Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:30:03 -0500 (EST)
On Tue, 23 Feb 1999, Carl Weese wrote:
> ... Even if a negative is technically perfect and is to
> be printed in silver, printing is a feedback process for
> photographer/printmakers who uses it that way. I have to print my own
> negatives--even though they are quite consistent--because I can't
> possibly tell someone else how I'd want them printed. I have to see it
> to know what I want, and the really subtle interpretations are the most
> important ones.
My paradigm is the photographer one way or another making the prototype
print themselves, with or without an assistant, then giving the data AND
the sample print (paper, exposure type & range, toning, whatever, already
chosen) to the printer for an edition.
You're talking about print quality anyway. That wasn't the original
argument, which was *market value.* Since when are the two related?
David Vestal, for instance, says his more recent prints are lots better
than his early ones. But what his dealer gets big bucks for are the
"vintage prints," usually made when ANY photographer is too harried &
inexperienced, overwhelmed & distracted to make the *best* possible print
of any given negative.
A whole mythology, hagiology if you will, has grown up around the "vintage
print," purely a marketing construct, with a VERY flimsy rationale. I
think the "made by" wants to be another. Do you think, Carl, that when
your prints are auctioned at Sotheby anyone gives a damn (or knows diddly)
about print QUALITY? Well, maybe they'd notice a crimp in factory paper &
knock off 25% for that. But otherwise? Anything YOU would fuss about? The
fact that *not* is frequently stated. I myself am not a judge -- nor have
I ever been to an auction, I hasten to add.
This list expresses feelings and desires, values and priorities of the
photographers taking part. It may even, or often, express an "ideal"
(though not always mine). But it is not necessarily a picture of the real
world as she is ... for better or worse.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:53