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

Christina Anderson zphoto at montana.net
Fri Jul 16 16:48:33 GMT 2010 

Great minds think alike, Mark and Bob :)

So was I. However, I dared not to say it on list because I was afraid I'd get trounced by Paul (V.) or Bob (Barnes) for vapidly babbling. 

Glad Bob Kiss said it and I didn't. And, gee, he didn't even get in trouble! Hmmmm...it must be that it was talk of alt workshops that made it more on topic.

Chris

Christina Z. Anderson
christinaZanderson.com

On Jul 16, 2010, at 11:39 AM, Mark Nelson wrote:

> Hehehe I was thinking the same thing Bob!   I died laughing when I read that!
> 
> Mark Nelson
> www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
> PDNPRint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
> www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com
> 
> sent from my iPhonetypeDeviceThingy
> 
> On Jul 16, 2010, at 9:48 AM, "BOB KISS" <bobkiss at caribsurf.com> wrote:
> 
>> O.K. Terry,
>>   I have a small problem with your last sentence.  "When it comes to
>> humor, I have the killer instinct...I go straight for the jocular!"  (Max
>> Headroom)
>>   Sooooooooooooooooo, I am trying REALLY hard to resist my desire to
>> make a joke of it and assume you meant to say, "I wish that everyone could
>> come 'to one' of my workshops"...right?  ;-))
>>       CHEERS!
>>           BOB
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org
>> [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of
>> Terry King
>> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 9:41 AM
>> To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org
>> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: ?: Re: Official press release about HPlarge
>> formatnegatives
>> 
>> One of the difficulties is that many gum prints are so unsubtle in the use
>> of the colour and process that the gum printing itself has got a bad name.
>> 
>> 
>> I wish that everyone could come on my workshops.
>> 
>> 
>> terry
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Diana Bloomfield <dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net>
>> To: The alternative photographic processes mailing list
>> <alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
>> Sent: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:24
>> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: ?: Re: Official press release about HPlarge
>> formatnegatives
>> 
>> 
>> I think I'm getting a headache here, Keith.  I suspect we're talking about
>> two different things.  Though I've never seen an "image" taken with a
>> lenscap on (unless it had a pinhole in it!), I have actually seen one or two
>> gum prints made in heavy fog-- and I will have to say that the image itself,
>> on each, was interesting.  The process enhanced that, but if the image
>> itself hadn't been compelling to begin with (no matter how faint it was), no
>> process would have made it so (my opinion). 
>> 
>> My issue, really, is that I see a lot of really bad work (again, that's my
>> subjective opinion) that someone thinks will be elevated if (1) he/she
>> prints it so big that people will be drawn to it, no matter what.  How can
>> they not be, taking up multiple feet of wall space? or (2) if printed in
>> some "alt" process, no matter how badly-- or, you know, he/she uses a
>> Photoshop application that might duplicate that process (seriously, I've
>> seen that too many times), and that will somehow elevate their banal image
>> into something special. 
>> 
>> I think you're delving into something much more nuanced than what my point
>> was-- but I get what you're saying.  (I think. ) 
>> 
>> Diana 
>> 
>> On Jul 16, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Keith Gerling wrote: 
>> 
>>> Diana, 
>>> 
>>> I had in mind works that have little or no image whatsoever, take for 
>>> instance gum bichromates work taken in heavy fog or perhaps an > "image"
>> taken 
>>> with the lenscap on!  So, yes, it is the process I find interesting > and
>> it 
>>> did much (everything) for the "image". 
>>> 
>>> Keith 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Diana Bloomfield < 
>>> dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net> wrote: 
>>> 
>>>> 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 
>>>>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ 
>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>> 
>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
>> database 5284 (20100716) __________
>> 
>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>> 
>> http://www.eset.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo

More information about the Alt-photo-process-list mailing list