>>4119825>He was a master printer.This is the only actual verifiable truth of Adams. He was good in the darkroom. Everything else about his work can be replicated by anyone.
>You need to see his prints in person.This can be said of nearly any photo.
>Compositionally, his style and subject matter was very innovative for the time.>for the time.Exactly. There is nothing special about it in retrospect as
>most of his work is tired nowbecause there is nothing extraordinary about it.
>His style is boring and repetitivebecause he has no style. This is why
>so many take the same pictures as him, and still still take the same pictures as him to this day. >He also literally invented zone system, which still holds up with digital cameras to this day.He didn't invent anything here. He just laid out and packaged for consumers what was obvious and already known by landscape painters and other photographers. Adams fame is based on being first in line with modern camera and film technology backed up by the ability to write, teach and sell himself to the world through modern mass media.
Take a look at the paintings of the Hudson River School of painters from the mid 1800s for example. Adams clearly was a product of such painters. He simply carried such artistic work over to the film medium because he was in the right place at the right time.
