so states Shalom. Goldberg............perhaps that feeling is akin to
the continuous flame 'neath the Arc de Triumph or @ JFK's gravesite. In
a way, placed there by us of today to honor those of then who made the
big attempt. Shalom's feelings are romantic, and, therein, is expressed
the perhaps that these historical processes of photography might fade
from use.
I don't think so. Like Herschel's 'cyanotype', which lay fallow for
decades until resurrected in the late Victorian era, these processes all
have wonderful qualities and exquisitely enhance one's specific
image/idea. For instance, look @ how Keith Dugdale has used cyanotype
for lyrical vision.
Now, here is where I get maudlin ... if society changes to some
repressive form, perhaps it could dictate description as seen in the
Social Realism in oppressive countries during this century. There
would only be certain things one could describe and maybe only certain
ways to do so. Too, we could lose the information related to these
processes if our libraries, like Alexandria, were torched by the wrong
flame. But, no, I think that what the folks on this list are doing, and
the recognition by students and teachers alike that these historical
aspects of the medium not only have potential, but also kinetic energy.
In a certain sense, the medium has gone along being improved by
manufacturers. Some slipping & sliding has happened but, overall,
photographic reproduction has become better. Now, as the light gathering
abilities of the CCD replace the light sensitive particles of silver
halides, the story might be complete. Chemical photography has gone
through its cycle and we have the whole panoply to use. It's as if we
are working with a choir and not a single voice
Jack