From: Sandy King (sanking@hubcap.clemson.edu)
Date: 03/13/01-10:26:41 AM Z
Luc Novovitch wrote:
>A reflexion about permanence... if I may. After being a photographer for
>more than 25 years (read making a living from my photography) it seems to me
>more and more that permanence is a would be photographer/sunday
>photographer/I have a day job photographer obsession. After almost 3 years
>running my own gallery, selling my own pictures (silver prints and pl/pd and
>soon carbon if I can master the &^%#@$@ coating!), no one, nobody, never
>asked about permanence of my images. I'm not talking about the average
>person pushing the door. I'm talking about buyers. I do have pix in museums,
>private collections, on people's walls, in people's drawers probably, etc...
>And nobody never asked about permanence. So my question is: who cares?
Luc,
There is another possibility other than the one you suggest, i.e. that
people don't care about permanence. It could be that most of these persons
are so ignorant of process that it never even crossed their mind to
question the permanence of a photograph? In other words, they might not
even be aware that there is a problem of permanence!! You can't be
concerned about a problem if you don't know there is one.
Sandy King
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:26 AM Z CST