Re: Fwd: Re: Re: A modest proposal -- the imp. signature


Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Tue, 23 Feb 1999 14:41:13 -0500 (EST)


On Tue, 23 Feb 1999, Richard Sullivan wrote:
>
> As for gum being unique shall we be reminded of Fresson and Sheila Metzner,
> et al? The invasion goes pretty deep.
>

Sorry, I don't follow here... You're suggesting that a factory-made
Fresson is a "gum print"?

Meanwhile, on the subject of *money*, in my experience a "collector" is
just as likely to be impressed that a photographer doesn't have to slave
her/himself doing the dirty work in the darkroom, but is hotshot enough to
have a team of experts to do it for him/her, while s/he spends the energy
getting inspiration and hanging out in trendy restaurants.

Besides which, some of the beacons of mid-century photography did not do
their own printing, but relied on expert printers who did that, they said
quite clearly, far better than they. And not only "factory" photo
processes either.... many had printers making gravures & so forth for them
too. Do I think a gravure is more valuable because the schnuck
photograpaher couldn't afford to hire an expert? Well, *I* may, but "the
market" doesn't usually agree with me.

Anyway, I thought all that stuff about zone system, with the Roman
numerals and the hand-held computers in the wilderness, not to mention
trigonometry and densitometry, was to get a perfect negative that more or
less prints itself without a lot of fumpfer & agony. I would assume then,
that the GOOD ZONE SYSTEM PHOTOGRAPHER (not the bad grab shooter such as
myself), need only determine the paper, tone & finish, a mood, a feel, and
let the trained help deliver the edition.

Obviously, a hand coated process capable of infinite variables &
manifestations is another matter, but I would not sanctify the one who
does his/her own printing on factory paper. I suppose there are expert
photog/printers who were never satisfied with another's printing for them,
but I have to tell you I have seen MANY students print for BIG NAME
photographers, whose names I do not reveal here. And these were
undergraduate photo major JUNIORS, quite good for sure, but hardly
geniuses. So could we please get real?

Judy



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:53