7 ms·
Being a photo geek, I’d love to know more about the technical side of these photos. Angel Adams is most often associated with large format (8x10 inch or larger
by abruzzi 8y ago
Being a photo geek, I’d love to know more about the technical side of these photos. Angel Adams is most often associated with large format (8x10 inch or larger) sheet film and zone system exposure and developing. But the subject matter of these photos is not conducive to that kind of photography. We’re these shot on 35mm or was he using a handheld large format (like a press camera)?
I’d also love to know the film used.
- rpeden 8y agoWhen I saw these pictures before, I noticed they were all square. So probably not 35mm. You could expose square photos on 35mm film, but it would be unusual. So probably likely medium format of some kind? Adams was known to use the Zeiss Ikonta B, which would have been available in the 1930s: https://www.cameraquest.com/zikontb.htm https://www.cameraquest.com/zikontb.htm So I think there's a decent chance it was used for these shots, but I've found no definite confirmation of this...yet.
- ghaff 8y agoHe used a variety of cameras. [1] [1] https://improvephotography.com/53059/what-kind-of-camera-did-ansel-adams-use/ https://improvephotography.com/53059/what-kind-of-camera-did... Your guess seems likely. He apparently also used a Hasselblad 500C a fair bit but that's a later camera.
- rpeden 8y agoYou're definitely correct, the Zeiss was one among many he used over the course of his career. I knew about the 500c but didn't mention it here because he wouldn't have been able to use it for these shots unless he were a time traveler. :)
- abruzzi 8y agoGood catch. I was looking at them on my iPad, and the site puts enough junk on my screen that I can’t see the entire photo at once. That would also make a 4x5 press camera unlikely. It seems the 6x6 folder makes sense.
- pvarangot 8y agoHe had a huge and spectacular collection of cameras and used all of them a lot. This most likely are taken with the Hasselblad 500C, he has a couple of very well known pictures with the 80mm and the 120mm and the dates match. If you are into Ansel and gear get "The Making of 40 Photographs" were he details gear, exposure, composition and scouting and development process for 40 pictures. Also I think most of his well known pictures are 4x5 and not 8x10, he has a lot of spectacular 8x10s because he liked to contact print big, like the famous portrait of Edward Weston sitting in the tree in Carmel.
- village-idiot 8y agoThe 500C was introduced in 1957, well over a decade after these photos.
- pvarangot 8y agoOh, then it's probably his Ikonta, the other 6x6 camera he used. It's a foldable. He also had a TLR but he seldom used it for people.
- sizzzzlerz 8y agoWhile technically proficient, as one expects from Ansel Adams, these images don't have the same feel or impact one gets from his classic landscape images. Looking closely at them, I wouldn't necessarily be able to attribute them to Adams in many cases if I didn't already know they were his. In contrast, when you see one of his Sierra Nevada images or photographs of the National Parks, you know immediately that they could only have been his. I have to wonder if he treated this assignment casually, as a means to make some money, as opposed to making art. It may also show an Ansel Adams operating outside his wheelhouse, applying his eye and skills but being a bit uncomfortable with the genre. In either case, I wouldn't mind being able to hang these on my wall.
- dan-robertson 8y agoThe article notes that he wasn’t very impressed with them and that he felt he hadn’t ever gotten the right weather for photographs. The main problem was likely that he didn’t have enough time to get the photos he wanted.
- saltcured 8y agoSome of his best landscape prints took years to produce. His photography is not about serendipitous "found" imaging, nor documenting a scene you were likely to see with your own eyes. Those romantic and dramatic landscapes existed in his mind, and I really mean he produced the images. He used the wilderness and environment like set pieces for studio work, and also manipulated the exposures and printing quite a bit to get some of the dramatic lighting. His technical skill was only one part of what made his art. His patience and deep familiarity with the land was also essential. He traveled the same areas repeatedly, imagined a composition, and returned later to get the season, weather, and light the way he wanted. Many return visits were not as fruitful as hoped, since nature doesn't have a reservation system. These urban photos seem more journalistic in nature. Not only was his time compressed for the work, the nature of the subject lacks the permanence to pre-visualize a composition and return to capture it at a more ideal time.
- sizzzzlerz 8y agoIt is well known that much of the impact those images make on people is due, in large part, to the time he spent making prints from the negatives. He was a master at that. I like you term, "journalistic", in referring to this work. That is concept I was thinking about but the word didn't come to me at that time.
- village-idiot 8y agoIirc he used quite a bit of medium format and 35mm later in his life, when he got too old to lug around the large format camera and tripod. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if he used those for more mobile work.