Fred Picker, and being a serious photographer . . .

[David M]

I suppose Minor White’s mysticism might be considered the equivalent* of paying minute attention to the mysterious inner mind of one particular developer. A kind of diversionary strategy by the Universe, so that the picture can get itself taken without interference. Is there a photographic Gaia?

* Didn’t mean “Equivalent” but it’s a remarkably serendipitous coincidence. My Gaia theory is looking more convincing.

 

[thronobulax]

British traditions largely died out because of WWII and then a shortage of materials and few new cameras after the war and heavy import restrictions, until the early 1950's. It's the 1960's and particularly the 1970's when photography revived as an art. Many date the start of the revival to the 1955 MOMA "The Family of Man" exhibition, being shown in London (a few years later).

It was the 1970's before Richard Sadler, Paul Hill, John Blakemore and others sset up the first Art Photography courses at Trent Polytechic in Nottingham and Derbt College of Art. There were excellent commercial photography courses but they weren't art orienred.

Yes there was US influence and Thomas Joshua Cooper a Minor White disciple moved from the US and joined the Derby college, but Paul Hill and others will tell you that a UK style evolved based or emulated on printed reproductions of the works of people like AA, Weston, Minor White, as almost no-one here had seen original prints. However British photographers evolved theit own styles.

Ian

I confess to knowing the US and Continental body of work but not any of the UK. Could you suggest a book or website that captures the essence of post-war UK photography? I am now curious.

 

[Alan9940]

@David M, I respectfully disagree regarding the style of Picker's work. Yes, he attended Ansel's workshop and certainly the underpinnings of his own photography and teaching are traced back to Adams, but I view his style as a more intimate relationship with the landscape. In the early days, he did seem to follow along in the "grand landscape" tradition of Adams--reference his Iceland portfolio or many of the images from Easter Island--but in later years (especially after his move back to Vermont) he concentrated on small, more intimate scenes--reference his images along brooks. For fact, he created an entire body of work from his "brooks series" that were 5x4 contact prints mounted on 12x9 boards. I vividly remember seeing about a dozen of these images propped up along a plate rail in his workroom. They were all quite lovely and invited quiet contemplation.

IMO, thronobulax has summarized it best. Fred tried to simplify Ansel's teachings to enable photographers to move beyond all the sensitometry, etc, that Adams taught. Was it too simple? Perhaps. But, I would argue that much good work could be done by simply picking one film, one developer, one printing paper, testing for your own personal EI and development time, then getting to work! I think you would agree that it's way more important to learn what you want to say vs having perfect, boring prints.

 

[Ian Grant]

I confess to knowing the US and Continental body of work but not any of the UK. Could you suggest a book or website that captures the essence of post-war UK photography? I am now curious.

There aren't many books looking specifally at British photography. Aperture published "British Photography - Towards a bigger picture" it's a bit light and misses out many of the more established photographers, it's more about new emerging phographers. "Through the Looking Glass - Photographic Art between 1945 -1989" published by the Barbican Art Gallery is much better, it's an exhibition catalogue with a number of essays.

Peter Turner's "History of Photography" has a more British and International approach compared to Beaumont Newhall's book with the same title.

Paul Lewis wrote in an article in ten* magazine titled Where the wild Things Went - Landscape the British Connection "Perhaps it is unfair to accuse the anti-rationalists of a lack of reason, but even judged on their own terms as spiritual artists they revealed an extraordinarily old fashioned and derivative approach. They seemed untouched by contemporary American practice and aligned themselves with old masters like Adams, Edward Weston, Bullock and White. There was no sense of awareness of what was being achieved by Baltz, Deal or Robert Adams. Although there were to be apostasies later, 12 of the original White disciples were Blakemore, Hill, Cooper, Moore, Blake, Jackson, Shield, Joyce, Davies, Locke, Baird and Jedrzejczyk. There were many more. Their style was crafted from the use of large format cameras for maximum definition, long exposures denoting the passage of time, flux and fluidity, dramatic natural lighting, an obsession with rich seductive textures, and great emphasis on the craft of printing and the quality of paper. It was demanded that the photographs be read for their symbolic power. They were meditations."

