Hi, Ted...I like that your view of photography is from the perspective of the images and the creative minds behind them, rather than the perspective of camera brands and RUclips "fotog" buzzwords. You spend a lot of your personal time sharing your knowledge and passion for the image itself and with a manner that is enjoyable and inspiring. I always feel like I have gained something useful here. Thank you
I think that digital photography is perceived in a different way than the way we used to perceive film photography. I feel like it has something to do with the abundance of content combined with the speed the new content is produced with. Whilst film photography seems to be a form of expression which takes more time to make, it also seems to keep the attention of the audience for longer. In times of Arbus, Kertesz, Depardon, Sieff, Capa, Cartier-Bresson, Lange, Frank or any other film photographers I would consider classic masters of their art, photographs were made to last and convey a message, not to be technically perfect. With digital photography, when so many people have absolutely amazing cameras and lenses, we started focusing more on getting perfect image quality, aesthetically pleasing images as opposed to focusing more on the meaning behind it...
Yeah, the digital photography reflects the world today: the awesome speed made the perception to follow it. Times have changed and Art expresses that transformation hence the digital . Thanks, Ted . The classics are fundamental .
What I love about the color images is that he his still making them in the “black and white style” if that makes sense. He is using color, yes, but he is really only using color in the foreground/subject matter. The background, while in color technically, are almost greyscale. So they are telling a story of say: innocence (strong colors, like the pink) against a drab background (which is still in color, and might be a pale blue hue or something to that effect, but is basically gray in comparison). You are getting a similar emotional effect as if it were a B/W image. You can clearly (or at least I can in my own opinion) see the influence of B/W in the color photos.
Even if I'm born in 1982 and only know photography through digital slrs, I do come here for the "non-gear-photoshop-tech" angle of your show. You're unique in talking about phtography as a visual art and not just a technical knowledges race to win.
I absolutely love Raymond Depardon's work... Thanks for the introduction.. I'm hoping to find more on him in bookstores and RUclips. Also, thank you for all of THIS... Art Of Photography..
Absolutely wonderful episode. It's good to be able to rely on your channel for photo history analysis; it feels like digital workflow and gear talk is everywhere on the internet.
Hi Ted, It is a good talk about Raymond. I was lucky to see his body of work in several major exhibitions in Paris . I own one of his books too and thanks for your hard work and i really enjoy it . Digital photography is just a fraction apart of my negative work. I keep that as a second side to my photography. I am interested in photography in general and digital is just a different aspect for me . Thanks again for your great work.
Thank you so much for another great episode! Regarding your question, I think it will be interesting to see episodes about using vintage/legacy lens on digital bodies. With the latest manual focus aid that some of the cameras manufactures offered today. It seems to be an interesting topic when people can now bring a vintage lens once used by their parents or grandparents back to life. Maybe we can discuss the different era of optic designs, mounting system and compatibility or the types of coating being applied to the lens and how they effect the look and feel of the result images. Maybe we can talk about a few lens that had reached a “legendary” status such as Carl Zeiss 50mm f1.8 Ultron, Voigtlander 35mm f3.4 Skoparex, Schneider Kreuznach C-Curtagon 35/2.8, just to name a few. We can discuss how they became legendary and if they really live up to their “legendary” status. Cheers, Brian
Thanks for a cool show Ted, love all the film stuff, the history is great, Would like to see some Digital info, its what most of the world is using every day,would love to get back into film ,but cost is a factor, used an Onlympus Om1 Om2, Om 40, Also have a Kiev 4A with a full set of Jupiter glass, Currently use mirrorless , Pentax Q and Oly Epl3, to me its all good, If i had an economical way of processing film and a ready source,Not so easy to come by as an SD Card, I would love to do get back into it. Anyway keep up the great work it is appreciated,Thanks Jim B, Jim Briggs
Jim Briggs sure cost is a factor, but I really think it evens out. You spend less on the cameras and cards ;-) Maybe I could do a series on economical film development.
Thanks Ted. Excellent episode. You're right about Raymond Depardon being not well recognised. If you make episodes on digital post-production, I'd certainly watch them (as I did in the past - I still remember your advice that film is exposed for shadows, and digital for highlights; that was real useful to know).
Thank you for the introduction to Depardon. Another well done episode! As far as your question about more digital photography coverage, I don’t see why it should be treated any different from other forms of photography, whether it is medium format, large format, 35mm or Polaroid. It is simply a means of capturing an image and carries its own style, restrictions and workflow. Introductions to specific models of digital cameras, in the same vein as your film camera series, is probably not needed since modern equipment is covered well other places. What would be nice to see is an episode on suggested workflow. Digital cameras lend themselves to more frames taken than their film counterparts and many, including myself, can have problems choosing the frames to keep and the frames to discard. This dilemma transcends the medium and is not a technical problem, but can be amplified once one no longer is limited to a roll of 24 or 36 exposures. Digital workflow: The process of taking a good photo (in camera) Throwing out the bathwater w/o throwing out the baby (discarding bad photos) Discarding photos before or after importing into editing SW such as Lightroom or Aperture. Mobile shoots and mobile editing and potentially having two LR catalogs (laptop and home computer)
Yeah... I agree. One thing I've been struggling with in digital - and he reason I've turned to film - is the emphasis on post production, and quantity over quality when shooting. I like the convenience of digital, but can't help falling into the habit of snapping countless pictures and spending hours combing through them on my computer. I'd be interested to know your views on the differences between film and digital workflow and how one can maybe inform the other. That might be a way to include digital on your show from a more holistic view.
