Re: SIZE Re: Photogravure was: Re: SPE and alt update!!!!!!

["Christina Z. Anderson" <zphoto@montana.net>]

Good morning all!

Since I brought up this thread I wanted to clarify my original statement.

First of all, how EXCITING that so many are finally posting and coming out
of the woodwork!  And newbies--Clair, thanks for sharing the postage stamp
watercolor story--that is very cool.

Second, my commenting about the ubiquitousness of large digital works  was a
critique on the ubiquitousness not the works.  I actually really loved some
of them, and I actually (gasp) like the "vacant banale" stuff going on today
in the art world.  I love Candida Hofer's work, for instance. Well, hers
isn't so "banale" in some instances.  Or large digiprints of blankly
inflected spaces.  BUT I do NOT love the fact that the diversity is not
there.  It is as if anyone who wants to show in a gallery is trying to mimic
a certain contemporary style or they feel they "won't get in" to their New
York fix. So it's the lemming factor I deplore, or maybe it is just purely a
zeitgeist that all of these photographers are following and not just each
other or the Yale school.

As far as size goes, I love big works in general, ESPECIALLY alt.  I think
to do a large work well in alt shows a certain virtuoso and I appreciate
that.  Sookang Kim's work is gorgeous, thanks for sharing her, Clay. But if
the image isn't good, big or small, it doesn't make it any better IMHO by
adding a size factor.  For instance, think of Sookang Kim's work as small
2x2" prints--they would still be simple and gorgeous--it is the light and
quality of printing and subject matter that catch the eye.

I think Sandy is tongue in cheek because if I seem to remember, Sandy owns
one of those honkin' big cameras that can do nothing BUT big works, so he
doesn't have much room to talk.  But I do agree with the space
consideration--I am having a huge issue with that right now, with way too
many framed works needing storage and darned if I will take them out of
frames once they are in there, dust free. One show of 50 works and voila,
storage problem. Not so big of a deal if they are 8x10's but 20x24's becomes
a problem.

Mark, I thought it is called Photopolymer Gravure...and I do think it is
fair to put "polymer" in there somewhere, though general public would be
hard pressed to tell the dif between a print from one form to the other.

Diana, I can understand why mezzotints are small.  Rocking a plate--4x5 was
plenty big.  There is a guy, and I forget his name, who rocked these HUGE
plates down south when I was at Clemson (he gave a presentation) and again,
I was blown away by his virtuoso.  But mezzotints are so gorgeous and
velvety small.  Wow.  I wonder if we are talking about the same guy...he's a
mezzotint king IMHO.

So I guess I have to say size is verrrry seductive but the proverbial proof
is in the performance--the image itself.
Chris

> Big VS small
>
> In centuries past artists were only able to create small prints  due to
> available tools of the artists trade at the time. Etchings, engravings
> etc.. were commonly put in albums which were enjoyed and shared . Rather
> like showing a friend a personal  collection. Or perhaps like showing a
> friend a favorite DVD.  Then there were the "paintings" larger images
> which were hung on walls. Later as plates got larger and the availability
> to use larger presses, engravings and etchings began to hang on walls.. In
> essences , print makers originally created images that were in albums
> painters painted paintings that hung on walls.  Times have changed and
> technology has evolved. We are more and more able to create larger and
> larger works as "print" makers, in essence,  whether it is a gum or carbon
> or pd/pt or any alt. process requiring a negative. We are  more and more
> able to make larger negatives. Each artist has his or her own statement to
> make. To say an image created by any process, an
> d by any of us , should be best seen large or small is truly up to the
> artist who is making the work, and that statement the artist whishes to
> make.  Yes small is beautiful and so is big. It is the work that counts
> not the size.  Study the past and grow into the future.
>
> Liz Tuttie
> http://photosplatinum.com