Re: physiology vs. sensitometry

Peter Marshall (petermarshall@cix.compulink.co.uk)
Sat, 8 Jun 96 18:07 BST-1

In-Reply-To: <199606071808.OAA10988@caracas.terraport.net>

Risa

You are obviously right that some pictures need to be seen for real. However
for many photographers this is not the case. Indeed for many of them the
print has been just an intermediate stage - of no more or no less interest
than the negative, as they have worked for the printed page.

Some of the others I mentioned (you will not have read my comment on this)
of course the work included in the book was the original platinum or
photogravure - there is nothing more original. If you see a framed Emerson
print it is almost certainly because a book has been vandalised - it
certainly used to be a very profitable practice to buy one, separate it into
pages and sell each separately.

In these cases it is the books and magazines that are live and you should
reserve your dancing and drooling for them. I have certainly done plenty on
the few occasions I have been able to handle a genuine Emerson volume.

I won't name the photographers - but there are a number exceptionally
well-known whose silver gelatine prints sell for high prices - who are not
particularly good at printing, but still produce their own work. In some
cases the laser scanning or whatever involved in the production of the
duotone (tri-tone, quadritone etc) plates has significantly improved the
work by clarifying both highlight and shadow detail.

Then there are some photographers who have benefited greatly from a book
editor (and yes I also know others who have suffered). Similarly some are
well served by exhibition curators and others are not. My experience is that
it is not uncommon to find an excellent book accompanied by an indifferent
show while the reverse is less common. (Fortunately often both are good.)

I had hoped to be able to finish this post without mentioning Walter
Benjamin but it is proving difficult. Maybe if I just drop his name and
don't go on any more?

Peter