Re: curators v. doctors
Judy,
Yep-- I can absolutely believe that (about the curators and
historians knowing "diddle" about alt processes). Your doctor
analogy reminds me of that old saying about those who graduate dead
last in med school-- what do we call them? I guess one could say the
same about curators who graduate dead last from "curator school." :)
Diana
On Dec 22, 2007, at 12:02 AM, Judy Seigel wrote:
Chris & co,
If you'd been reading the history of photography list as many years
as I have, you'd know that curators and historians generally know
DIDDLE about our processes.
They may be, often are, extremely erudite, fact packed, world-class
expert in their fields, even several fields, but take their word
for ANYTHING about "alternative processes" including what & which
they are, and you're in for a shock. (Even dealers, or in the
current eupehmism "gallerists," know more, tho a friend once heard
a famous one explaining to a customer that you could only make one
platinum print from a negative). And I stand by the analogy with
doctors -- who have actually been to med school and done
residencies & fellowships. They know so little for sure that when
they actually make a diagnosis, the NY Times magazine prints an
article about it.
I happen also (for example) to have a little book from the Getty
(somewhere in this mess) that even as a beginner I found 2 or maybe
it was 3 mistakes in a once-over lightly... and they weren't really
delving into anything, just being descriptive. (Wanna bet the word
"archival" wasn't on those pages? -- tho admittedly it's some years
since I read it, so I wouldn't bet more than a half million or so.)
J.
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
No...it was a discussion about something else, and he brought up
the point about "gum not being the most archival process" and I
was shocked because I had always told my students it was the most
archival process there was, and was worried I would have to
recant. Thus this point is very important to me. I have always
also said pt/pd was up there, but thought gum/carbon were still
higher. However, in my convo with him, I was "all about gum" and
didn't even think to ask about pt/pd.
Chris
----- Original Message ----- From: "Diana Bloomfield"
<dhbloomfield@bellsouth.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: archivalness of gum
Thanks, Chris. Yes, Marek mentioned that about the gum layer
over the pt/pd possibly working as sort of a preservation tool--
which is good to know. Again, I'm really curious -- since the
curator disagreed with you about carbon and gum being the "most
archival," did she say what she thought was-- in her estimation?
On Dec 20, 2007, at 11:38 PM, Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
Diana,
I am not sure how much time it took to transfer, but it seemed
like it was
decades. Also, it was a faint ghost of an image, and I would
wager a bet
that even with the transfer of some of the metal to paper in
contact, a
platinum print is still way up there in archivalness, in the
same category
as carbon and gum.
If one thinks about it, look at BW paper--I've seen Becher
Typology Water
Towers hanging on the walls of the Walker in Mpls that already
were showing
brown spots and silvering out and such. And then think of
albumen prints
that turn yellow with time. One reason gum printing was so
exciting in the
beginning was that it was an answer to the fading of silver
nitrate based
prints at that time--people wanted something that had more
permanence than
what they were finding in a few short years was fading. Luckily
I xeroxed
those discussions from the early 1860's when gum and carbon came
on the
horizon. There is no silver to fade or fox or spot, just
pigment and gum
and paper and very little dichromate left. Well, and now some
sodium
hypochlorite in Marek's prints :)
So by comparison, so I thought, gum, carbon and platinum were
the best. OH,
and guess what--if the gum layer is on top of the pt/pd print,
it would
prevent the ghosting from occurring by acting as a barrier to
the paper in
contact with the print, so in fact it should HELP with any
shortcomings
pt/pd may have!
Chris
Christina Z. Anderson
Assistant Professor
Photo Option Coordinator
Montana State University
Box 173350
Bozeman, MT 59717
406.994.6219
CZAphotography.com
|