Re: I agree with Sandy
Yes, the same way. I looked it up on Google. Since this is a family
forum I won't post any of the links but if you do a Google on "What do
bordellos smell like?" you'll find some interesting links.
The traditional vs modern is not a binary choice but one of degrees. Do
you use a digital negative? Or as some die-hards would insist, a wet
plate collodion negative. Carbon on Yupo? Na2 for contrast in pt?
BOB KISS wrote:
I assume you know the smell of a bordello for the same reason that I
know that the lovely, scented, tropical shrubs called "Ladies of the Night"
we planted outside our bedroom windows are accurately named.
From: Richard Sullivan [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2007 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: I agree with Sandy
I have to agree with Judy and Sandy.
There is a small group that meets twice a week at the B+S carbon works
factory. We call ourselves the Carbon Study Group but we also do more
than carbon. At this moment I am turning our indsutrial neighborhood
into what smells like a bordello since I am boiling down $50.00 worth of
lavender oil to a resin for a pre-daguerreian/* */photo experiment for
tomorrow's session. There are other cheaper modern materials that would
work as well To the point of Judy and Sandy's comments, we do run into
the modern vs traditional argument. As we explore these processes we can
see how they can be improved with modern methods and materials. We can
substitute "the modern this" for the "traditional that" and avoid some
of the problems inherent in the older traditional process. But and that
is a big "but," it isn't the same. There is a sense of historical
connection that one makes by doing it the way they used to do it. It is
in a sense related to that idea of the handmade that I have discussed
here before. On the other hand, there is the utilitarian approach that
some people take that is it is the results that count. If one gets a
beautiful picture then what's the gripe? Both sides have their merits.
Ok, someone's going to ask how I know what a bordello smells like.
Judy Seigel wrote:
Sndy King wrote:
It has always seemed to me that the mystique of Fresson is almost
entirely due to the fact that the prints are made by members of the
Fresson family using a proprietary printing method that around a
century old. Even if one were able to manufacture a direct carbon
type paper that is superior to Fresson it still would not be a Fresson.=================================
On that score, gum bichromate prints are in the same family as direct
carbon. The color gum prints made by a number of contemporary workers
are technically much superior to color prints made by Fresson, IMHO.
But there are still many people who would prefer to own a real Fresson.
Exactly, exactly, exactly.
The most beautiful photograph in the most exquisite medium might not
get a second glance. In our celebrity crazed culture, how could it be
otherwise. Maker of this beautiful picture is not a celebrity. Maybe
some day, but Fresson is already celebrity.
My hunch anyway is that with today's software & hardware, a
"technically" better print could be made by graduate student with
Photoshop, Apple Giraffe, & inkjet.
However, forget that. "Art" across the board today is a commodity, and
don't kid yourself that old process is somehow "different." I think
of today's (Sunday's) NY Times Business section article, under topic
Sunday Money: "Art Advice, for hire. By Julie Bick, page 5."
Maybe someone has that already on line, and would take the part that
starts "Consultants can charge by the hour, " and continues through
"For those who want to measure art sale returns as part of their
financial portfolios, ArtASAnAsset.com offers the Mei Moses Fine Art
indexes...." and well, actually through the end of the article.
In sum: they take the artist you liked, divide his/her last auction
price by previous year's sales, subtract from gallery's monthly
rental, add to last year's price and length of waiting list, multiply
by consultant's hourly rate, add 50 points for famous lover, and
advise whether to buy or not.