back to master's degree

THE BIG PICTURE

A study of the large scale photographic print

We can go back to the early 1400’s to recognize the importance of the reproduction of scale in art. Leonardo Da Vinci was said to have sketched (and presumably used) a device (1) that allowed the image before him to be drawn so the proportions matched, fitted and was representational. By the 1600’s, drawing machines were being used that divided “a complicated scene into several easily rendered sections, and by varying the scale of the drawn grid, any amount of proportional reduction is possible”(2) .

A. Bosse. Traité des Pratiques Géométrales et Perspectives. 1665

I suppose it was inevitable that eventually technology would replace the sketching ability of the artist and allow a direct depiction of the image to be reduced on to “light-sensitive paper - and photography was born”(3) . In the 1800’s, the box camera condensed the natural immensity of the image before it, whether a landscape or portrait, by comparison, to a smaller scale version presented as a “miniature picture of the objects before which it had been placed”(4) . Photographs were naturally restricted by the size of the camera, and the paper, and the processes that produced them. In the 2000’s, experimentation has pushed those limits beyond imagination and led to an explosion of not just the quantity of different techniques that have been introduced and are now followed, but the very size of the photograph that can be reproduced. In this contemporary era of photography, and since those early exploring days, we have seen photography reach mural proportions. As the dimension of sheet film expanded, and enlargers were built bigger or able to be placed horizontally, paper was manufactured in rolls and was taped together, film grain was exploded and finally digitised, and the size of the digital print seems to know no boundaries. No longer is the size of the negative, from which to print the image, limited to the size of the camera. Today, with the modern technology of digital photography we work with pixels and megabytes and computer advancement. We are no longer constrained by the limit of the camera, film and paper and instead can be rewarded with “monumental scale and breathtaking visual clarity that predominate when one experiences the photographic print”(5) .

With my own work, in the Bluehouse Darkroom, I have been experimenting with techniques of large scale hand-printing, exploring the grain of the print, the extent of grayscale it produces and contrasts that can be achieved. By exploding the image I can achieve a better understanding of the make-up of the negative and in turn create a large scale picture that has the texture of a charcoal drawing or pencil sketch that brings an atmosphere and sense of feeling to the print. I have found that working with traditional methods allows for chance and, when experimenting, this chance happening takes it beyond the original concept of the artwork; contrasts may be deeper, textures may vary and in seeking the aesthetic in the print, other elements may occur beyond my intention and to my liking. Digitised photographic printing does not allow for that. I believe the final product of the digital print to be too clinical and prefer the hand techniques that keep it real.

Every photographic artist who themselves explores the realm of photographic art and the large scale print has their reasons for doing so. This paper considers the large scale print through the history of photography; from those early pioneers and experiments to enlarge the black and white print, to the contemporary art society and artists using the digital technology available today. I consider, where relevant, the artist’s reaction to the sublime and the implication of including the aesthetic in their presentation of the large scale image to the viewer, and discuss the darkroom techniques of hand printing that affected such, considering if the progression in technology has influenced any change in this approach. Finally I make comparisons, as both elements of the art – digital and darkroom - continue, and attempts to create the large scale photograph considers an aspect of commercialism as well as the concept of art. Throughout this history the large scale print has been comparable to the context of painting, with a determination to be acceptable as a work of art, and this paper considers if printing photography big was/is a reaction to the impressive large scale canvases that were/are so acceptable and established in the critique of art?

Originally there was much skepticism as to the value of photography in an art context. Photographers were keen to establish their skill to the, then, contemporary Art Society and “to compete with painting, photographers began to manipulate the image”(6) . Photography in those early stages kept to a process that meant the images were produced as a direct contact print; photographs were printed small, as single images, confined by the limits of the camera and the paper negative or plate. When taking a photograph, to overcome the excess exposure of light from the sky, above the landscape, a technique of ‘combination printing’(7) was followed that meant two scenes were captured on separate negatives, one allowing for the light of the landscape, and the other, of the sky. They would then be masked over each other to create one photograph showing both sky and land with correct exposures. One such artist to follow this technique was Oscar G. Rejlander.

O.J. Rejlander. The Two Ways of Life. 1857.

In 1857, Oscar G. Rejlander took the process further to create ‘The Two Ways of Life’. Photographing a social scene of great proportion on thirty separate negatives, rather than overlay them, he placed them adjacent to each other, and “printed the negatives one by one in appropriate positions”(8) , to create a final print that measured 31 inches by 16 inches; a print that was considered “the finest photograph of its class ever produced”(9) . Exhibiting the photograph gave him great status, for the picture was purchased by Queen Victoria. Critics were concerned with his attempts “to rival painting”(10) but Rejlander “considered it an example of the camera’s usefulness to artists”(11) , presumably meaning they could use such a technique from which to paint. Rejlander received critical comment for presenting the nude in his image with such reality as the photograph allowed, an issue considered inappropriate for the Victorian Age. Rejlander’s concerns were more with his attempt to portray “the plasticity of photography”(12) – a quality of depicting space and form so they appear three-dimensional - the subject was secondary. Rejlander’s attempt to print at this large scale was his first and last, for he considered “the technique was too time-consuming and expensive”(13) .

Henry Peach Robinson. Fading Away. 1858

Another discussion at the time was with photography’s “truthful representation”(14)of a scene. Using a comparable technique of stitching negatives together, Henry Peach Robinson combined five negatives to produce ‘Fading Away’, a scene of a young woman literally dying. The scene was considered a true event though criticised over its “inconsistencies in lighting and modeling”(15) . Robinson’s composition of this scene was his attempt to reach his “youthful ambition to become an artist”(16) and stated “that he saw nothing wrong in mixing the real with the ideal in a photograph to improve the narrative element and therefore the artistry”(17) . To ensure photography could be compared equally to painting Robinson was willing to follow any “dodge, trick, and conjuration”(18) , stating “A great deal can be done and very beautiful pictures made, by a mixture of the real and the artificial in a picture”(19) . Robinson admired the work of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood and the realism in their painting. His determination to match the composition and aesthetic of their paintings was apparent, and he was to follow these instincts. Robinson showed the human figure in a natural setting, similar to the realistic images painted by many of The Pre-Raphaelites, keen to portray the aesthetic qualities of photography. Large scale photographs like ‘Autumn’ and ‘Bringing Home the May’ were composites from a quantity of ‘stitched’ negatives and were Robinson’s attempt to “cause the pleasure he (the viewer) experiences in looking upon them”(20) and so pull together “relations between photography and painting”(21).

P.H. Emerson. A Winter’s Sunrise. c1890.

