters and paintings by others. Try to determine what characteristics make them unique. Compare them to your work and decide what you like and dislike about each. Your public or university library is a great resource for pictures. The internet is not so good, due to low image resolution and size. In addition, most pictures on the internet have not gone through any kind of independent evaluation process, so the average quality is low.

Try emulating some well-known photographers' styles for practice as you develop your voice. Consider Margaret Bourke-White's monumental images, Ralph Gibson's tension-filled masterpieces, Uelsmann's fantasies, or Feininger's telephotos. And don't forget Weegee. I regularly explore 100-year-old photographs and books for inspiration. Perhaps some of their style elements can be combined differently, or will energize you in other ways. If you are lucky enough, take advantage of an opportunity to teach. It's a great way to learn.

Ask yourself what is it that makes you like the work of these other photographers--how you decide whether another photographer's prints are good or not. Ask why you became serious about photography in the first place. Ask what kind of pictures you really like to make. Ask yourself why you choose to make that kind of image. You will likely find that the very scenes and subjects that inspire you to photograph contain elements of your developing style. Use those photographs to motivate you to photograph different subjects similarly. The subject is not as important a style characteristic as you might think. A Van Gogh self-portrait and a Van Gogh landscape are immediately recognizable as two pictures done in the same style and by the same artist.

Your personal style can be revealed to you through others. Listen carefully to what others say about your photographs. They will see things that you don't. Sometimes my son will say to me "Ah, that's one of your best kind," or "I saw a picture the other day that looked like one of yours." He is identifying some stylistic features of my work that I haven't recognized. As I build on these, a more focused body of work will emerge. So ask your friends what your pictures look like.

As you examine your pictures and seek to become aware of your style potential, look for common threads. Then decide whether or not to move in that direction. It is important to include your failures as well as you successes, since your failures may indicate a direction you are attempting to go as you develop. Look for happy accidents. Think of your style as a pilgrimage, rather than an end. And do photograph what you like, rather than what you think you should.

Make a few mistakes on purpose. They may surprise you. In fact these may be a precursor to your future direction. Try something really different while on every outing. Give yourself an occasional "assignment." A few years ago, during a barren winter, I gave myself the assignment of taking pictures of doors. The result was more than a dozen final pictures that I would have otherwise never made.

From time to time, every photographer is subject to editorial genre pressure, especially from critics, magazines, books, museums, universities, galleries and juries. Pictorialist Mortensen was pushed almost into oblivion by Group f/64, who felt that he was out of touch. Similarly there may be certain rules or taboos that cause your pictures to be rejected by your peers. While there may be no reason to modify your style, it is wise to be aware of current fashions. Whatever you do, ask yourself whether you are taking pictures for yourself or others.

Artistic Growth

Over time, you will begin to develop a consistent way of seeing, reacting and photographing every subject. It will go slowly. It may only become apparent when you view a large group of your photographs taken over a period of years. You will discover that certain elements or characteristic traits in your earlier images are being repeated in present work perhaps almost automatically. From there, you can continually refine your basic style. This is artistic growth. Rarely, your style may not get "better" but instead jump into something new. Keep asking yourself why you have included certain elements into your style. If you can't answer that question, neither can your viewer.

The fact that we usually equate personal style with the masters suggest that it requires both inborn talent and intensity--Garry Winogrand took hundreds of thousands of pictures. Perhaps we cannot achieve greatness ourselves. But we can achieve a level of excellence that is recognized by our peers

You might decide to never concern yourself with your style, and just make the best pictures you can. That's all right--it's your choice. Stylistically, however, your pictures may still be a lot more identical than you realize.