Great show, love the new directions with format and content, truly one of the best photog channels! Looking forward to the shootout as well! While I'd love to hear your insights on digital, RUclips and the web in general is saturated, whereas good deep talk on photography as art and film- specific is a niche you really excel at, so I'd say, keep up just what you're doing- it's exactly what I want!
I have two books of Depardon that I bought in Paris. One is “Un moment si doux” and the other is “Paris Journal”. Depardon is a Pulitzer-prize (1977) winner.
theartofphotography Ted, another great show. I am going to take a different path than the comments above. I agree that digital is important and digital is what most of us shoot most of the time. But what is not offered by other channels and sites is the contextual history of photography as an art form. You are doing a great job with that. I look forward to your videos because I know that you will cover material missing elsewhere. For those who want to know about workflow and digital process there are fantastic resources all over the web. I subscribe to Kelbyone.com, lynda.com and creativelive.com. Those sites, amongst many others, provided thousands of hours of education on digital process, workflow, compositing, printing and so forth. A quick search on RUclips will list hundreds of videos on those topics. Your channel is unique in providing an appreciation of the history of photography and exposing viewers to photographers we may never have known about. Perhaps to satisfy the desires of those who want more digital coverage you can supply links to the sites and photographers whose methods you respect. Thanks for the Art of Photography and please keep offering such great and inspiring information!
This is a rather simple idea but discussing the argument of which is believed to be more superior; film or digital; could be interesting. It's seems to be a rising issue on the net in recent times and discussing how each has its own application and merits could be a good introduction to more shows with a digital theme. This could even digress further into discussing photographers who left film behind for a digital workflow and vice versa.
Cost is no longer a factor for B&W film shooting. I process at home in the bathroom, then scan the negs. An Epson V550 scans more than well enough for the web and if I really love an image I have the option of printing on my Canon Pro9500 MkII inkjet printer, or have a wet print made at a lab. I acquired all the above items dirt cheap. Nothing in the digital world can ever compare with the satisfaction that comes with taking a photograph made a vintage Rolleiflex, Mamiya, Hasselblad, etc. It's a sublime reward no digital robot camera will ever provide for you.
Dear Ted, I do love analog but digital post processing is something I would definately like to see more of. Specially infrared, and color processing. Color to b&w is something i like as well
I think its refreshing that you bring the film 'genre' of photography via your show's to us. We do tend to get carried away that digital is the all singing all dancing answer to image making. We can learn a lot from using film cameras as well as studying the old masters. There are some that still use film today (Michael Kenna as one example) that produce stunning work. Don't get get me wrong here their are some fantastic digital only photographer's in the world today with equal talent and who we can learn from. I wonder though do we think that the old master is a better photographer because he had inferior equipment than the digital user of today, that begs the question? There a lot of shows out there concentrating on digital photography work, tutorial and equipment reviews, personally I think you have created a niche for your programme that is unsurpassed. I say 'don't fix whats not broke" (English saying) Anyhow a couple of photographers that I'd like to suggest Ted... Michael Levin www.michaellevin.ca/new-work Jonathan Chritchley www.jonathanchritchley.net/gallery.html and a good friend of mine Alex Lambrechts alexlambrechts.viewbook.com/ all the best talk soon...
Please do few episodes on digital ! Not really on how to process ( step by step type of videos) but rather how to develop a style in digital photography and stay consistent. I find it hard keeping my photographs in the same color style when developing each photograph independently without using any VSCO presets or something similar.
Hi Ted, I'm originally from Glasgow so its fascinating the see it featured! You mentioned that you aren't sure about why the work was commissioned, while I don't have any first hand information I can theorise with the benefit of some local knowledge. Around 1980 was, I believe, when one of the larger shipbuilding yards on the Clyde located at Scotstoun previously known as the Charles Connell yard, but at the time of its closure known as Scotstoun Marine Ltd, closed after 119 years in operation. The decline in shipbuilding and heavy industry on the Clyde is complicated and especially during the 80s involved a lot of complex politics, corporate manoeuvring and labour relations issues. This wasn't unique to Glasgow by any means in the UK. My guess would be this was intended to document the social effects of the decline in general (perhaps prompted by the closure) hence somewhat grim choices of subject matter! Anyway hope that's of some interest, really enjoy all aspects of the channel - thanks for all your hard work!
