> Ansel Adams was able to break the mold of people's stereotypes of photography.
> It is because of him (and others), that a nature scenic could be considered fine
> art in the USA. Consider that when you are hawking your nature prints somewhere
> online as something worthy of being framed and displayed as art.
Ollie:
I couldn't agree more with this. The technical quality of Ansel Adam's work had little to do
with what made him important, it was all in the timing. Today, when I visit local art fairs
around the States, nature photography is one of the most common "arts." Every last
photographer shoots exactly the same way; using the rules laid down by Ansel Adams.
Adams didn't write those textbooks so nature photographers could follow him, he did them
because they codified the way most commerical photographers worked in his day.
As for Robert, beautiful photos, but nothing that makes the sort of original statement that
those folks from California made eighty years ago. Robert; what made Adams better was
timing. There were vast numbers of serious photographers in his day and few chose to shoot
what he was. I urge you to learn about the context and chronology of fine art photography so
you can understand how this all fits.
The impact of Ansel Adams can't be understated. A vast number of photographers are stuck
on what he was doing and have done little to move the art of nature photography forward.
This business of finding sharper lenses or more beautiful light is a sideshow, the art world
has moved forward and the commercial world needs something else.
Brian Yarvin
Author, Educator, Photographer
http://www.brianyarvin.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment