BackdoorArts
Senior Member
Don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking your self portrait. It is a well executed shot, the lighting is good .as well the post processing. (I could do without the selective coloring on the eyes however, but that's just personal taste.)
On the Ansel Adams reference, I would say that any black and white shot of trees and mountains is a black and white photograph.
I didn't think you were, but I wanted to be clear that the concept of a self portrait is a long-standing one that has much less to do with the pure narcissism exhibited in the "selfie". Sure, it can be argued that any time one decides to capture a permanent representation of themselves that there is some degree of vanity and narcissism involved, a self portrait - for me at least - differs from the selfie in that, 1) its purpose is to invoke some meaning or emotion other than "look at me!!", and 2) more time was spent snapping the image than spent thinking about taking it.
Van Gogh and DaVinci never did selfies, in fact, I'd say it's near impossible to paint one (see rule #2). And while I suspect there were occasional selfies taken in the film days (I recall taking quite a few at weddings where a disposable camera was placed on every table), it wasn't until a camera lived in your pocket 24x7 that the real selfie was born. Not that you can't take a self portrait with a camera phone, or a selfie with a DSLR...
...but considering them as synonyms does a disservice to all those for whom portraiture is a serious study, and for whom lighting means something other than bathroom fluorescents.