John Ruskin, as a recognized artist and writer, prolonged the argument that photography is “for art purposes, worth – a good deal less than zero”(22) . PH Emerson in his fight for photography to be recognized as fine art argued that the “student should try to express his subject as it has never expressed before”(23) . Emerson, who printed large photographs from the single negative(24) , spoke out, “that it is through artists of all kinds that we learn to love nature”(25) . Emerson’s ‘truth to nature’ was a revelation to “make photographs so beautiful that even the stupid could feel them”(26) . At an exhibition of the Photographic Society of Great Britain in 1883 in which Emerson participated, it was remarked that appreciation was difficult due to “the jumbled hanging – from floor to ceiling … several pictures to a frame. It was impossible to concentrate on any one image, unless very large and hung more or less on ‘the line’, the average eye level”(27) . Emerson did not want his large prints to be “enormous, accurate bores, devoid of light, cloud or mood”(28) and subsequently did not want his pictures to stand out and be appreciated just for their size. Emerson explored many experimental techniques in printing, and not all his plates were large, as mentioned, so it would be safe to assume that his concerns were not primarily with printing big. Size was a by-product of his experimentation. Emerson may have recognized the effect large scale photographs were having in standing out from the ‘salon-style’ gallery wall and establishing themselves, and “denounced Robinson and the position he had occupied”(29) attempting to influence the approach to the gallery wall by stating that “the present system of framing (several pictures to one frame)… is most inartistic … (and the gallery) … looks like a shop”(30) and he recommended changes that would “improve the art value of the exhibition”(31) , where “all pictures be hung on the line … (for) … if it was not worth hanging on the line it was not worth hanging at all”(32) . Monochrome photography at the time could not (obviously) compete with the vibrant colour of oil painting and the ability to create the scene from the imagination. If Ruskin considered photography to be worthless, by comparison he thought true art to be in the hand of the painters, recognising J.M.W. Turner as the “greatest”(33) in that field. Large canvases by J.M.W. Turner in the earlier half of the century were expressive in colour and light(34) , and Turner was known to piece together scenes from different experiences(35) , manifesting the colour and the light as he desired. Photography could not do this. It relied on capturing the event, the moment of the experience and photographers did not have use of their ‘imagination’ to enhance any scene. Large Scale photography was therefore limited and in Emerson’s case being in the right place at the right to time to capture the experience became vital.

J.M.W. Turner. Frosty Morning. 1813.

In Turner’s painting ‘Frosty Morning’ 1813, Turner’s main concern had been to portray the experience of that morning, wanting the viewer to feel “the start of a bitter, sunny day in winter”(36) . Emerson’s interest was in capturing such a subject matter in photographic form; the content, the style - or rather his portrayal of it - and the techniques he followed to produce such an artistic photograph that could be comparable to such emotive paintings. Emerson poetically reflects on a trip he made on the Norfolk Broads in search of such opportunities, “a fine rain began to fall, powdering the grass-blades with soft droplets, and bedewing the marshes that stretched far and wide about the misty clumps of sallow looming like veiled islands upon a misty sea”(37) . It was with this experience; this view before him; this sense of feeling, Emerson photographed and produced ‘Cattle in Mist’, an image that like Turner’s ‘Frosty Morning’, captures and portrays the emotion of the experience, as we feel the mist gathering in, the loneliness of the landscape and the solitude it represents.

P.H. Emerson. Cattle In Mist. c1890.

In his attempt to promote photography as an “independent art”(38) , and particularly his aesthetic interests in that truth to nature, Emerson supported a new movement in painting where the painters “go directly to Nature to paint … and (are) painting Nature as she is”(39) ; recognizing the importance of true representation that he believed photography captured and perhaps Turner did not(40) . With regard to the earlier comment by John Ruskin, he agreed with the comment that “only artists were qualified to criticize art … with no need whatsoever of babbling critics”(41), attempting to put Ruskin in his place where photography as an art form was concerned.

Carleton Watkins. The Vernal Falls. 1868.

In America, Carleton E. Watkins specifically captured his images in the Yosemite Valley on large, single, 18 inch by 21 inch plates. Watkins was unconcerned with the debate amongst Britain’s Art Society, as to the value of photography. He, like many others on the new continent, embraced the technology and used it to show the “inhuman scale”(42) of the discovered land. As a photographer, he was employed by the Pacific Railroad and the California State Geological Survey to chart the land of the unexplored frontier. The Yosemite Valley was a “giant land … it was big and bracing … a natural monument”(43) . It seemed apt to portray the immensity of Yosemite with giant prints produced from his “giant camera”(44) . Watkins’ was not a person who wrote or talked about his methods and why he printed his pictures big, but we are able to plot the progression of his art: “Working with the daguerreotype had refined his (Watkins) sensitivity to delicate tonal and textural contrasts and to the single importance of the angle and quality of light in the construction of spatial clarity. Transferring this vision to wet plates, he had become adept at recording and virtually triangulating landscapes for judicial review. Extending his scale to the mammoth plate, which required even more dexterous handling, Watkins proceeded with the scrupulous and deliberate manner of a master artisan”(45). Printing big was perhaps his method of creating an image suited to the environment he perceived and the views he wished to attain. Critic Mary Warner Marien writes of his images “Watkins synthesized a soaring sublime based on wilderness … The immediate sensation is one of transcendence and invincibility”(46) . Watkins large scale prints evoke spirit and invite the viewer in; to climb to the atmosphere he portrays, a long way from any subdued British landscape previously experienced on a smaller scale. Watkins’ approach to photography was certainly with a commercial outlook, for he uniquely framed his artwork and presented them for sale and commission, but were Watkins’ artistic interests to produce large scale imagery to reflect the sublime, and capture the emotion of the landscape and portray this to the viewer? Certainly at the time, the production of the large scale print was an expensive task and hard to sell(47) , but Watkins, in his production of the photographic panorama presented them as “an experience of western landscape”(48), keen to promote the experience of the “immensity in its mountains, trees, deserts and ocean”(49) within this new frontier. He did not want to sell just a photograph of the landscape; he wanted to sell his experience of that landscape.

Carleton Watkins. The Half-Dome from Glacier Point. c1878-81.

This relationship with the landscape is perhaps comparable to the Romanticist view of the landscape that pre-empted Watkins and his photography. German Romanticist painter Caspar David Friedrich painted large canvases portraying nature and the landscape. “Nature, for him (Friedrich), was imbued with divine forces; God revealed himself in nature.”(50) Friedrich’s painting, like the intuitive contemplation of the early Romantics, is focused on an “inner image’ of religion”(51). Friedrich “creates a religious landscape by relying on his own particular feeling”(52) and what he “mediates is not a meaning, but an experience of the full presence of landscape (that) … may have … more to it than meets the eye”(53) .

Caspar David Friedrich. Mountain Landscape. 1803.

In Friedrich’s case it may be the personal belief in God, but Watkins may have had a comparable perception of the sublime in his large scale photography. The suspicions of this are explained further by Douglas R. Nickel, (when viewing a framed mammoth print of Watkins) “the spectator first stands back the distance mandated by the large scale of the picture to acquire its general design, by moving in to examine its super-abundance of detail. Watkins’s detail often verges on the hallucinatory. Up close, the textures of granite, mining dirt, leaves, wood, sidings, water, and assorted debris invite sustained, even obsessive examination; we discover inconspicuous animals, small figures, incidental still life’s, and other pictorial minutiae, as graphic order dissolves into an energetic hopscotch activity of the eye. The picture unfolds with time across the viewer’s space”(54) . Watkins composition of his photographs suggests he wants us to experience the immensity of the western landscape with a super-human view of the unexplored America, as much as Friedrich wanted us to feel his portrayal and relate to nature with his Romantic association. Like Friedrich, Watkins pays attention to the detail he is revealing and the viewer benefits from the image’s large scale with a sense of depth in the environment that can be studied and appreciated. Eventually Watkins was to sell “tens of thousands of photographic prints”(55) and viewing each was “meant to be not so much an intellectual as an experiential affair”(56) , which would suggest Watkins achieved what he set out to do: to sell the experience.

Nancy Newhall. Ansel Adams. 1944.