I am not 100% sure, but the assignment was to shoot the difference between the middle class and the working class in Glasgow, but he couldn't find the middle class. So in a sense the assignment failed in the eye of the Times editor.
I love all the history stuff, for me it is what defines the channel. Your knowledge and excellent commentary really shines through, I am an exclusive digital person, as that is when I first really picked up a camera but it doesn't appeal to me as a topic like the history of photography and learning about film (which i will do myself one day soon, i hope). One topic of interest in relation to digital would be the extent to which digital has managed to penetrate the world of art photography and high standard photojournalism, when was it first taken seriously (if at all in terms of 'fine art'), Do the current Magnum guys shoot film or digital, that kind of thing....
Crackin vid :-) I've never thought to look up Magnum's web page, BUT, I will now! As for your question..... What attracted me to your video's was the fact that they are full of 'Old school' info! of which I have learned a lot through them!! I can go to most photography vids on youtube and find out ANYTHING about digital!!! I can't with 'Old school (real)' photography!! That is what keeps me coming back!! :-) By the way........Glasgow is pronounced as 'Glazgo' Ted :-) Not Glasscow ;-)
Thanks, Raymond Depardon is one of my all time favorite photographers. He's a celebrity in France, but outside of his county indeed he is quite unknown. He uses Leica M cameras a lot, and more recently he also worked in large format. (All analog ofcourse.) He is a prolific publisher of photobooks, but also an internationally renowned documentary film maker. Check out his films, they are amazing. He writes beautifully too, but you would need to read French, as he's not widely translated. If you want to know more about his Glasgow color photographs, he talks about them in this video (with English subtitles) that was done after his 2013 exhibition in Paris, 'Un moment si doux', about his color photography. Exposition « Raymond Depardon, un moment si doux » (full version)
Hey! Im new to Depardon’s work! Seeing you seem to know alot about him… what Photo Books of Depardon would you recommend? I particularly like the Black and white work, but any recommendations are welcome.
@@Midas87 Hi, he made (still makes) a lot of books. I think a great introduction is 'Voyages', it gives a general view of his work. Some of my favorites are Manicomio (about Italian lunatic asylums), Errance (just going where the road leads him) and Manhattan Out (Street photography). But tbh there are many more. Also check out his documentaries if you can, like San Clemente, 10e Chambre : Instants d'audiences, and maybe my favorite, Faits Divers (about the Paris police).
@@EchteSuperErnie thank you for responding (so quickly as well)! I was afraid you wouldnt with your initial comment being years old. Im ordering Voyages straight away. Again, thanks so much!
First things first: I really love your show(s), Ted! The very first comment captured perfectly how I feel about them, too. Alternative/special printing techniques would be an awesome topic to cover, even more so if they can be applied to digital photography, too. Maybe in "photo threes"? Maybe even in a separate show? I'd love to learn much more about that "final step" which I've just started to explore. Cheers, David
Great episode on a photographer I've never heard of, but will definitely have to check out some more now. As for the question posted, I think I'm in the camp (is there a camp? Do we get badges? ;-)) of not really needing a focus on digital stuff on this show. There are so many other channels, websites and outlets that offer post-production training that it isn't needed here. What IS needed though, and one of the reasons why I've stuck around since about show ten or so is the focus on the ART of photography, not on the technique. I like the why rather than the how...so to speak. That being said I don't plan on unsubscribing if there is more focus on digital things either. Since I so far shoot all digital I will no doubt pick up interesting things from those shows too. :-)
Answering your question at the end of the episode: i think dont talking about "how to use curves in PS" or "addig realistic film grain to your digital photo" makes this show to stand out of the 99999 others. I really like all the three weekly episodes mostly because of their deep (or almost deep) photo history and analog photography related stuff. Maybe because I found your chanel 1,5-2 years ago when I was looking for some dark room techiques on the web. And i've found many of them at your chanel! Regarding your previous "official" episodes. They were a bit boring to me, so i've skiped them, as there was too much information and episodes on twin-lens cameras. But the episode with comparing the same shot, shot with different cameras sounds really interesting. No other show does that, imho. Thank you for sharing that much information with the communtity outta here every week! Best!
Ted, it would be cool if you did an entire episode dedicated to the history of Magnum. By the way, as I was typing this comment, I noticed at around 3:00 you said the agency has existed for over a century, which isn't true. It was formed in 1947. Which I'm sure you were aware of but didn't word correctly. Anyhow, very informative episode, as always! This is definitely one of my favorite channels on RUclips.
I really enjoy these photolit episodes. This is a selfish request, but I'd like to see some episodes on large format photography and gear, specifically 4x5. The digital photography I'm slightly apprehensive of just because it is everywhere on RUclips, however I know you'll break away from the norm anyway. Less tech and more photography when it comes to digital.
