From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 12/08/01-01:26:21 PM Z
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Richard Knoppow wrote:
> Part one is probably still on the site somewhere. A group of Mortensen
> images appears on the same site at:
> http://www.thescreamonline.com/photo/photo06-01/mortensen/mortensen_images.h
> tml
That article is a not very well written (ie pedestrian) rehash of material
already in circulation, tho more *accessible* than better info in print,
which is EXACTLY the trouble with Web !
> I have never been sure whether to take Mortensen seriously but my
> tendency is to do so. I think the zeitgeist of the period in which he
> worked must be taken into consideration in judging his stuff. Its clear
> that no matter how much one may criticize it for its kitchyness it has some
> quality than his many imitators have never been able to duplicate.
The most interesting thing about Mortensen (tho not the ONLY) is the
controversy he kicks up today, and for that thank Coleman, primarily.
> As far as "secret formulas" go, there were lots of magic developers,
> etc., proposed in the 1930s especially for fine grain. Most have nothing at
> all to recommend them, and are the result of alchemy rather than chemistry.
> Champlin's formulas are a good example. Mortensen's assistant, George
Mortensen's "secret formulas" (and I know of only one that WORKED that he
kept supposedly secret, others were rather feeble versions of direct
gelatin, or laborious handwork) were not film or paper developers, but
post-darkroom manipulations, toning, carbro, & like that.
I have several such in the file, but the fellow who passed those along
said not to bother. The Metalchrome, which was the "secret" one, is in
earlier toning books but just called gold over sepia. It's in Post-Factory
#3 by Nina Rizzo, who did it 2 years later for Photo Vision (there of
course in color).
The method can however be treated perfectly "straight," & upcoming P-F has
Janet Neuhauser doing just that -- tho based on Liam Lawless's formulas in
PF #5. Which is to say, in case you didn't know -- the name of the game is
*marketing.* Mortensen took a known technique and hyped & mystified --
tho one of his "metalchrome" toned prints (shown in the CCP catalog in
color & in PF-3 in B&W) is among the most stunning prints of the period,
ever. OK, I guess in all fairness I should add that besides the name & the
mystique, Mortensen incorporated subsequent hand coloring.
> Dunham, is supposed to have done much of his lab work and also is supposed
M didn't do a lot of "lab work," mostly after applications. And
incidentally, he describes a lot of that in his books, names each in
monsters & madonnas. But his great love was the studio set ups for his
"effects," which he describes in loving detail in M&M & everywhere else.
> to have written most of Mortensen's books.
>
> Mortensen did extensive art work on his photographs. In a few cases its
> hard to tell if there is actually a photograph under the work.
>
And vice versa.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 01/02/02-04:47:33 PM Z CST