Ansel Adams “seeks for his photographs … the moment of revelation, when in a passing light or mood he sees his subject in a new significance”(57) . If this is not enough, Adams considers the taking of the photograph - the negative, merely “the score; the print is the performance”(58) . He compares “a truly fine print to the experience of a symphony … the wealth of detail, forms, values – the minute but vital significances revealed so exquisitely by the lens – deserves exploration and appreciation”(59) . Like Watkins, Adams was in awe of the Yosemite Valley, and his photographic studies were a study of the land and the effect of light upon it. To take the photographs, Adams used a variety of different cameras available to him, and in exhibiting, developed a variety of techniques, perfecting the rate of exposure, the tonal range of the print and his composition, documenting the processes and teaching what he knew. Adams enlarged his prints from the negative and though most averaged 8 inches by10 inches, on occasions he experimented with larger, reaching mural proportions. Adams was first commissioned by the Yosemite Park and Curry Company to make a mural size print, 40 inches by 60 inches. Obviously motivated by the money he would earn from the commission, Adams was also “fascinated with the challenge of making a photographic print in grand scale”(60) . Adams experimented with several murals and “wrestled with the technical and creative problems of very large prints for many years”(61) , reaching extreme proportions of twelve feet long by nine feet high which Adams stated he “was very proud of”(62) .

Ansel Adams. Branches In Snow. 1940

One mural measuring 73 inches by 77½ inches he applied to a three panel folding screen that stood in his own studio from the date of its conception. Adams has expressed that he “found … a ‘semi-abstract’ subject – a pattern of leaves, natural or mechanical forms etc – wears much better, with less likelihood of visual fatigue, than the usual representative subject matter”(63), hence his liking (enough to keep in his studio) the three panel screen ‘Branches In Snow’. When it came to the large-scale print he was careful to consider his limitations; “there is usually a limit to the enlargement of a negative where the size of the grain and the loss of definition detract from the desired qualities of the image”(64) . Adams was also aware of what he wanted to achieve when viewing the large print, compared to the aesthetic of the smaller print, “where the viewer must stand fairly close, a smaller print will usually have a more ‘natural’ effect. However, close viewing of a large print may reveal exciting aesthetic qualities of detail and depth otherwise not seen”(65) . Viewing a large print from a distance, Adams considers “the illusion of definition can sometimes be enhanced by using a fine-textured surface”(66) and considers the photographic papers he uses further; “Glossy surfaces are difficult to process in large sizes because they are subject to breaks and abrasions”(67) . Adams goes on to state that the full-tone of a glossy paper would be “too dominating, especially in a location where it is seen frequently”(68) and advises that “avoiding glossy papers will … achieve a somewhat softer image for the mural-sized print”(69) . He explains further, in 1940, in an article for U.S. magazine, where he describes photo-murals as “enlargements with a vengeance”(70) . “The subject itself is not an important factor in the determination of the best size of print, although we usually think of small objects requiring more intimate treatment than large, inclusive subjects would demand. It is, rather, the textural and compositional aspects of the photograph that determine the scale of the finished print”(71). In the same article he supports his earlier statement that favoured the ‘semi-abstract’ in his choice to frame it as a three-panel screen saying “this produces effects not only of altered perspective and scale, but, on account of reflective properties of the panels, of light intensity as well. Obviously, the more abstract the subject, the better the result. A literal subject can suffer severely when broken into two or more sections placed at various angles, but an all-over pattern, or semi-abstract arrangement can be most favorably accented”(72) .

Gary Mortenson. Ansel Adams’ Fresh Snow. 1980.

Select images, like ‘Fresh Snow’, that were exhibited as a screen, were produced as three separate prints from a single 8 inches by 10 inches negative, designed to overlap in relation to the sections of the screen. If Adams’ intention was to produce a straight print, exhibited as a single image, Adams was keen to state that the “intensity of the visual expression relates, not to the sheer size of the print, but to the relationship of size to the image itself”(73). If Ansel Adams believed some images worked when printed big, then, obviously, some images did not. When Edward Steichen, Head of Photography at the Museum of Modern Art, New York, wanted to enlarge and exhibit a huge mural from the negative ‘Mount Williamson, Sierra Nevada, From Manzanar, California’, Adams was desperate to do the print himself, concerned that Steichen “enlarged … way beyond the point where there was any beauty remaining”(74) . He relented, as he hoped that, with this image, “size is necessary from the point of view of majesty and dramatic force”(75) . His concerns were justified for the result left him feeling “ill … He (Steichen) had transformed ‘Mt Williamson’ from one of (Adams) strongest statements into expensive wallpaper”(76) .

Ansel Adams. Mount Williamson, Sierra Nevada, From Manzanar, California. 1944.

Ironically this comparison was echoed by writer Nancy Newhall when she remarked “Photo-murals were a craze of the day; banks, corporations, travel bureaus, and so forth were ordering huge blow-ups and montages with which to paper their walls”(77) . This one failure of Adams (and Steichen), however, does not mean that all landscapes will fail as large scale images. Certainly Ansel Adam’s main interests, as mentioned, were not with the large print, though it seems apparent that he did enjoy the technical challenge of it, but further experimentation may have discovered other choices of image that could have been successful – perhaps a landscape that reveals hidden depth or has a distant viewpoint that invites the viewer in, like the attempts of Watkins and large canvases by Friedrich.

Ansel Adams. Colorama 157, Zabriske Point, Death Valley, California. 1959.
Ansel Adams. Colorama 215, Near Badger Pass, Yosemite National Park. 1963.

Large scale photography was now, however, moving away from the experimental hand print and going commercial and “in 1948 the concept of the Colorama … was developed”(78) . When Adams was asked to participate in the Kodak Colorama, it was an opportunity to participate in a large scale colour print, of mammoth proportions. Adams said of the experience "the Coloramas became something of a landmark … and I happily made quite a number of them. They were aesthetically inconsequential but technically remarkable”(79) and he was willing to participate, recognizing they “presented the ‘real’ world … with commercial motivation”(80) and Kodak would pay him(81) for doing what he enjoyed - taking photographs in the landscape (for one commission he spent four weeks in Monument Valley “waiting patiently for the necessary dramatic clouds”(82)).

Artist unknown. Kodak Colorama Installation. c1948.

The Colorama measured 18 feet high by 60 feet long and was made up of twenty inch wide strips taped together and exhibited in Central Station in New York. It was intended to promote photography to the general public, and, commercially, Kodak products. The Coloramas were “originally intended to provide a dramatic series of pictures”(83), transparencies printed from “an unusual format”(84). Over the duration, the pictures were taken in a variety of ways, experimenting with alternate formats of photography, using several techniques - enlarging from the single negative “with extreme accuracy”(85), overlapping several negatives, exploring the use of large format, panoramic and banquet cameras. Adams commented that “the severe proportions of the format made it rather difficult to find appropriate subjects”(86). Adams even found it necessary to invent his own apparatus capable of spanning across the horizontal without displacing the foreground and capturing the necessary image on two overlapping 8 inches by 10 inches film(87). The format of these wide-angle Coloramas, in the tradition of painting, were perhaps inspired by the ‘Great Pictures’ and ‘Panoramas’ paintings from the Nineteenth Century in America - “a vary large painting exhibited publicly and conceived in subject to appeal to a wide spectrum of popular taste”(88).

Ansel Adams. Sierra Club. c1930.

Ansel Adams, who said he “never intentionally made a creative photograph that related directly to an environmental issue”(89), through his involvement in The Sierra Club, saw that his images were beginning to have an environmental impact and his photography “proved to be a great asset to the campaign”(90) that “supported the idea of true wilderness reserves”(91). Ansel Adams commented in his autobiography that “Watkins’s photographs of Yosemite had great positive effect on the efforts that made Yosemite Valley a state park in 1864”(92). Adams recognized the “lobbying tool”(93) photography was and could be, and was himself considered a “conservationist, mountaineer, lover of the wilderness (who) … specialized in the interpretation of the natural scene”(94). His art, through exhibition, books and magazines, reached the masses and created an impact. A new generation of artist, in photography and painting, now aware of the potential of their artwork, began to make the concept behind their work the reason for their imagery, eager to reveal their thoughts and discuss their art.

