[alt-photo] Re: ?: Re: Official press release about HPlarge formatnegatives

[Diana Bloomfield]

Hi Keith,

If I'm reading you correctly, you actually just supported what I was  
saying in my last sentence here.  The actual process in those works of  
art is what you found interesting, or captivating-- (You're obviously  
in that small percentage of people who are interested in the process  
of art.)-- But, by your own admission, the processes didn't do much  
for the image, or for the final piece of art, which "might be lacking."

Whether the work "has substance" or not is a totally different topic,  
I think (?).

On Jul 15, 2010, at 8:54 PM, Keith Gerling wrote:

> Heresy perhaps, but I would beg to differ with that last statement.   
> There
> are examples of paintings, photographs and sculpture and film that  
> *I* find
> especially captivating although the image may be minimal, abstract or
> particularly droll.  Perhaps it is texture, or the use of color, or  
> the
> manner in which washes or impasto is used to build up the work,  but  
> the
> work still has substance even though the fundamental image might be
> lacking.
>
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Diana Bloomfield <
> dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> I agree with most of what you've said here, but when I say the  
>> final image
>> is really what really matters-- I mean that this is what matters to  
>> the
>> general public/ people who may look at those images.  I do think  
>> the process
>> matters, but it truly only matters (mostly) to me (ie, to the  
>> person making
>> the art).  Of course-- for any of us-- there might be some curators/ 
>> gallery
>> owners/collectors who will know what they're looking at and be very
>> interested in the process involved-- especially true for gallery  
>> owners who
>> will want to pass that on to their collectors/viewers-- but for the  
>> vast
>> majority of people who look at photography, it really is the final  
>> image
>> that matters to them.  They rarely want to hear about the fine  
>> details.
>>
>> And I don't care how the image is printed, even if your print just  
>> rolled
>> off a big old Epson printer-- if the image itself isn't  
>> captivating, no
>> amount of good (or bad) printing--  no matter what process used--  
>> will make
>> it so.
>>
>> Diana
>>
>> On Jul 15, 2010, at 5:28 PM, BOB KISS wrote:
>>
>>        I have been following this thread for a while and much  
>> information
>>> and many interesting opinions have been shared.  I really do not  
>>> want to
>>> get
>>> into the question of the steps in getting to the final print.
>>>       However I think a few distinctions should be offered.
>>> 1) I agree that no one will be interested in any print if the  
>>> image is not
>>> captivating in some way, even if in its subtlety.
>>> 2) It is very interesting that many of you who belong to this list  
>>> and
>>> have
>>> worked very hard mastering alternative methods of *printing*  
>>> suggest that
>>> image is all that counts.  If this were so you would post all of  
>>> your
>>> images
>>> to Facebook and be done with it.
>>> 3) One must remember that the OBJECT OF ART is also important and  
>>> THIS is
>>> the strength of alternative processes that should be presented to  
>>> gallery
>>> owners when trying to show alt prints.  Again, boring image?  No  
>>> one wants
>>> it.  But a great image presented with a creatively appropriate alt
>>> printing
>>> process creates an object of art that is stunning and saleable.   
>>> Don't
>>> forget, gallery owners are business people and they need to sell  
>>> to keep
>>> the
>>> doors open and track lights on.
>>> 4) Why do we do alt printing if not for the wonderful textures,  
>>> colors,
>>> tonalities etc presented by each process?
>>> 5) These are not just my opinions.  I learned them from a photo  
>>> historian,
>>> former holder of a chair in the graduate dept of Pratt, and NYC  
>>> gallery
>>> owner.  He said, firstly, the image has to be great.  Then you  
>>> look at the
>>> object of art itself and this greatly affects the desirability and  
>>> price
>>> of
>>> the print.  He has sold and continues to sell many vintage and  
>>> modern alt
>>> process prints, except that the vintage ones were not alt in their
>>> day...they were "high tech" for the 19th century!  ;-))
>>>
>>>                       CHEERS!
>>>                               BOB
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo