sasaki@harvard.ARPA (Marty Sasaki) (08/17/85)
While I find the various technical discussions interesting and useful,
I find these philosophical discussions the most interesting. Here's
more of what my good friend David calls "pseudo-intellectual aesthetic
clap-trap". This note will be rambling, and very long, and I apologize
and give warning. Please don't flame, there is always the "n" key.
I think that dogma can be very dangerous, at the worst, and limiting
at best. This is not to say that I don't engage in dogmatic thinking,
but that one must be very careful.
I learned a lot about photography at the (now defunct) MIT Creative
Photography Lab. The staff consisted at that time of Minor White
(director), Jonathan Green, and Peter Laytin, all very skilled
technically, and all producing beautiful photographs. I managed to
study with Minor White who was a very active advocate of the Zone
System.
I walked around with a view camera and my Weston Master V meter,
taking exposures, writing notes, and all of that. I then returned to
the darkroom, developed my negatives exactly the right way, and made
technically beautiful prints. I was an expert craftsman, but I was
hardly an artist. I also spent a lot of time thinking about things
like "trancendance", and "equivalence".
Minor White was very dogmatic. He was a Catholic mysticist who
translated much of his mysticism into his photography. He extended
Steiglitz's concept of the photographic (and by extention, the
semantic) equivalent into the photographic sequence. All of his
students *believed* in the Zone System.
It was very easy to get wrapped up in the equipment and the technique
and forget entirely about the reason for the equipment and the
technique. It was also very easy to get caught up in thinking about
photography and what you are trying to do aesthetically and end up not
doing anything.
I was guilty of this in school, and find myself slipping into it
again, more often than I like. I like gadgets quite a bit and had to
restrain myself when the Canon A-1, and more recently the Minolta
Maxxum, came out. These cameras are really neat toys, but I know that
they won't make me a better photographer.
On a lark, and because it was on sale, and also because it was a
*really* neat toy, I bought an SX-70. This changed my thinking about
photography completely. Using the Zone System was almost impossible
since 1) the only adjustment was the lighten and darken knob, 2) you
could only crudely change the development (warming or cooling the
ejected print) and 3) it was color. (As an aside, I find it interesting
that Ansel Adams' first published color photograph was an SX-70.)
Because of this I spent more time taking pictures and experimenting.
I still use the Zone System when I drag out a view camera. I also
find myself placing a tone on a certain zone when using my 35mm. I
even do this when shooting color. When XP-1 came out I did the film
speed tests and even tried to vary the contrast by changing the
development (don't do it, it doesn't work at all). The difference
between now and back in my school days is that now the photograph is
what is important. I am still a pretty good craftsman, and I'm
working my way towards being an artist. If I had completely accepted
Minor White's dogma, I would not have grown as a photographer.
Before closing (finally), let me say that Minor White was a really
great photographer and a pretty good teacher. His dogma and
insistence on the Zone System have taught me enough about practical
photo sensitometry that I almost always get the exposure right. Above
all, he taught me to care about photography and photographs.
To those of you in the Boston area, Peter Laytin is teaching
photography for the Cambridge Adult Education program. He is an
excellant teacher, and a fine photographer.
--
----------------
Marty Sasaki net: sasaki@harvard.{arpa,uucp}
Havard University Science Center phone: 617-495-1270
One Oxford Street
Cambridge, MA 02138