[alt-photo] Re: new MFA program in alt!

[Diana Bloomfield]

Have to agree with all of this.  I went to a mixed-media juried  
exhibit recently, and I was stunned to see that of only nine  
photographs that were in this show (of ~ 80 pieces of artwork), all  
were inkjet prints (though mostly given fancier names-- and based on  
this show, doesn't seem "giclee" has gone out of favor yet).   I was  
also stunned to see the prices attached to these not particularly  
compelling (image-wise) and mostly over-saturated inkjet prints.  Of  
course, there were no red dots on them, but still-- I went away  
thinking I needed to raise my prices.

I had a conversation recently with someone I know who is going to be  
teaching a summer workshop at one of these nationally recognized  
places, and he commented that one of the issues he'll be discussing is  
the pointlessness (my word, not his) of making small prints.  His  
comment was that people have to consider how many of those small  
prints they'd have to sell in order to make any money, and that people  
really needed to print big . . . I was so dumbfounded by the comment  
that before I could respond, some other issue came up-- probably a  
good thing as I wasn't even sure where to begin with a comment like  
that.

And following up on what Paul said here about people looking to be  
"original" and not caring what came before-- I have actually heard  
several people say to me in the last year that they're so glad they're  
"self-taught" and aren't bogged down by worrying about what came  
before-- that they're really not interested.   Whew.

On the upside, I was invited by a former student of mine, who is now a  
full-time graduate student at a nearby university, to come and talk to  
their student group, to show my work, and I was invited to a gum  
workshop they're having, as well as to a pinhole class.  So that will  
be really interesting.  I was excited to learn that alt processes  
still seem to be alive and well there.

I'm curious about this new MFA program that's in the works, though.   
While that sounds like a good thing, I'm really wondering how many  
universities will actually be looking to hire new MFA graduates whose  
specialty is alt processes?  Maybe Christopher James knows something  
we don't.  Otherwise, unless there's a very heavy dose of digital to  
go along with that, I can't imagine alt processes is a real calling  
card for somebody looking for a job.  But maybe this means more alt  
process printers and interest in all things alt is on the rise?

As I've probably stated before, I am sick to death of seeing nothing  
but huge-ass digital prints everywhere I go.  Even their larger than  
life sizes seem to have lost their initial impact-- on me, anyway.

Diana


On Apr 19, 2010, at 11:26 AM, Paul Viapiano wrote:

> Judy et al,
>
> I agree with a bunch of what you said. I'm a small collector as well  
> as photographer, and I just can't bring myself to buy an inkjet  
> print no matter how much I like the image, I just can't do it  
> especially at the prices I've seen. And it seems like everything out  
> there is inkjet these days.
>
> I like inkjet for a few things, to make little books at home, family  
> snaps for relatives, little greeting cards with my images...mostly  
> digital negatives, which I still feel a little funny about making.
>
> A friend who teaches photography at a big art school here in LA  
> tells me that the darkroom is no longer taught, or is glossed over  
> in an afternoon, alt is not taught at all...mostly concept and  
> photoshop.
>
> It really pains me to hear this because if you substitute my other  
> discipline, which is music, and decide not to teach Bach and the  
> rest of the canon, plus don't teach how to play an instrument and  
> just substitute electronic sampling and sequencing...well then, all  
> bets are off for the future of music.
>
> As far as schools go (for anything), I hear that students are not  
> interested in history, of what came before, they are looking to be  
> original. They don't understand the value of a foundation. Just take  
> a look at the work proliferating out there and it'll confirm this.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel at panix.com>
> (A while back I mentioned that more
>> than 3/4 of the contemporary prints for sale in some recent issue  
>> of whatever it was -- fundraiser of some kind -- were classified as  
>> "inkjet.")
>>
>> So, as I say, what ARE they teaching in photography courses these  
>> days? I know there are so-called "alternative workshops" -- even  
>> teach some, but not for years in a certified *academic  
>> institution.*  So OK, OK, they can teach handling a camera,  
>> exposure, history (probably great, with lots of countries,  
>> processes and geniuses), theory (LOTS of "theory"), etc, etc.,  
>> while showing slick prints of recent wars and bare asses. But what  
>> do they teach for process????
>> >
>> Finally, about folks sneering at the "fetishism" of "process"  
>> -- .... how do you say "sour grapes" in photo talk?
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo