[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Bigger is better???


Valerie et al,

When I first started in alternate process I made a number of prints from 4 x 
5 in-camera negatives. I still have some around. I really liked them, I 
matted them in 8 x 10 mats. I felt that the viewer
was more "intimate" with the prints since he/she had to get up
close.

Some of the shows around here have an 80 square inches minimum
rule. I pointed out to them that this effectivly eliminated certain
things such as daguerreotypes and manipulated polaroid.

It is more difficult and more expensive to make prints large and
bigger does not automatically mean better.

Bob Schramm


>From: valerie_matthews@notes.teradyne.com
>Reply-To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>Subject: Re: Marker Paper (Correction)
>Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 13:09:57 -0400
>
>
>This whole big tray discussion is making me think of a topic that's been on
>my mind for awhile now - big art.
>
>How do people feel about being one (for the most part) of the smallest - in
>size that is - art form.  Everthing seems
>so big today.  I recently entered a juried show with a 7"x7" matted,
>platinum print and didn't get in.   That's fine, but
>when I went to the show, everything was huge.  I don't think that there was
>much smaller than 16x20 and my print would
>have looked really out of place there.
>
>One of the reasons I learned how to make digital negatives is to make large
>platinum prints or I may not be making
>them at all - too difficult and too time consuming without the digital
>portion - in grad school you're expected to
>produce, produce, produce, but I guess that's a good mode to be in for real
>life ;-)
>
>Art has gotten bigger and bigger the the past couple of decades.  When will
>it end?
>
>Valerie
>
>
>
>
>valerie_matthews@notes.teradyne.com on 10/06/2000 12:55:14 PM
>
>Please respond to alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>
>To:   alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>cc:    (bcc: Valerie Matthews/Bos/Teradyne)
>Subject:  Re: Marker Paper (Correction)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I've tried to print on the Bienfang up to 11x14.  Larger than that, I have
>problems.  Can you tell me more about how you process it in one tray?
>
>Valerie
>
>
>
>
>Eric Neilsen <e.neilsen@worldnet.att.net> on 10/05/2000 08:26:29 PM
>
>Please respond to alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>
>To:   alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>cc:    (bcc: Valerie Matthews/Bos/Teradyne)
>Subject:  Re: Marker Paper (Correction)
>
>
>
>This paper works great.  I make platinum prints on it up to the 19x24"
>pieces.
>It did take some getting used to , but it washes easily in a 20x24 print
>washer
>and does dry flat if put into a cold press slightly damp and then put into
>a
>heat press after.  It will take on a slight texture later controllable by
>dry
>mounting.
>
>If you fan your fingers under it as you lift it, you can move it quite
>easily.
>I would recommend a one tray processing if possible.
>
>EJ Neilsen
>
>
>Earl McAlan Greene wrote:
>
> > Correction. In my previous message, I wrote Bienfang 600. It should
>actually
> > read Bienfang 360.
> >
> > Alan Greene
> >
> > 
>_________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at 
>http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> > http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>--
>Eric J. Neilsen
>4101 Commerce Street, Suite #9
>Dallas, TX 75226
>214-827-8301
>http://e.neilsen.home.att.net
>http://www.ericneilsenphotography.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.