[Alt-photo] Re: Process or filter?

Diana Bloomfield dlhbloomfield at gmail.com
Tue Mar 26 18:56:24 UTC 2013

 "A bad image that looks like a tintype is a bad image, regardless of whether it’s created digitally or whether it’s an actual tintype."  Yes.  
And-- just being my usual judgmental self here-- but that cat cat image is really bad, and-- yes-- telling.  And, despite his belief in his first sentence here, that image does not look the least bit like a "an image made using the wet-plate process."   Is he serious?

Anyway-- he sounds lot like my gallery owner here.  I swear, I've heard him utter some of the exact same words to me.  If I didn't know any better, I would think he wrote this.  Nevertheless, I do agree that people shouldn't depend on process to determine the quality of the work.    

The article rambles a bit.  I'm not completely sure what his point really is-- and - honestly-- sounds to me like a diatribe he stayed up late one night writing-- maybe directed to somebody who may have told him recently that she didn't like his (cat) photographs and that he was a bad (and lazy) photographer.  Just  a wild guess .  . . 


On Mar 26, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Harlan Chapman wrote:

> It is telling that the author includes a photo of his cat to illustrate his
> article.
> -Harlan

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