Hannah Collins. In The Course Of Time (detail). 1996.

Mark Rothko, who used paint as his medium, said “painting, like every other art, is a language by which you communicate something about the world”(95). He said of his large canvasses “(they) take you into them, you are not outside of them”(96). He explains that he paints large pictures “precisely because I want to be very intimate and human … However you paint the larger picture, you are in it …”(97). British contemporary photographer Hannah Collins has a similar thought with her large-scale black and white photographs. Like the Coloramas, Collins uses a “panoramic format (which) aids her in this respect, for it calls for a sustained and contemplative looking that art has traditionally required of the viewer”(98). I discussed earlier the aspect of portraying the sublime in artwork, photography and painting, referring to Caspar David Friedrich, and Hannah Collins is keen to include this aspect in her artwork right from the offset; she states “going somewhere to take the pictures is in itself a task – finding a place that reflects a feeling that I might have about something that I might want to express or record through the image”(99). Hannah Collins believes that “what is important is creating some kind of interrelated reflection of things”(100) and working large scale allows her to approach the work like a painter, “the exposures are very long and I might have an hour or more, masking areas and working on others, in front of the enlarger. During that time I can rethink or change things and in that sense it is exactly the same as making a painting”(101).

Caspar David Friedrich. Wanderer Above A Sea Of Fog. 1818.

In certain Friedrich paintings such as, ‘Wanderer above a Sea of Fog 1818’ or ‘Monk by the Sea 1808/10’, the artist challenges the perspective of the image with the viewer, for we can picture the scene up to the horizon, but we are compelled to consider the viewpoint of the figure in the painting. We cannot see what he (the Wanderer or the Monk) can see. We cannot imagine the depth of the sea, or the chasm below the mountain peak and if we wish to experience it, we must project ourselves into the picture to do so. Hannah Collins large scale image, ‘In The Course Of Time, 6 (Factory, Krakow)’ measures 2 metres high by 5 metres wide. Like Rothko and Friedrich, Collins invites the audience into the scene, offering the viewer a “physical relationship … (that they are) … about to enter the pictorial space”(102). Rothko wanted the viewer to stand in close to the point that “the edges are grayed off to one’s peripheral vision”(103), such are the size of his paintings, believing “a close viewing range is like opening a door into an internal realm”(104). In her series of the Egyptian desert 1987-88, she brought to the fore the subject of rock erosion that creates deserts. “By printing virtually life-size to make the image as experiential as possible, she offered … a foreign atmosphere into which viewers could project themselves, and a sensation of extreme presentness”(105) similar to the experience of viewing Friedrich’s work. Taking it one step further Collins “crops her images (and) situates them within a continuity, as if she has isolated a fragment from a widescreen panning shot”(106), so in terms of the experience, the viewer becomes Friedrich’s Wanderer, looking out on the scene before and below him, but capable of taking in the periphery and considering all that surrounds him.

Andreas Gursky. Chicago Board Of Trade II. 1999.

Emerson stated “photography was an independent and potentially great art form capable of expressing thoughts and emotions beyond the scope of the other and older art forms”(107). In the late 1980’s, colour photography had reached new proportions as digitised print methods began to take hold on the art. Deadpan photography – “photography of monumental scale and breathtaking visual clarity”(108) showed “typologies of nature, industry, architecture and human society through the sustained photographing of single subjects”(109). Andreas Gursky photographs on the large-format negative, manipulating and refining with the use of computer software to achieve precision in the print, which with some images reached 2 metres by 5 metres. Gursky likes producing big pictures, and he likes to fill the view point with a lot of information, encouraging the viewer to stand back to take in the scene. Gursky likes to take his photographs from a unique position to the scene. His images of the stock exchange ‘Chicago, Board of Trade II, 1999’ have us looking down on tiny human figures packed into a large scene that emphasizes the room. The quality of print production allows us to pinpoint each character, their movements and actions, but standing back, taking in the large print, we experience the conditions and the state, and more particularly the experience itself. We should also be aware, that like Collins, and in a similar vein of the discussion we had comparing to Friedrich, Gursky makes us aware that there is more to the scene than we can actually witness. He photographs just a section of the view that “encompass large distances and a visible strata of information”(110), but here the comparisons must stop, for “here the search for the sublime in nature – that in their epic scale and sweeping vistas Gursky’s works make reference to – it is ironically repositioned in culture … where it often discovers beauty in the banal”(111). Here though we must not consider the artwork for its aesthetic but in its social commentary and the achievement of the artist in the detail he reveals; the minute detail achievable through the technology of combining the large format film with the digital print.

Still image from video interview KQED, Inc. Catherine Wagner’s Flux Density. 2003 - 2005.

Mark Rothko “takes his large canvas and fills it so that it brims with presences that seem to inhabit different spaces”(112). Rothko had an “obsession with the aura – the subtle, invisible emanation or exhalation”(113), and his large canvasses were his attempts to capture it, to paint it and reveal his visions, his meditative state, for the aura “must be more than perceived”(114). Contemporary photographer, Catherine Wagner, photographed on a large scale film format to produce the large scale commission ‘Flux Density: A narrative of Bubbles’. Keen to show images that “reveal the internal structure of the organic world”(115) she converted the image from film to digital to produce the final “mammoth six by thirty foot image that is a stunning meditation on the beauty of everyday things”(116). As mentioned, Rothko wanted you to stand up close to his paintings to experience his ‘meditative state’. Catherine Wagner did exactly that in capturing her image; she stood the camera lens up close for her photograph of a cloud of air bubbles in water “rendering an extreme close-up with a startling degree of detail and precision”(117). Unlike Gursky, “the majority of … (Catherine’s) … work is in black and white”(118). She says “I think I continue to work with black and white because I’m always trying to get at the essence of something and in much of my work I felt that colour almost got in the way because I’m always trying to get at that very core of what I’m looking at”(119).

Still image from video interview KQED, Inc. Catherine Wagner’s Flux Density. 2003 - 2005.

Catherine photographs with a 4x5’ and 8x10” view camera, as she believes that as “amazing as digital technology is right now there is still nothing that can compete with the quality of 8x10 film – (the) size of negative creates (a) quality resolution … (and is) … hyper-realistic … (and) … magical”(120). ‘Flux Density’ is “a very glamorous piece of public art in a restaurant setting”(121); a commission for the ‘Frisson’ Restaurant in San Francisco. ‘Flux Density’ contrasts Catherine’s 25 years as an artist creating large scale photographic artwork that like Gursky has a social comment and is an observation of human society, man-made environments and the natural world. Of her work she says “it almost doesn’t matter what I photograph – the content, because I think I’m always trying to move to this very internal place, I am always trying to move toward internal structure”(122) and like Rothko she is attempting to draw the viewer in close to the artwork of ‘Flux Density’; “It’s a piece that grows clearer the closer you come to it. It is the opposite phenomenon to a bill board that grows more abstract the closer you come”(123). She considers the aesthetic affect of the piece on the viewer: “I really wanted to do a meditative piece and I thought about how mesmerizing it is to look at something, whether it is staring out of a window or watching bubbles rise in a glass – these very states of wonder I think are quite mesmerizing”(124). Catherine Wagner achieves this dual perspective of her artwork, for indeed, like the billboard and the scene from the window, the overview of the piece is aesthetically pleasing, and as we draw closer, the abstract of the bubbles behind glass has a quality that the detail enhances. Combining the attributes of photographic film and the use of digital technology, Catherine has achieved what she set out to do; “Digital technology allows people to work larger and Catherine has been embracing that – it enables her to create images with an incredible density, a visual density that was impossible to do in traditional film”(125).