Ted, Thanks for the huge effort that you put into the show. Regarding your question: I would like to hear your opinion on what impact the digital camera has had on photography as an art form. Also what is the latest thinking in the fine art world about digital photography? Are artists using digital photography to produce images on new medium like canvas and metal. If so how is this received, critiqued or accepted? Are there any new artists using these types of printed medium? If so who are they? Where would one go to see their work? With digital photography, I have often thought that pushing the shutter button is just the first step in making an image and that processing the image can make the image say so much more. What do you think about that? Thanks, John.
Another excellent episode. Do you know anyone that does night B&W? I've looked and looked and can't find urban long exposure black and white photographers. That's the kind of photography I'm in to and would like to see what some of the top photographers are doing.
it would be a shame to waste your precious time on post production and digital... my advice is: go on like this, it's entertaining and original. Thank you for your work... I can't wait to see the tlr shootout episode ^^
Hi Ted love the page, I have been struggling to find an affordable enlarger for 8x10 negatives so I have decided to build my own but I could use some advice as to what lens I should use as the foundation of my build. Would like to run 4x5's with it as well but the bread and butter with will be 8x10's. Thanks
Dear Ted I think this show is special because it is NOT! about getting the newest stuff. The joy about making pictures and learn to see pictures, is a lot more interesting. And of course - real film...
Almost everything is digital today. And, a lot of great work is being done. To stay relevant I think you need to include some digital images and contemporary photographers. I do think your videos on older masters and film is important. That's the foundation of great photography today.
Thanks for the show - very much appreciated. If you move on with coveríng digital, please let us know something about shooting raw and what is really important to check out in the post production. Having watched your show about tethered shooting, I decided to get a D40x, because I needed to get a digital cam to practice some shooting with flash, umbrellas and so on. Besides, I'd like to know something about Helmut Newtons work, because I adore his work in black and white - did he shoot with Tri-X? What do I have to do in the developing process to get that certain look in his interieur shots (like in "Big Nudes")? Other photographer who interest me are Wolfgang Tilmanns, Stephen Shore and Dennis Hopper. William Eggleston has already been covered (thanks for that!). P.S.: Very funny thumbnails at the bottom of your screen on the right during your pintrest presentation.
Hi Ted, regarding your question, I was wondering in how far you think lightroom/Photoshop manipulation have become tools for developing a 'photographic style' as opposed to using the camera to create a style? Would the use of these post production tools still be considered photographic style or rather graphic design?
its called photo design. by the way - 'post production', as you call it, is nearly as old as photography itself. people just use the tools and techniques which are available.
Digital photography enables immediate display of the picture, allowing a way to "fix" the image at the moment with another picture, use this advantage as a post processing on site, avoiding major corrections in post processing software. Thank you! Great show.
Like many I have moved on digital as technology moves on and if feel we need to embrace it. Like many though I still cling on to using film from time to time. My thoughts would be why not see if you could compare the characteristics of film and digital by using digital Photoshop techniques on an image to try and create the same effect used by past masters in film developing. perhaps even something as simple as dodge and burn. Sort of Old v New ...... Just a thought!!
Hi Ted uhm... please take care of the other stuff, that appear on the screen, from tumblr for example, at some point of times there've been naked male/female bodies (right bottom corner) and they had nothing to do with the topic of the episode (it was just an ad) and what if parents watch it with kids? Thank you.
theartofphotography Howdy :) Yep, it wouldn't hurt to have a discussion about that too. You understood my point, if you offered the maybe next discussion topic. It's all about expectations.And I guess nobody was offended. It was more like: "Whaaa? Well, surprise!" :) It's a great channel and congrats, because even in Bulgaria it's being followed :)
There's a million+1 channel, magazine, website etc that deals with digital photography, while you have your own niche and do it well, so why branch out? IMO and all that.
![ARGENTINA vs. CHILE [3-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 7](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/De3AWmXzhuA/mqdefault.jpg)
Hi, Ted...I like that your view of photography is from the perspective of the images and the creative minds behind them, rather than the perspective of camera brands and RUclips "fotog" buzzwords. You spend a lot of your personal time sharing your knowledge and passion for the image itself and with a manner that is enjoyable and inspiring. I always feel like I have gained something useful here. Thank you
Thank you Kevin
YES, to digital photography. And I would also appreciate to see some important work in photojournalism that is being done TODAY.
Far and away the most interesting, inspirational and 'grown up' photo show on the net please please please keep 'em coming Ted.
I think that digital photography is perceived in a different way than the way we used to perceive film photography. I feel like it has something to do with the abundance of content combined with the speed the new content is produced with. Whilst film photography seems to be a form of expression which takes more time to make, it also seems to keep the attention of the audience for longer. In times of Arbus, Kertesz, Depardon, Sieff, Capa, Cartier-Bresson, Lange, Frank or any other film photographers I would consider classic masters of their art, photographs were made to last and convey a message, not to be technically perfect. With digital photography, when so many people have absolutely amazing cameras and lenses, we started focusing more on getting perfect image quality, aesthetically pleasing images as opposed to focusing more on the meaning behind it...
