Lance Lewin

Lance Lewin

Atlanta, Georgia

For the most part, my inspiration from behind the viewfinder comes from a richly filled combination of studying the pioneers of photography in the mid to late 19th century and masters of the 20th century, (e.g., Julia Margret Cameron, Alfred Stieglit...
Read More

Articles

Creating A Sense Of Space In Your Compositions

Creating A Sense Of Space In Your Compositions

Outdoor Portraiture  In recent months while attending several online and in the classroom photography critique sessions, it occurred to me how many of the participants suggested cropping photos – moving in closer, as it were – as a fix for the photograph...

Read more
Softer Digital Interpretations

Softer Digital Interpretations

Using Bokeh and Natural Lighting For A “Rembrandt” Like Complexion As we continue to marvel at the amazing clarity digital photography has bestowed upon us, today I want to discuss how to make digital photography, well, a little less digital. There are...

Read more

Forum Topics Started

Forum Replies Created

  • Author
    Topic: Members Read 0 Times
  • Lance Lewin
    Lance Lewin
    Participant
    Posts: 44
    Film, I Just Don’t Get It
    on: September 25, 2023 at 10:31 am

    Jeremy, of course, if editing the scanned image file the print is made from it. Alternatively, in rare cases, if I see no benefit in editing the scanned image file, may proceed to use the negative for printing. But there is no significant compromise to print from the edited (or non-edited) scanned image file of a film based composition.

    The registered “photographic event” (on film or digital sensor) imbues all the characteristics of the subject, and those imposed via camera dynamics (e.g., aperture, ISO, type of lens used, position …etc.), and scanning film negatives does not alter this very fact. So, those who shoot film and then scan negatives, and from there edit (or not) , thereafter printing from (this) image file, has absolutely no bearing on ones choice to shoot film as apposed to shooting digitally. As Kevin pointed out, we enjoy the aesthetics of film, and (these) visual nuances do not diminish with (well) scanned negatives.

    Summary: the choice to shoot film is purely aesthetic, and obviously not directed by a particular workflow, as we can see from my description, is more involved than shooting a digital image. It is important to realize, for all practical purposes, scanning a film negative does not diminish the nuances registered during the original photographic event  – through the lens and onto a piece of film, and thus the action of scanning is purely for easily editing the image as opposed to a darkroom workflow.

     

    Thank you.

    Lance A. Lewin

    Lance Lewin
    Lance Lewin
    Participant
    Posts: 44
    Re: Film, I Just Don’t Get It
    Reply #1 on: September 20, 2023 at 10:08 am

    As I mentioned, if you are a film photographer, then that is great as long as you are happy. No matter what, in the end, that is what counts. In my studio at the Indy Art Center, there is a large teaching and a fully functional wet darkroom. In my opinion, if you carry your whole workflow through in analog, then I think that is great. I don’t get the shooting on film and then switching over to a digital workflow after the negative is scanned. In art and photography, no one can be a judge of what work is and how it is done. As long as the artist is happy. However, in our field of enjoyment there are a lot of critics. Go for it if you are having fun.

    [/quote]
    Hi Kevin! This is a very interesting discussion, indeed. So, the purpose I scan my negatives is to be able to create digital files for sending to friends, family and perhaps clients, or often, examples of my work requested via “call for artists” at galleries, for one example. However, I also take my B&W images into PSCC and Silver Efex Pro-3 to review the image for cropping options and exposure adjustments. Also, in Silver Efex Pro-3 I always add custom toning. Only if a film-based B&W image includes the actual negative in the print (as part of the “compositional structure”) then cropping is not an option; and why, in most of my work, I try to crop through viewfinder, especially with film, and to a lesser degree with digital.

    Warm regards, Kevin.

    Lance A. Lewin

    Lance Lewin
    Lance Lewin
    Participant
    Posts: 44
    Re: Creating Artistic Photographs 
Film to Digital Paradigm Shift: Part 1
    Reply #2 on: May 21, 2021 at 4:30 am

    This article, like one Briot wrote over a year ago, seems desperate in its overall tone: seemingly brainwashing-like; over powering in his claims, opinions and ideas on how he thinks photography has changed since the beginning of the digital photography revolution.  In Briot’s other demanding speech (a year ago) he claimed it is alright to completely manipulate the modern day photograph for Arts sake or as the wish of the artist photographer. And as “artists” we have the right to do whoever we want in creating a “photograph”. Here, again, I am being told too many misleading ideas, concepts that are extremely opinionated, and his tone is dictator-like, and can be very impressionable on new students of photography – which I suggest is very unhealthy from a pedagogy standpoint.