Mark Rothko (Tate Gallery, London). Black on Maroon. 1959 Red On Maroon. 1959. Red On Maroon. 1959.

There have been several contemporary gallery exhibitions in recent years to show the work of photographic artists working in large scale. In a review of an exhibit at The Detroit Institute of Art comparing ‘Oversized Prints, Drawings and Photographs’ they discuss “in the last half of the 20th century, advances in technology have permitted artists to create prints and photographs of unprecedented scale. With equipment and paper now being produced in sizes that rival dimensions that only paintings and some drawings achieved in the past, the nature of the composition is as broad as it has ever been”(126). An exhibit in 2005 at The Bemis Center for Contemporary Arts, called ‘Making It Big – Contemporary Large – Format Photography’ they state “Big denotes size; big connotes grandeur. Big signifies all that is vast and momentous … big means creating art on a grand and revolutionary scale”(127). The exhibit, because of their size, featured only six photographs that are of “such size and scale that they immediately emerge as complex works replete with multiple themes and intriguing technical innovations. These photographs are more than just physically big: they are fraught with complicated subject matter that smaller, more conventionally-sized photography is incapable of capturing … (therefore) … large format photography … transforms the traditional viewing experience, enhancing it by triggering peripheral vision and the greater inspection of details”(128). Art collector, Todd Simon puts it in simpler terms. He considers these photographs have “a greater, more provocative impact that (he) find(s) … captivating”(129).

As part of my research, I spoke to Jeremy Stern, Curator for The Bemis Center and asked him what had inspired him to want to put on the exhibit and what critical evaluation did he have in hindsight?

”Large-format photography has been a consistent trend in contemporary art for several years now, it only seemed appropriate that we address the subject as a Contemporary Art institution. Moreover, all of the artists involved are VERY good – and we’re always looking to put on the best exhibitions possible.
A consensus seems to be that large-format photography is able to both confront the viewer more directly (perhaps simply by overwhelming them with size) and convey a more complicated subject matter through its use of space. The show also seemed to comment indirectly on the development of technology in relationship to photography. 10 years ago, making prints this size would have been enormously difficult and expensive, additionally many of the photographs in the show were, in their various ways, created on computers. Colette Fu’s “A Colorful Dish is a Balanced Dish” is a three panel light box display, that featured hundreds of traditional photographs, Photoshop-ed into a single image; Xiang Liqing and Steven Shearer share a similar process.”

These contemporary methods, using Photoshop, are reminiscent of the experiments O.J. Rejlander and Henry Peach Robinson followed to create those first large scale images though using modern technology.

Colette Fu. A Colorful Dish Is A Balanced Dish. 2003.

Jeremy Stern goes on to say more:

“In general, I see large-format photography everywhere I go. I think there is a perception that anyone can take a photograph, but not everyone can make a huge photograph – so when people see one, they are more apt to accept it as “art”. I saw this played out time and again while walking around the Art Basel Miami Beach fair this past December – viewers and collectors alike making comments to the effect of: “look at the size of this one” or “I really feel like I’m there” which I read as product of size, not content.”

Following the progression of photography I now have an understanding of the methods and the reasons for producing the large scale print. Experimentation, and determination to be recognized for their achievements, were a driving force of photography’s pioneers and I can appreciate the lengths (and widths) photographers have gone to create a relationship with the viewer, exploring the sublime and aesthetics of the print, paying attention to detail and the realism of the scene, experimenting with narratives or concepts and the limits of photography in relation to painting and the large canvas. Ultimately as the digital age has progressed I realize that commercialism has had an affect and technology has allowed a level of perfection never considered in those earlier stages, but the art of perfection is now following a new course in photography.

Mike and Doug Starn. Self Portrait With Plexi And Wood. 1987.

“Mike and Doug Starn have changed our thinking about photography perhaps more than any photographers in the last twenty-five years”(130) . In search of the aesthetic, they “physically and conceptually ‘deconstruct’ photography’s processes and traditions”(131). The Starns’ “resolve to ‘show what the medium does’ led (them) to … experimenting (and) … altering the traditional black and white print”(132). Doug and Mike Starn, themselves, recognize that their art “needs to break down a lot of problems with photography and its traditions”(132), and one way they are doing that is by presenting their photography in an artistic context, on a large scale. Their modern view point goes against the grain of perfection embedded over the past 150 years; a view point that considers that the masters we have adhered to did not produce art, but were mere masters of a craft. The Starns state their artwork is “discussed in the art-world, not the photography world”(133), so perhaps they have finally achieved what photographers have strived to achieve since the pioneers we have discussed first increased the scale of their work and competed with the painter and their paintings of grandeur. In contrast to the inventors who attempted to print one large scale picture from one negative or a sequence of stitched negatives, the Starns print one picture printed on many sheets of paper”(134). I contacted Mike Starn, to discuss his work,

“We didn’t like the large 30x40” Lab processed C-prints that were being used by other photographers in the art world. We saw those prints as distanced from reality. In 1985, we printed a large portrait of Mike onto a few small pieces of paper (that we could easily process in our darkroom) and taped them together, hung it on the wall ….and hated it. It seemed an abomination to photography. We rolled it up and tried to forget about our horrible failure.

In a few months, we found it in a drawer and pinned it back on the wall. Now that the experiment had fermented in our minds, we could see that we had done exactly what we intended.”

Mike and Doug Starn. Seascape. 1988-89

In essence, for the Starn Twins, photography is merely a tool, with which they create and construct their art through which they explore “the conditions and possibilities of picture making”(135) , questioning why “this part of photography be just a craft”(137) . “By treating photographs in the same manner as painters treat canvas, the Starns tend to dematerialize both mediums”(138) , but “like … Friedrich … the Starns focus our attention on their own sensibility”(139) .

Mike says:

“We don’t just make prints, we cultivate an appropriate printing technique to approximate the meaning or to bring you towards the meaning. Our prints are metaphors, they are meant to bring across a meaning or a suggestion of a way of thinking about our concepts.”

Mike and Doug Starn. Lisa On Metal. 1988.

Not all their art is of mammoth proportion, allowing them to squeeze artwork around each other, to hang in the gallery space in the ‘salon style’ that so disgusted Emerson and so inspired photography on a route that now comes full circle. The Starns originally worked with a horizontal enlarger in the darkroom, projecting the image on to the wall. “The further back it goes, the bigger the image cast.”(136) Having decided on the size to suit the image, they taped round the projection, then pieced in the wall-space with photographic paper, not necessarily of equal dimensions, like a jigsaw, before making the exposure. The final artwork is re-constructed in the gallery. By taping the paper together, and so dismissing the need for perfection, they are able to exceed the limit of available paper sizes, and like the technology of digital printing they therefore recognize no boundaries. At times the subject matter is surreal. Other images can be portraits, or self-portraits, representations of popular works of art, or Christ, or the sea. Nature can be represented, or wildlife. Sometimes the finished product is abstract, toned, or tinted. There appears to be no pattern to the evolution of the Starn’s work with regard to the subject matter. It is non-political. There would appear to be no concept, bar the experimentation and the enjoyment of the photographic creation. There have been references to Cubism, and Romanticism, to abstract expressionism and the work of Rembrandt, or Man-Ray, Fox Talbot, Gilbert and George (the comparisons are endless) and maybe they are, or are not, an influence. Maybe “their discoveries are only rediscoveries.”(137) The Starn Brothers claim “beauty is … an instrument and an aim in their work”(138). They turn their “back on the intellectual process of art-making, to presage a return to an art-for-art’s-sake self-sufficiency”(139), and remain quite private in their thoughts and inspirations. It has been noted that their art (or artifacts – as they were described) “emulate vintage prints … echoing older visions in process and content … (and) … their prints challenge (an) assumption that aura only attaches to the traditional art of painting (a view that Mark Rothko sought – as discussed) … aura is found in the artifact of the vintage photograph. It is this commodification of the photograph through suffusing it with aura, which lends the Starns’ photographs their most significant characteristic”(140). By treating the process of photography as an art, rather than a technical craft, the Starns have achieved what artists like Mark Rothko were obsessed about. The Twins declare, “Unlike a Mark Rothko that has changed with age and is not the painting it originally was, our work is conceived to change and age. Its ageing is not its death but its life and creation”(141). As mentioned, for the Starns, photography is the medium of their art, but as artists, even they have recognized the compelling attraction to the digital age. I spoke to them about the progression of their original techniques,