Yeah, the digital photography reflects the world today: the awesome speed made the perception to follow it. Times have changed and Art expresses that transformation hence the digital .
Thanks, Ted . The classics are fundamental
.
What I love about the color images is that he his still making them in the “black and white style” if that makes sense. He is using color, yes, but he is really only using color in the foreground/subject matter. The background, while in color technically, are almost greyscale. So they are telling a story of say: innocence (strong colors, like the pink) against a drab background (which is still in color, and might be a pale blue hue or something to that effect, but is basically gray in comparison). You are getting a similar emotional effect as if it were a B/W image. You can clearly (or at least I can in my own opinion) see the influence of B/W in the color photos.
Even if I'm born in 1982 and only know photography through digital slrs, I do come here for the "non-gear-photoshop-tech" angle of your show. You're unique in talking about phtography as a visual art and not just a technical knowledges race to win.
I absolutely love Raymond Depardon's work... Thanks for the introduction.. I'm hoping to find more on him in bookstores and RUclips. Also, thank you for all of THIS... Art Of Photography..
Absolutely wonderful episode. It's good to be able to rely on your channel for photo history analysis; it feels like digital workflow and gear talk is everywhere on the internet.
Hi Ted,
It is a good talk about Raymond. I was lucky to see his body of work in several major exhibitions in Paris . I own one of his books too and thanks for your hard work and i really enjoy it . Digital photography is just a fraction apart of my negative work. I keep that as a second side to my photography. I am interested in photography in general and digital is just a different aspect for me . Thanks again for your great work.
thank you for your great presentation of great photographers!
Thank you so much for another great episode!
Regarding your question, I think it will be interesting to see episodes about using vintage/legacy lens on digital bodies. With the latest manual focus aid that some of the cameras manufactures offered today. It seems to be an interesting topic when people can now bring a vintage lens once used by their parents or grandparents back to life. Maybe we can discuss the different era of optic designs, mounting system and compatibility or the types of coating being applied to the lens and how they effect the look and feel of the result images. Maybe we can talk about a few lens that had reached a “legendary” status such as Carl Zeiss 50mm f1.8 Ultron, Voigtlander 35mm f3.4 Skoparex, Schneider Kreuznach C-Curtagon 35/2.8, just to name a few. We can discuss how they became legendary and if they really live up to their “legendary” status.
Cheers,
Brian
Thanks for a cool show Ted, love all the film stuff, the history is great, Would like to see some Digital info, its what most of the world is using every day,would love to get back into film ,but cost is a factor, used an Onlympus Om1 Om2, Om 40, Also have a Kiev 4A with a full set of Jupiter glass, Currently use mirrorless , Pentax Q and Oly Epl3, to me its all good, If i had an economical way of processing film and a ready source,Not so easy to come by as an SD Card, I would love to do get back into it.
Anyway keep up the great work it is appreciated,Thanks Jim B, Jim Briggs
Jim Briggs sure cost is a factor, but I really think it evens out. You spend less on the cameras and cards ;-) Maybe I could do a series on economical film development.
That would be great Ted, thanks
Thanks Ted. Excellent episode. You're right about Raymond Depardon being not well recognised.
If you make episodes on digital post-production, I'd certainly watch them (as I did in the past - I still remember your advice that film is exposed for shadows, and digital for highlights; that was real useful to know).
Hi Ted! Thanks a lot for introducing me to the great Images from Depardon.
Thank you for the introduction to Depardon. Another well done episode!
As far as your question about more digital photography coverage, I don’t see why it should be treated any different from other forms of photography, whether it is medium format, large format, 35mm or Polaroid. It is simply a means of capturing an image and carries its own style, restrictions and workflow.
Introductions to specific models of digital cameras, in the same vein as your film camera series, is probably not needed since modern equipment is covered well other places.
What would be nice to see is an episode on suggested workflow. Digital cameras lend themselves to more frames taken than their film counterparts and many, including myself, can have problems choosing the frames to keep and the frames to discard. This dilemma transcends the medium and is not a technical problem, but can be amplified once one no longer is limited to a roll of 24 or 36 exposures.
Digital workflow:
The process of taking a good photo (in camera)
Throwing out the bathwater w/o throwing out the baby (discarding bad photos)
Discarding photos before or after importing into editing SW such as Lightroom or Aperture.
Mobile shoots and mobile editing and potentially having two LR catalogs (laptop and home computer)
Nice suggestions Jason - thank you!
Yeah... I agree. One thing I've been struggling with in digital - and he reason I've turned to film - is the emphasis on post production, and quantity over quality when shooting. I like the convenience of digital, but can't help falling into the habit of snapping countless pictures and spending hours combing through them on my computer. I'd be interested to know your views on the differences between film and digital workflow and how one can maybe inform the other. That might be a way to include digital on your show from a more holistic view.
Thanks a lot for this great episode! Yes, I would like to know your opinion on the future of art and photography in the digital era.
the Glasgow project now featured at the Strange & Familiar exhibition at the Barbican, London. Stunning.
