Richard Sullivan (richsul@earthlink.net)
Mon, 08 Mar 1999 11:26:34 -0700
I have spent over 20 years now in close contact with the alt-photo world.
On a days average, I talk to anywhere from 5 to 10 people a day on the
phone. Many are folks new to the alt-photo world who have just discovered
there is more to photography than Polycontrast. Melody talks to many more
than I do and does a lot of hand holding for new customers.
I think I can say that I have some idea of how people come to the world of
alt-photo and how the mind set they have about it.
As the old book says: "All Gaul is divided into two parts" or something
like that.
There are two basic divisions in the alt-photo world. We here at B+S are
adept at jumping from one paradigm to the next as it doesn't make a lot of
business sense to choose up sides.
Side one: The Technologist. These are the folks for whom the process is
foremost. The process is the end goal. Often the esthetic can be defined in
terms of an H+D curve or a zone patch. An A. Adams print does not achieve
its esthetic goal until perfectly printed
Side two: The Artist. These folks see the process as only a means to an
end. Often times the subtle nuances that can be achieved by exercising
extreme control over the process are immaterial to them.
Now of course, most folks are not strictly one or the other. Most of us are
a little of each. Some of us straddle the fence, some are Side One one day,
and Side Two the next. There is however some clumping of people at either
extreme and there's where the rub is.
To the "Artist" removing the esthetic from alt-photo removes its very
essence. To them alt-photo is "syntax." The technology can only be seen in
terms of esthetic result.
To the technologist, the esthetic is the entwined in the nuance of fine
control of the process and often the esthetic's raison d'etre is to support
the process.
The current battle here is germane, if we can use it to understand where
each side is coming from. Of course it does not do any good to go thrashing
about like we have.
In defense of Jewelia.
I think we can all see that she is in the Artist camp. Jewelia brought work
to Platypus this year and yes, she does do some really nice alt-photo work.
She also does some stunning spit bite etchings which she showed as well.
(We are not so anal retentive that we restrict showings to only
photography!) Jewelia is a superb technologist and as far as I know, she
has done more work with the uranium process than anyone currently active.
To know Jewelia is to know that her life and her art work are one and the
same. The nom de plume of Jewelia Margueritta Cameroon is both a serious
and a humorous (humorous can be serious too) personification of her life.
I am afraid that what Jewelia is about may not translate well over the
List. She may frighten people at first. I am afraid that some people may
dismiss her as a "nut case" and that has been implied here. She definitely
is not, and anyone who was at Platypus XIV knows that. Pay attention and
listen carefully, I think there is a lot to be learned from Jewelia.
As an aside. Jewelia will be doing a performance piece at APIS Santa Fe in
July. The piece will involve her life and work. I've seen the synopsis and
it is going to be very interesting. Anyone whose life deconstructs into
nuclear submarines and uranium printing can't be all bad.
--Dick Sullivan
505-474-0890 FAX 505-474-2857
<http://www.bostick-sullivan.com>http://www.bostick-sullivan.com
http://www.workingpictures.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:09:01