I have done a lot of thinking about what is "alternative." Its hard
to come up with a good definition. To say non-silver won't work because
kallitype uses silver as do some other , more obscure alternative
processes. Anyway, anyone making Daguerreotypes today (and there are
quite a few folks doing that) would consider that processes non-silver
(sorry, I meant to type "that process alternative") as would the
ambrotypists (sp?). One is tempted to say "prints which are not made with
commercially made printing paper" but what if I used a really old, toner
that you have to mix yourself (like a uranium or vanadium toner) on a
silver print made on commercial paper. Does that qualify? Then there are
digital images. Under the first definition, they would qualify, but
so much of it is being done today for advertising, etc. one could hardly
call it alternative.
I believe that any process we use which is not the normal process
used in making a photograph should be called an alternative process.
Therefore, what we do is not only the real thing but it is also
abnormal. Thus we are abnormal photographers.;-) (or artists if you
prefer) In defense of that statement, just ask yourself- would I
really be doing this if I were normal? Who wants to be normal anyway?
Doesn't "normal" imply mediocre, average, common. Are we then the
children of Lake Wobegone where all the men are good looking, all the
women are strong and all the children above average? But I digress.
I know this is not the Photo Art list, but I really would like to
hear from folks who are doing alternate process what they think these
processes are since this is a question which arises frequently around
here.
Bob Schramm