Steve Shapiro (sgshiya@redshift.com)
Sun, 25 Jul 1999 20:08:30 -0700
Well, I have to punt this in ... .
I use a Kodak 8X10 Master Camera and was gien Brett Weston's Reis tripod on
an extended loan. Immediately I found excuses to set up and make pictures
with no, absolutely no hesitation or procrastination.
I have been making a dozen exposures a week, before my last heart surgery
ten days ago; and if anyone wants to know the results write me at the snail
mail:
Steve Shapiro
P.O. Box 4391
Carmel, CA 93921
It's insporing, and with Brett Weston's prints available just about anywhere
that has photographs around here, the Reis is a real treasure.
Subject: Re: VAULT 'EM, DON'T BURN 'EM
> Anyone who knows me knows that I am a thorough skeptic. I don't indulge in
> very much that could be called mystical. But I do remember as a kid of 12
> or 13 (c 1952) growing up in Washington D.C. (Arlingotn Va.) of going into
> town with a couple of friends. We ended up at the Ford Theatre where
> Lincoln was shot. In those days it was not a real museum like it is today.
> It was still a theatre and they had some glass cases of stuff around. We
> were ooohing and ahhing over one of the cases and some guy in charge came
> over and started talking to us. He eventually opened the case with his key
> and let each of us put on the spectacles Lincoln wore the night he was
> shot. I still get goose bumply thinking about it. Of course no sane museum
> curator would do any such thing today.
>
> I also was at Ron Partidge's house in Berkeley about 10 years ago. Ron is
> one of Imogene's twin boys. (Imogene who?) One of the rituals at Ron's
> place is to drink espresso from Edward's espresso pot. (Edward who?)
>
> There is some connectedness that we make through objects. I think the
> German's have a word for this as they have words for all kinds of
emotions.
> In English sadly we don't. The same kind of thing connects us to an artist
> through his art. The glasses were in fact just an old pair of glasses but
> somehow I still feel as if I made some connection to Lincoln -- I even
feel
> it today. Any chemical test on the espresso would show it to be espresso
> like any other, but in a sense it is maybe the closest thing we have to a
> Photographic Holy Communion.
>
> No one quite cringes over cancelling a plate the same way they cringe over
> destroying a negative. Perhaps the negative is connected to some bygone
> reality where the plate is just connected to the artist. Just some random
> thoughts.
>
> --Dick
>
>
> At 01:50 PM 7/22/99 -0700, you wrote:
> >I do understand your meaning in all this, but there are so many issues it
> >brings up to say the least. Owning an Ansel Adams print or an 8x10 film
> >holder? Well if it was not a print done when Ansel was alive with his
> >signature the answer is quite easy. The film holder, and it would be kept
> >for special images at that. As far as saving the negatives so people can
> >share your vision. Well that is part of why I am troubled with this in
the
> >first place. My point is the negative is not your vision at all. Just
> >another tool to get to your vision, the PRINT. The negative is
information
> >that you use to create that image with. Just like the developer you use
or
> >the lens you choose. All the things that go into the final print the
artist
> >included. All these things influence the way that final print looks. I do
> >agree in many cases where the artist was unknown at the time that it is
very
> >important and fullfilling to see thier work even in a diminished way.
This
> >debate has gone on and on in the photographic arts for years. And I am
sure
> >just like the rest of history it will repeat itself over and over for
many
> >more to come. So I will leave it with, it is a personal choice.
> >
> >A wonderful day to you all,
> >
> >Kurt
>
>
>
> 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 Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:40:38