“We started huge taped together pictures in the 80’s, just tilt the enlarger up, tape up small pieces, expose, then put them one by one into the processing trays, very basic. Very long exposures, sometimes overnight.
Now we split the negs up digitally, have LVTs made and print in slightly smaller sections - shorter exposures.”

Mike and Doug Starn. Rose. 1982-88

I accept that those early pioneers of photographer were keen to experiment in an attempt to line up alongside artists of the time and have their art critiqued, with a determination to make it acceptable. Perhaps inspired by the aesthetic content and portrayal of the sublime by the important painters of the previous centuries, especially with the subject of the landscape, early photographic practitioners were keen to emulate and be inspired and use their techniques to compete. Darkroom manipulation to extend the limitations of size and produce the large scale photograph were the first influences which led to experimenting with an enlarger and manufacturing darkroom techniques to push those limits.

Ansel Adams. Agitating Roll Paper In Developer. c1983

Ansel Adams said “the making of big enlargements can be cumbersome, and therefore requires a certain amount of specialized equipment”(142). When he spoke I am sure he had no foresight in to how specialised that equipment would have to be. Modern technology has brought photography in to this new century where picture sizes have increased to beyond the original mural proportions where digital printing is now used commercially and is easier to access. When Kodak first conceived the idea of the Colorama, how could they comprehend the extent this ‘billboard’ advertising would stretch across the world and launch the large scale photograph to this degree of approval? Michael Schwager, director of the Sonoma University Gallery recognizes a “current trend … to work large … (because of) the increasing availability of new technology – originally developed for billboards and other signs – that makes such prints possible”(143). Photography now reaches out as much to the general public as the established art societies and the argument for its acceptance is not such an issue anymore. Artists using the digital photographic techniques as their medium have included a social comment and highlighted the concept to make an issue, and add relevance to the photograph as an art piece because now even size is not enough to create an impact. This manipulation is not just with the print, but the production. Throughout, artists are concerned with the aesthetic and used computer programmes to perfect this production and reach a level of precision first desired by the black and white practitioners that set the standards. With even the Starn Brothers having re-invented the use of hand-printing methods in this contemporary art society, then converting to the digital technology to save time and effort, does this mean the end of hand-printing forever? When I spoke to the suppliers of hand-printed photographic materials they bowed to the ‘new technology’ and admitted that by comparison to perhaps ten years ago few artists bought supplies to print large scale imagery. Jan Herlinger, director of Fotospeed, recalls a small group who had applied the chemicals to paper using mops and buckets, with the large sheets spread over plastic liners on the darkroom floor, but their experiments were too messy to try regularly. That was a while ago and since then no-one has enquired. Fotospeed no longer sell rolls of photographic paper. Judy Wong, Marketing Manager of Ilford, admits that since being rescued from receivership, Ilford have had to put their focus on the digital technology. Though they still manufacture rolls of paper for hand-printing, they are concentrating on digital and are about to launch additional ranges of paper rolls suitable for digital prints. Gary Hume, Director of Kentmere paper agrees. Sales of rolls of paper are nothing compared to ten years ago, and though they sell a few, no-one seems compelled to want to hand-print big with them, preferring to buy bulk to save money rather than be creative on a large scale. My research has discovered projects teaching traditional methods; in New York, Adam Eidelberg teaches a course in printing the mural size photograph that continues to be well attended. In The Bluehouse Darkroom I have successfully ran funded programmes of learning, teaching traditional hand-printing techniques, for two years. In doing so many members of the local community have shown interest in using the equipment and learning the techniques and in communication with Arts Departments and Arts Councils – the established arts society of today in Britain - interest has been with increasing these facilities and supporting such projects financially for the benefit of future artist and practitioners. My own work will continue as I attempt methods to hand-print even bigger, reach, and exceed, the mammoth proportions documented by Ansel Adams, but like the Starn Brothers, adhere to the aesthetic of the art world and instead of competing with painting perhaps now the traditional hand-print needs to compete with the digital print, before the techniques originated by those pioneers we have mentioned become forgotten or ignored. There is no doubt that the big photographic picture is finally an acceptable form of contemporary art, but how it is produced is still, and perhaps always will be, open to interpretation, experimentation and enjoyment.

Kent Gazette. Robert Howie Smith / Large Scale Prints. 2004


Robert Howie Smith
MA Photography
University College for Creative Arts at Rochester, England
2006

Footnotes

[1] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter One ‘The Camera and Other Drawing Machines’ Doug Nickel. Page 2. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[2] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter One ‘The Camera and Other Drawing Machines’ Doug Nickel. Page 2/3. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[3] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, Edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter One “The Camera and Other Drawing Machines” Doug Nickel. Page 9. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[4] The History of Photography by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Three ‘Prints From Paper’. Page 31. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[5] The Photograph As Contemporay Art, by Charlotte Cotton. Chapter Three ‘Deadpan’. Page 81. Thames and Hudson 2004.

[6] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Five ‘Pictorial Effect’. Page 59. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[7] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Five ‘Pictorial Effect’. Page 59. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[8] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Five ‘Pictorial Effect’. Page 60. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[9] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Five ‘Pictorial Effect’. Page 60. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[10] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter Ten ‘O.G. Rejlander: Art Studies’ Stephanie Spencer. Page 128. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[11] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Five ‘Pictorial Effect’. Page 60. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[12] Photography, A Concise History, by Ian Jeffrey. Chapter Two ‘Instantaneous Pictures’. Page 44. Thames and Hudson 1981.

[13] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter Ten ‘O.G. Rejlander: Art Studies’ Stephanie Spencer. Page 128. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[14] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Five ‘Pictorial Effect’. Page 61. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[15] Photography, A Concise History, by Ian Jeffrey. Chapter Two ‘Instantaneous Pictures’. Page 45. Thames and Hudson 1981.

[16] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter Eleven. ‘Henry Peach Robinson: The Grammar of Art. Page 134. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[17] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter Eleven. ‘Henry Peach Robinson: The Grammar of Art. Page 134/135. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[18] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Five ‘Pictorial Effect’. Page 61. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[19] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Five ‘Pictorial Effect’. Page 61. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[20] Photography, A Concise History, by Ian Jeffrey. Chapter Two ‘Instantaneous Pictures’. Page 46. Thames and Hudson 1981.

[21] Photography, A Concise History, by Ian Jeffrey. Chapter Two ‘Instantaneous Pictures’. Page 47. Thames and Hudson 1981.

