It alarms me to read about an aversion to scanned images as a means of showing
others ones work. Granted once scanned an image can be manipulated in all manner
of ways to change colour, contrast, sharpness etc and any image shown on a
monitor will have different tactile qualities to one shown as an original print.
Anyone with an aversion to scanned images is also denying themselves the chance
to have their work published as ink on paper, which we know is far from ideal
for reproducing the tactile qualities of fine prints but is however accepted as
a means of showing work to a broader audience. Carrying on from this it is
easier to get a good looking scan on a monitor than to get it into print, it is
also cheaper and easier to publish electronically and this list proves many who
are interested could then view the work and make some albiet limited judgements
on the quality of the work.
We are all on this list to discuss ideas and procsses but I would hope that the
images made have something more to recommend them than just the process used.
The process should be used to enhance the communication of the artists idea if
this is not the case then why not just print greyscales and resolution charts
and bicker about the finer points of (non)sensitmetry -but then we did that in
the summer didn't we:)
ttfn
Barney