It's fair to say Fred Picker was largely unknown here in the UK until the rise of Forums, and Zone VI products weren't exported from the US. Ironically I had a long conversation late yesterday afternoon with a US photographer living in Paris, he knew Fred Picker. Zone VI photo papers were just rebadged Forte.

Ian

 

[thronobulax]

<snip> (And thank you.)

It's fair to say Fred Picker was largely unknown here in the UK until the rise of Forums, and Zone VI products weren't exported from the US. Ironically I had a long conversation late yesterday afternoon with a US photographer living in Paris, he knew Fred Picker. Zone VI photo papers were just rebadged Forte.

Ian

I'm not sure that's the entire story. The original graded Brilliant papers (my favorites of all time), I believe were made by Guilleminot and Boespflug, a French concern. Then along came Brilliant VC, which may have been Forte or Ilford, I am unclear. Brilliant Bromide II was a UK product, probably made by Kentmere. Brilliant VC III was made by Ilford.


What I do know is that the VC had nowhere near the surface tooth and texture of the graded papers. I have yet to find an equal for Brilliant graded either in hard grades or VC. It was simply beautiful. I'd give up VC split printing in a heartbeat if a paper of that beauty were once again available.

 

[Alan9940]

The original graded Brilliant papers (my favorites of all time), I believe were made by a French concern.

I loved, loved, loved the original graded Brilliant papers. Like you, if something similar was available today I'd toss my VC head, install my old Zone VI coldlight head with stabilizer and never look back!

 

[Ian Grant]

I'm not sure that's the entire story. The original graded Brilliant papers (my favorites of all time), I believe were made by a French concern. Then along came Brilliant VC, which may have been Forte or Ilford, I am unclear. What I do know is that the VC had nowhere near the surface tooth and texture of the graded papers. I have yet to find an equal for Brilliant graded either in hard grades or VC. It was simply beautiful. I'd give up VC split printing in a heartbeat if a paper of that beauty were once again available.

Zone VI papaer may well have been made by Guilleminot until they went bankrupt in 1994, after that it was definitely made by Forte. Guy Gerard who founded Bergger, had worked for Guilleminot, his Bergger films papers were re-badged Forte. Part of the discussion I had yesterday was about Guy Gerard who was unaware of Fred Picker & Zone VI, Freestayle, B&H, J&C etc, and more importantly hadn't realised Bergger and Zone VI papers were both from Forteidentical. The way it was put was he was unaware of much of the English speaking world, my contact had done the translations for Bergger's export datasheets etc, their chemistry was made in Italy by Bellini.

Ian

 

[Alan9940]

Well, if the later version of Brilliant paper was made by Forte it's no wonder I liked it throughout its lifespan; Forte being one of my other favorite stocks. Still have a box of 14x11 Polywarmtone in the freezer!

 

[Ian Grant]

Well, if the later version of Brilliant paper was made by Forte it's no wonder I liked it throughout its lifespan; Forte being one of my other favorite stocks. Still have a box of 14x11 Polywarmtone in the freezer!

I've never frozen film or papaer, actually Simon GAlley (formerly) of Ilford said it wasn't a good idea, just cold storage. I have quite a bit of Polywarmtone left mostly 30"x24" from the very last run. I bought about £1000 Then maybe $1500) worth from Fotoimpex. It's the best paper Ive ever used, so I cut the last large sheets to what I still neeed.

When the Polywarmtone is all gone I've a huge stash of Ilford Warmtone, The Polywarmtone will only be uased to complete existing projects.

Ian

 

[David M]

Alan, I can’t disagree with anything you say. I haven’t seen the contact prints.

 

[Ian Grant]

Well, if the later version of Brilliant paper was made by Forte it's no wonder I liked it throughout its lifespan; Forte being one of my other favorite stocks. Still have a box of 14x11 Polywarmtone in the freezer!

I've never frozen film or papaer, actually Simon Galley (formerly) of Ilford said freezing wasn't a good idea, just cold storage. I have quite a bit of Polywarmtone left from the veery last run. I bought about £1000 worth from Fotoimpex back in 2006/7 as Forte closed.

Now I've switched to Ilford Warmtone, the Polywarmtone is being used to finish existing projects where all the other prints have been made with it.

Ian