To the six
hundred,
Apologies for what might be regarded as
a waste of space, but I needed, in
an attempt to preserve some of my
integrity, to reply, in public, to
Judy's slightly
acerbic complement (?) in being compared to ''ERIE''.
Thanks,again, Judy,
for your supperriouer litrerry addvice.
He He He He
He He He He He He etc.,...................
Now, I'm really getting
angry.
Wham ! ! Pow ! ! !
John- Diminutive Photographist - London -
UK
..............................................................................................
-----
Original Message -----
From: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel@panix.com>
To: "The List" <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 2:35
AM
Subject: Re: Attn. Sandy King + All Re the viability of Direct Carbon
Paper.
>
J.
......................................................................................................................................
Actually John, I'm a little afraid of you, tho not yet afraid of Erie,
but
I think you need the same advice; DON'T put so much info in a single
long
paragraph without line spaces. VERY hard to read, definitely against
a
steep gradient. For some of us ancient decrepit bifocal-wearing
relics,
reading on the monitor is already a pain.
And for the love of
heaven, SKIP A LINE BETWEEN PARAGRAPHS. You're not
paying for
paper.
Just look what it looks
like:
J.
...............................................................................................................
On Sun, 27 May 2007, John Grocott wrote:
> Sandy, I
have felt this same reticence you display for many years and I
> might
have agreed there was no commercial market for this Direct Carbon
>
product, at present, in TODAY'S WORLD. I feel that this climate will
>
change in the near future. (B & S please note.) Photography is a young
> science ( approx. 170 years old) and there have been great social
> upheavals in society which have slowed the merging of artistic
evolution
> with photographic techniques. Younger generations learn from
what was
> discovered by pioneers and then there is a demand, once more,
for products
> for the practice of these obscured techniques.
Digitalisation cannot
> provide everything to satisfy searching artistic
drive. The computer is
> common place, today and cannot provide the
theraputic needs of people in
> practicing something as satisfying as
developing your own films or making
> your own prints. Now, electronics
and improved communication systems has
> made this merging even easier.
Maybe the sale of Direct Carbon paper would
> not take off without a lot
of promotion and tight maunufacturing controls
> but , certainly,
knowledge of the subject and how to provide one's own
> materials ( as
Echague did ) is a very viable product. A similar situation
> exists with
Bromoil. It is part of Information Technology ( IT ) which is
> just a
hyped up way of saying, ''Learning how to do something''. The
> latest
zip phrase is, I believe, ''Information + Communication
> Technology.'' (
ICT ). This is a very commercially viable product, in
> itself, in
today's world.
> Maybe, as you suggest, I will eventually publish and
share what I have
> learned with the rest of us. I will endeavour to try
to make you happier.
> Hope you are settling with pleasure into your
recent retirement from your
> previous employment. I did this eight years
ago and still cannot find
> enough time to devote to photography
.
> Regards. John -Photographist - London- UK
>
.........................................................................................
>
Sandy wrote:-
> ''I could be wrong, and nothing would make me happier than
to see you
> or Dave or Art make so much money from your labours that you
will set
> up your grandchildren for life, but this boy just don't see
that
> happening, and my suggestion would be to just share what you
have
> learned with the rest of us.
>
> I hate to rain on the
parade but I just don't believe there is any
> commercial market for this
product in today's world.
>
> Sandy
King''
|