From: Keith Gerling (kgerling@ameritech.net)
Date: 06/28/01-11:03:48 AM Z
Reading over the contributions to this thread, I can't help but be reminded
of the classic division-of-mindset that one encounters in almost all aspects
of life: left-brain/right-brain, Aristotelian/Socratic,
Apollonian/Dionysian, etc. (remember, there are two kinds of people in this
world: people that separate people into two groups, and people that don't!).
>From what I read here, it would seem that photographers seem to divide into
two camps: those that find or create a subject and attempt to "accurately"
capture what they "see" , and those that capture a subject, ponder over it
and then "free" it with whatever process seems most appropriate for success.
After 20 years of attempting to force myself into the first camp, using
larger and larger cameras, finessing my process in order to capture every
iota of detail in my larger neg, I now find myself comfortably inhabiting
the second. Now I place a bunch of my twenty years worth of negatives out
on the light table, and possibilities jump out at me. These are shots that
never made the grade before, perhaps because the pyro stain wasn't perfect,
or I had tried a new developer and the grain wasn't "tight", or because I
hadn't tightened the view camera and the foreground was just a tad mushy.
For all of these years, I was chasing something I couldn't grasp. Sure, I
took some good pictures. But, friends and family that have politely
tolerated my lectures on Pyro vs. Rodinal, Agfa vs. Ilford, etc. now are
clamoring to own one of my gum photos (wouldn't you know it: as soon as I
start using a process that needs weeks in order to finish a print, I get
popular!). There is a new life in my works, a vision that wasn't present
before. Gum, with its infinite variety, is the perfect process for me, but
I still use the noble metal and silver salts, cyanotype, etc. More often
than not, my years of training still result in photographs that use the full
frame and full spectrum of tonality and detail. But, the difference in my
approach is that I no longer greet a subject with an end result in mind. I
feel that the flexibility offered with being able to choose from a variety
of alt processes have freed me from the requirement to capture the "perfect"
shot in the camera. This freedom, in turn, has opened me up to new
possibilities and allowed a new level of spontaneity in the picture-taking
act. It's like coming out of the closet! The negative has assumed a role
in an on-going building process, rather than existing as fixed "score". I
still have a great deal of respect for those photographers that can look at
a scene and know what the end result will like. I'm sure many with that
mindset will call me lazy, and perhaps they are right.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Pietrzak [mailto:jpptprnt@gte.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 2:18 AM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Shooting for Alternative Processes
Hi all,
As some of my friends will a-test-to; that I have problems in choosing
what pair of black socks to put on. Over 20 years ago I saw the work of
a photographer working in P/P. The feel, the look, the tone of the
prints sucked me in. I still print some silver prints today to keep up
my skills (christmas prints/cards, 200 of them). But my feeling is for
the quality of P/P. Do I feel that one image is this or that maybe, I
don't know?. Do I use other processes, Yes!! I teach them. What do I
go back to P/P. Well it it time for bed and I need to lay-out some pairs
of black socks.
Ernestine I will be in Santa Fe, the 7th or 8th. I would love to join
with you and others to setup a dialog of seeing/shooting for Alt.
jan pietrzak
xoxoxjpxoxox
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 07/12/01-11:41:55 AM Z CST