Great show, love the new directions with format and content, truly one of the best photog channels!
Looking forward to the shootout as well!
While I'd love to hear your insights on digital, RUclips and the web in general is saturated, whereas good deep talk on photography as art and film- specific is a niche you really excel at, so I'd say, keep up just what you're doing- it's exactly what I want!
I have two books of Depardon that I bought in Paris. One is “Un moment si doux” and the other is “Paris Journal”. Depardon is a Pulitzer-prize (1977) winner.
theartofphotography Ted, another great show. I am going to take a different path than the comments above. I agree that digital is important and digital is what most of us shoot most of the time. But what is not offered by other channels and sites is the contextual history of photography as an art form. You are doing a great job with that. I look forward to your videos because I know that you will cover material missing elsewhere.
For those who want to know about workflow and digital process there are fantastic resources all over the web. I subscribe to Kelbyone.com, lynda.com and creativelive.com. Those sites, amongst many others, provided thousands of hours of education on digital process, workflow, compositing, printing and so forth. A quick search on RUclips will list hundreds of videos on those topics.
Your channel is unique in providing an appreciation of the history of photography and exposing viewers to photographers we may never have known about.
Perhaps to satisfy the desires of those who want more digital coverage you can supply links to the sites and photographers whose methods you respect.
Thanks for the Art of Photography and please keep offering such great and inspiring information!
This is a rather simple idea but discussing the argument of which is believed to be more superior; film or digital; could be interesting. It's seems to be a rising issue on the net in recent times and discussing how each has its own application and merits could be a good introduction to more shows with a digital theme.
This could even digress further into discussing photographers who left film behind for a digital workflow and vice versa.
So good to see some more photo lit stuff Ted, you do it the best
Cost is no longer a factor for B&W film shooting. I process at home in the bathroom, then scan the negs. An Epson V550 scans more than well enough for the web and if I really love an image I have the option of printing on my Canon Pro9500 MkII inkjet printer, or have a wet print made at a lab. I acquired all the above items dirt cheap. Nothing in the digital world can ever compare with the satisfaction that comes with taking a photograph made a vintage Rolleiflex, Mamiya, Hasselblad, etc. It's a sublime reward no digital robot camera will ever provide for you.
Dear Ted, I do love analog but digital post processing is something I would definately like to see more of. Specially infrared, and color processing. Color to b&w is something i like as well
I loved this insightful episode, thanks Ted!
I think its refreshing that you bring the film 'genre' of photography via your show's to us. We do tend to get carried away that digital is the all singing all dancing answer to image making. We can learn a lot from using film cameras as well as studying the old masters. There are some that still use film today (Michael Kenna as one example) that produce stunning work. Don't get get me wrong here their are some fantastic digital only photographer's in the world today with equal talent and who we can learn from. I wonder though do we think that the old master is a better photographer because he had inferior equipment than the digital user of today, that begs the question? There a lot of shows out there concentrating on digital photography work, tutorial and equipment reviews, personally I think you have created a niche for your programme that is unsurpassed. I say 'don't fix whats not broke" (English saying)
Anyhow a couple of photographers that I'd like to suggest Ted...
Michael Levin www.michaellevin.ca/new-work
Jonathan Chritchley www.jonathanchritchley.net/gallery.html
and a good friend of mine Alex Lambrechts alexlambrechts.viewbook.com/
all the best talk soon...
Keep this direction. Digital photography is not interesting. I like the photo history. Thank you for the interesting post.
The way Ted says "Depardon" kills me lmao 😂😂😂😂
Please do few episodes on digital ! Not really on how to process ( step by step type of videos) but rather how to develop a style in digital photography and stay consistent. I find it hard keeping my photographs in the same color style when developing each photograph independently without using any VSCO presets or something similar.
Hi Ted, I'm originally from Glasgow so its fascinating the see it featured! You mentioned that you aren't sure about why the work was commissioned, while I don't have any first hand information I can theorise with the benefit of some local knowledge. Around 1980 was, I believe, when one of the larger shipbuilding yards on the Clyde located at Scotstoun previously known as the Charles Connell yard, but at the time of its closure known as Scotstoun Marine Ltd, closed after 119 years in operation. The decline in shipbuilding and heavy industry on the Clyde is complicated and especially during the 80s involved a lot of complex politics, corporate manoeuvring and labour relations issues. This wasn't unique to Glasgow by any means in the UK. My guess would be this was intended to document the social effects of the decline in general (perhaps prompted by the closure) hence somewhat grim choices of subject matter!
Anyway hope that's of some interest, really enjoy all aspects of the channel - thanks for all your hard work!
I am not 100% sure, but the assignment was to shoot the difference between the middle class and the working class in Glasgow, but he couldn't find the middle class. So in a sense the assignment failed in the eye of the Times editor.
