Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/02

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] My attitude about Colo(u)r
From: chandos at cox.net (Chandos Michael Brown)
Date: Wed Feb 2 17:08:27 2005

Parts of this discussion regarding color puzzle me.  First off, would
any of us willingly part big money for lenses that we knew in some
fundamental way failed to transmit the spectrum faithfully from the
subject to the film or sensor?  We talk on the LUG constantly about lens
signatures and the various attributes of different emulsions, but it
seems to me that these conversations invariably assume that there is
such a thing as "normal" color and that we can reach a broad consensus
as to what it is.  Otherwise it's patently nonsensical to speak of
rendering "flesh tone" as "naturally" as possible; yet there've been
numerous conversations on the LUG about this very subject.

Second, it's not clear to me wherein resides the logic that color
representation is necessarily in thrall to "artistic" license; to argue,
in effect, that "because color is subjective, I [the artist] am free to
represent the visible world however it suits me, or to reduce it to
absurdity: because you see red and I see red and never the twain
perceptions shall meet, I'll represent it as green.  I'm reminded of a
line from the French phenomenologist Maurice Merleau-Ponty in which he
imagines "a sky so blue that only blood could be more red."  I think we
all are comfortable, however, with an astonishing range of saturations
(hence the frequent discussion about different emulsions). Eggleston and
Parr seem to inhabit a world of hyper-saturated color, presumably
because they both 'see' the world that way and, most important, they
expertly deploy film technologies to convey that vision to us, but I
never question that they know what they are about.

When I view an image in which there's no discernable aesthetic point (I
am aware this will strike some as inflammatory) that invites me to
linger on the effect of mismatching film to light, where the
contemplation of yet another nacreous complexion (of the sort one
associates more with the autopsy table than with any organism that still
takes nourishment) yields no sudden frisson (such as took place, I must
say, the first time I spent any time with Parr's work) the first thing I
ask myself is: "is this photographer even aware that this effect will
strike the reasonably informed viewer as a technical deficiency?"  I
examine the composition perhaps more carefully than it otherwise
deserves, and, should it, too, fail to yield, then I conclude that this
is the work of someone who is either not technically proficient in the
craft (whether film or digital) or indifferent to its subtleties.

In the former case, I feel that I'm obliged (energy permitting) to
return what I've learned here and elsewhere and to talk about what I
see. In the latter case, I follow Henry Adams' dictum that next to good
humor, silence is best.

I don't wish to rope Doug Herr into a discussion that he has not
voluntarily joined, but I would be curious to know how he feels about
the accurate reproduction of color.  

Cheers!

Chandos







-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+cmbrow=wm.edu@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+cmbrow=wm.edu@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
SonC@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 7:16 PM
To: lug@leica-users.org
Subject: Re: [Leica] My attitude about Colo(u)r

 
 
For the record, I don't think I am related to Ric, but it sure sounds
like  
similar DNA.
 
Sonny
 
 
In a message dated 2/2/2005 6:08:23 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
ricc@mindspring.com writes:

Seldom  do I have the memory capacity to recall the color balance of a 
given  frame. Heck, our brains do so much to jerk around our reaction to

color?  what color predominated the last 15 minutes of our lives has 
huge effects  on what we see. What I see on the same monitor is much 
different  if  the shade is drawn or open; if the light across the room 
on; if I remember  to shift to a gray desktop picture.

For the years that I worked in  newspapers, I worried about not 
betraying reality. I left hideous  powerlines in otherwise lovely 
compositions. I corrected color (when the  little paper allowed me the 
luxury of color) to match the real situation  as best I could.

Now, the non-journalistic work I do is for the  pleasure of MY eye. The 
color falls where I like (or will settle for on  those stubborn ones). 
Unsightly trees, or trash, or powerlines are  banished without  
conscience.

Unless you must exactly portray  reality, the color balance of a photo 
is no more right or wrong that the  pallet chosen by any other artist. 
Some may like it and others not, but it  can?t be wrong to the 
photographer unless they don?t get what they  want.

Ric Carter



 
Regards,  
Sonny
http://www.sonc.com
Natchitoches, Louisiana
Oldest continuous  settlement in La Louisiane
?galit?, libert?,  crawfish

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from SonC at aol.com (SonC@aol.com) ([Leica] My attitude about Colo(u)r)