In any case, those who develop their own recognizable style that communicates powerfully are the photographers we will remember.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): David. In the idealized pictorial style of William Mortensen. The simple composition is based on a dominant mass. It has flat lighting and no shadows. Graduation in the highlights was enhanced using Mortensen's abrasion tone process, with powdered graphite and pumice.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): The Three Nuns of New Orleans. Interest here is in the compositional structure and human interest with the three "nuns" and two tiny people walking past the contrast between new and old.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): Any mention of products or services in this article or anywhere else in the PSA Journal does not constitute an endorsement or approval of those items.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): Stargazer. I call this contemporary pictorialism The focus is on texture and tonality rather than the subject itself.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): Dream. Composition, color, mystery and wonder are the overriding elements.

~~~~~~~~

I liked this photograph for several reasons. Their ingenuity and forethought shown through in the shelters they built. This particular one, with its roundness and geometric stability was no exception. This particular shape gave the Oklahoma tornadoes it is famous for little to catch hold of. Mant native Americans believed that evil spirits hung out in the corners of square buildings. Apparently happiness truly does runs in a circular motion.

I love this photograph. It says so very much about their pride and even glimpses into their solemness. The color, obviously being afterwards gives the viewer a clue into the rich hues of color they used in their clothing. Because of their constant exposure to the elements, their skin became progressively weathered. This man was obviously younger than most of the other males photographed. It is hard to tell whether or not he minded being photographed. In this and many of the other photographs their humaness shows through. I don't believe the Europeans truly saw them as savages, but in fact suffered from extreme greediness. They say anyone who came in close contact with the various tribes were forever changed.

I liked this photograph even though she didn't look to thrilled about being there. Many of these photographs appear this way. I am glad there was a record of the native Americans in this country and their way of life for this and future generations. I think that Native Americans had to be the smartest folks with their practicality and design. They never hemmed garments, but would fringe the article to fit. They were artist in their own right and in every way, with their beadwork and attention to detail. They also managed to incorporate functionality into their handiwork. I was surprised to see their short haircuts in this and other of this photographers pictures. I thought they always kept their hair long.

Buffalo still run wild on the plains of Oklahoma. This is not an unusual sight to see. I have even had a herd run in front of the car when you get down to places like the Arbuckle mountains. The buffalo came very close to becoming extinct even during this last century, but thanks to laws to protect endangering species, they have begun to multiply once again. The native Americans used every part of the Buffalo to live by. They never shot them unless they were needed. They were so much more advanced than than the Europeans in Environmental and the ecological sciences.

Buffalo still run wild on the plains of Oklahoma. This is not an unusual sight to see. I have even had a herd run in front of the car when you get down to places like the Arbuckle mountains. The buffalo came very close to becoming extinct even during this last century, but thanks to laws to protect endangering species, they have begun to multiply once again. The native Americans used every part of the Buffalo to live by. They never shot them unless they were needed. They were so much more advanced than than the Europeans in Environmental and the ecological sciences.

I liked this particular photograph because you can see the cracked earth. It is so dry there at times, but this much foilage is usually only present in the southeast part of the state still today. Trees are a luxury there even today. This pictures gives you a good idea of the climate just by looking at it. If it was in color the sand or earth would be red or almost orange. It is beautiful to look at, but very difficult to get out of clothing.

J210 Wk1 Homework

After reading the article from Newsweek, and then viewing several videos on youtube I became sick to my stomach. I believe these are a powerful tool for the insurgents trying to shape public opinion. To a people who are technologically backward or behind Westerns, This must be impressive footage and computer technology.
By comparing Bush with Hitler repeatedly they are creating a visual image of a mass murdereding bigot that I am sure is staying with them.
Visual communication is so very powerful and in this case intimidating. The people on one hand see the insurgents blowing away our military...the strongest in the world. This sends a message that they should put up with what has been happening there, or they will be next.
On the other hand it is portraying our President as a man who could care less about the number of casualties incurred during these battles. 'He even acts like Hitler.' To a people who have never really known what it is like to be free, these are confusing messages. Like for all violence victims change takes time, and staying alive becomes the goal at any cost. It would be hard for anyone to see past their immediate circumstance to believe that there is something different or better than what they have experienced in the past.
Besides what the West have begun to experience- PTSD; something they have experienced their entire lives; they are refugees at best. How do you plan for the future trying to survive the day?
If seeing is believing, and I am sure it is for these people; the insurgents must be right. After all if you can't trust your own eyes, what can you trust?
The saddest element of this to me is that many of the insurgents themselves are probably victims in some way; having been brainwashed to join the cause at a very young age. Where does it all stop? How does one win a battle against such a deep set foe... education I guess is the only answer I can come up with.