I love all the history stuff, for me it is what defines the channel. Your knowledge and excellent commentary really shines through, I am an exclusive digital person, as that is when I first really picked up a camera but it doesn't appeal to me as a topic like the history of photography and learning about film (which i will do myself one day soon, i hope). One topic of interest in relation to digital would be the extent to which digital has managed to penetrate the world of art photography and high standard photojournalism, when was it first taken seriously (if at all in terms of 'fine art'), Do the current Magnum guys shoot film or digital, that kind of thing....
Crackin vid :-) I've never thought to look up Magnum's web page, BUT, I will now! As for your question..... What attracted me to your video's was the fact that they are full of 'Old school' info! of which I have learned a lot through them!! I can go to most photography vids on youtube and find out ANYTHING about digital!!! I can't with 'Old school (real)' photography!! That is what keeps me coming back!! :-) By the way........Glasgow is pronounced as 'Glazgo' Ted :-) Not Glasscow ;-)
Thanks, Raymond Depardon is one of my all time favorite photographers. He's a celebrity in France, but outside of his county indeed he is quite unknown. He uses Leica M cameras a lot, and more recently he also worked in large format. (All analog ofcourse.) He is a prolific publisher of photobooks, but also an internationally renowned documentary film maker. Check out his films, they are amazing. He writes beautifully too, but you would need to read French, as he's not widely translated.
If you want to know more about his Glasgow color photographs, he talks about them in this video (with English subtitles) that was done after his 2013 exhibition in Paris, 'Un moment si doux', about his color photography.
Exposition « Raymond Depardon, un moment si doux » (full version)
Hey! Im new to Depardon’s work! Seeing you seem to know alot about him… what Photo Books of Depardon would you recommend? I particularly like the Black and white work, but any recommendations are welcome.
@@Midas87 Hi, he made (still makes) a lot of books. I think a great introduction is 'Voyages', it gives a general view of his work. Some of my favorites are Manicomio (about Italian lunatic asylums), Errance (just going where the road leads him) and Manhattan Out (Street photography). But tbh there are many more. Also check out his documentaries if you can, like San Clemente, 10e Chambre : Instants d'audiences, and maybe my favorite, Faits Divers (about the Paris police).
@@EchteSuperErnie thank you for responding (so quickly as well)! I was afraid you wouldnt with your initial comment being years old. Im ordering Voyages straight away. Again, thanks so much!
@@Midas87 haha no thanks, I had completely forgotten about this comment but happy to oblige
First things first: I really love your show(s), Ted! The very first comment captured perfectly how I feel about them, too.
Alternative/special printing techniques would be an awesome topic to cover, even more so if they can be applied to digital photography, too. Maybe in "photo threes"? Maybe even in a separate show? I'd love to learn much more about that "final step" which I've just started to explore.
Cheers,
David
Edit: I actually meant the comment right next to mine..
Great episode on a photographer I've never heard of, but will definitely have to check out some more now.
As for the question posted, I think I'm in the camp (is there a camp? Do we get badges? ;-)) of not really needing a focus on digital stuff on this show. There are so many other channels, websites and outlets that offer post-production training that it isn't needed here. What IS needed though, and one of the reasons why I've stuck around since about show ten or so is the focus on the ART of photography, not on the technique. I like the why rather than the how...so to speak.
That being said I don't plan on unsubscribing if there is more focus on digital things either. Since I so far shoot all digital I will no doubt pick up interesting things from those shows too. :-)
Keep up the good work Ted !
Answering your question at the end of the episode: i think dont talking about "how to use curves in PS" or "addig realistic film grain to your digital photo" makes this show to stand out of the 99999 others. I really like all the three weekly episodes mostly because of their deep (or almost deep) photo history and analog photography related stuff. Maybe because I found your chanel 1,5-2 years ago when I was looking for some dark room techiques on the web. And i've found many of them at your chanel!
Regarding your previous "official" episodes. They were a bit boring to me, so i've skiped them, as there was too much information and episodes on twin-lens cameras. But the episode with comparing the same shot, shot with different cameras sounds really interesting. No other show does that, imho.
Thank you for sharing that much information with the communtity outta here every week!
Best!
Very informative Ted
Ted, it would be cool if you did an entire episode dedicated to the history of Magnum. By the way, as I was typing this comment, I noticed at around 3:00 you said the agency has existed for over a century, which isn't true. It was formed in 1947. Which I'm sure you were aware of but didn't word correctly. Anyhow, very informative episode, as always! This is definitely one of my favorite channels on RUclips.
I really enjoy these photolit episodes. This is a selfish request, but I'd like to see some episodes on large format photography and gear, specifically 4x5. The digital photography I'm slightly apprehensive of just because it is everywhere on RUclips, however I know you'll break away from the norm anyway. Less tech and more photography when it comes to digital.
Ted, Thanks for the huge effort that you put into the show.