[22] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter One ‘The Camera and Other Drawing Machines’ Doug Nickel. Page 1. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[23] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 146. Aperture 1975.

[24] In 1924 Emerson wrote “I am a productive photographer, I develop all my own plates, including the 24 x 22’s”. PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 111. Aperture 1975.

[25] Photography, A Concise History, by Ian Jeffrey. Chapter Four ‘Small Pictures’ Page 70. Thames and Hudson 1981.

[26] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Chapter Seven. Page 31. Aperture 1975.

[27] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Chapter Seven. Page 31. Aperture 1975.

[28] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Chapter Two. Page 14. Aperture 1975.

[29] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter Eleven. ‘Henry Peach Robinson: The Grammar of Art. Page 133. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[30] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 37. Aperture 1975.

[31] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 37. Aperture 1975.

[32] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 37. Aperture 1975.

[33] A record from Ruskin’s diary states “Introduced to-day to the man who beyond all doubt is the greatest of the age; greatest in every faculty of the imagination, in every branch of scenic knowledge; at once the painter and poet of the day, J.M.W. Turner”. The Life of J.M.W. Turner by A.J. Finburg. Page 380. Oxford University Press 1961.

[34] “Two large topographical views of ports, the Dieppe shown in 1825 and the Cologne shown in 1826 … are pervaded by a high key of golden light”. Turner, by Graham Reynolds. Page 120. Thames and Hudson 1969.

[35] To the painting of ‘Snowstorm: Hannibal and his Army Crossing the Alps’, Turner “added the swirling effect of a storm he had observed a year or two before on the Yorkshire Dales”. Turner, by Graham Reynolds. Page 87. Thames and Hudson 1969.

[36] Turner, by Graham Reynalds. Chapter Three ‘A wonderful range of mind’. Page 89. Thames and Hudson 1969.

[37] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 249. Aperture 1975.

[38] British Photography In The Nineteenth Century, edited by Mike Weaver. Chapter Eleven. ‘Henry Peach Robinson: The Grammar of Art. Page 133. Cambridge University Press 1989.

[39] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 37. Aperture 1975.

[40] Emerson wrote “Great as Turner was in his time … his pictures often have the lighting of two suns”. PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 37. Aperture 1975.

[41] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 36. Aperture 1975.

[42] Photography, A Concise History, by Ian Jeffrey. Chapter Three ‘Documentary Meanings’. Page 59. Thames and Hudson 1981.

[43] Photography, A Concise History, by Ian Jeffrey. Chapter Three ‘Documentary Meanings’. Page 58/59. Thames and Hudson 1981.

[44] Photography, A Concise History, by Ian Jeffrey. Chapter Three ‘Documentary Meanings’. Page 58. Thames and Hudson 1981.

[45] Text from Maria Hambourg, introduction to "Carleton Watkins: The Art of Perception" by Douglas R. Nickel. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 1999.

[46] Photography: A Critical Introduction, edited by Liz Wells. Chapter ‘On and beyond the white walls, Photography As Art’. Page 297. Routledge 1997.

[47] Carleton Watkins, The Art of Perception by Douglas R. Nickel. Page 26. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 1999.

[48] Carleton Watkins, The Art of Perception by Douglas R. Nickel. Page 26. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 1999.

[49] Carleton Watkins, The Art of Perception by Douglas R. Nickel. Page 25. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 1999.

[50] Casper David Friedrich, by Jens Christian Jenson. Chapter Five ‘Griefswald’. Page 33. Barron’s 1981.

[51] Casper David Friedrich, by Jens Christian Jenson. Chapter Thirteen ‘Controversy over a Painting’. Page 92. Barron’s 1981.

[52] Casper David Friedrich, by Jens Christian Jenson. Chapter Thirteen ‘Controversy over a Painting’. Page 90. Barron’s 1981.

[53] Casper David Friedrich and the subject of landscape, by Joseph Leo Koerner.Page 164. Reaktion Books limited 1990.

[54] Carleton Watkins, The Art of Perception by Douglas R. Nickel. Page 25. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 1999.

[55] Carleton Watkins, The Art of Perception by Douglas R. Nickel. Page 20. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 1999.

[56] Carleton Watkins, The Art of Perception by Douglas R. Nickel. Page 21. San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 1999.

[57] From Adams to Stieglitz, Pioneers of Modern Photography, by Nancy Newhall. Chapter ‘Ansel Adams, The Eloquent Light’. Page 11. Aperture 1989.

[58] From Adams to Stieglitz, Pioneers of Modern Photography, by Nancy Newhall. Chapter ‘Ansel Adams, The Eloquent Light’. Page 11. Aperture 1989.

[59] From Adams to Stieglitz, Pioneers of Modern Photography, by Nancy Newhall. Chapter ‘Ansel Adams, The Eloquent Light’. Page 13. Aperture 1989.

[60] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 187. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[61] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 188. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[62] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 187. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[63] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Eight ‘Special Printing Applications’. Page 174. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[64] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Four ‘Proof and Work Prints’ .Page 72. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[65] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Four ‘Proof and Work Prints’ .Page 71/72. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[66] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Eight ‘Special Printing Applications’. Page 173. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[67] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Eight ‘Special Printing Applications’. Page 174. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[68] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Eight ‘Special Printing Applications’. Page 174. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[69] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Eight ‘Special Printing Applications’. Page 174. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[70] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 188. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[71] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 188/189. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[72] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 189. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[73] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Four ‘Proof and Work Prints’ .Page 72. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[74] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 209. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[75] Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Scaling The Sublime’ by Robert Silberman. Page 39. Friends of Photography 1993.

[76] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 210. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[77] Ansel Adams, New Light.Notes from chapter ‘Scaling The Sublime’ by Robert Silberman. Page 41. Friends of Photography 1993.

[78] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 173. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[79] Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Scaling The Sublime’ by Robert Silberman. Page 33. Friends of Photography 1993.

[80] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 175. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[81] “Adams wrote Stieglitz in 1933 that ‘creative work is one thing and commissions are another’.”. Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Scaling The Sublime’ by Robert Silberman. Page 34. Friends of Photography 1993.

[82] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 175. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[83] Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Scaling The Sublime’ by Robert Silberman. Page 33. Friends of Photography 1993.

[84]Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Scaling The Sublime’ by Robert Silberman. Page 34. Friends of Photography 1993.

[85] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 173. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[86] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 174. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[87] He called it a ‘breadboard’ and it attached to the tripod, supporting the camera so the lens remained in the centre when “swung from one position to another”. Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 174. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[88] Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Scaling The Sublime’ by Robert Silberman. Page 34. Friends of Photography 1993.

[89] Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Forging The Wilderness Idea’ by Renée Haip. Page 75. Friends of Photography 1993.

[90] Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Forging The Wilderness Idea’ by Renée Haip. Page 77. Friends of Photography 1993.

[91] Ansel Adams, New Light. Chapter ‘Forging The Wilderness Idea’ by Renée Haip. Page 76. Friends of Photography 1993.

[92] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 149. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[93] Ansel Adams, An Autobiography. Page 149. Thames and Hudson 1985.

[94] The History of Photography, by Beaumont Newhall. Chapter Eight ‘Photography as an Art”. Page 130. Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.

[95] About Rothko, by Dore Ashton. Chapter Nine. Page 144. First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.

[96] About Rothko, by Dore Ashton. Chapter Nine. Page 155. First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.

[97] About Rothko, by Dore Ashton. Chapter Seven. Page 122. First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.

[98] The Photograph as Contemporary Art, by Charlotte Cotton. Chapter Two ‘Once Upon a Time’. Page 79. Thames and Hudson 2004.

