U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | New trends <was Re: Direct Carbon Potential.>

New trends <was Re: Direct Carbon Potential.>

Greg Schmitz wrote:
achakali@wideopenwest.com wrote:

===some deleted: snip%<

To expand on the commercial side of things, I think the current market for either a carbon transfer or direct carbon printing product is miniscule. However, if we turn back the clock about 30 years, one could have made the same statement about platinum printing. It is my understanding that Dick Sullivan went ahead and began producing platinum printing materials at a time when a market didn’t exist and quite likely contributed a good deal of the impetus for its successful revival. Though carbon transfer is not widely used today, Dick’s current work to make carbon transfer products available makes perfect sense in light of platinum’s resurrection.
===rest deleted: snip%<

A bit of a follow on. Art, you might be on to something. I can't take credit for this, because my "partner in crime (or whatever)," Emily Ramos - a book and paper conservator (and sometime film shooter) has argued for sometime now that there will be a backlash from "kids" that grew up with digital imaging; they will look back in time for their muse. I'm 51 (I think) and that's what happened in the 1960s and 1970s when I was an adolescent. My generation, or at least some of us, rejected or looked for alternatives to the slick "commercial" and/or "cliche" images being produced at the time (Ansel was not always a favorite, nor was Mortensen). Process was one way to head in a different ("new") direction (the same was true in the "printing arts" BTW). Recently, I've seen a few posts to photography groups that read something like, "hey, I used my dad's Nikon and shot film - really cool." We'll see where it goes, but perhaps the corporate market place is not always in the drivers seat.

Best -greg schmitz