Regarding your question: I would like to hear your opinion on what impact the digital camera has had on photography as an art form. Also what is the latest thinking in the fine art world about digital photography? Are artists using digital photography to produce images on new medium like canvas and metal. If so how is this received, critiqued or accepted? Are there any new artists using these types of printed medium? If so who are they? Where would one go to see their work?
With digital photography, I have often thought that pushing the shutter button is just the first step in making an image and that processing the image can make the image say so much more. What do you think about that?
Thanks, John.
Another excellent episode.
Do you know anyone that does night B&W? I've looked and looked and can't find urban long exposure black and white photographers. That's the kind of photography I'm in to and would like to see what some of the top photographers are doing.
it would be a shame to waste your precious time on post production and digital... my advice is: go on like this, it's entertaining and original.
Thank you for your work... I can't wait to see the tlr shootout episode ^^
Hi Ted love the page, I have been struggling to find an affordable enlarger for 8x10 negatives so I have decided to build my own but I could use some advice as to what lens I should use as the foundation of my build. Would like to run 4x5's with it as well but the bread and butter with will be 8x10's. Thanks
Dear Ted
I think this show is special because it is NOT! about getting the newest stuff. The joy about making pictures and learn to see pictures, is a lot more interesting.
And of course - real film...
Almost everything is digital today. And, a lot of great work is being done. To stay relevant I think you need to include some digital images and contemporary photographers. I do think your videos on older masters and film is important. That's the foundation of great photography today.
Great choice. Any chance of reviewing Marc Riboud (another apparently underrated Master)
Edward Allen Underrated, Riboud, Depardon ? I don’t think so, i mean everyone who’s into photography should know them. :)
Thanks for the show - very much appreciated.
If you move on with coveríng digital, please let us know something about shooting raw and what is really important to check out in the post production.
Having watched your show about tethered shooting, I decided to get a D40x, because I needed to get a digital cam to practice some shooting with flash, umbrellas and so on.
Besides, I'd like to know something about Helmut Newtons work, because I adore his work in black and white - did he shoot with Tri-X? What do I have to do in the developing process to get that certain look in his interieur shots (like in "Big Nudes")?
Other photographer who interest me are Wolfgang Tilmanns, Stephen Shore and Dennis Hopper. William Eggleston has already been covered (thanks for that!).
P.S.: Very funny thumbnails at the bottom of your screen on the right during your pintrest presentation.
Hi Ted, regarding your question, I was wondering in how far you think lightroom/Photoshop manipulation have become tools for developing a 'photographic style' as opposed to using the camera to create a style? Would the use of these post production tools still be considered photographic style or rather graphic design?
I think it depends on how much post we're talking. There definitely is a point where it just becomes photoshop art.
its called photo design. by the way - 'post production', as you call it, is nearly as old as photography itself. people just use the tools and techniques which are available.
Digital photography enables immediate display of the picture, allowing a way to "fix" the image at the moment with another picture, use this advantage as a post processing on site, avoiding major corrections in post processing software.
Thank you! Great show.
Aren't there any recent photographers in this playlist that have exclusively colour work? Were all the bests before the colour film period?
v interesting thanks!!!
Could you maybe do an episode on Alec Soth at some point? His work is outstanding.
Un e traduction en français serait la bienvenue. Merci à ceux qui ont le pouvoir sur cette vidéo !
Like many I have moved on digital as technology moves on and if feel we need to embrace it. Like many though I still cling on to using film from time to time.
My thoughts would be why not see if you could compare the characteristics of film and digital by using digital Photoshop techniques on an image to try and create the same effect used by past masters in film developing. perhaps even something as simple as dodge and burn. Sort of Old v New ...... Just a thought!!
What cameras would he use? I ask because most of the images have a heavy vignette.
The vignette might be done in post, but I believe he shot mostly MF Rangefinders, but I could be wrong. I think he was a Mamiya 6/7 user.
are there any photographers that just shoot with instant cameras?
***** thank
Hi Ted
uhm... please take care of the other stuff, that appear on the screen, from tumblr for example, at some point of times there've been naked male/female bodies (right bottom corner) and they had nothing to do with the topic of the episode (it was just an ad) and what if parents watch it with kids?
Thank you.
Do we need to have a discussion on the human figure? After looking - yeah there were some Pinterest "art" suggestions. Sorry if they offended.
theartofphotography
Howdy :) Yep, it wouldn't hurt to have a discussion about that too. You understood my point, if you offered the maybe next discussion topic. It's all about expectations.And I guess nobody was offended. It was more like: "Whaaa? Well, surprise!" :) It's a great channel and congrats, because even in Bulgaria it's being followed :)
You can't be serious.. but I fear you are.
No to censorship of TAOP.
May I suggest Disney channel
Thank you.
I am interested in digital photography. I am interested in post processing, but more interested in being exposed to digital photographers.
Subtitles spanish please.... :,,,,,,,(
There's a million+1 channel, magazine, website etc that deals with digital photography, while you have your own niche and do it well, so why branch out?
IMO and all that.
Please no digital stuff.....