    The only paradigm shift that is relevant within the digital photography revolution is the 1. how patrons of the arts look and interpret photographs in museums, galleries and online. Here, every time the same question is asked…’is this image authentic, was it manipulated...’ In other words, how we approach and decipher a photograph has changed forever!  And this change, in how we approach and look at a photograph, is a direct construct of 2. photography has become increasingly mind-dependent, but not from behind the viewfinder, but instead, the blossoming of creativity is from behind illuminated computer screens. At this point, I will suggest, the user has moved past pure photographic techniques, and entered a new realm of photography: like multimedia paintings…a similar dynamic has become increasingly prevalent in 21st Century photography: the Hybrid era.

    What we need (and I am a strong advocate for) is a new and consistent method of identifying work created from a traditional photographic posture, and alternative compositions, I will term, “photographic mixed media” or suggested by Lucy Soutter, “Hybrid” photographs. (Soutter is a photographer, critic and art historian. She is a tutor in the Department of Critical and Historical Studies at the Royal College of Art).

     Simply, it not about how you create your art, (you should be free to reveal from your heart and mind) but more important, how it is presented.  I would not consciously share the same wall space with a painter, like wise, I would not want my (either film or digital captured) Landscape photograph hanging next to a similar, but (Briot created) photographic composite.  Of course, the underlying factor (issue) is at what point does the photographer-artist cross the line from traditional to photographic mixed media? 

    This is a very deep and concerning discourse that needs a lot of room to expand for proper and thorough processing, indeed.  I look forward to your comments.  Thank you.

    Kind regards,

    Lance

    visualizingart.com

    Lance A. Lewin

    Lance Lewin
    Lance Lewin
    Participant
    Posts: 44
    Re: Creating Artistic Landscape Photographs Part 7 – 
Lachez du Lest
    Reply #3 on: April 1, 2020 at 5:32 pm

    Hello, Terry, everyone. Been off the grid for some time and just saw this post: allow me to comment.

    Well, I am sure we will agree – for the most part – we are all experienced – and including the parameters suggested in Alain Briot outline above for what constitutes being titled a photographer: that is, for the sake of this discussion, we are all accustomed to using the camera and each of us have enjoyed a variety of experiences, instruction and experimentation to call ourselves “Photographers”.  Moving on.

    In the turn of the century, the term “Photographer-Painter” was used often to describe those photographers more equipped both in using the camera and searching, composing and capturing a scene/subject better, more lustrous and sometimes photographs that would “Prick” the viewer, as stated so eloquently by Roland Barthes in his 1980 landmark book, Camera Lucida, as a way of identifying a photograph of great interest that initiated an emotional reaction from the viewer. This included those who took part in the Pictorial photography movement, as well.  The point for many – how do you describe our (photographic) Art in a world that has moved decisively toward digital post-production software in finalizing a piece of fine art: how do we categorize the results? Are we Photographers or Digital Artists?

    In my opinion, and others included in discussions, (mostly from artist and patrons of the arts in Ellijay, Ga where I spend a lot of time as the gallery co-director), while using a digital image file (or scanned film negative) as the agency defining the core medium, illustrative and conceptualized style photographs are easily identified as Digital Art. For example, in a recent Digital Photography Exhibition at the Booth Western Museum in north Georgia, the guest curator stated: I am paraphrasing…’well, we can even say this is a Digital Art exhibition’…as every piece had a multitude of digital post-production tricks, accents and layering that revealed some of the best…Visual 2-D work I have seen! Incredible work!

    Alternatively, if an artist uses a variety of digital and non-digital approaches to their work, then these artists can present their work accordingly – I see no reason to attach a specific subtitle to a Photographer-Artist if they use multiple processes: present the work accordingly: that is, disclose the process, especially in exhibitions where both traditional and digital-concept work is presented side-by-side. In fact, we may even decide to call these heavily manipulated work – Multimedia (or photographic multimedia) – as do painters that use photography, acrylics, paper, leaf and assortment of lacquers that cover the canvas in creating a piece of fine art. A Point to Ponder, indeed.

    It is written and discussed with much debate or differences, if the Digital Photography Revolution (and some of its more elaborate iterations) has accelerated the (and allow me to use a phrase from Michael Rush’s book New Media in Art, ‘final Avant-garde of the Twentieth Century’.

    As I have posted here and elsewhere – allow me to reiterate – this is a deep and important discourse I hope continues to bring new insights to the table, that perhaps one day, we will see the light at the end of the photographic tunnel.

    (Attached image: my latest work from the ongoing series Intimate with Nature. Captured on Eastman Double-X/5222 film stock.)

    Thank you.

    Best regards,
    Lance A. Lewin

    Lance A. Lewin

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 2 months ago by Lance Lewin.
    Lance Lewin
    Lance Lewin
    Participant
    Posts: 44
    Re: Creating Photographic Art
    Reply #4 on: January 30, 2020 at 7:23 am

    The only item I will respond to is the Bold text: in my post above the entire piece was written within MSW, as such, transferring the work over to be printed here, is too small (likely because of the font I am using, I have no idea), so I add “Bold” so it can be read more easily.

    LAL

     

    Lance A. Lewin

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 4 months ago by Lance Lewin.