Re: physiology vs. sensitometry
Jack Fulton (jfulton@itsa.ucsf.EDU)
Mon, 10 Jun 1996 06:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
This debate is interesting and could use space ad infinitum (another list
to discuss aesthetics and approaches) ... To see a print physically is
supremly important because it is uncorrupted by reproduction. However, for
the majority, the content leaks out to the spectator and most of the time
a reproduction's vicarious quality suffices.
I was forever changed by Bill Brandt prints @ SFMOMA in the late 50's or
early 60's to see how he'd gouched, scraped, penciled and inked a set of
his 'nudes.' During the halcyon 60's and 70's, fortunate enough to travel
to NYC & Europe, I saw many of the photo auctions and stayed w/dealers.
The whole history of pretty near everyone was @ one's hands in bins. It
was a revalation again for such beauty had not been seen by my eyes ...
let alone repos of various photographic authors.
Lastly, my own work, because of it's nature, just would not have been seen
by as many w/out the book and/or set of of slides. I have also gained much
to change my life both ecstatically and spiritually through photos of
foreign places I shall/cannot visit + the atmosphere of time the
photograph allows.
Anarchy does not take place w/out reality ... once they have seen Paree
etc. etc.... Ultimately, both sides of the coin (real vs repo) have
a visual voice to communicate and who am I to say one is more eloquent or
sings a sweeter song?
Jack (gimme reality & experience) Fulton
***The eye is the Pencil of Nurture***