Re: alt exhibit

To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: Re: alt exhibit
From: jstrain@iquest.net
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:56:50 -0400
Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
In-reply-to: <BC875BD3-CAEE-43B7-8AB1-A2BBBED731AD@pacifier.com>
List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
References: <NFEBKFNNLLKIMINCGJJFCECNDKAA.mark@dragonbones.com><BC875BD3-CAEE-43B7-8AB1-A2BBBED731AD@pacifier.com>
Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.1

Maybe it is what we have all been worried about.  Film, silver prints and 
chromogenic prints have all become "alt" processes.  Jim

Quoting Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>:

> 
> On Sep 4, 2007, at 9:47 PM, D. Mark Andrews wrote:
> >  Here I was thinking I had them
> > figured out.
> 
> 
> What I'm curious about is whether for the purpose of this exhibition,  
> pinhole was considered "alt" in and of itself, because some of the  
> color images appear to be pinhole images, but also appear to be  
> printed in conventional (not alternative) color printing processes.
> kt
> 
>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: alt exhibit
  - From: Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>

References:
- RE: alt exhibit
  - From: "D. Mark Andrews" <mark@dragonbones.com>
- Re: alt exhibit
  - From: Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>