Fred Picker

D

David M

Very Active Poster
Registered User
Joined
Jan 29, 2017
Messages
2,787


Fred Picker talking about his own methods. Quite long and the video quality is not great, but still interesting.
 
I have quite a bit of his material and some of his equipment. While he came off as strongly opinionated in his newsletters, I did once have the opportunity to chat with him via telephone. He was a gentle, thoughtful guy with an immense curiosity about all things photographic. I also find much of his own work quite good, but hampered by poor reproduction quality.

I use the Zone VI VC cold light head on an ancient Omega D-2 every week. Until recently I also used the Zone VI development timer, but that's now been replaced by a comparable device of my own design and creation.

I think it's fair to say that Picker continued the educational tradition of Adams by simplifying Zone System for mere mortals. Even having read Adams cover-to-cover, I found reading Picker's "Zone System Workshop" a breath of fresh air that punched through the key ideas in very pragmatic terms.
 
I think it was Calumet who were selling off the complete collection of Fred Pickers Videos on DVD 3 or 4 years ago at a bargain price. someoneone on APUG/Photrio took some orers online and did a collective purchase posting them around the world at cost. The quality wasn't very good.

I found them heavy going and no longer enlightening, although they probably were at the time made. I also have the complete set of his newsletters.

Ian
 
The thing I most miss from Zone VI was the original Brilliant Graded paper. I have never seen a more lovely paper before- or since from any vendor.
 
For people beginning in LF and Zone System ideas, it might be useful. Clearly it’s now historical - no VC paper, so no split-grade printing, no Astonishingly Prolonged Development, no digital workflow or hybrid technique.
As has been mentioned elsewhere on the forum, he comes across as much more relaxed than in the Newsletters.
I was interested in his going right up to subjects with a spot meter and his method of measuring through filters. Not what I’d expected.

Like everyone else who pulls the figure out of the air, he fails to explain where the magical number 0.01 above FB+F comes from, or how it was derived, invented, or handed down on a golden scroll by angels.

(…perhaps for photographers is should be a silver scroll.)
 
David M said:
Clearly it’s now historical - no VC paper, so no split-grade printing,
Click to expand...
Not sure why you think this. Ilford Multigrade is a Variable Contrast (VC) paper and split grade printing is in normal use daily by a large number of darkroom workers.
 
Bill Martindale said:
Not sure why you think this. Ilford Multigrade is a Variable Contrast (VC) paper and split grade printing is in normal use daily by a large number of darkroom workers.
Click to expand...

Bill,
I think you have mis-understood what David was saying.

Alan
 
Yes, I was saying that the Picker videos make no mention of these things, which are now commonplace. I don't actually know, but I'd imagine that most wet prints are made on VC paper these days. There was a time when they were not as good as they are today and "fine" printers avoided them.
A good deal of Mr Picker's advice is still useful today of course, although most members here will have have evolved their own systems.
Interesting to see him using 35mm for his Zone testing. I'm not entirely sure about this. They are necessarily coated on different bases, so there may be further differences in the emulsion itself.
There remains the question of 0.01.
 
I don't really think it matters when photographic advice was given or if it's archaic or outdated - I think you can find nuggets of gold hidden fairly easily. I use a 'viewfinder' app on my phone (with multiple available formats and focal lengths) to spot shots before I lug my gear from the car - not so very far from Mr Pickers approach ... just updated a bit. :)
 
The thing I most miss from Zone VI was the original Brilliant Graded paper. I have never seen a more lovely paper before- or since from any vendor.
 
OK, looks like my error so I apologise. VC paper was available in Pickers time he was just very dismissive of it according to his newsletters. Things have moved on in quality terms since then though.
 
Marley said:
I don't really think it matters when photographic advice was given or if it's archaic or outdated - I think you can find nuggets of gold hidden fairly easily. I use a 'viewfinder' app on my phone (with multiple available formats and focal lengths) to spot shots before I lug my gear from the car - not so very far from Mr Pickers approach ... just updated a bit. :)
Click to expand...

Some advice is timeless, but Fred Picker's advice on how to get to grips with the Zone system revolved round graded paper. Central to it was finding the minimum print time to get full black on the paper when printing through a clear negative. Try this with today's Multicontrast paper and you will get a different time with each change of filter grade.....

Alan
 
While I use VC exclusively and split print everything, you cannot argue with the results of yesteryear. Lodima Press here in the US has made a lot of the work of Edward and Brett Weston available in high quality softbound books (at rational prices). One need only look at some these to realize what the masters could do with relatively simpler materials.
 
A walk through the British Museum will show that human creativity can work very well with “relatively simpler materials”. What we get from modern technology is greater convenience, not more creativity.
Imagine… if only Mozart and Phidias had had focus-stacking and the Big Stopper…
 
there are many useful information in those three hours, not all all are still that much important.
I lately saw a video with UK "best" still living printer, Mr. R. Bell, and he's using many different customers negatives for such beautiful prints. I assume those negs are not always in best quality but he's the one who makes the best of it.

 
With more technology has come more convenience, and where that doesn't equate with lower quality I'll cherry pick from old and new technology to get the best of all worlds. For me the impermanence of digital files means I shoot everything important with film ,,, but I'm not really sad I don't have the space to print, as a professional I always paid an expert to do that for me , and today I scan. Before I turned professional I did a ton of darkroom work so I feel I paid my dues :)
I can digitally dodge and burn my scanned files as much as I want with no wastage and infinite re-dos ... hybrid work flow suits me ... it won't suit everyone.
 
One of the advantages of digital dodging and burning is that you can deal with shadows, midtones and highlights separately. There may be work-rounds with VC paper, but I'm not qualified to say. I do think that some darkroom experience is very useful for digital work.
You can't really learn to print on perfect negatives. I'm pretty sure that Mr Bell has to deal with some horrific ones.
 
David M said:
One of the advantages of digital dodging and burning is that you can deal with shadows, midtones and highlights separately. There may be work-rounds with VC paper, but I'm not qualified to say. I do think that some darkroom experience is very useful for digital work.
You can't really learn to print on perfect negatives. I'm pretty sure that Mr Bell has to deal with some horrific ones.
Click to expand...


You can do a lot of this with VC split printing and dodge/burn accordingly to change local contrast. The thing that digital makes possible is complex edge transition corrections - say a wooded treeline against a cloudy sky. These are really hard to get right with silver printing but a matter of proper masking with digital.

I own a very fine digital capture system. I own a Hasselblad with several lenses for which a very fine MF digital back is available. I am an engineer by training and profession computers are second nature to me. But, what keeps me from going digital is output - I have yet to find any digital output media that is as beautiful at scale as a silver print. Yes, I could shoot film, scan, correct, and produce a full sized internegative for printing with silver. But that last step is daunting and hard to really get right. For now, at least, I continue to shoot film and print wet, while acknowledging that digital probably has a place in my future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top