From: John Richardson (jrplatinum@earthlink.net)
Date: 06/02/00-01:43:31 PM Z
This thread is between two individuals on the list and is certainly now way off
topic. Please address each other off-list
Thanks,
John Richardson
peter fredrick wrote:
> KatharineThayer wrote
>
> >>We still have little disagreement as long as the goal is the production
> of a contact negative as part of the two-step process of making an
> alternative process print. What I object to is the prospect of this list
> being taken over by folks who have no interest in alternative processes
> and for whom digital output is not a means to an end but an end in
> itself.<<
> I am in complete agreement with you on this point, but is this invasion
> going to take place ? there are many strong highly intelligent members of
> this list who are hardly likely to let this happen !
>
> >>Discussions about digital output as a final product don't belong
> here, in my opinion, and there are plenty of other places for such
> discussions to occur. This list is supposed to be about alternative
> processes. As long as that's the ultimate goal, I agree with everything
> you've said.<<
> Katharine
>
> Again we are in broad agreement concerning the ultimate goal of this list,
> but I personally feel it is healthy for the list to veer off subject from
> time to time to discuss associated subject matter after all everything
> impinges on everything whether we like it or not . Otherwise we are
> encouraging a ghetto mentality.
>
> Pete
>
> Ps I take your point Sil see new subject title
>
> peter fredrick wrote:
> >
>
> > No that is not what I meant , possibly I may not have explained it as well
> > as I should, for this forgive me .If you wish to make an excellent
> > technical /creative alt process print you need to know all about the
> > technical /creative possibilities of the prime imaging process ie to use
> > my simile, with the horse you will need to look in its mouth and and
> > inspect its teeth, this applies to both photographic and digital
> > methodology. You cant just say I only need the information which will
> > produce a fine contact negative.
> > There is in my opinion a genuine need to try and master as much
> > information as possible however hard and stony the learning curve. If in
> > gaining this information we as a list from time to time veer off topic so
> > be it . So you see I
> > do have reasons for this list to be used to discuss digital issues other
> > than the production of digital contact negatives for alternative
> > processes.The prime one being holistic. The pursuit of excellence in image
> > making ! not just negative construction.
> >
> > Pete
> >
> > peter fredrick wrote:
> > >
> > > Jeffrey D. Mathias wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Paul Jordan wrote:
> > > > > ... I'm just wondering why you do not consider digital as "alt" process.
> > > >
> > > > I too do not consider digital an "alt" process as it is the mainstream
> > > > commercial image process.
> > >
> > > >>There are lists and newsgroups everywhere that concern themselves with
> > > digital equipment, digital photography, digital output. I agree with
> > > Jeffrey; digital is not an "alt" process and there is no reason for this
> > > list to be used to discuss digital issues other than the production of
> > > digital contact negatives for alternative processes.
> > > Katharine Thayer<<
> > >
> > > Whilst I hate to disagree with both Jeffrey and Katharine. I feel this
> > > issue has been oversimplified. The problem lies in what we understand as an
> > > "alt" process which is by its very nature a two stage process rather like
> > > a horse and cart. The first or prime photographic stage, which Judy
> > > describes as factory orientated, ie our film and cameras and the second
> > > post factory stage that is the actual hand crafted light sensitive
> > > processes, ie Platinum, gum carbon cyanotype etc, these processes are
> > > often seen as the prime process, there is however one snag with this
> > > assumption ,Like the horse and cart example the cart wont move without the
> > > horse, so we cant make "alt" process prints without factory generated
> > > equipment or materials, with the exception of course of the Photogram,
> > > Cliche Verre, and similar methodologies. Personally I see no difference
> > > between prime photographic manipulation and prime digital, it is just a
> > > horse of a different colour, it still pulls the cart !
> > >
> > > We could if we wished describe the two as Photo/alt light sensitive
> > > printmaking and digital/alt light sensitive printmaking but this may just
> > > confuse the issue even more.
> > >
> > > Pete
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 07/14/00-09:46:44 AM Z CST