[99] Portfolio. Issue 25. ‘Filming Things - A Conversation with Hannah Collins’ by Pavel Büchler.

[100] Portfolio. Issue 25. ‘Filming Things - A Conversation with Hannah Collins’ by Pavel Büchler.

[101] Portfolio. Issue 25. ‘Filming Things - A Conversation with Hannah Collins’ by Pavel Büchler.

[102] The Photograph as Contemporary Art, by Charlotte Cotton. Chapter Two ‘Once Upon a Time’. Page 80. Thames and Hudson 2004.

[103] About Rothko, by Dore Ashton. Chapter Eleven. Page 191. First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.

[104] About Rothko, by Dore Ashton. Chapter Eleven. Page 191. First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.

[105] http://www.eyestorm.com/artist/Hannah_Collins_biography.aspx

[106] Portfolio, Issue 21. ‘The Hunter’s Space’ by Iwona Blazwick.

[107] PH Emerson, The Fight For Photography As A Fine Art, by Nancy Newhall. Page 3. Aperture 1975.

[108] The Photograph As Contemporary Art by Charlotte Cotton. Chapter Three ‘Deadpan’. Page 81. Thames and Hudson 2004.

[109] The Photograph As Contemporary Art by Charlotte Cotton. Chapter Three ‘Deadpan’. Page 82. Thames and Hudson 2004.

[110] Portfolio. Issue 29. ‘A World Made to Order’ by David Chandler.

[111] Portfolio. Issue 29. ‘A World Made to Order’ by David Chandler.

[112] About Rothko, by Dore Ashton. Chapter Eight. Page 138. First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.

[113] About Rothko, by Dore Ashton. Chapter Eight. Page 139. First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.

[114] About Rothko, by Dore Ashton. Chapter Eight. Page 139. First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.

[115] http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[116] http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[117] http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[118] Transcript from video interview: link from http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[119] Transcript from video interview: link from http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[120] Transcript from video interview: link from http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[121] Transcript from video interview: link from http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[122] Transcript from video interview: link from http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[123] Transcript from video interview: link from http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[124] Transcript from video interview: link from http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[125] Transcript from video interview: link from http://www.kqed.org/spark/artist-orgs/catherinew.jsp

[126] http://www.absolutearts.com/artsnews/2oo5/03/16/32838.html

[127] http://www.bemiscenter.org/art/?req=calendar/event&eventuniqID=1039-0--&month=1&day=1&year=1005

[128] http://www.bemiscenter.org/art/?req=calendar/event&eventuniqID=1039-0--&month=1&day=1&year=1005

[129] http://www.bemiscenter.org/art/?req=calendar/event&eventuniqID=1039-0--&month=1&day=1&year=1005

[130] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Foreword by Dennis Barrie. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[131] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Introduction by Sarah Rogers-Lafferty. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[132] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 27. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[133] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Interview, page 9. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[134] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Interview, page 9. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[135] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Interview, page 14. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[136] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 46. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[137] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 27. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[138] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg.Page 43. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[139] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 44. Harry N. Abrams Inc.

[140] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Interview, page 18. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[141] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 23. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[142] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 23. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[143] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 29. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[144] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 35. Quote by Elisabeth Sussman. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[145] Mike and Doug Starn byAndy Grundberg. Essay by Andy Grundberg. Page 38. Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

[146] The Print, by Ansel Adams. Chapter Eight. Page 173. Little, Brown and Company 1983.

[147] http://www.sonoma.edu/pubs/newsrelease/archives/0004000.html


Bibliography
Mike Weaver. ‘British Photography in the 19th Century, The Fine Art Tradition.’ Cambridge University Press 1989.
Beaumont Newhall. ‘Photography, A Short Critical History.’ The Museum of Modern Art 1938.
Ian Jeffrey. ‘Photography, A Concise History.’ Thames and Hudson 1981.
Beaumont Newhall. ‘The History of Photography’ Martin Secker and Warburg limited 1972.
Edited by Liz Wells. ‘Photography, A Critical Introduction.’ Routledge 1997.
Nancy Newhall. ‘From Adams to Stieglitz.’ Aperture 1989.
Nancy Newhall. ‘P.H.Emerson, The Fight for Photography as a Fine Art.’ Aperture 1975.
Editor Jack Schofield. ‘How Famous Photographers Work.’ Eaglemoss Publications Ltd 1983.
Charlotte Cotton. ‘The Photograph as Contemporary Art.’ Thames and Hudson 2004.
Dore Ashton. ‘About Rothko.’ First Da Capo Press Edition 1996.
Ellen G. Landau. ‘Jackson Pollock.’ Thames and Hudson 2005.
Editor Micheal Read. ‘Ansel Adams New Light.’ Friends of Photography 1993.
Michael Freeman. ‘The Encyclopedia of Practical Photography.’ Tigerbook International PLC 1987.
Michael Langford. ‘The Darkroom Handbook.’ Ebury Press 1989.
John P. Schaefer. ‘Ansel Adams Basic Techniques of Photography Book2.’ Little, Brown and Company 1998.
Tim Rudman. ‘The Photographers’ Master Printing Course.’ Octopus Publishing Group Ltd 1994.
Basil Cannon. ‘Ansel Adams, Photographs from the National Park Service Archive.’ Grange Books 1999.
Ansel Adams. ‘An Autobiography.’ Thames and Hudson 1985.
Roland Barthes. ‘On Photography.’ The University Press of Florida 1997.
Graham Reynolds. ‘Turner.’ Thames and Hudson 1969.
Jens Christian Jenson. ‘Caspar David Friedrich.’ Barron’s educational series 1981.
Joseph Leo Koerner. ‘Caspar David Friedrich and the subject of landscape.’ Reaktion Books limited 1990.
Douglas R.Nickel. ‘Carleton Watkins, The Art of Perception.’ San Francisco Museum of Modern Art 1999.
A.J. Finburg. ‘The Life of J.M.W. Turner.’ Oxford University Press 1961.
Ansel Adams. ‘The Print.’ Little, Brown and Company 1983.
Andy Grundberg. ‘Mike and Doug Starn.’ Harry N. Abrams Inc. 1990.

Websites
http://www.largeformatphotography.info
http://www.viewcamera.com
http://www.ephotozine.com
http://www.linhofstudio.com
http://www.paulpolitis.com
http://www.hunter-gis.com
http://www.absolutearts.com
http://www.dia.org
http://www.bemiscenter.org
http://www.sonoma.edu
http://www.bbc.co.uk
http://www.rochester.edu
http://www.stevenkatzmanphotography.com
http://www.mopa.org
http://www.tfaoi.com
http://www.citybeat.com
http://www.bombsite.com
http://www.laurencemillergallery.com
http://www.undo.net
http://www.britannica.com
http://www.eyestorm.com
http://www.hannahcollins.net
http://www.aberlardomorell.net
http://www.wild-landscape.com
http://www.danmassey.co.uk
http://www.f45.com
http://www.adamjahiel.com
http://www.michaelkahn.com
http://www.michaelkenna.net
http://www.maraini.com
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk
http://www.silverprint.co.uk
http://www.alternativephotography.com
http://www.cfaahp.org
http://www.gumphoto.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.fotospeed.com
http://www.kqed.org
http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/A/anatomy_disgust/manchot.html

Magazines / News
Portfolio. Issues 21, 25, 29.

Interviews : With thanks to
Jeremy Stern, Bemis Arts Center.
Collette Fu
Judy Wong, Ilford
Jan Herlinger, Fotospeed
Mike Starn
For their time in talking and emailing.

© BluehouseArt