On 2013-12-08 15:31, Randy Little wrote: > Ansel Adams is not the be all photographer of all time. No, of course not. But I think he's an important voice in the field, and I agree with the particular maxim I quoted and like the way he stated it. > I would be > the words and works of Stieglitz above Adams ANY DAY. I would put > mortensen in that same realm. What comes from the camera far from > needs to be the final result. It can be but it for sure doesn't need > to be. It always *can* be of course. But the vast majority of the time it can be better. Look at the attachment of photographers from Henry Cartier-Bresson to Sebastio Salgado to the printer Voja Mitrovic for somewhat more recent examples. (The more you're working in the studio, where everything can be controlled, the more you can if you want dispense with expert printing; but when we're talking about art, that's rarely coming out of controlled studio conditions.) -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info Nikon DSLR photo list: http://d4scussion.com
