[alt-photo] Re: another new gum...

Mon Jun 14 04:18:23 GMT 2010

Hey Paul, love the work you are doing and keep workin' with the gum.  
You have made great progress with the process! Go for what YOU WANT in  
your work.

Best

Mark Nelson
www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com
PDNPRint Forum @ Yahoo Groups
www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com

sent from my iPhonetypeDeviceThingy

On Jun 13, 2010, at 10:34 PM, Diana Bloomfield <dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net 
 > wrote:

> Hi Keith,
>
> Yes, could be a difference in monitors, but I suspect we simply have  
> an aesthetic difference-- with this particular image.
>
> I feel bad talking about Paul and his prints, as though he's  
> somewhere in the room listening, but not allowed to respond-- but my  
> point, really, was that I think it could be stronger with printing  
> it differently (and without introducing muddiness or a "cloying"  
> quality).  In fact, as it stands, the bottom part of the image--  
> though not dark or rich-- looks muddy to me now.
>
> I like the subject matter, and even though I like the way the sky is  
> rendered,  the rest just seems to be lacking somehow..  Maybe Marek  
> clarified it by saying that, overall, the image has a cyan cast to  
> it.  That's what it looks like to me, too.  I couldn't determine  
> what it was, except that everything seemed to look the same to me--  
> There wasn't that wonderful richness and definition of colors and  
> tones that were so evident in the first prints posted.  Not that  
> every print has to be the same, but this just seem much less  
> "accomplished" to me.
>
> How one chooses to print-- in whatever process-- should, of course,  
> have to satisfy no one but the image-maker.  But this reminds me of  
> students I sometimes have, who will show just amazing work-- with a  
> real eye for what makes a compelling image-- and not only that, they  
> know how to print-- and I have to wonder what they're doing in my  
> class in the first place.  Then these same students will turn around  
> the next week-- and show work that makes it hard to believe it's  
> coming from the same set of eyes.  My usual response is, "What in  
> the hell were you thinking with this?"  (Though I  typically say  
> that in a much nicer way.)
>
> So I stand by my comment that, print-wise, this just isn't nearly as  
> accomplished or as strong as Paul's earlier prints he posted-- at  
> least, from my viewpoint (and how it appears on my screen).  Not  
> everything has to be the same, obviously-- but, for me, it's hard to  
> believe the same person who made this, also made those others.
>
> The good news, Paul, is that people are so taken with your images,  
> that you're getting responses and some actual dialogue about them.   
> I hope you'll post more.  :)
>
> Diana
>
> On Jun 13, 2010, at 4:49 PM, Keith Gerling wrote:
>
>> Diana,
>>
>> I find the sky in this work to be incredibly rich and complete.    
>> Maybe its
>> a difference in monitors or something, but I really cannot  
>> visualize this
>> picture any "richer" w/o being cloying.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Diana Bloomfield <
>> dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Do you really think so, Keith?  It seems to me I've seen some  
>>> wonderful gum
>>> prints that are rich and full of color that don't actually cross  
>>> that fine
>>> line into muddiness.  I also see this image (subject matter) open  
>>> to various
>>> "techniques" and options.  Obviously, a different mood would be  
>>> evoked if
>>> printed differently,  but I can see this image printed both richer  
>>> and
>>> darker-- even, and especially, in the bottom third (without  
>>> evolving into
>>> muddiness) and becoming a print that's is as interesting and  
>>> seemingly
>>> "perfect" as this one.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 13, 2010, at 10:12 AM, Keith Gerling wrote:
>>>
>>> Nice Paul.  The technique should fit the subject, which this  
>>> does.  I like
>>>> the way you handled the bottom third of this composition.  A richer
>>>> handling
>>>> would have turned to mud.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Diana Bloomfield <
>>>> dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Paul,
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, this is nice, too-- but I like the others you did so much  
>>>>> better.
>>>>> Maybe I just like the images themselves better than this one,  
>>>>> but I also
>>>>> thought the printing was just superior and richer in every way.   
>>>>> I think
>>>>> this is the style (that a lot of people seem to love, I guess)  
>>>>> that
>>>>> always
>>>>> makes me think of Polaroid emulsion lifts.  That's what this more
>>>>> "painterly" style looks like to me.  For what it's worth, my  
>>>>> vote is for
>>>>> the
>>>>> other way.  :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Diana
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 12, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Paul Viapiano wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's another new gum in a more painterly style than my last two
>>>>>
>>>>>> offerings...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/viapiano/4691939849/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo