U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: TYPO ...Re: 3 questions (one of them dumb)

Re: TYPO ...Re: 3 questions (one of them dumb)

Hello Peter,

How funny, we met at the lensculture party and I had no idea that you were part of this list!
I saw your photos of the party at Jim and Millie's afterwards and they were fantastic!
I completely agree with you about the MacDermott prints, I commented afterwards that I have seen much better from this list.

Colleen Leonard

----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Marshall" <petermarshall@cix.co.uk>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: TYPO ...Re: 3 questions (one of them dumb)

I wrote a little piece somewhere a couple of years ago after going round one of the big shows - probably Paris Photo - about all the various different ways dealers were trying to hide the fact that some prints on sale were inkjet prints. Of course many are still at it, though I did see the "i" word used a little more this year. And many of the best contemporary prints on show were inkjet, particularly colour but also some fine b/w prints.

There were also some fine historical examples of alt-process prints on show this year, and of course the MEP had the impressive MacDermott & MacGough show, though I have to say I was not impressed by the quality of their gum prints or cyanotypes - I think most people here could have made better prints for them!

I'll possibly get round to writing more about this later - if so I'll try and remember to post here. At the moment I'm still trying to catch up after a rather busy time in Paris

Peter Marshall - Photographer, Writer: NUJ
petermarshall@cix.co.uk _________________________________________________________________
Re:PHOTO                     http://re-photo.co.uk
My London Diary                  http://mylondondiary.co.uk/
London's Industrial Heritage: http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/
The Buildings of London etc:  http://londonphotographs.co.uk/
and elsewhere......

Judy Seigel wrote:

oops -- typo... that's,

not "glicee," but "GICLEE" was (also if not primarily) used to obscure the fact ...