>Shel wrote: While I've never really been a big fan of
> Adams' landscape and portraiture, I've always admired the quality of
> his prints.
Funny you should mention that because I remember wondering back around the time you
took so much flak over your PUG criticism how Adams work would have fared on the PUG.
I've always like Adam's pictures and books but when I visited a travelling exhibit of
the Mitsubishi collection (I think that's whose it was) I was blown away by some of
his actual prints. One of the prints, roughly a 4x6 of a lone horse in vast valley,
was really impressive. Your eye was immediately drawn to that horse even though it
probably didn't comprise more than a fraction of a percent of the total image area.
The really impressive part of the print was how crisp it was. Oh, I forgot to
mention, it was 4 x 6 feet, not inches.
>Shel wrote: I understand that the museum is exhibiting the same
> photographic scene from early and from late in his career to show the
> changes in his
> work. That should be interesting.
Yes, that was also highlight of the exhibit I saw. The change is interesting. I
thought some of his early prints were, well . . ., fuzzy. Just shows that even the
greats need practice.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
